INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

THE SPIRIT, OBJECT, AND CHARACTER OF THE PLAY-COMPARISON OF ITS
PRESENT FORM WITH THAT OF ITS ORIGINAL PUBLICATION-STATE OF
THE TEXT, ETC.

HEN

ENRY THE FIFTH is remarkable among its author's works, as being the only one addressed entirely to national feeling, and devoted directly and exclusively to the celebration of his country's proud recollections of military glory. It was styled in its earlier editions, published in the author's lifetime, a "chronicle history;"-the ancient phrase for what we should now term an historical drama, which it is in the strictest sense, and it is also in the very highest form of that class of dramatic art. It borrows nothing from mere invention in incident, and scarcely in character. Its story, in all its details and circumstances, is purely historical; its interest, the excitement and the sentiments which it arouses, or to which it appeals, are all public and national. Even the comic characters, by which the graver history is relieved and illustrated, including those of our old acquaintance of Falstaff's retainers, reproduced from the preceding plays, as well as the Scotch and Welsh captains, and the blunt, manly English private, are almost as much historical as the more dignified personages of the scene; since they make up the lively portraiture of such an army as Harry of Monmouth must have led. But the naked history is in itself a splendid tale of glory and valour; while the "warlike Harry," far as he actu ally was from the ideal model of a truly wise, and good ruler, such as would be framed by calm and enlightened philosophy, had all the brilliant and popular qualities that chivalric romance and epic poetry have lavished on the heroes of their invention-youth, valour, genius, generosity, courtesy, frank affability, combined with that religious spirit so rare, and at once so touching and so graceful in the successful soldier. To the stage-effect of such a story, made familiar in all its details to the Englishmen of former times by fond and proud tradition, as it has been to later generations by the Poet's genius, he saw that dramatic art could add nothing by the invention of new incidents, or the introduction of the emotions and passions of domestic life.

His aim seems, therefore-especially in the play as we now read it, in its more perfect form-to raise the plain "chronicle history” to an epic elevation, and to present in his scenes the story of Agincourt in the same spirit in which Homer told the tale of Troy. I do not assert that Homer was immediately in the Poet's thoughts, nor is it evident whether, when HENRY V. was written, he had read his friend Chapman's translation of the first seven books of the Iliad, which had been published a little before. The resemblance is merely in the general spirit of his "swelling scene." With "a kingdom for a stage, princes to act," like Homer, he invokes "a muse of fire," and makes his hero, like Achilles, "assume the port of Mars." He dwells sometimes on details, prosaic in themselves, (such as the ground of Henry's claim to the French crown,) in the same manner that Homer does on the pedigrees or topography of Greece, and with the same effect; knowing that, unpoetical as they were, they were yet full of interest to his countrymen. The animated history is relieved and elevated by frequent bursts of lofty poetry-sometimes of solemn reflection, such as the King's meditation on the dread responsibilities of power, and the worthlessness of the "thrice gorgeous ceremony of greatness;" or Burgundy's wise teachings on the blessings of peace, that "dear nurse of arts, plenties, and joyful births;" and sometimes of fiery declamation, arousing the audience, and almost the readers, to join in the battle-cry of "God for Harry, England, and St. George." The several choruses, skilfully inserted to avoid that shock to dramatic illusion, likely to result from the sudden and large chasms in the unity of time and place, become in themselves a series of brief lyrical poems; for, though not lyrical in metre, they are strictly so in spirit, crowded with a quick succession of rapidly-passing brilliant scenes, majestic images, glowing thoughts, and kindling words. With all this, and with the amusing effect of the comic scenes, this drama seems to me, for its purpose, nearly perfect. Yet universal opinion has ranked it as one of its author's second-rate works-and rightly so, as compared with a higher standard than that which he proposed to himself. Under the shadow of LEAR or MACBETH, this brilliant drama becomes faint and dim. But this arises from the comparative inferiority of the subject, not from that of the poetical execution. It is addressed to the national feeling of Englishmen, and comes home less directly to the breasts of men as men. It awakens the public and huzza feeling of a great nation-a feeling loud and exciting when aroused, but how less deep or general than that of strong sympathy with personal passion, enjoyment, and suffering!

Trying the piece by the Johnsonian rule "of doing best what many have tried to do well," it is without a rival. Tragedies, comedies, and melodramas without number have been produced, during the last two centuries, in England and on the continent of Europe, (America may add to the list,) all aiming at the same effect of a national patriotic

drama. They are all failures, as to taking any abiding place in the literature of the civilized world. Those few historical dramas which, like the admirable "Wallentshen" of Schiller, might be considered as exceptions, are so because, though historical in their subject, they belong to a different and higher class, engrafting on some story of national interest the poetry, the philosophy, and the passion of pure tragedy.

In this play the effect is produced with such directness and completeness, and so little apparent loss of power, (if we may apply the terms of mechanical science to the drama,) that it would naturally seem to have poured forth continuously and rapidly from the author's mind, when once raised and warmed by the glow of poetic composition in the choruses, or of the speeches of its heroes. It is true, that we do not find here that fervid rapidity of thought and pervading unity of passion or sentiment, which show us in many of his plays, as in OTHELLO and MACBETH, that, whatever minor improvement might have been subsequently added to the play, the whole work was substantially "struck out at a heat," and came at once warm from the Poet's mind, with the very form and pressure it was destined to bear. Nevertheless HENRY V. has, as little as possible, the indications of being any thing else than the unlaboured effusion of a mind familiar with all the materials of his subject, and throwing them with rapid facility into their present dramatic form. Yet this was not the case, as I was surprised to find, when the duties of an editor led me, for the first time, to the critical examination of the text, and the comparison of the old editions. The literary history of this play, as shown by the collation of those old editions, is exceedingly curious, and presents one of the most interesting records of Shakespeare's modes of composition. It was first published in a quarto pamphlet, in the same year with the second part of HENRY IV., and bore this title: "The Cronicle History of Henry the fift, With his battell fought at Agin Court in France. Togither with Auntient Pistoll. As it hath bene sundry times played by the Right honorable the Lord Chamberlaine his seruants. London Printed by Thomas Creede & Co. And are to be sold at his house in Carter Lane, next the Powle head. 1600. 4to. 27 leaves." It was afterwards twice reprinted, during the author's life, (in 1602 and 1608,) but always without his name. These editions do not differ from the first, and the play, in the form it bears in these very scarce old editions, has been made accessible to the world, by being reprinted with precise accuracy in Stevens's collection of " the Twenty Plays of Shakespeare," as originally printed in quarto.

The reader will there find a short play, containing the story, incidents, and whole action of the present HENRY V., with all its characters and much of the present dialogue,—indeed all of it that is necessary for the story. It is comprised in about eighteen hundred lines. HENRY V., as printed in the folio collection, has about three thousand five hundred lines; and the additions contain, besides large expansions of the speeches and dialogue, the prologue with all the choruses, Henry's speech before Harfleur, his meditation after his conversation with William, ("Upon the king," etc.,) Burgundy's fine description of the evils of wars, in short, much of the higher poetry of the piece and almost all of its grave meditative morality. Some of the commentators say that this earlier drama. the mere skeleton of the present play, appears thus because it was a pirated edition, printed from an imperfect copy, "hastily made up from notes taken at the theatre during the performance, subsequently patched together."— (COLLIER.)

The old editions, it is true, are very carelessly printed, after the manner of the slovenly typography of most of the lighter literature of that day. They omit and mistake words, turn prose into verse, and, what is worse, make bad verse out of prose. But the comparison of the shorter with the fuller play, shows the insertion of large parts, no trace of which is found in the first; and in many passages, too metrically correct and well expressed in the shorter form, to have been an accidental abridgement, there is an entire re-construction of the lines, with added thoughts, improved epithets, in short, all of those kinds of alterations that indicate the author's own careful revisal. The inference is obvious. The author of HENRY IV. had hastened to follow up his dramatic success, by continuing the story, as he had promised in his epilogue to the last play. He produced a spirited and successful "chrom cle drama," enriching the story with his old friends Pistol and Nym, with some new military comic personages. But he saw that his play was worthy of more magnificent decoration, and perhaps he felt that he had not done justice to his favourite hero. The play was then re-written for the stage, and the enlarged copy carefully kept for the exclusive use of the theatrical owners, until it appeared after the author's death in the folio. It is worthy of remark, that while the change otherwise consists mainly in the poetic splendour that has thus been poured over the spirited action of the original draft, the only variation of character is that of the higher and graver tone of moral feeling given to his royal soldier. There is no positive evidence, as to the time when this revision took place. If the allusion in the chorus to act v., ("Were now the general of our gracious empress,") be, as is commonly supposed, to the Earl of Essex's return from Ireland, it would place the date in 1599, and show that the author brought out a hasty sketch of his play, sufficient for stage effect, immediately after the two parts of HENRY IV., and that it was enlarged and enriched soon after, while the subject was yet fresh and warm in his mind. The perfect unity and continuity of the whole play, without any of those marked contrasts of style that are found in ROMEO AND JULIET, and some other plays, correspond with this suggestion. Collier, however, thinks that the choruses might have been in the original piece, though omitted in the early and pirated edition, and that the revision was probably some years later, in 1605, when the play was represented at court. However this may be, of the fact of a very thorough revision and large additions, there can be no reasonable doubt. It is indeed fully admitted by Mr. Collier, though he attributes a larger share of the differences between the two editions to the accidental omissions of a transcriber, than seem to me probable.

The more considerable variations of the text, and especially the enlargements, are pointed out in the notes. The text is generally in a satisfactory state. Where that of the present edition differs from the common text of Stevens or Malone, it is mainly from adherence to the revised folio text, without attempting to compound the two forms

of the play. In two or three places the quartos have been found useful in suggesting the probable correction of typographical errors in the folio.

COSTUME.

The following curious notices on the civil and military costume of Henry V.'s reign, are selected from Mr. Planché's articles on this subject, referring the reader who wishes to study out his authorities more fully, to the Pictorial SHAKESPEARE. They are valuable as items of the history of manners, independently of their use for artistic purposes. The notice of the alternations of the fashions in the bearded and smooth-shaved face, may serve to prepare the bearded and moustachoed younger generation of the present day, for the laughter or the veneration of their closely shaved grandsons, when fashions come round in another half century:

"The great characteristic of this reign is the close-cropping of the hair round above the ears, in contradistinction to the fashion of the last century; and the equally close-shaving of the chin. Beards being worn only by aged personages, and mustachoes but rarely, even by military men: the king is always represented without them. "The armour of this period was completely of plate. Even the camail, or chain neck-piece, was superseded or covered by the gorget, or hausse col of steel.

"The jupon, with its military girdle, and the loose surcoat of arms, were both occasionally worn; and, in many instances, were furnished with long hanging sleeves, indented at the edges like those of the robes. Two circular or shield-shaped plates, called pallettes, were sometimes fastened in front by aiguillettes, so as to protect the armpits. St. Remy, a writer who was present at the battle of Agincourt, describes Henry, at break of day, hearing mass in all his armour, excepting that for his head and his cote d'armes, (i. e. emblazoned surcoat or jupon.) After mass had been said, they brought him the armour for his head, which was a very handsome bascinet a barriere, (query, baviere,) upon which he had a very rich crown of gold, (a description and valuation of 'la Couronne d'Or pur le Bacinet,' garnished with rubies, sapphires, and pearls, to the amount of £679 5s., is to be seen in the Rolls of Parliament,) circled like an imperial crown. Henry IV. is said, by Froissart, to have been crowned with a diademarchée en croix.'

"Elmham, another contemporary historian, says, 'Now the king was clad in secure and very bright armour: he wore, also, on his head, a helinet, with a large splendid crest, and a crown of gold and jewels; and, on his body, a surcoat with the arms of England and France, from which a celestial splendour issued; on the one side, from three golden flowers, planted in an azure field, (Henry V. altered the arms of France, in the English shield, from semi of fleurs-de-lys to three fleurs-de-lys, Charles VI. of France having done so previously;) on the other, from three golden leopards sporting in a ruby field.' By a large splendid crest may be meant, either the royal heraldic crest of England, the lion passant guardant, or a magnificent plume of feathers,-that elegant and chivalric decoration, for the first time after the conquest, appearing in this reign. It was called the panache, and knights are said to have worn three or more feathers, esquires only one; but we have no positive authority for the latter assertion, and the number would seem to have been a matter of fancy. Robert Chamberlayne, the king's esquire, is represented with two feathers issuing from the apex of the bascinet. He wears an embroidered jupon and the military belt. The crown round Henry's bascinet was twice struck and injured by the blows of his enemies. The Duke of Alençon struck off part of it with his battle-axe; and one of the points or flowers was cut off by a French esquire, who, with seventeen others, swore to perform some such feat, or perish.

"The English archers at the battle of Agincourt were, for the most part, (according to Monstrelet,) without armour, and in jackets, with their hose loose, and hatchets, or swords, hanging to their girdles. Some, indeed, were barefooted, and without hats, or caps; and, St. Remy says, they were dressed in pourpoints, (stitched or quilted jackets;) and adds, that some wore caps of boiled leather, (the famous cuir bouilli,) or of wicker-work, crossed over with iron. In the army of Henry V. at Rouen, there were several bodies of Irish, of whom (says Monstrelet) the greatest part had one leg and foot quite naked. They were armed with targets, short javelius, and a strange sort of knife, (the skein.)

"The French men-at-arms, engaged at Agincourt, are described as being armed in long coats of steel, reaching to their knees-the taces introduced at this period,-below which was armour for their legs, and above, white harness (i. e. armour of polished plate, so called in contradistinction to mail,) and bascinets with camails, (chain neck-pieces.)

"The banners borne in the English army, besides those of the king and the principal leaders, were, as usual, those of St. George, St. Edward, and the Trinity.

"The French, in addition to the royal and knightly banners, displayed the oriflamme, which was of bright scarlet, embroidered with gold, and terminating in several swallow tails.

"The female costume of this period was disfigured by a most extravagantly high and projecting horned headdress. The rest of the habit was rather graceful than otherwise; consisting, in general, of a long and full robe confined by a rich girdle, high in the neck, the waist moderately short, and the sleeves like those of the men, reaching almost to the ground, and escallopped at the edges.

"Isabelle of Bavaria (mother of Queen Katharine) is engraved in Montfaucon, from a MS. in the French Royal Library, wearing the high, heart-shaped head-dress, introduced into England in the reign of Henry VI., but, probably, worn earlier in France. There are several other portraits of her in the steeple head-dress, a still later fashion, contemporary in England with the reign of Edward IV."