The Firﬅ Part of Henry the Fourth

Dating Shakespeare’s Plays: Henry IV Part 1

The Firﬅ Part of Henry the Fourth,

wi th the Life and Death of Henry sirnamed Hot- Spvrre

he extant 1 Henry IV can be dated at Meres mentions Henry IV but does not distinguish any time between the publication of the parts 1 or 2. Like Richard II, Henry IV was soon second edition of Holinshed in 1587, and reprinted, and attributed to W. Shake-Speare: T1598, when 1 Henry IV first appeared in print. [Q2 1599] The History of Henrie the Fourth; Publication Date With the battell at Shrewsburie, betweene the King and Lord Henry Percy, surnamed Henry Hotspur of the North. With the humorous King Henry IV Part 1 was registered and published conceits of Sir lohn Falstaffe. Newly corrected in 1598, the year after Richard II was published: by W. Shake-speare. At London, Printed by S(imon) S(taf-ford) for Andrew Wise, dwelling [SR 1598] xxvto die Februarij. Andrew Wyse. in Paules Church-yard, at the signe of the Entred for his copie vnder thandes of Master Angell. 1599. DIX: and master Warden Man a booke intituled The histrye of Henry iiijth with The rights to publication were soon transferred his battaile of Shrewsburye against Henry from Andrew Wise to Matthew Lawe, which Hottspurre of the Northe with the conceipted distinguishes the two parts: mirthe of Sir John Ffalstoff vjd [Q1 1598] The History of Henrie the Fourth; [SR 1603] 25 Junij. Mathew Lawe. Entred for With the battell at Shrewsburie, betweene the his copie in full courte Holden this Day. These King and Lord Henry Percy, surnamed Henrie ffyve copies followinge . . . viz iii enterludes Hotspur of the North. With the humorous or playes . . . The Third of Henry the 4 the conceits of Sir Iohn Falstalffe. At London, first parte. all kinges . . . all whiche by consent Printed by P(eter) S(hort) for Andrew Wise, of the Company are sett ouer to him from dwelling in Paules Church-yard, at the signe Andrew Wyse. of the Angell 1598. Despite the publication of Henry IV Part 2 It is possible that there were two quartos printed in 1600, subsequent editions of this play are in 1598, the earlier of which now (Qo) only exists simply called The History of Henrie the fourth in four leaves, covering 1.1.119 to 2.2.106. These without any further distinction: leaves, which were used as binding for another book, are more widely spaced and would have [Q3 1604] The History of Henrie the required more sheets for the entire quarto. It is fourth, With the battell at Shrewsburie, therefore thought that they were quickly revised betweene the King, and Lord Henry and probably offer an earlier and superior reading Percy, surnamed Henry Hotspur of the North. With the humorous conceits of to Q1. Otherwise, the uniformity of speech Sir lohn Falstaffe. Newly corrected by W. prefixes and the quality of the readings suggest Shake-speare. London Printed by Valentine that Q1 was set from the author’s so-called ‘fair Simmes, for Mathew Law, and are to be papers’ (Chambers, WS, I, 375–384). solde at his shop in Paules Churchyard, at In his list of 12 plays by Shakespeare in 1598, the signe of the Fox. 1604.

Title page to the anonymous first quarto of Henry IV Part 1, 1598. By permission of Bodleian Library, University of Oxford, shelfmark Arch. G d.45 (5) title page.

[Q4 1608] The History of Henry the The Dering Manuscript (owned by Sir Edward Fourth, With the battell at Shrewesburie, Dering, 1598–1644, of Surrenden in Kent) betweene the King, and Lord Henry interestingly conflates both parts of Henry IV. Percy, surnamed Henry Hotspur of the It is usually considered a copy from 1622–3 of North. With the humorous conceites of Sir Iohn Falstalffe. Newly corrected by W. a redaction made after 1613. It is based on Q5 Shake-speare. London, Printed for Mathew of 1 Henry IV and the 1600 Q of 2 Henry IV. Law, and are to be sold at his shop in Paules The Dering MS may have been prepared for Churchyard, neere vnto S. Augustines gate, amateur theatrics, as many readings anticipate at the signe of the Foxe. 1608. modern interpretations. It covers about 90% of 1 [Q5 1613] The History of Henrie the fourth, Henry IV and about 30% of 2 Henry IV. It has With the Battell at Shrewseburie, betweene also been suggested that the Dering MS preserves the King, and Lord Henrie Percy, surnamed Shakespeare’s originally single play Henry IV, Henrie Hotspur of the North. With the which the poet later expanded into two parts humorous conceites of Sir lohn Falstaffe. to capitalize on the popularity of the Falstaff Newly corrected by W. Shake-speare. London, character. The Dering MS is now in the Folger Printed by W(illiam) W(hite) for Mathew Shakespeare Library, Washington.1 Law, and are to be sold at his shop in Paules Church-yard, neere vnto S. Augustines Gate, [Q6 1622] The History of Henrie the fourth, at the signe of the Foxe. 1613. With the Battell at Shrewseburie, betweene

the King, and Lord Henrie Percy, surnamed Sir John Oldcastle, Part 1 (for which Henslowe Henrie Hotspur of the North. With the paid Drayton, Hathaway, Munday and Wilson humorous conceites of Sir lohn Falstaffe. in October 1599) was an attempt to restore the Newly corrected by W. Shake-speare. London, reputation of the historical Oldcastle, as can be Printed by T(homas) P(urfoot) for Mathew Law, dwelling in Paules Church-yard, at the seen in the prologue: signe of the Foxe neere S. Augustines. 1622. It is no pampered glutten we present When published in the First Folio, the two Nor aged Councellour to youthfull sinne. parts are distinguished: There is further discussion in the edition of [F1 1623] The First part of King Henry the Bevington, but there is no definitive evidence as to fourth, [Head-title] The First Part of Henry which person, if any, made the dramatist change the Fourth, with the Life and Death of Henry the name of the character. It is also possible that Sirnamed Hotspur. Henry Carey, first Baron Hunsdon, had required the change. Hunsdon had succeeded Thomas Chambers believed that later quartos and the folio Radclyffe, Earl of Sussex and served as Lord derived in sequence from Q1 and that “newly Chamberlain from 1585–1596, presiding over the corrected”, which occurs from Q2 onwards, is Lord Chamberlain’s Men from their formation in merely a sales pitch. There are about 168 lines in 1594. F1, not reported in Q1, which are taken to be cuts as Q1 is left with awkward transitions. It is widely believed that the character of Falstaff Relations to Richard II, was originally named Sir John Oldcastle (as in the Henry IV Part 2 and The Merry Wives anonymous Famous Victories of Henry V, discussed of Windsor below and in Chapter 40), e.g. he is addressed as “my old man of the castle” (1.2.47) and there is a Most commentators follow Chambers and agree speech prefix ‘Old’ in 2 Henry IV at 1.2.137 where that Richard II was composed with Henry IV one might expect ‘Fal’. In the epilogue to 2 Henry in mind. The theme of father and son appears IV, a pointed reference is made to the fact that he strongly in the earlier play (Gaunt–Bolingbroke; is NOT Oldcastle but Falstaff. York–Aumerle; Northumberland–Hotspur) and is developed in the second play. At the end of Falstaff shall die of a sweat sc.[ in France], Richard II, Bolingbroke, now Henry IV, compares unless already a be killed by your hard his own son unfavourably to Hotspur, a rivalry opinions. For Oldcastle died martyr and this that reaches its climax in Henry IV Part 1. is not the man. Bolingbroke’s relationship with the Percys is also developed across the plays. Various prophecies and Chambers notes that the character was referred promises are recalled in Henry IV, while Henry to as Oldcastle as late as 1639. Gary Taylor has IV often alludes to the “crooked ways” in which developed the argument2 that after a performance he had gained the crown. of the play in 1596–7 (for which there is no direct Similarly, most commentators believe that evidence), the author bowed to pressure from Sir Henry IV Part 1 was composed with Henry IV John Oldcastle’s descendant, Sir William Brooke. Part 2 in mind. Part 1 ends with the dispatch of Brooke, who was the tenth Baron Cobham, held Henry’s princes to deal with the Archbishop of the post of Lord Chamberlain from August 1596 York’s Rebellion, which begins Part 2. Tillyard3 briefly until his death on 5 March 1597. In this and Dover Wilson agree on the idea of a ten- capacity, he was responsible for the Office of act play. Jenkins and Melchiori believe that the Master of Revels and for licensing plays. It Shakespeare envisaged a single five-act play is also possible that the pressure to change the (covering the main action in both parts) but name of the braggard soldier from Oldcastle to expanded it into two plays as he progressed. Falstaff came from Sir William’s son, Sir Henry Against this, Law has emphasised the differences Brooke, eleventh Baron Cobham. Taylor (and in the two parts, especially with the reduplication others) have further argued that the play called of material, but this is a minority view.

Finally, most commentators agree that Henry with Oldcastle in the three plays 1, 2 Henry IV IV Parts 1 & 2 were composed before Merry and Henry V; Famous Victories does not cover Wives of Windsor, because the comedy assumes Henry IV’s dealings with his rebellions. knowledge of characters from the history plays. A The following suggestions have been made few believe that Shakespeare broke off his history about Famous Victories in its relation to Henry IV: plays (before or during the composition of Henry IV Part 2) so as to write Merry Wives of Windsor. • FV is a memorial reconstruction of a This suggestion is considered in the chapter on longer play by another author, in which Henry IV Part 2. Oldcastle featured more prominently (Chambers, Ribner); • Shakespeare wrote FV (although the Relation to the anonymous extant version is a shortened, corrupt Famous Victories of Henry the Fifth version). Shakespeare later adapted and (1594 ?) expanded Famous Victories into the Henry IV – Henry V trilogy (Tillyard, Bullough and especially Pitcher4); There is no evidence about the relationship • FV was an original play by the Earl of between the anonymously published The Famous Oxford, later adapted and expanded by Victories of Henry the Fifth (FV) and Shakespeare’s him (Clark, Jimenez). plays. Although FV was registered on 14 May It is very clear that there is a close relationship 1594 and the earliest extant edition dates from between Famous Victories of Henry V and the 1598, there are various reasons to think that it was Henry IV–Henry V plays. See Ramon Jimenez, played earlier. The title page of FV records that it Chapter 40, for further consideration. had been played by the Queen’s Men, who were mainly active in the 1580s (according to Scott Performance Date McMillin and Sally-Beth MacLean, The Queen’s Men and their Plays, 1999. Richard Tarlton, who There are no contemporary records of actual died in 1588, is recorded as performing in a Prince performances of Henry IV Part 1 or Part Hal play (in Tarlton’s Jests): 2. However, judging by the many mentions of Falstaff, it would appear that Part 1 was At the [Red] Bull at Bishops-gate, was a play of Henry the fift, where in the judge was to performed frequently. The Chamber Accounts take a box on the eare; and because he was of 1612-13 record performances of plays called absent that should take the blow, Tarlton Hotspur (which is presumed to be 1 Henry IV) himself, ever forward to please, took upon and Sir Iohn Falstaffe, which Weis believes was 2 him to play the same judge, besides his owne Henry IV.5 part of the clowne. Sources Since the anecdote suggests events in a single play, FV, which are spread across Henry IV and Henry Bullough cites similar historical sources for Henry V, it seems likely that Tarlton appeared in a version IV Parts 1 & 2 as for Richard II. of Famous Victories, which would mean that it Edward Hall, The Union of the Two Noble must have been written before 1588. and Illustre Famelies of Lancastre and Yorke There is a reference in Nashe’s Pierce Pennilesse (1548–50). Bullough argues that the author began (1592), which recalls a scene similar to the ending his plan for the tetralogy by studying Hall but in Famous Victories: concedes that Hall might not have been used for What a glorious thing it is to have Henrie any details in the Henry IV plays. It is thought the fifth represented on the stage leading the likely, however, that the dramatist would have French king prisoner and forcing both him read Hall, where the sense of nemesis felt by and the Dolphin to swear fealty. Henry IV is particularly strong. Raphael Holinshed, The Chronicles of Ribner notes that FV only covers the events Englande, Scotlande, and Irelande (1st ed. 1577 concerning Prince Hal (or Henry V as he is called) & 2nd ed. 1587). Bullough demonstrates how

Holinshed provided most of the detailed material certainly used for Richard II) have also been for the play, including Worcester’s dismissal from noted in the references to misrule (Henry IV court, Percy’s rebellion, Mortimer’s capture and anxious that his son will not repeat the mistakes the Battle of Shrewsbury. It seems the wording of Richard II), an energetic Chief Justice and the for the second edition was used, e.g. “by smiling portrayal and intermingling of different social pickthanks and base newsmongers” (3.ii.25) which classes. is not in the first edition. Shaheen discusses the large number of biblical Samuel Daniel’s epic poem The First Fowre references in Henry IV Part 1. He notes that while Bookes of the Civile Wars was registered on all the sources tend to be moralistic and religious 11 October 1594 and published twice in 1595 in tone, there are very few actual references to the (according to the title page), i.e. two years before Bible in the original chronicles and only three in the registration and publication of Richard II. Famous Victories. Thus, according to Shaheen, Both play and poem make Prince Hal (historical Shakespeare introduced his own religious date of birth 1387) and Hotspur (historical birth references, especially for Falstaff (who utters 23 in 1364, and thus older than Hal’s father) roughly out of 55 references). References to classical works contemporaries. Both play and poem make are rare, but are evident in some of Falstaff’s Hal save the King’s life from Douglas and kill disquisitions on honour, (e.g. from Plautus’ Miles Hotspur. The problem is knowing whether Daniel Gloriosus, ‘the Braggart Soldier’) and in Vernon’s embarked on his epic poem before Shakespeare comparison of Hal to Mercury at 4.1.107, which began his tetralogy, or whether Shakespeare’s recalls Ovid’s Metamorphoses IV. Allusions to handling of various themes influenced Daniel. specific English literary works are also rare, but The anonymous Famous Victories of Henry include the anonymous New Enterlude called the Fifth (c. 1594 ?) provides the theme of the Thersytes (1537) for the braggart soldier (Falstaff) madcap prince developing into a fine king. While and John Lyly’s Endimion (1591), which seem to Hal’s antics were previously recorded, they were have influenced Falstaff’s speech at 2.4 368. The given prominence in this play. 1 Henry IV takes direction of influence, however, is not absolutely up the highway robbery; the riotous tavern established. scenes; the anticipations of mis-rule; the parody of authority; and the reconciliation of the Prince Orthodox Date – Internal Evidence with the King. The companions include Oldcastle (much less developed in FV compared to Falstaff King Henry IV Part 1 is uniformly dated to 1596 in 1H4), Ned (Poins) and Gadshill. Bullough or 1597, soon after the (apparent) composition of believes that the extant text of Famous Victories Richard II and shortly before its own publication is a debased, shortened form of an original play in quarto in 1598. Events and themes in Henry IV by Shakespeare, which may have been in the Part 1 follow closely on from Richard II. Wiggins repertoire before 1588. See Chapter 40 for further dates this play to 1597. consideration. Bullough believes that John Stow’s Chronicles Orthodox Date – External Evidence of England (1580) and Annals of England (1592) (or previous chronicles) was an indirect source, Christopher Highley has argued that there is a as it was almost certainly used by the author of close correspondence between Henry IV Part 1 Famous Victories for Hal’s adventures and for a and events in Ireland in the 1590s. In particular, legal report about Sir John Fastolf of Nacton. he sees parallels between Tyrone’s rebellion against A Mirrour for Magistrates (1559, 1563, 1578), the rule of Elizabeth and Shakespeare’s portrayal like Hall, begins with the reign of Richard II, and of Glendower. Bullough has suggested that the provided material for many characters featured levying of soldiers unfit for service (by Falstaff in I Henry IV: Bullough believes that the author at 4.i in 1H4 and at 3.ii in 2H4) resonates with might have used The Mirror for Magistrates(1559) events in the 1590s. Sir John Smithe had published for material on Owen Glendower and Henry Instructions, Observations and Orders Militarie in Percy, Earl of Northumberland, rather than Hall. which he gave advice on the recruitment of soldiers. Similarities with Thomas of Woodstock(almost In September 1596, the Council ordered that a

© De Vere Society 5 Dating Shakespeare’s Plays: Henry IV Part 1 hundred “serviceable” men, not “the baser sort”, 96). Jimenez, however, argues for an even earlier be levied in Northamptonshire for campaigns in date in the late 1560s, before Oxford attended Ireland.6 Gray’s Inn. For more details, see Chapter 40. For the revised version of Henry IV Part 1, close Oxfordian Dating connections to early 1587 have been suggested. Firstly, more than one plot against Elizabeth’s own There are many links between the behaviour of life had been made lately, including that of William Hal and the life of the young Oxford. The Boar’s Parry, member of Parliament and employee of the Head was the emblem of the de Vere family and trustworthy Sir Francis Walsingham. Secondly, the Earl himself had been unfavorably compared the author’s words about “fearful muster and to a boar’s head by Sir Christopher Hatton. prepared defense” apply closely to England in In 1602, the Earl’s own players were granted January 1587, with the Spanish armies had not permission to play at the Boar’s Head Inn in yet been engaged. The change from Oldcastle to Eastcheap. Another parallel lies in the depiction Falstaff would thus have been required by Henry of Falstaff committing highway robbery on the Carey as Lord Chamberlain. King’s Receivers at Gad’s Hill (between Rochester and Gravesend) only to be robbed by the disguised Conclusion prince in turn. This is reminiscent of a robbery in May 1573 of two of Lord Burghley’s servants by The extant 1 Henry IV can be dated to any time Oxford and some friends. Indeed, Burghley often between the 1587 publication of the second complained of the low life company kept by his edition of Holinshed, and 1598, when 1 Henry IV son-in-law.7 A further comparison lies in the very first appeared in print. sympathetic portrait of Henry IV, for whom the 8 Earls of Oxford had fought. Notes Oxfordians generally agree that the play was intended for performance at court, and that it 1. See Kastan’s edition, Appendix C, 349–53. is possible the Falstaff scenes were developed for 2. Gary Taylor (ed.), Henry V, Oxford edition, 1982. popular appeal when the play transferred to the 3. E. M. W. Tillyard’s Shakespeare’s English History public stage. Clark dates the early revision of Plays, original edition 1944 (rptd 1980). 1 Henry IV shortly after 1583–4 and she cites 4. Irvine Ribner, The English History Play in the Age many details in the play which correspond to the of Shakespeare (1957). Seymour Pitcher, The ‘Throckmorton Plot’ in 1582 to assassinate Queen Case for Shakespeare’s Authorship of ‘The Famous Elizabeth, with Hal’s errant behaviour based on Victories of Henry V’, 1966. See Jimenez, Chapter 40, for further discussion. Oxford’s own life. The rebellion of the Percys in 5. Rene Weis (ed.), King Henry IV Part 2, 1987. The 1 Henry IV appears to coincide closely with the second part of the text includes mention of Northern Rebellion against Elizabeth in 1569. many plays: Clark argues that Famous Victories was written Item paid to the said John Heminges by Oxford in the early 1570s to explain and excuse vppon the lyke warrant, dated att his behaviour in absconding to the Low Countries Whitehall xx° die Maij 1613, for without the permission of the Queen. It has presentinge sixe severall playes, viz: been variously described as “crude”, “primitive”, one playe called A badd beginininge “almost imbecilic”, a “decrepit pot-boiler”, and “a makes a good endinge, One other medley of nonsense and ribaldry”, which seems called the Capteyne, One other the to mark it out as a youthful endeavour. If Oxford Alcumist, One other Cardenno, presented his story of a ‘truant prince who begs One other The Hotspur, And one other called Benedicte and Betteris, forgiveness of the King’, as Clark suggests, before All played within the tyme of this the Queen at Christmas 1574, then it worked: Accompte viz: paid Fortie powndes, Elizabeth granted Oxford the next week a licence And by waye of his Majesties rewarde to travel. It may have been the “device” praised twentie powndes, In all lxn. and credited specifically to Oxford by the French Ambassador on 3 March 1579 (Chambers, ES, IV, 6. Christopher Highley, Shakespeare, Spenser and

the Crisis in Ireland. 1997. 7. Nelson describes the robbery (89–93) and the licence for the Boar’s Head (390–1). 8. See Verily Anderson, The De Veres of Castle Hedingham, 89–92, who describes the support of Richard, 11th Earl of Oxford, for Henry IV and Henry V.

Other Cited Works

Bevington, David (ed.), King Henry IV Part 1 Oxford: OUP, 1987 Bullough, G., Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare, vol. IV, London: Routledge, 1962 Chambers, E. K., William Shakespeare: a study of facts and problems, 2 vols, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930 Clark, E. T., Hidden Allusions in Shakespeare’s Plays, New York: Kennikat, rptd 1974 Farina, William, De Vere as Shakespeare, Jeffferson NC: MacFarland, 2006 Hodgdon, Barbara (ed.), The First Part of King Henry the Fourth, New York: Bedford Books, 1997 Humphreys, A. R. (ed.), King Henry IV Part 1, London: Arden 2, 1960 Humphreys, A. R. (ed.), King Henry IV Part 2, London: Arden 2, 1966 Kastan, David Scott (ed.), King Henry IV Part 1, Arden 3, London: Arden Shakespeare, 2002 Jenkins, Harold, The Structural Problem in Shakespeare’s ‘Henry IV’, London: Methuen, 1956 Law, R. A., ‘Structural Unity in the two parts of Henry IV’, SP 24, 1927: 223–242 Melchiori, Giorgio (ed.), The Second Part of Henry IV, Cambridge: CUP, 1989 Nelson, A. H., Monstrous Adversary, Liverpool: LUP, 2003 Shaheen, Naseeb, Biblical References in Shakespeare’s Plays, Delaware: UDP, 1999 Tillyard, E. M. W., Shakespeare’s History Plays, London: Chatto & Windus, 1944 Weis, Rene (ed.), King Henry IV Part 2, Oxford: OUP, 1987 Wells, S. & G. Taylor, William Shakespeare: a textual companion, Oxford: OUP, 1987 Wiggins, Martin (ed.) British Drama 1533–1642: A Catalogue, Volume III: 1590–1597. Oxford, OUP, 2013 Wilson, J. Dover (ed.), King Henry IV Part 1, Part 2, Cambridge: CUP, 1946