Prophecy in Shakespeare’s English History Cycles Lee Joseph Rooney Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements of the University of Liverpool for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy September 2014 Abstract Prophecy — that is, the action of foretelling or predicting the future, particularly a future thought to represent the will of God — is an ever-present aspect of Shakespeare’s historical dramaturgy. The purpose of this thesis is to offer a reading of the dramas of Shakespeare’s English history cycles — from 1 Henry VI to Henry V — that focuses exclusively upon the role played by prophecy in representing and reconstructing the past. It seeks to show how, through close attention to the moments when prophecy emerges in these historical dramas, we might arrive at a different understanding of them, both as dramatic narratives and as meditations on the nature of history itself. As this thesis seeks to demonstrate, moreover, Shakespeare’s treatment of prophecy in any one play can be viewed, in effect, as a key that can take us to the heart of that drama’s wider concerns. The comparatively recent conception of a body of historical plays that are individually distinct and no longer chained to the Tillyardian notion of a ‘Tudor myth’ (or any other ‘grand narrative’) has freed prophecy from effectively fulfilling the rather one-dimensional role of chorus. However, it has also raised as-yet- unanswered questions about the function of prophecy in Shakespeare’s English history cycles, which this thesis aims to consider. One of the key arguments presented here is that Shakespeare utilises prophecy not to emphasise the pervasiveness of divine truth and providential design, but to express the political, narratorial, and interpretative disorder of history itself. It is also argued that any conception of the English history plays that rejects homogeneity and even consistency must also acknowledge that prophecy, as a form of historical narrative in essence, cannot be expected to manifest itself in the same ways in each drama throughout Shakespeare’s career. In this sense, the purpose of this thesis is to show that Shakespeare not only uses ‘prophecy’ to construct ‘history’: as a dramatist, he also thinks through ‘prophecy’, in various ways and from multiple perspectives, in order to intensify and complicate our sense of the complexity and drama of history itself. This thesis treats the English chronicle plays in order of composition and performance. While the Introduction contextualizes concepts of prophecy in the early modern period, and its relationship to history in particular, chapters 1–3 address the Henry VI plays and Richard III, with chapters 4 and 5 examining Richard II and the two parts of Henry IV. Henry V is addressed in the Conclusion. The inclusion of the second cycle of histories, rarely interrogated by critics in relation to prophecy, is crucial to the approach taken by this thesis. Unlike previous studies, this thesis privileges prophecy in both the earlier and the later histories, not least because its perceived absence from the plays of the second cycle is capable of informing our understanding of Shakespeare’s historical dramaturgy more generally. What is at stake in this reading of prophecy in Shakespeare’s English histories, both locally in the plays themselves and more generally across the cycles, are questions of causality, identity (both personal and national), monarchy, and the art of theatre itself. Acknowledgements This thesis could not have been completed without my family and friends, whose love and support has sustained me throughout my doctoral studies. I am eternally and especially grateful to my parents, without whom I would have been unable to come this far: this thesis is for them. Thank you to my supervisor, Dr Michael Davies, who has given incredible guidance and encouragement, and shown me great empathy, patience, and understanding, for the last four years; thanks also to Dr Greg Lynall, who not only acted as my primary supervisor in Michael’s absence, but twice read my thesis in its entirety. Special mention is due to the staff and postgraduates of the School of English at the University of Liverpool, but particularly to Maria Shmygol, who has lent her ear and provided me with invaluable conversation (as well, of course, as coffee) on more occasions than I could possibly remember. I would like to express my gratitude to Mrs Barbara Statham, whose generous endowment to the School of English helped to fund me for much of my doctoral studies. Finally, to Molly: thank you for your love, and for managing to care about my work despite the demands of your own; I would not wish any companion in the world but you. Contents Introduction p. 1 1. ‘A prophet to the fall of all our foes!’: Prophecy and challenging history in 1 Henry VI p. 35 2. ‘What it doth bode God knows’: Prophecy, disorder, and unpredictability in 2 and 3 Henry VI p. 62 3. ‘Libels, prophecies, and dreams’: Prophecy and the foundations of historical myth in Richard III p. 99 4. Hollow words and hollow crowns: The performance of prophecy in Richard II p. 136 5. ‘O, I could prophesy...’: The absence of prophecy of 1 and 2 Henry IV p. 169 Conclusion: ‘The chronicle of wasted time’: Prophecy in Shakespeare’s English history cycles p. 209 Bibliography p. 221 Introduction Let me speak, sir, For heaven now bids me, and the words I utter Let none think flattery, for they’ll find ’em truth.1 In the final scene proper of Henry VIII, or All Is True, believed to have been first performed in 1613, Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury, demands the prerogative of the prophet, whose claim to communicate divine truth grants him or her a uniquely privileged platform from which to speak. Presiding over the baptismal ceremony of Princess Elizabeth, Cranmer, as if inspired, utters a prophecy that foretells her glorious reign, as well as that of her successor, James VI and I. Though lengthy, it is worth quoting in full: This royal infant—heaven still move about her— Though in her cradle, yet now promises Upon this land a thousand thousand blessings, Which time shall bring to ripeness. She shall be— But few now living can behold that goodness— A pattern to all princes living with her, And all that shall succeed. Sheba was never More covetous of wisdom and fair virtue Than this pure soul shall be. All princely graces That mould up such a mighty piece as this is, With all the virtues that attend the good, Shall still be doubled on her. Truth shall nurse her, Holy and heavenly thoughts still counsel her. She shall be loved and feared. Her own shall bless her; Her foes shake like a field of beaten corn, And hang their heads with sorrow. Good grows with her. In her days every man shall eat in safety Under his own vine what he plants and sing The merry songs of peace to all his neighbours. 1 William Shakespeare and John Fletcher, Henry VIII, or All Is True, ed. by Jay L. Halio (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 5.4.14–16. All subsequent references are to this edition and are placed in the body of the text. 1 God shall be truly known, and those about her From her shall read the perfect ways of honour And by those claim their greatness, not by blood. Nor shall this peace sleep with her but, as when The bird of wonder dies—the maiden phoenix— Her ashes new create another heir As great in admiration as herself, So shall she leave her blessedness to one, When heaven shall call her from this cloud of darkness, Who from the sacred ashes of her honour Shall star-like rise as great in fame as she was, And so stand fixed. Peace, plenty, love, truth, terror, That were the servants to this chosen infant, Shall then be his and like a vine grow to him. Wherever the bright sun of heaven shall shine, His honour and the greatness of his name Shall be, and make new nations. He shall flourish And like a mountain cedar reach his branches To all the plains about him. Our children’s children Shall see this and bless heaven. KING HENRY Thou speakest wonders. CRANMER She shall be to the happiness of England An agèd princess. Many days shall see her, And yet no day without a deed to crown it. Would I had known more. But she must die— She must, the saints must have her—yet a virgin. A most unspotted lily shall she pass To th’ ground, and all the world shall mourn her. (HVIII, 5.4.17–62) It is ironic that the final prophecy — and, indeed, the final scene — of Shakespeare’s last English history play is likely to have been written not by Shakespeare himself but by a collaborator, John Fletcher.2 Nevertheless, Cranmer’s speech was no doubt included in the play with Shakespeare’s blessing, and its status as the probable handiwork of another playwright does little to diminish the sense that the prophecy represents an apt end to Shakespeare’s career as a writer of historical drama. In fact, 2 See Brian Vickers, Shakespeare, Co-Author: A Historical Study of Five Collaborative Plays (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), pp. 331–402, 433–45, 480–91. 2 throughout his English histories, Shakespeare turns regularly to prophecy in order to achieve a variety of effects. It offers a means of organising and thereby illuminating history and historical drama, but it is equally capable of emphasising and even engendering complexity, confusion, and chaos, often signalling ‘terror’ rather than ‘Peace’ (HVIII, 5.4.47), to borrow Cranmer’s terms.