Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T14:35:40.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shakespeare, Hayward, and Essex

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Ray Heffner
Ray Heffner*
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In her article “Shakespeare's Richard II and the Essex Conspiracy,” Miss Evelyn May Albright seeks to establish a “vital connection” between Shakespeare's Richard II and John Hayward's Henry IV. Such a connection she thinks would prove Shakespeare's interest in and adherence to the Earl of Essex in his quarrel with the Queen and certain of her counsellors. In presenting her case, however, Miss Albright has failed to give full evidence which, if given in an unprejudiced manner, would destroy the value of her conclusions. It is my purpose in this paper to supply the evidence available concerning both the playing of Shakespeare's Richard II on February 7, 1601, and the publication of Hayward's Henry IV. This account will, I think, show that there is no evidence of any connection between either Hayward and Shakespeare or Shakespeare and Essex.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , September 1930 , pp. 754 - 780
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1930

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 PMLA, XLII, 686-728.

2 Op. cit., 578.

3 Elizabethan Stage, I, 325.

4 Op. cit., II, 204-7, 270.

5 Op. cit., 690.

6 Hargrave, Francis (Ed.): A Complete Collection of State-Trials … . Fourth Edition, London, 1778, Vol. II, p. 60. Miss Albright (p. 689) gives this quotation from Howell's State Trials, I, 1410 ff., but the account in Howell (p. 1412) is as follows: “It was also proved that the afternoon before the Rebellion, Merrick with a great company of others, who were all afterward in the action, had procured to be play'd before them the play of deposing King Richard The Second; neither was it casual but a play bespoke by Merrick; and when it was told him by one of the Players that the Play was old, and they should have loss in playing it, because few would come to it, there were forty shillings extraordinary given for it, and so it was played.” This is taken from Bacon's account as quoted above. See Hargrave, I (1776), p. 210 for another copy.

7 Op. cit. p. 690. She gives neither page reference nor signature, but implies that the quotation is from the main part of the work. It is to be found, however, in the second part which is entitled “Proceedings at the arraignments and after,” in the account of Merrick's trial. The signature is “Q 3.”

8 Loc. cit.

9 Sir Francis Bacon His Apologie, in certaine imputations, Concerning the Late Earle of Essex … London: 1604. Reprinted in Abbott's Bacon and Essex, App. 1, p. 20.

10 Loc. cit.

11 Annals (English Translation printed for Benjamin Fisher, London, 1630), Book 4, pp. 192-193.

12 Loc. cit.

13 I quote the title-page and full text of the dedication from the copy in the Peabody Library: The First Part of the Life and raigne of King Henrie the IUI. Extending to the first yeare of his raigne. Written by I. H. (Colophon) Imprinted at London by John Wolfe, and are to be solde at his shop in Popes Head Alley, neere to the Exchange, 1599. Illustrissimso & honoratisimo Roberto Comiti Essexiæ & Ewe, Comiti Marcescallo Angliæ, Vicecomti Herefordiæ & Bouchier: Baroni Ferrariis de Chartley, Domino Bouchier & Louen: Regiæ Maiestati Hyppacomo: Machinanum bellicarum præfecto: Academiæ Cantabrigiensis: Ordinis Georgiani Equiti aurato: Serenissimæ Domino Reginæ a sanctioribus consilijs: Domino meo Pluimum obseruando. Optimo & Nobilissimso (inquit Euripides) ex qua sententia in primus ac solus fere occurebas (illustrissime comes) cuius nomen si Henriai noster fronte radiaret, ipse & lætior & tutior in vulgus prodiret. Magnus siquidem es, & presenti iudicio & futuri temporis expectatione: in quo, veluti recuperasse nunc oculos, cæca prius fortuna videre potest; Dum cumulare honoribus eum gisti, qui omnibus, virtutibus est insignitus. Hunc igitur si læta fronte excipere digneris, sub nominis tui umbra (tanquam sub Aiacis clipio Teucer ille HOMERICUS) tutissime latebit. Deus opt. max celsitudinem tuam nobis, reique publicæ diu, servet in columen: quo nos vz. tam fide quam armis potentia tua dextra defensi, ultique diutina cum securitate tum gloria perfruamur. Honori tuo deditissimus.

I. Haywarde.

14 Cal. S. P. Dom., 1598-1601, p. 452. Miss Albright fails to quote this passage, although she does refer (pp. 700-701) to Harsnett's petition.

15 Op. cit. Bk. 4, pp. 126-127.

16 Op. cit. Book 4, p. 138.

17 Cal. S. P. D., 1598-1601, pp. 450-51. Dated July 13, 1600.

18 In the State Papers there is a copy of this preface: “Epistle to the reader vindicating Dr. Hayward's Henry IV from intending any attack upon the present times, where it speaks of ”Oppressions both unlawful and intolerable,“ because no impositions are hurtful or hateful, unless excessive or wastefully expended. Fable of the belly and the members. Illustration of the need of supporting the Prince from the siege of Constantinople, when the citizens hid their money instead of contributing to the defense; the Turks took the city and they were slaughtered.” (Cal. St. P. Dom. 1598-1601, p. 405 Two Copies.) It would seem from this question that the authorities did not accept the epistle as written in good faith. This is interesting in connection with the use of the “Fable of the belly” in Shakespeare's Coriolanus.

19 Cal. S. P. D., 1598-1601, p. 405. Dated “Feb. ? 1600”, but should be July.

20 S. P. D., 1598-1601, p. 453.

21 Op. cit., 555.

22 Op. cit., 567.

23 A comparison of the charges against Essex prepared in the Star Chamber on November 29, 1599, with those actually made against him at his first trial and later incorporated in the “analytical Abstract in support of the charge of treason against the Earl of Essex” (Cal. S. P. Dom., 1598-1601, p. 453) of July 22, 1600 will show how much Bacon's part in the trial “helped” Essex and what service he did by preventing the hearing in the Star Chamber.

24 Memoirs, II, 450.

25 Loc. cit.

26 Annals, Book 4, pp. 165-166.

27 P. 14. Italics mine.

28 Cal. S. P. Dom., p. 453-455. Dated July 22, 1600.

29 Op. cit., p. 20.

30 Cal. S. P. Dom., 1598-1601, p. 457.

31 “Shakespeare and Hayward,” Stud. in Philol. xxv, 312 ff.

32 Op. cit., p. 706.

33 These questions are quoted in full on page 777.

34 Cal. S. P. Dom. 1598-1601, 404-5. Italics mine.

35 E. K. Chambers places it in 1595, Eliz. Stage, II, 194.

36 E. P. Kuhl, op. cit., calls attention to Miss Albright's failure to quote accurately Hayward's statement concerning the time of his writing the history.

37 Op. cit., p. 692.

38 Op. cit., 701. The second italics are mine.

39 Op. cit., 706.

40 Cal. S. P. Dom., 1598-1601, p. 455. Italics are Miss Albright's.

41 Although the editor of the Calendar of State Papers dates the list of questions to be asked of Hayward Feb. ? 1600, this examination, dated Jan. 22, 1601, is evidently Hayward's answer to the list of questions drawn up by Chief Justice Popham. Hayward was taken into custody prior to July 26, 1600, as John Chamberlain's letter (quoted ante) indicates. The numerous entries in the Calendar around July 22 make it clear that Hayward's arrest followed Essex's first trial.

42 Camden Annals, pp. 606-607. Quoted Cadwallader, L. H.: Career of the Earl of Essex (1597-1601) Phila. 1923. p. 75.

43 “Rough notes of Speeches in the Star Chamber,” Feb. 13, 1601, Cal. S. P. D. 1598-1601, p. 575.

44 Op. cit., 567.

45 Op. cit., 584.

46 Nichols: Progresses of Q. Elizabeth, III, 552.

47 Hamlet and the Scottish Succession.

48 pp. 36-37. However, in justice to Miss Albright, I should point out that she is confused about the date—she thinks that it is 1601 instead of 1600.

49 Treasons and Practices, sig. Q.

50 Cal. S. P. Dom., p. 347.

51 Op. cit., p. 351.

52 Hayward's answer is quoted ante.

53 Cal. S. P. Dom., 1598-1601, pp. 404-5, Miss Albright quotes all the above except the last three, but she gives no indication that her list is not complete. Numbers and italics are mine.

54 Op. cit., pp. 352-3.

55 Op. cit., p. 449. Not quoted by Miss Albright.

56 Quoted ante.

57 From his own admission, he was employed by the Queen in at least three such tasks, the two trials of Essex and one other.

58 Cal. S. P. Dom., 1598-1601, p. 567.