¹¹⁷ PRO SP 12/274, no. 61; italics mine, showing change of emphasis.

¹¹⁸ Hayward's historical theory and its significance has not had the benefit of much modern commentatary. Goldberg, S. L., ‘Sir John Hayward, ‘politic’ historian,’ Review of English Studies, NS 6 (1955), 233–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Levy, F. J., Tudor Historical Thought (San Marino, Calif., 1967), esp. 259–69Google Scholar, are the most comprehensive treatments. Dean, L. F., in ‘Sir Francis Bacon's theory of civil history writing,’ ELH, 8 (1941), 161–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar, treats Hayward's theory of history mainly in relationship to Bacon's. E.B. Benjamin offers a brief but very useful survey of Hayward's stylistic dependence upon Savile's translations of Tacitus, in ‘Sir John Hayward and Tacitus,’ RES, NS 8 (1957), 275–6Google Scholar. Mervyn James (noted above) mentions Hayward's reliance upon honour as a central theme. Woolf, D. R., Change and Continuity in English Historical Thought, c.1590–1640 (unpublished D. Phil, thesis, Oxford, 1983)Google Scholar, gives a general summary of Hayward's historiography. Lily B. Campbell analyses The First Part and the topicality of its themes in Shakespeare's ‘Histories’, 168–212, in a chapter that elaborates her earlier article ‘The use of historical patterns in the reign of Elizabeth, ,’ Huntington Library Quarterly, i (1938), 135–69.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ PRO, SP 12/278, no. 17.

¹²⁰ Dean, 170–1.

¹²¹ According to Benjamin, a complete list of Hayward's borrowings in The First Part from Sir Henry Savile's translations of the Histories and The Life of Agricola, and from Savile's The Ende of Nero to the Beginning of Galba (both cited above) would run to a dozen pages, particularly in the identification of ‘political aphorisms and maxims used to interpret and clarify the events of Richard's reign.’ Benjamin gives the following examples (his page references are to the quarto editions of Savile (1598) and Hay ward (1599): Aphorisms and maxims: S (p) 165, H (pp) 1–2; S 137, H 135; S 199–200, H 12, 54; S 201, H 50, 52; S 6, H 59; S 2, 1, 2, 17, H 64, 65, 66, 67–8. Broader historical parallels: S 190, 191, 192–3, 194, 196, 189, H 56, 57, 58, 60. Battle scenes: S 135–6, H 31; S 110–11, H 142; S 131, H 148. Characters: S 1, H 4; S 139, H 130. (Savile was himself imprisoned briefly at the time of the earl's trial.)

¹²² One example: a diary-entry of Sir Symonds D'Ewes (23 May 1623): ‘I studied a little, and lighting by chance upon Heiwards Henrye the fowerth, read somewhat in it and was the rathre drawen to reed further, because his raigne came somewhat neare our hard times.’ Bourcier, Elisabeth, ed., The Diary of Sir Simonas D'Ewes, 1622–1624 (Paris, Sorbonne, 1975), 138Google Scholar, also 34. Note also its 1642 publication in a double volume with Sir Robert Cotton's intentionally topical Life of Henry III (Wing, 06494; see below, ‘Bibiliographic Comment,’ item F.).

¹²³ Bradford, Alan T., ‘Stuart absolutism and the ‘utility’ of Tacitus,’ Huntington Library Quarterly, 46 (1983), 127–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹²⁴ Benjamin (275) points out that Hayward's assessment of Richard's banishment of Bolingbroke is based on Machiavelli's Discourses, ii, 13, and that the Bishop of Carlisle's long speech amounts to a ‘direct translation of the part of Bodin's République (ii, 5) that distinguishes between elective and hereditary monarchy.’

¹²⁵ PRO, SP 12/278, no. 17.

¹²⁶ BL MS Cotton Julius C III, f. 191 (14 Oct. 1621). Italics mine.

¹²⁷ Hayward asserts in The Life and Raigne of King Edward the Sixt (1630)Google Scholar, that the reporting of Acts of Parliament unrelated to main political events, is ‘fruitlesse & improper to a true caryed history’ (p. 47). He asserts elsewhere that ‘in all Histories three things are especially required, Order, Poyse, and Truth.’ See the introduction to his edition of SirWilliams, Roger' The Actions in the Low Countries (London, 1618)Google Scholar. See also Goldberg, , 236–43Google Scholar; Dean, , 177Google Scholar. But Strype, John, Ecclesiastical Memorials (1822) II, ii, 186–7Google Scholar, adds this to the other faults he found in Hayward's writing.

¹²⁸ Although the quartos do not mark these divisions, I have marked them in the present edition of The First Part as a convenience to the modern student. Hayward's inclination to cast material into a dramatic structure is not limited to his retelling of the Henry IV story. It is even more evident in The Life and Raigne of Edward the Sixt (1630)Google Scholar, where he explicitly refers to such segmentation (‘And now to begin the third act of this tragedie…’); on this point see Levy, , 265–8Google Scholar. See also below, 166: ‘… and in his person … the tragedie did end.’

¹²⁹ Hayward's confusion about Bolingbroke's military expeditions in 1390 (to Prussia) and 1392 (to Jerusalem), offer an example. He incorporates details (from Walsingham) of the siege of Vilna, a feature of the 1390 campaign (in which Derby participated) into his account of the Anglo-French raid on Tunis and the Barbary pirates (in which he did not). For interesting comment upon Hayward's mishandling of this account, see Smith, Lucy Toulmin, ed., Expeditions to Prussia and the Holy Land made by the Earl of Derby, Camden Society Publications new ser., no. 52 (1894), p. xxxviii.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ This inclination was not uniformly admired by 18th- and 19th-century observers. Bishop Nicolson noted that Hayward ‘had the Repute (in those Days) of a good clean pen, and smooth style; tho' some have since blam'd him for being a little too Dramatical,’ in The English, Scotch and Irish Historical Libraries, Giving a Short View and Character of Most of our Historians, … etc. (London, 1736), 821Google Scholar. Strype reports that ‘his style and language is good, and so is his fancy too; only he makes too much use of it for an historian: which puts him sometimes to make speeches for others which they never spake, nor perhaps thought on …’ (Ecclesiastical Memorials, II, ii, 179Google Scholar.). The Fasti Oxoniensis (I, 368) observes that ‘some have wished that in his History of Hen. 4 … he had not changed his historical stile into a dramatical….’ Oldys, in the Harleian Miscellany (London, 1809)Google Scholar, repeats Strype's view, noting that ‘Kennet terms him, a professed speech-maker’ (438).

¹³¹ SP 12/278, 17 (italics mine).

¹³² Campbell, (Shakespeare's ‘Histories’, 185)Google Scholar argues Hayward's side.

¹³³ Patterson, Annabel, Censorship and Interpretation: the Conditions of Writing and Reading in Early Modern England (Madison, 1984), 46–8Google Scholar. A capacity of early modern texts to resist unambiguous interpretation of arguably anti-government statements is typical of the uneasy balance between author and censor during this period. Prof. Patterson focusses upon The First Part and discerns in Chamberlain's letter about the book (cited above) the principles governing a broad mutual understanding between authors and readers of the period concerning controversial topics: ‘topical (and hence exciting) reading may be present, but cannot be proven to be so.’ She argues that ‘this indeterminacy is central to the hermeneutics of censorship,’ or, as Chamberlain puts it, ‘every thing is as it is taken.’

¹³⁴ Goldberg, , 238Google Scholar, citing The First Part, 69.Google Scholar

¹³⁵ Goldberg, , 235.Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Hayward's most extensive commentary upon historiography and historians appears in the introduction he wrote for his edition of The Actions of the Lowe Countries, by Sir Roger Williams (London, 1618)Google Scholar, quoted here.