Chapter II: Part 2

If it is difficult to reconcile Anne's heartlessness with her piety, it should be remembered that cruelty is often the twin-sister of religious fervour.

Whatever may have been her failings of character, whatever misfortunes she may have suffered during her life, Anne will ever live in history as one of the master mistresses of the world.

THE DIVORCE

As to the divorce, it will be well to clear away the enormous amount of argument, of vituperation and prevarication by which the whole question is obscured, and to seek by the magnet of common sense to find the needle of truth in this vast bundle of hay.

The situation was complicated. In those days it was generally supposed that no woman could succeed to the throne, and a male successor was regarded as a political necessity. Charles V., too, was plotting to depose Henry and to proclaim James V. as ruler of England, or Mary, who was to be married to an English noble for this purpose.

_The Succession_

The Duke of Buckingham was the most formidable possible heir to the throne, were the King to die without male heirs. His execution took place in 1521. Desperate men take desperate remedies. Now, in 1519, Henry had a natural son by Elizabeth Blount, sister of Lord Mountjoy. This boy Henry contemplated placing on the throne, so causing considerable uneasiness to the Queen. In 1525 he was created Duke of Richmond. Shortly after he was made Lord High Admiral of England and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. It was suggested that he should marry a royal Princess. Another suggestion was that he should marry his half-sister, an arrangement which seems to have commended itself to the Pope, on condition that Henry abandoned his divorce from Queen Katharine! But this was not to be, and Mary was betrothed to the French prince. An heir must be obtained somehow, and the divorce, therefore, took more and more tangible shape. A marriage with Anne Boleyn was the next move. To attain this object, Henry applied himself with his accustomed energy. His conscience walked hand in hand with expediency.

To Rome, Henry sent many embassies and to the Universities of Christendom much gold, in order to persuade them to yield to the dictates of his conscience. His passion for marriage lines in his amours was one of Henry's most distinguishing qualities.

In 1527 an union between Francis I. and the Princess Mary was set on foot. Here the question of Mary's legitimacy was debated, and this gave Henry another excuse for regarding the divorce as necessary.

As the modern historian might aptly say: "Here was a pretty kettle of fish."

There can be little doubt that as a man of God, Wolsey strongly disapproved of the divorce, but as the King's Chancellor he felt himself bound to urge his case to the best of his ability. He was in fact the advocate--the devil's advocate--under protest. One cannot imagine a more terrible position for a man of conscience to be placed in, but once even a cardinal embarks in politics the working of his conscience is temporarily suspended. In world politics the Ten Commandments are apt to become a negligible quantity.

Henry's conscience was becoming more and more tender. Much may be urged in favour of the divorce from a political point of view, and no doubt Henry had a powerful faculty of self-persuasion--such men can grow to believe that whatever they desire is right, that "there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so." It is a pity, however, that Henry's scruples did not assert themselves before the marriage with Katharine took place, for the ethical arguments against such an union were then equally strong. Indeed, these scruples appear to have been a "family failing," for Henry's sister Margaret, Queen of Scotland, obtained a dispensation of divorce from Rome on far slenderer grounds. To make matters worse for Henry, Rome was sacked--the Pope was a prisoner in the Emperor's hands. In this state of things, the Pope was naturally disinclined to give offence to the Emperor by divorcing his aunt (Katharine).

At all costs, the Pope must be set free--on this errand Wolsey now set out for France. But Charles V. was no less wily than Wolsey, and dispatched Cardinal Quignon to Rome to frustrate his endeavours, and to deprive Wolsey of his legatine powers. A schism between Henry and Wolsey was now asserting itself--Wolsey being opposed to the King's union with Anne Boleyn. ("We'll no Anne Boleyns for him!") Wolsey desired that the King should marry the French King's sister, in order to strengthen his opposition to Charles V. of Spain.

The Cardinal was indeed in an unenviable position. If the divorce succeeded, then his enemy, Anne Boleyn, would triumph and he would fall. If the divorce failed, then Henry would thrust from him the agent who had failed to secure the object of his master. And in his fall the Cardinal would drag down the Church. It is said that Wolsey secretly opposed the divorce. This is fully brought out in Shakespeare's play, and is indeed the main cause of Wolsey's fall.

There was for Henry now only one way out of the dilemma into which the power of the Pope had thrown him--that was to obtain a dispensation for a bigamous marriage. It seems that Henry himself cancelled the proposition before it was made. This scruple was unnecessary, for the Pope himself secretly made a proposition "that His Majesty might be allowed two wives."

The sanction for the marriage with Anne Boleyn was obtained without great difficulty--but it was to be subject to the divorce from Katharine being ratified. Thus the King was faced with another obstacle. At this moment began the struggle for supremacy at Rome between English and Spanish influence. The Pope had to choose between the two; Charles V. was the victor, whereupon Henry cut the Gordian knot by throwing over the jurisdiction of Rome. Wolsey was in a position of tragic perplexity. He was torn by his allegiance to the King, and his zeal for the preservation of the Church. He wrote: "I cannot reflect upon it and close my eye, for I see ruin, infamy and subversion of the whole dignity and estimation of the See Apostolic if this course is persisted in." But Pope Clement dared not offend the Emperor Charles, who was his best, because his most powerful ally, and had he not proved his power by sacking Rome? The Pope, although quite ready to grant dispensations for a marriage of Princess Mary and her half-brother, the Duke of Richmond, though he was ready to grant Margaret's divorce, could not afford to stultify the whole Papal dignity by revoking the dispensation he had originally given that Henry should marry his brother's wife. Truly an edifying embroglio! Henry was desirous of shifting the responsibility on God through the Pope--the Pope was sufficiently astute to wish to put the responsibility on the devil through Henry. There was one other course open--that course the Pope took.

In 1528 he gave a Commission to Wolsey and Cardinal Campeggio to try the case themselves, and pronounce sentence. Back went the embassy to England. Wolsey saw through the device, for the Pope was still free to revoke the Commission. Indeed Clement's attitude towards Henry was dictated entirely by the fluctuating fortune of Charles V., Emperor of Spain. Meanwhile, Charles won another battle against the French, and the Pope at once gave secret instructions to Campeggio to procrastinate, assuring Charles that nothing would be done which should be to the detriment of Katharine. The wily Campeggio (emissary of the Pope) at first sought to persuade Henry to refrain from the divorce. Henry refused. Thereupon he endeavoured to persuade Katharine voluntarily to enter a nunnery. Among all these plotters and intriguers, Katharine, adamant in her virtue, maintained her position as lawful wife and Queen.

When Wolsey and Campeggio visited the Queen she was doing needlework with her maids. It appears (and this is important as showing the inwardness of Wolsey's attitude in the matter of the divorce) that "from this interview the Queen gained over both legates to her cause; indeed, they would never pronounce against her, and this was the head and front of the King's enmity to his former favourite Wolsey." In the first instance, Wolsey was undoubtedly a party, however unwilling, to the separation of the King and Queen, in order that Henry might marry the brilliant and high-minded sister of Francis I., Duchess of Alencon. That lady would not listen to such a proposal, lest it should break the heart of Queen Katharine. Wolsey was, either from personal enmity towards Anne Boleyn or from his estimate of her character, or from both, throughout opposed to the union with that lady.

Subsequently the King sent to Katharine a deputation from his Council announcing that he had, by the advice of Cranmer, obtained the opinions of the universities of Europe concerning the divorce, and found several which considered it expedient. He therefore entreated her, for the quieting of his conscience, that she would refer the matter to the arbitration of four English prelates and four nobles. The Queen received the message in her chamber, and replied to it: "God grant my husband a quiet conscience, but I mean to abide by no decision excepting that of Rome." This infuriated the King.

After many delays and the appearance of a document which was declared by one side to be a forgery, and by the other to be genuine, the case began on May 31, 1529. In the great hall of Blackfriars both the King and Queen appeared in person to hear the decision of the Court. The trial itself is very faithfully rendered in Shakespeare's play. Finding the King obdurate, Katharine protested against the jurisdiction of the Court, and appealing finally to Rome, withdrew from Blackfriars.

Judgment was to be delivered on the 23rd of July, 1529. Campeggio rose in the presence of the King and adjourned the Court till October. This was the last straw, and the last meeting of the Court. Henry had lost. Charles was once more in the ascendant. England and France had declared war on him in 1528, but England's heart was not in the enterprise--the feeling of hatred to Wolsey became widespread. Henry and Charles made terms of peace, and embraced once more after a bloodless and (for England) somewhat ignominious war. The French force was utterly defeated in battle. The Pope and Charles signed a treaty--all was nicely arranged. The Pope's nephew was to marry the Emperor's natural daughter; certain towns were to be restored to the Pope, who was to crown Charles with the Imperial crown. The participators in the sacking of Rome were to be absolved from sin; the proceedings against the Emperor's aunt, Katharine, were to be null and void. If Katharine could not obtain justice in England, Henry should not have his justice in Rome. The Pope and the Emperor kissed again, and Henry finally cut himself adrift from Rome. It was the failure of the divorce that made England a Protestant country.

Henry now openly defied the Pope, by whom he was excommunicated, and so "deprived of the solace of the rites of religion; when he died he must lie without burial, and in hell suffer torment for ever." The mind shrinks from contemplating the tortures to which the soul of His Majesty might have been subjected but for the timely intervention of his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury.

So far from Henry suffering in a temporal sense, he continued to defy the opinion and the power of the world. He showed his greatness by looking public opinion unflinchingly in the face; by ignoring, he conquered it. Amid the thunderous roarings of the Papal bull, Henry stood--as we see him in his picture--smiling and indifferent. "I never saw the King merrier than now," wrote a contemporary in 1533. Henry always had good cards--now he held the ace of public opinion up his sleeve.

Wolsey, although averse to the Queen's divorce and the marriage of Anne Boleyn, expressed himself in terms of the strongest opposition to the overbearing Pope. A few days before the Papal revocation arrived, the Cardinal wrote thus: "If the King be cited to appear at Rome in person or by proxy, and his prerogative be interfered with, none of his subjects will tolerate it. If he appears in Italy, it will be at the head of a formidable army." Opposed as they were to the divorce, the English people were of one mind with Wolsey in this attitude.

Henry was not slow to avail himself of the new development, and he made the divorce become in the eyes of the people but a secondary consideration to the pride of England. He drew the red herring of the Reformation across the trail of the divorce. The King and his Parliament held that the Church should not meddle with temporal affairs. The Church was the curer of souls, not the curer of the body politic.

Katharine's cause sank into the background. The voice of justice was drowned by the birth shrieks of the Reformation.

KATHARINE OF ARAGON

From the Portrait in the National Portrait Gallery]

THE REFORMATION

We must remind ourselves that the divorce was merely the irritation which brought the discontent with Rome to a head. Religious affairs were in a very turbulent state. The monasteries were corrupt. The rule of Rome had become political, not spiritual. Luther had worked at shattering the pretensions of the Pope in Europe. Wolsey had prepared the English to acquiesce in Henry's religious supremacy by his long tenure of the whole Papal authority within the realm and the consequent suspension of appeals to Rome. Translations of the New Testament were being secretly read throughout the country--a most dangerous innovation--and Anne Boleyn, who had no cause to love the Pope or his power, held complete sway over the King.

She and her father were said to be "more Lutheran than Luther himself." Though Henry was anti-Papal, he was never anti-Catholic, but, as the representative of God, as head of his own Church, he claimed to take precedence of the Pope. Moreover, the spoliation of the Church was not an unprofitable business.

Rome declared the divorce illegal. Henry, with the support of his Parliament, abolished all forms of tribute to Rome, arranged that the election of Bishops should take place without the interference of the Pope, and declared that if he did not consent to the King's wishes within three months, the whole of his authority in England should be transferred to the Crown. This conditional abolition of the Papal authority was in due course made absolute, and the King assumed the title of Head of the Church.

"The breach with Rome" was effected with a cold and calculated cunning, which the most adept disciple of Machiavelli could not have excelled."--(Pollard.)

With an adroitness amounting to genius, Henry now used the moral suasion (not to use an uglier word) of threats towards the Church to induce the Pope to relent and to assent to the divorce. One by one, in this deadly battle, did the Pope's prerogatives vanish, until the sacerdotal foundations of Rome, so far as England was concerned, had been levelled to the ground.

After many further political troubles and intrigues Henry prevailed on Cranmer, now Archbishop of Canterbury, as head of the Church, to declare the marriage between himself and Katharine to be null and void, and five days later Cranmer declared that Henry and Anne Boleyn were lawfully married. On the 1st of June, 1533, the Archbishop crowned Anne as Queen in Westminster Abbey. Shortly after she gave birth to a daughter, who was christened Elizabeth, and became Queen of England.

Beyond this incident, with which the strange eventful history of Shakespeare's play ends, it is not proposed to travel in these notes, which are but intended as a brief chronicle that may guide the play-goer of to-day (sometimes a hasty reader) to realize the conditions of Henry's reign.

MANNERS AND CUSTOMS

In the days of Henry VIII., the ways of society differed from our own more in observance than in spirit. Though the gay world danced and gambled very late, they rose very early. Their conversation was coarse and lacked reserve. The ladies cursed freely. Outward show and ceremony were considered of the utmost importance. Hats were worn by the men in church and at meals, and only removed in the presence of the King and Cardinal. Kissing was far more prevalent as a mode of salutation. The Court society spent the greater part of their income on clothes. To those in the King's set, a thousand pounds was nothing out of the way to spend on a suit of clothes. The predominant colours at Court were crimson and green; the Tudor colours were green and white. It was an age of magnificent plate, and the possession and display of masses of gold and silver plate was considered as a sign of power. Later on in Shakespeare's time, not only the nobles, but also the better class citizens boasted collections of plate.

A quaint instance of the recognition of distinctions of rank is afforded by certain "Ordinances" that went forth as the "Bouche of Court." Thus a Duke or Duchess was allowed in the morning one chet loaf, one manchet and a gallon of ale; in the afternoon one manchet and one gallon of ale; and for after supper one chet loaf, one manchet, one gallon of ale and a pitcher of wine, besides torches, etc. A Countess, however, was allowed nothing at all after supper, and a gentleman usher had no allowance for morning or afternoon. These class distinctions must have weighed heavily upon humbler beings, such as Countesses; but perhaps they consumed more at table to make up for these after-meal deficiencies.

Table manners were a luxury as yet undreamed of. The use of the fork was a new fashion just being introduced from France and Spain.

A NOTE ON THE PRODUCTION OF HENRY VIII. AT HIS MAJESTY'S THEATRE

From the descriptions which have appeared in these pages, it will be seen that the period of Henry VIII. was characterized by great sumptuousness; indeed, the daily life of the Court consisted largely of revels, masques and displays of splendour.

Henry VIII. is largely a pageant play. As such it was conceived and written, as such we shall endeavour to present it to the public. Indeed, it is obvious that it would be far better not to produce the play at all than to do so without those adjuncts, by which alone the action of the play can be illustrated. Of course, it is not possible to do more than indicate on the stage the sumptuousness of the period of history covered by the play; but it is hoped that an impression will be conveyed to our own time of Henry in his habit as he lived, of his people, of the architecture, and of the manners and customs of that great age.

_The Text_

It has been thought desirable to omit almost in their entirety those portions of the play which deal with the Reformation, being as they are practically devoid of dramatic interest and calculated, as they are, to weary an audience. In taking this course, I feel the less hesitation as there can be no doubt that all these passages were from the first omitted in Shakespeare's own representations of the play.

We have incontrovertible evidence that in Shakespeare's time, Henry VIII. was played in "two short hours."

"... Those that come to see
Only a show or two and so agree
The play may pass. If they be still and willing
I'll undertake may see away their shilling
Richly in two short hours."

These words, addressed to the audience in the prologue, make it quite clear that a considerable portion of the play was considered by the author to be superfluous to the dramatic action--and so it is. Acted without any waits whatsoever, Henry VIII., as it is written, would take at least three hours and a half in the playing. Although we are not able to compass the performance within the prescribed "two short hours," for we show a greater respect for the preservation of the text than did Shakespeare himself, an attempt will be made to confine the absolute spoken words as nearly as possible within the time prescribed in the prologue.

In the dramatic presentation of the play, there are many passages of intensely moving interest, the action and characters are drawn with a remarkable fidelity to the actualities. As has been suggested, however, the play depends more largely than do most of Shakespeare's works on those outward displays which an attempt will be made to realize on the stage.

_Shakespeare as Stage Manager_

That Shakespeare, as a stage-manager, availed himself as far as possible of these adjuncts is only too evident from the fact that it was the firing off the cannon which caused a conflagration and the consequent burning down of the Globe Theatre. The destruction of the manuscripts of Shakespeare's plays was probably due to this calamity. The incident shows a lamentable love of stage-mounting for which some of the critics of the time no doubt took the poet severely to task. In connection with the love of pageantry which then prevailed, it is well known that Shakespeare and Ben Jonson were wont to arrange the Masques which were so much in vogue in their time.

_The Fire_

The Globe Theatre was burnt on June 29th, 1613. Thomas Lorkins, in a letter to Sir Thomas Puckering on June 30th, says: "No longer since than yesterday, while Bourbidge his companie were acting at ye Globe the play of Henry 8, and there shooting of certayne chambers in way of triumph; the fire catch and fastened upon the thatch of ye house and there burned so furiously as it consumed ye whole house all in lesse than two hours, the people having enough to doe to save themselves."

_Other Productions of the Play_

There are records of many other productions of Henry VIII. existing. In 1663 it was produced at Lincoln's Inn Fields as a pageant play. The redoubtable Mr. Pepys visited this production, without appearing to have enjoyed the play. In contrast to him, old Dr. Johnson said that whenever Mrs. Siddons played the part of Katharine, he would "hobble to the theatre to see her."

In 1707, Henry VIII. was produced at the Haymarket, with an exceptionally strong cast; in 1722 it was done at Drury Lane, in which production Booth played Henry VIII.

In 1727 it was again played at Drury Lane. On this occasion the spectacle of the Coronation of Anne Boleyn was added, on which one scene, we are told, L1,000 had been expended. It will come to many as a surprise that so much splendour and so large an expenditure of money were at that time lavished on the stage. The play had an exceptional run of forty nights, largely owing, it is said, to the popularity it obtained through the Coronation of George II., which had taken place a few weeks before.

The play was a great favourite of George II. and was in consequence frequently revived during his reign. On being asked by a grave nobleman, after a performance at Hampton Court, how the King liked it, Sir Richard Steele replied: "So terribly well, my lord, that I was afraid I should have lost all my actors, for I was not sure the King would not keep them to fill the posts at Court that he saw them so fit for in the play."

In 1744, Henry VIII. was given for the first time at Covent Garden, but was not revived until 1772, when it was announced at Covent Garden as "'Henry VIII.,' not acted for 20 years." The Coronation was again introduced.

Queen Katharine was one of Mrs. Siddons' great parts. She made her first appearance in this character at Drury Lane in 1788. In 1808 it was again revived, and Mrs. Siddons once more played the Queen, Kemble appearing as Wolsey.

In 1822, Edmund Kean made his first appearance as Wolsey at Drury Lane, but the play was only given four times.

In 1832, the play was revived at Covent Garden with extraordinary splendour, and a magnificent cast. Charles Kemble played King Henry; Mr. Young, Wolsey; Miss Ellen Tree, Anne Boleyn; and Miss Fanny Kemble appeared for the first time as Queen Katharine. Her success seems to have been great. We are told that Miss Ellen Tree, as Anne Boleyn, appeared to great disadvantage; "her headdress was the most frightful and unbecoming thing imaginable, though we believe it was taken from one of Holbein's." In those days correctness of costume was considered most lamentable and most laughable. In this production, too, the Coronation was substituted for the procession. The criticism adds that "during the progress of the play the public seized every opportunity of showing their dislike of the Bishops, and the moment they came on the stage they were assailed with hissing and hooting, and one of the prelates, in his haste to escape from such a reception, fell prostrate, which excited bursts of merriment from all parts of the house."

In 1855, Charles Kean revived the play with his accustomed care and sumptuousness. In this famous revival Mrs. Kean appeared as "Queen Katharine."

_Irving's Production_

Sir Henry Irving's magnificent production will still be fresh in the memory of many playgoers. It was admitted on all hands to be an artistic achievement of the highest kind, and Sir Henry Irving was richly rewarded by the support of the public, the play running 203 nights. Miss Ellen Terry greatly distinguished herself in the part of Queen Katharine, contributing in no small degree to the success of the production. Sir Henry Irving, in the part of Wolsey, made a deep impression. Mr. William Terriss played the King. Mr. Forbes Robertson made a memorable success in the part of Buckingham; and it is interesting to note that Miss Violet Vanbrugh played the part of Anne Boleyn.

From the Portrait by Holbein, at Warwick Castle]

_The Music_

An outstanding feature of the Lyceum production was Edward German's music. I deem myself fortunate that this music was available for the present production. It may be mentioned that Mr. German has composed some additional numbers, amongst which is the Anthem sung in the Coronation of Anne Boleyn.

_Shakespeare's Accuracy of Detail_

I cannot help quoting one passage from Cavendish at length to show how closely Shakespeare keeps to the chronicles of his time. It will be found that Scene 3 of Act I. is practically identical with the following description:--

The banquets were set forth, with masks and mummeries, in so gorgeous
a sort, and costly manner, that it was a heaven to behold.

... I have seen the king suddenly come in thither in a mask, with a
dozen of other maskers, all in garments like shepherds.

... And at his coming and before he came into the hall, ye shall
understand that he came by water to the water gate, without any
noise; where, against his coming, were laid charged many chambers,
and at his landing they were all shot off, which made such a rumble
in the air, that it was like thunder. It made all the noblemen,
ladies and gentlewomen to muse what it should mean coming so
suddenly, they sitting quietly at a solemn banquet. Then immediately
after this great shot of guns, the cardinal desired the Lord
Chamberlain, and Comptroller, to look what this sudden shot should
mean, as though he knew nothing of the matter. They thereupon looking
out of the windows into Thames, returned again, and showed him, that
it seemed to them there should be some noblemen and strangers arrived
at his bridge, as ambassadors from some foreign prince. With that,
quoth the Cardinal, "I shall desire you, because ye can speak French,
to take the pains to go down into the hall to encounter and to
receive them, according to their estates, and to conduct them into
this chamber, where they shall see us, and all these noble personages
sitting merrily at our banquet, desiring them to sit down with us and
to take part of our fare and pastime." Then they went incontinent
down into the hall, where they received them with twenty new torches,
and conveyed them up into the chamber, with such a number of drums
and fifes as I have seldom seen together, at one time in any masque.
At their arrival into the chamber, two and two together, they went
directly before the cardinal where he sat, saluting him very
reverently, to whom the Lord Chamberlain for them said: "Sir,
forasmuch as they be strangers, and can speak no English, they have
desired me to declare unto your Grace thus: they, having
understanding of this your triumphant banquet, where was assembled
such a number of excellent fair dames, could do no less, under the
supportation of your good grace, but to repair hither to view as well
their incomparable beauty, as for to accompany them to mumchance, and
then after to dance with them, and so to have of them acquaintance.
And, sir, they furthermore require of your Grace licence to
accomplish the cause of their repair." To whom the Cardinal answered,
that he was very well contented they should do so. Then the masquers
went first and saluted all the dames as they sat, and then returned
to the most worthiest.

... Then quoth the Cardinal to my Lord Chamberlain, "I pray you,"
quoth he, "show them that it seemeth me that there should be among
them some noble man, whom I suppose to be much more worthy of honour
to sit and occupy this room and place than I; to whom I would most
gladly, if I knew him, surrender my place according to my duty." Then
spake my Lord Chamberlain, unto them in French, declaring my Lord
Cardinal's mind, and they rounding him again in the ear, my Lord
Chamberlain said to my Lord Cardinal, "Sir, they confess," quoth he,
"that among them there is such a noble personage, whom, if your Grace
can appoint him from the other, he is contented to disclose himself,
and to accept your place most worthily." With that the cardinal,
taking a good advisement among them, at the last, quoth he, "Me
seemeth the gentleman with the black beard should be even he." And
with that he arose out of his chair, and offered the same to the
gentleman in the black beard, with his cap in his hand. The person to
whom he offered then his chair was Sir Edward Neville, a comely
knight of goodly personage, that much more resembled the king's
person in that mask, than any other. The king, hearing and perceiving
the cardinal so deceived in his estimation and choice, could not
forbear laughing; but plucked down his visor, and Master Neville's
also, and dashed out with such a pleasant countenance and cheer, that
all noble estates there assembled, seeing the king to be there
amongst them, rejoiced very much.

If Shakespeare could be so true to the actualities, why should not we seek to realise the scene so vividly described by the chronicler and the dramatist?

In my notes and conclusions on "Henry VIII. and his Court," I have been largely indebted to the guidance of the following books:--

Ernest Law's "History of Hampton Court"; Strickland's "Queens of England"; Taunton's "Thomas Wolsey, Legate and Reformer"; and Cavendish's "Life of Wolsey."

AN APOLOGY AND A FOOTNOTE

Here I am tempted to hark back to the modern manner of producing Shakespeare, and to say a few words in extenuation of those methods, which have been assailed in a recent article with almost equal brilliancy and vehemence.

The writer tells us that there are two different kinds of plays, the realistic and the symbolic. Shakespeare's plays, we are assured, belong to the latter category. "The scenery," it is insisted, "not only may, but should be imperfect." This seems an extraordinary doctrine, for if it be right that a play should be imperfectly mounted, it follows that it should be imperfectly acted, and further that it should be imperfectly written. The modern methods, we are assured, employed in the production of Shakespeare, do not properly illustrate the play, but are merely made for vulgar display, with the result of crushing the author and obscuring his meaning. In this assertion, I venture to think that our critic is mistaken; I claim that not the least important mission of the modern theatre is to give to the public representations of history which shall be at once an education and a delight. To do this, the manager should avail himself of the best archaeological and artistic help his generation can afford him, while endeavouring to preserve what he believes to be the spirit and the intention of the author.

It is of course possible for the technically informed reader to imagine the wonderful and stirring scenes which form part of the play without visualizing them. It is, I contend, better to reserve Shakespeare for the study than to see him presented half-heartedly.

The merely archaic presentation of the play can be of interest only to those epicures who do not pay their shilling to enter the theatre. The contemporary theatre must make its appeal to the great public, and I hold that while one should respect every form of art, that art which appeals only to a coterie is on a lower plane than that which speaks to the world. Surely, it is not too much to claim that a truer and more vivid impression of a period of history can be given by its representation on the stage than by any other means of information. Though the archaeologist with symbolic leanings may cry out, the theatre is primarily for those who love the drama, who love the joy of life and the true presentation of history. It is only secondarily for those who fulfil their souls in footnotes.[6]

I hold that whatever may tend to destroy the illusion and the people's understanding is to be condemned. Whatever may tend to heighten the illusion and to help the audience to a better understanding of the play and the author's meaning, is to be commended. Shakespeare and Burbage, Betterton, Colley Cibber, the Kembles, the Keans, Phelps, Calvert and Henry Irving, as artists, recognised that there was but one way to treat the play of Henry VIII. It is pleasant to sin in such good company.

I contend that Henry VIII. is essentially a realistic and not a symbolic play. Indeed, probably no English author is less "symbolic" than Shakespeare. "Hamlet" is a play which, to my mind, does not suffer by the simplest setting; indeed, a severe simplicity of treatment seems to me to assist rather than to detract from the imaginative development of that masterpiece. But I hold that, with the exception of certain scenes in "The Tempest," no plays of Shakespeare are susceptible to what is called "symbolic" treatment. To attempt to present Henry VIII. in other than a realistic manner would be to ensure absolute failure. Let us take an instance from the text. By what symbolism can Shakespeare's stage directions in the Trial scene be represented on the stage?

"A Hall in Blackfriars. Enter two vergers with short silver wands; next them two scribes in the habit of doctors.... Next them with some small distance, follows a gentleman bearing the purse with the great seal and a Cardinal's hat; then two priests bearing each a silver cross; then a gentleman usher bareheaded, accompanied with a sergeant-at-arms bearing a silver mace; then two gentlemen bearing two great silver pillars; after them, side by side, the two Cardinals, Wolsey and Campeius; two noblemen with the sword and mace," etc.

I confess my symbolic imagination was completely gravelled, and in the absence of any symbolic substitute, I have been compelled to fall back on the stage directions.

Yet we are gravely told by the writer of a recent article that "all Shakespeare's plays" lend themselves of course to such symbolic treatment. We hear, indeed, that the National Theatre is to be run on symbolic lines. If it be so, then God help the National Theatre--the symbolists will not. No "ism" ever made a great cause. The National Theatre, to be the dignified memorial we all hope it may be, will owe its birth, its being and its preservation to the artists, who alone are the guardians of any art. It is the painter, not the frame-maker, who upholds the art of painting; it is the poet, not the book-binder, who carries the torch of poetry. It was the sculptor, and not the owner of the quarry, who made the Venus of Milo. It is sometimes necessary to re-assert the obvious.

Now there are plays in which symbolism is appropriate--those of Maeterlinck, for instance. But if, as has been said, Maeterlinck resembles Shakespeare, Shakespeare does not resemble Maeterlinck. Let us remember that Shakespeare was a humanist, not a symbolist.

_The End_

The end of the play of Henry VIII. once more illustrates the pageantry of realism, as prescribed in the elaborate directions as to the christening of the new-born princess.

It is this incident of the christening of the future Queen Elizabeth that brings to an appropriate close the strange eventful history as depicted in the play of Henry VIII. And thus the injustice of the world is once more triumphantly vindicated: Wolsey, the devoted servant of the King, has crept into an ignominious sanctuary; Katharine has been driven to a martyr's doom; the adulterous union has been blessed by the Court of Bishops; minor poets have sung their blasphemous paeans in unison. The offspring of Anne Boleyn, over whose head the Shadow of the Axe is already hovering, has been christened amid the acclamations of the mob; the King paces forth to hold the child up to the gaze of a shouting populace, accompanied by the Court and the Clergy--trumpets blare, drums roll, the organ thunders, cannons boom, hymns are sung, the joy bells are pealing. A lonely figure in black enters weeping. It is the Fool!

CHRONOLOGY OF PUBLIC EVENTS DURING THE LIFETIME OF KING HENRY VIII.

1491. Birth of Henry, second son of Henry VII. and Elizabeth of York.

1501. Marriage of Arthur, Prince of Wales, eldest son of Henry VII. and
Elizabeth of York, to Katharine of Aragon, daughter of Ferdinand
and Isabella of Spain.

1502. Death of Arthur, Prince of Wales.

1509. Death of King Henry VII.

Marriage of Henry VIII. at Westminster Abbey with Katharine of
Aragon, his brother's widow.

Thomas Wolsey made King's Almoner.

1511. Thomas Wolsey called to the King's Council.

The Holy League established by the Pope.

1512. War with France.

1513. Battles of the Spurs and of Flodden.

Wolsey becomes Chief Minister.

1516. Wolsey made Legate.

Dissolution of the Holy League.

1517. Luther denounces Indulgences.

1520. Henry meets Francis at "Field of Cloth of Gold."

Luther burns the Pope's Bull.

1521. Quarrel of Luther with Henry.

Henry's book against Luther presented to the Pope.

Pope Leo confers on Henry the title "_Fidei Defensor_."

1522. Renewal of war with France.

1523. Wolsey quarrels with the Commons on question of 20 per cent.
property tax.

1525. Benevolences of one-tenth from the laity and of one-fourth from
clergy demanded.

Exaction of Benevolences defeated.

Peace with France.

1527. Henry resolves on a Divorce.

Sack of Rome.

1528. Pope Clement VII. issues a commission to the Cardinals Wolsey and
Campeggio for a trial of the facts on which Henry's application
for a divorce was based.

1529. Trial of Queen Katharine at Blackfriars' Hall.

Katharine appeals to Rome.

Fall of Wolsey. Ministry of Norfolk and Sir Thomas More.

Rise of Thomas Cromwell.

1530. Wolsey arrested for treason.

Wolsey's death at Leicester Abbey.

1531. Henry acknowledged as "Supreme Head of the Church of England."

1533. Henry secretly marries Anne Boleyn.

Cranmer, in Archbishop of Canterbury's Court, declares
Katharine's marriage invalid and the marriage of Henry and Anne
lawful. Anne Boleyn crowned Queen in Westminster Abbey.

Birth of Elizabeth (Queen Elizabeth).

1535. Henry's title as Supreme Head of the Church incorporated in the
royal style by letters patent.

Execution of Sir Thomas More.

1536. English Bible issued.

Dissolution of lesser Monasteries.

Death of Katharine of Aragon.

Execution of Anne Boleyn.

Henry's marriage with Jane Seymour.

1537. Birth of Edward VI.

Death of Jane Seymour.

Dissolution of greater Monasteries.

1540. Henry's marriage with Anne of Cleves.

Execution of Thomas Cromwell.

Henry divorces Anne of Cleves.

Henry's marriage with Catherine Howard.

1542. Execution of Catherine Howard.

Completion of the Tudor Conquest of Ireland.

1543. War with France.

Henry's marriage with Catherine Parr.

1547. Death of Henry. Age 55 years and 7 months.

He reigned 37 years and 9 months.

SHAKESPEAREAN PLAYS PRODUCED UNDER HERBERT BEERBOHM TREE'S MANAGEMENT.

A.--AT THE HAYMARKET THEATRE

1889. "The Merry Wives of Windsor."

1892. "Hamlet."

1896. "King Henry IV." (Part I.)

B.--AT HIS MAJESTY'S THEATRE

1898. "Julius Caesar."

1899. "King John."

1900. "A Midsummer's Night's Dream."

1901. "Twelfth Night."

1903. "King Richard II."

1904. "The Tempest."

1905. "Much Ado About Nothing."

First Annual Shakespeare Festival:
"King Richard II."
"Twelfth Night."
"The Merry Wives of Windsor."
"Hamlet."
"Much Ado About Nothing."
"Julius Caesar."

1906. "The Winter's Tale."

"Antony and Cleopatra."

Second Annual Shakespeare Festival:
"The Tempest."
"Hamlet."
"King Henry IV." (Part I.)
"Julius Caesar."
"The Merry Wives of Windsor."

1907. Third Annual Shakespeare Festival:
"The Tempest."
"The Winter's Tale."
"Hamlet."
"Twelfth Night."
"Julius Caesar."
"The Merry Wives of Windsor."

1908. "The Merchant of Venice."

Fourth Annual Shakespeare Festival:
"The Merry Wives of Windsor."
"The Merchant of Venice."
"Twelfth Night."
"Hamlet."

1909. Fifth Annual Shakespeare Festival:
"King Richard III."
"Twelfth Night."
"The Merry Wives of Windsor."
"Hamlet."
"Julius Caesar."
"The Merchant of Venice."
"Macbeth." (Mr. Arthur Bourchier's Company.)
"Antony and Cleopatra" (Act II., Scene 2).

1910. Sixth Annual Shakespeare Festival:
"The Merry Wives of Windsor."
"Julius Caesar."
"Twelfth Night."
"Hamlet." (By His Majesty's Theatre Company and by Mr. H. B.
Irving's Company.)
"The Merchant of Venice." (By His Majesty's Theatre Company
and by Mr. Arthur Bourchier's Company.)
"King Lear." (Mr. Herbert Trench's Company.)
"The Taming of the Shrew." (Mr. F. R. Benson and Company.)
"Coriolanus." (Mr. F. R. Benson and Company.)
"Two Gentlemen of Verona." (The Elizabethan Stage Society's
Company.)
"King Henry V." (Mr. Lewis Waller and Company.)
"King Richard II."
Scenes from "Macbeth" and "Romeo and Juliet."

1910. September 1st, "King Henry VIII."

PRINTED BY CASSELL & COMPANY, LIMITED, LONDON, E.C.

15.311

SPECIAL SERIAL ISSUE

The Century Shakespeare

Introductions by the famous Shakespearean
Scholar,
Dr. FURNIVALL,
assisted by JOHN MUNRO

FULL NOTES, MAPS, and GLOSSARIES

Commencing with the Henry VIII Edition, published on the _eve of His Majesty's Theatre Revival_, the CENTURY SHAKESPEARE WILL BE ISSUED

Weekly in 40 Volumes at 9{D.} net One Volume per week thus affording every reader an opportunity of obtaining this famous Edition, with its unsurpassable scholarship, at a merely nominal weekly cost.

Each volume will contain a beautiful Photogravure Frontispiece, reproduced from a Painting by a FAMOUS ARTIST.

The Henry VIII Volume bears on its cover a Colour Reproduction of Mr. Charles Buchel's picture of Sir Herbert Tree as "Cardinal Wolsey."

The next volume is "SHAKESPEARE: LIFE AND WORK," by Dr. FURNIVALL and JOHN MUNRO. The most human document about the Poet yet published.

_It contains a beautiful Coloured Reproduction of the famous picture, "ROMEO AND JULIET," by Frank Dicksee, R.A._

Complete Prospectus free on receipt of a Postcard.

OF ALL BOOKSELLERS AND NEWSAGENTS
CASSELL AND CO., LIMITED, LA BELLE SAUVAGE,
LONDON, E.C.

Footnotes:

[1] Cavendish was Wolsey's faithful secretary, and after his fall wrote the interesting "Life of Wolsey," one of the manuscript copies of which evidently fell into Shakespeare's hands before he wrote _Henry VIII._

[2] "Pastime with Good Company," composed and written by Henry, is sung in the production at His Majesty's Theatre.

[3] Hypocras--"A favourite medicated drink, compound of wine, usually red, with spices and sugar."

[4] It is Wolsey's fool to whom is given the final note of the play in the production at His Majesty's Theatre.

[5] The ceremony of bringing the Blessed Sacrament from the sepulchre where it had lain since the Good Friday. This took place early on Easter Monday.

[6] Personally, I have been a sentimental adherent of symbolism since my first Noah's Ark. Ever since I first beheld the generous curves of Mrs. Noah, and first tasted the insidious carmine of her lips, have I regarded the wife of Noah as symbolical of the supreme type of womanhood. I have learnt that the most exclusive symbolists, when painting a meadow, regard purple as symbolical of bright green; but we live in a realistic age and have not yet overtaken the _art nouveau_ of the pale future. It is difficult to deal seriously with so much earnestness. I am forced into symbolic parable. Artemus Ward, when delivering a lecture on his great moral panorama, pointed with his wand to a blur on the horizon, and said: "Ladies and gentlemen, that is a horse--the artist who painted that picture called on me yesterday with tears in his eyes, and said he would disguise that fact from me no longer!" He, too, was a symbolist.

Transcriber's Notes:

Passages in italics are indicated by _underscore_.

The original text contains both "playgoer" and "play-goer" and contains both "Guistinian" and "Giustinian."

Superscripted letter is shown in {brackets}.

End of Project Gutenberg's Henry VIII and His Court, by Herbert Tree