198 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 43. 



HBxtevicS. 



WHO WEOTE SHAKSPEARe's HENRY vm. ? 



I had no sooner read the title of an essay in the 



current niniiber of the Gentlemaiis Magazine, 

 " Who wrote Shakspeare's Henry VIII. ? " than I 

 became aware that I had been anticipated in at 

 least the publication of a discovery I made three 

 or four years ago, but for the making known of 

 which a favourable opportunity had not occurred. 

 The fact is, that I was anxious to arrive at a more 

 satisfactory conclusion than has yet presented it- 

 self to me ; and a paper on the subject commenced 

 more than two years ago, I, witli this feeling, laid 

 aside. My present object is to strengthen the 

 argument of the writer in the Gentleman! s Maga- 

 zine, by recording the fact that I, having no com- 

 munication with him, or knowledge of him, even 

 of his name, should have arrived at exactly the 

 same conclusion as his own. That conclusion is 

 (should any of your readers not have seen the 

 article referred to), that Fletcher has at least an 

 equal claim with Shakspeare to the authorship of 

 Henrij VIII. 



In the unfinished paper to which I have alluded, 

 having asked how it was that, with so much to be 

 learned personal to Shakspeare from his works, 

 our criticism was so limited, and having stated it 

 to be my intention to confine myself to the simple 

 inquiry, " What did Shakspeare really write ? " I 

 continued : — 



" To those who consider the text as having been 

 settled ' by authority,' this question may seem super- 

 fluous; but, not to refer to plays of very early date, in 

 connection with which we could bring forward facts 

 that, we doubt not, would be considered sufficiently 

 startling ; we now state it as our belief that a great 

 portion of the piay of Henry VI 11. — nay, more than 

 lialf, was not written by Shakspeare." 



My intention now is, not to enter into any argu- 

 ment in support of this view, but to state the 

 results, which will be shown in the following 

 extract from my note-book : — 



" Act I. 



Act II, 



Act in 



Act IV, 



Act V. Scene 1. Shakspeare. 

 „ 2. Fletcher. 

 „ 3. Ditto. 

 „ 4. Ditto. 

 Prologue and Epilogue, Ditto." 



So far all is clear, and in this apportionment Mr. 

 Urban's correspondent and myself are agreed. 

 My conviction here is as complete as it is of my 

 own identity. But beyond, at jn-esent, all is dark; 

 I cannot understand the arrangement; and I 

 doubt if my friend, who has treated the question 

 with so much ability, is altogether satisfied with 

 his own explanation. 



In the meanwhile, I would suggest one or two 

 points ibr consideration. In those parts which I 

 have set down as Shakspeare's, and in which this 

 writer imagines he occasionally detects "a third 

 hand,'' does the metre difier materially from that 

 of Shakspeare's early plays ? 



It will be observed that, in Act iii.. Scene 2., 

 there are two " farewells," the second being a kind 

 of amplification of the first ; both, however, being 

 in the part which I ascribe to Fletcher. Is it not 

 probable that these were written at difl^erent 

 periods ? And supposing Fletcher to have im- 

 proved his part, might there not originally have 

 been a stronger analogy than now appears between 

 this play and the Two Noble Kinsmen ? 



The more it is tested the brighter shines out the 

 character of Shakspeare. The flatteries of James 

 and Elizabeth may now go packing together. The 

 following four lines which I have met with in no 

 other edition of Shakspeare than Mr. Collier's, are 

 worth any one of his plays for their personal value ; 

 they show how he could evade a compliment with 

 the enunciation of a general truth that yet could 

 be taken as a compliment by the person for whom 

 it was intended : — 



" Shakspeare on the King. 



" Crowns have their compass ; length of days their 

 date; 

 Triumphs, their tomb ; felicity her fate ; 

 Of nought but earth can earth make us partaker, 

 But knowledge makes a king most like his Maker." 



Samuel Hickson. 

 August 12. 1850. 



iafliiior (laucric^. 



The Ahhe Strickland. — In the third volume of 

 the Castlereagh Correspondence, an Abbe Strick- 

 land figures as a negotiator between the English 

 Catholics and the court of Rome. His name is also 

 mentioned unfavourably in the '■'■Quarterly" Teyiew 

 of that work. Will some of your readers direct me 

 where further information can be had of him, and 

 his ultimate destination ? J. W. H. 



