DRAMATIS PERSONÆ.

1. HENRY VI. In this play the troublous reign and life of this unfortunate king are both brought to a conclusion. As to the manner of his death, it will perhaps be more convenient to summarize the evidence on that point here. Fabyan and Hall, following common report, both ascribe his death to the murderous hand of Gloucester. Hall's words are (p. 303): “Poore kyng Henry the sixte, a litle before depriued of his realme, and Imperiall Croune, was now in the Tower of London, spoyled of his life, and all worldly felicitie, by Richard duke of Gloucester (as the constant fame ranne) which, to thintent that king Edward his brother, should be clere out of all secret suspicion of sodain inuasion, murthered thesaid kyng with a dagger." There is no allusion, in this play, to the circumstance which really was the immediate cause of King Henry's being removed out of the way of his rival, namely, the brief insurrection headed by Thomas Neville, commonly called the Bastard of Falconberg. This bold attempt to liberate Henry from captivity nearly succeeded. No doubt it impressed upon the most zealous partisans of Edward, that there was no real security for the House of York as long as Henry was alive. In a note, vol. iv. pp. 191, 192, Lingard gives the evidence of two contemporary writers on the subject of Henry's death, one the Croyland historian, the other the author of the Harleian MS. 543. They were both strong Yorkists; and appear to have been eye-witnesses of many of the events which they record, or, at any rate, to have had access to trustworthy sources of information. We translate the Latin of the original: "May God spare and give space for repentance to him, whoever he was, that dared to lay sacrilegious hands on the Lord's anointed. Whence both the agent of the tyraut, and the sufferer (patiensque) may deserve the title of glorious martyr." Continuation, Croyl. 556. The other writer merely gives the same account as that circulated by the friends of Edward, namely, that Henry died of pure displeasure and melancholy." Although the dead body was exposed at St. Paul's, no examination or inquiry as to the cause of death seems to have taken place. Holinshed (vol. iii. p. 324) says that the body bled in the presence of the beholders both at St. Paul's and Blackfriars. The assassination is said to have taken place on 21st May, 1471. Those few writers who have sought to whitewash that execrable murderer, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, lay too much stress on the fact that it would appear, from the public accounts allowed in the exchequer for the maintenance of Henry VI. and his dependants in the Tower, that he lived until the 12th June. Lingard says in foot-note 1 (vol. iv. p. 192) that "they afford no proof that Henry lived till the 12th of June. The latest date of any particular charge is that of William Sayer for the maintenance of Henry and ten guards for a

fortnight, beginning the 11th of May, and of course ending on the day on which the king is said to have been buried. The mistake arises from this, that Malone has taken the day of the month on which the accounts were allowed at the exchequer, for the day on which the expenses ceased." The account of these expenses is to be found in Rymer's Fœdera, vol. xi. p. 712.

As to King Henry's personal appearance and his character, Hall (p. 303) says: "Kyng Henry was of stature goodly, of body sleder, to which proporcion, al other mēbers wer correspondent: his face beautifull, in the which continually was resident, the bountie of mynde, with whiche, he was inwardly endued. He did abhorre of his awne nature, all the vices, as well of the body as of the soule, and from his verie infancie, he was of honest conuersacion and pure integritie, no knower of euill, and a keper of all goodnes: a dispiser of all thynges, whiche bee wonte to cause, the myndes of mortall menne to slide, fall, or appaire. Beside this, pacience was so radicate in his harte, that of all the iniuries to him committed, (whiche were no small nombre) he neuer asked vengeaunce nor punishment, but for that, rendered to almightie God, his creator, hartie thankes, thinking that by this trouble, and aduersitie, his synnes were to him forgotten and forgeuen." In the epigrammatic character of him, given in Baker's Chronicle (edn. 1643, p. 91), there are one or two sentences worth quoting: "His greatest imperfection was, that he had in him too much of the Logge, and too little of the Storke; for he would not move, but as he was moved, and had rather be devoured, than he would deBy being innocent as a Dove, he kept his Crown upon his head so long; but if he had been as wise as a Serpent, he might have kept it on longer." There is no doubt that he was wanting in strength of character; but we may say of him that he was too virtuous a man to make a good king.

voure.

2. EDWARD, PRINCE OF WALES, was born at Westminster, October 14th, 1453. From his mother he seems to have inherited beauty and courage; from his father sweetness of disposition and virtue. At the time of his birth his father, unhappily, was completely incapacitated by bodily and mental illness. In one of the Paston Letters (vol. i. p. 263, No. 195), dated 19th January, 1454, occurs the following account of the first presentation of the infant prince to his unhappy father: "As touchyng tythynges, please it you to wite that at the Princes comyng to Wyndesore, the Duc of Buk1 toke hym in his armes and presented hym to the Kyng in godely wise, besechyng the Kyng to blisse hym; and the Kyng yave no maner answere. Natheless the Duk abode stille with Prince by the Kyng; and whan he coude no maner answere have,

1 i.e. the Duke of Buckingham.

the Queene come in, and toke the Prince in hir armes and presented hym in like forme as the Duke had done, desiryng that he shuld blisse it; but alle their labour was in veyne, for they departed thens without any answere or countenance savyng only that ones he loked on the Prince and caste doune his eyene ayen, without any more." One of the first signs of his recovery was the interest he took in his little son. In a later letter (ut supra, p. 315. No. 226), we read: And on the Moneday after noon the Queen came to him, and brought my Lord Prynce with her. And then he askid what the Princes name was, and the Queen told him Edward; and than he hild up his hands and thankid God therof, And he seid he never knew til that tyme, nor wist not what was seid to him, nor wist not where he had be whils he hath be seke til now." It would seem that young Edward shared many of the dangers of his unhappy parents. The well-known story of the capture of the queen and her son by robbers, various versions of which exist, is thus narrated by Monstrelet (vol. ii. p. 290): "I must mention here a singular adventure which befel the queen of England. She, in company with the lord de Varennes and her son, having lost their way in a forest of Hainault, were met by some banditti, who robbed them of all they had. It is probable the banditti would have murdered them, had they not quarrelled about the division of the spoil, insomuch that from words they came to blows: and, while they were fighting, she caught her son in her arms and fled to the thickest part of the forest, where, weary with fatigue, she was forced to stop. At this moment she met another robber, to whom she instantly gave her son, and said; Take him, friend, and save the son of a king. The robber received him willingly, and conducted them in safety toward the seashore, where they arrived at Sluys, and thence the queen and her own son went to Bruges, where they were received most honourably." After the battle of Towton, he accompanied his father and mother to Scotland; whence, after a time, Henry sent the young prince with the queen into France. He was married, or, as some say, only affianced, to the second daughter of Warwick, the King-maker; a most extraordinary marriage, as the elder sister was already the wife of the Duke of Clarence, the son of the greatest enemy of the House of Lancaster. Hall (p. 281) thus refers to the marriage: "After that thei had long comoned, and debated diuerse matters, concernyng their suretie and wealthe, they determined by meane of the Frenche kyng, to conclude a league and a treatie betwene them: And first to begin with all, for the more sure foundacion of the newe amitie, Edward Prince of Wales, wedded Anne second daughter to therle of Warwicke, which Lady came with her mother into Fraunce." It is supposed that Warwick, by thus allying himself with both houses, hoped, during his lifetime, to hold the balance of power between them in his own hand. This unfortunate prince was taken prisoner after the battle of Tewksbury. Hall's account of his death is as follows (p. 301): "After the felde ended, kyng Edward made a Proclamatiō, that who so euer could bring prince Edward to him alyue or dead, shoulde haue an annuitie of an. C. 1. [£100] duryng his lyfe, and the Princes life to be saued. Syr Richard Croftes, a wyse and a valyaut knyght, nothing mistrusting the

kynges former promyse, brought furth his prisoner prince Edward, beynge a goodly femenine and a well feautered yonge gentelman, whome when kynge Edward had well aduised, he demaunded of him, how he durst so presumptuously enter in to his Realme with banner displayed. The prince, beyng bold of stomacke and of a good courage, answered sayinge, to recouer my fathers kyngdome and enheritage, from his father and grandfather to him, and from him, after him, to me lyneally diuoluted. At which wordes kyng Edward sayd nothyng, but with his had thrust hym from hym (or as some say, stroke him with his gauntlet) whom incontinent, they that stode about, whiche were George duke of Clarence, Rychard duke of Gloucester, Thomas Marques Dorset, and Willia lord Hastynges, sodaynly murthered, and pitiously manquelled. The bitternesse of which murder, some of the actors, after in their latter dayes tasted and assayed by the very rod of Justice and punishment of God. Hys body was homely enterred with ye other symple corses, in ye church of the monastery of blacke monkes in Tewkesburye." Whether Edward actually struck the young son of his rival or not, is a matter of little importance. What is indisputable is that the murder was committed in his presence and with his consent; and that it adds one more to the many crimes which stain his character.

3. LEWIS XI., KING OF FRANCE. This celebrated prince was born in 1423. He was the son of Charles VII. (see I. Henry VI. note 22) and Mary of Anjou, sister of René, Duke of Anjou, and therefore first cousin to Queen Margaret of England. When only seventeen years old, Lewis, then Dauphin, took part in the rising known as la Praguerie. He revolted against his father again in 1456, and took refuge with the Duke of Burgundy, Philip le Bon, at whose court he remained till the death of the king in 1461, when he came to the throne the same year as Edward IV. On his accession he made all sorts of fine promises, which he fulfilled by exacting the most exorbitant taxes, and by punishing most severely the cities Rheims, Angers, &c,, whose inhabitants had complained of his extortion. He surrounded himself with people of the lowest birth, such as the well-known Olivier le Dain, his barber, and the Provost Tristan. In 1465 some of the discontented nobles under his own brother, Charles Duke of Berry, and Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, formed against him a league known as the League "Du Bien Publique." For nearly twelve years he carried on with varying success an almost continuous war with the Duke of Burgundy; in the course of which, by dint of cunning. hypocrisy, unscrupulous lying, and abominable cruelty, he added considerably to the possessions of France; but left behind him one of the most infamous names in all history. He promised assistance to Henry VI. (to whom he was also first cousin) and to Margaret during the fatal struggle against the House of York; but his only purpose was to obtain some considerable advantage to himself. He very nearly succeeded, by a trick, in recovering Calais. Ultimately he got back the whole of the nominal possessions of René by lending him money to redeem Queen Margaret from captivity after the death of her husband. His character has been drawn by a masterly

hand in Quentin Durward; while the more detestable features of his character are, perhaps, equally well known to the playgoers of this country from the English version of Casimir Delavigne's play. He was twice married: first, when Dauphin, to the Princess Margaret, daughter of James I., King of Scotland, by whom he had no issue; and, secondly, to Charlotte of Savoy. By the latter he had three children: a son, who succeeded him as Charles VIII; and two daughters, Anne, who married Pierre de Bourbon, Lord of Beaujeu, and Jeanne, who married the Duke of Orleans, afterwards Lewis XII. Lewis died in 1483, four months after the death of Edward IV., so that the reigns of these princes were almost coterminous.

4 DUKE OF SOMERSET. This was Edmund Beaufort, fourth and last Duke of Somerset, and son of Edmund, Duke of Somerset, in the last play. (See II. Henry VI. note 6.) He succeeded his brother Henry the third duke. This Duke Edmund held a high command at the battle of Barnet, 1471, and at Tewksbury in the same year. In the latter he was taken prisoner and beheaded by order of Edward IV. See v. 5. 3:

For Somerset, off with his guilty head.

This duke, like all his family-except the third duke, Henry, for a very short interval (see below, note 236)was always faithful to the House of Lancaster; it was a great mistake, therefore, on on the part of the dramatist, to introduce him at the court of Edward IV. in act iv. sc. 1.

5. DUKE OF EXETER. Henry Holland, son of John Holland, Earl of Huntingdon, was created Duke of Exeter, 1445, and held the offices of Constable of the Tower and Lord High Admiral. According to Holinshed, it was in the former capacity, that is, Constable of the Tower, that he played an important part in the arrest and execution of Suffolk. (See I. Henry VI. note 10.) John Holland married Anne Stafford, widow of Edmund Mortimer, last Earl of March (see I. Henry VI. note 13); and of this marriage the subject of the present memoir was born. He always remained faithful to the House of Lancaster, and was severely wounded at the battle of Barnet. succeeded to the second duke, and married Anne Plantagenet, sister of Edward IV. She obtained a divorce from him, and married Sir Thomas St. Ledger. The next year her unhappy husband, who had been detained in the custody of the king, with a weekly allowance of half a mark (according to Lingard, vol. iv. p. 193), and whom Philip de Comines said he saw suffering the greatest poverty, was found dead in the sea between Dover and Calais (according to Fabyan, p. 663); but how he came to his end was not known.

He

6. EARL OF OXFORD. This was John de Vere, thirteenth Earl of Oxford, and Hereditary Lord Chamberlain of England. He was descended from Aubrey de Vere, created Earl of Oxford in 1135 by Henry II. The ninth earl was one of Richard II.'s favourites, and was created Duke of Ireland. He succeeded his father, John, the twelfth earl, his elder brother, Aubrey de Vere, having been beheaded in 1461 with his father, as narrated by Hall (p. 258): “In the whiche Parliament, the Erle of Oxford farre striken in age and the Lord Awbrey Veer, his sonne and heire, whether it wer for malice of their enemies, or thei wer

suspected, or had offended the Kyng, they bothe and diuerse of their counsailors, wer attainted and put to execucion, whiche caused Jhon erle of Oxford, euer after to rebell."

The dramatist alludes to these executions in iii. 3. 101105:

Call him my king by whose injurious doom

My elder brother, the Lord Aubrey Vere,

Was done to death? and more than so, my father,
Even in the downfall of his mellow'd years,

When nature brought him to the door of death?

At the second battle of Barnet, April 14th, 1471, Oxford, in conjunction with the Marquis of Montague, Warwick's brother, commanded the right wing of the Lancastrian army. At first the division of the army, which Oxford commanded, pressed the wing of Edward's army opposed to it so hard, that a great many of the Yorkists fled towards Barnet and London, carrying the news of the defeat of the Yorkists. Stow says in his description of the battle (p. 423), "they fought in a thick mist from 4. of the clocke in ye morning till ten, diuers times ye E. of Warwickes men supposed that they had got the victory of the field, but it happened that the earle of Oxfords men had a star with streams both before and behinde on their liueries, and King Edwards men had the sun with streames on their liuery; whereupon the earle of Warwickes men, by reason of the mist, not well discerning the badges so like, shot at the Earle of Oxfords men that were on their own part, and then the Earle of Oxforde and his men cried treason, and fled with eight hundred men." King Edward says (v. 5. 2): Away with Oxford to Hammes Castle straight. But he there anticipates events. Oxford and Somerset fled towards Scotland, but changing their minds "turned into Wales, to Jasper erle of Penbroke" (Hall, p. 297). Stow says (p. 426): Also sir John Vere Earle of Oxforde, that had withdrawne himselfe from Barnet fielde, first into Scotland, after into France, then getting much goods on the Sea, landed in the West countrey, and entred Saint Michaels Mount, with 77 men, the last of September, whereon he was by the kings appoyntment, besieged by Bodrigan and other, but with such fauour, that the Earle reuictualled the Mount." Oxford surrendered ultimately, 1473, to Richard Fortescue, Sheriff of Cornwall, who was sent to supersede Bodrigan, being in fear of treachery, on the promise of his life being spared. He was sent, not to Guisnes, as Fabian and Stow say, but to the Castle of Ham in Picardy, where he was kept a close prisoner for twelve years. Fabyan (p. 663) says: "in all whiche season my lady his wyfe myght neuer be suffred to come vnto hym, nor had any thyng to lyue vpon, but as the people of their charites wold gyne to her, or what she myght get with her nedyll or other suche conynge as she excercysed." The rest of the memoir of the Earl of Oxford will be found in note 16, Richard III.

Cheer'd up the drooping army; and himself,

Lord Clifford, and Lord Stafford, all abreast, Charg'd our main battle's front, and, breaking in, Were by the swords of common soldiers slain. King Henry also alludes to it in the same scene, when, addressing the subject of the present memoir, he says (line 54):

Earl of Northumberland, he slew thy father.

He was the eldest son by his father's marriage with Eleanor Neville, daughter of Ralph, Earl of Westmorland, by his second wife Joan Beaufort. He was killed at the battle of Towton, March 29th, 1461. He married Eleanor, daughter and coheiress of Richard Poynyngs, by whom he left an only son, Henry Percy, who succeeded him as fourth earl.

8. EARL OF WESTMORELAND. This was the second earl; he succeeded his grandfather, the celebrated Ralph Neville, who figures in I. Henry IV. and II. Henry IV. and Henry V. His father, John, Lord Neville, died 1423, having married Elizabeth Holland, daughter of Thomas, second Earl of Kent, and therefore connected with the Plantagenets through Joan, the mother of Richard II. (See Richard II. note 7.) By her he had three sons: Ralph, the subject of the present memoir; Sir John Neville, killed at Towton; and Thomas. Ralph married Elizabeth Percy, widow of Lord Clifford and daughter of Hotspur, by whom he had only one son, who predeceased his father. He married again Margaret, daughter of Sir Reginald Cobham, but by her had no issue; and on his death, in 1483. he was succeeded, as third earl, by his nephew Ralph Neville, son of the Sir John Neville slain at Towton.

9. LORD CLIFFORD. The young Clifford of II. Henry VI. was the son of Lord Clifford killed at the battle of St. Albans. (See II. Henry VI. note 9) This Lord Clifford, after the cruel murder of young Rutland at the battle of Wakefield, was known by the title of "Butcher," to which Gloucester alludes, ii. 2. 95:

Are you there, butcher 1—0, I cannot speak!

He was slain in the skirmish at Ferrybridge, just before the battle of Towton in 1461. Hall gives the following account of the engagement (p. 253): "the lord Fawconbridge, syr Water Blont, Robert Horne with the forward, passed the ryuer at Castelford. iii. myles from Ferebridge, entending to haue enuironed and enclosed the lord Clyfford and his copany, but they beyng therof aduertised, departed in great haste toward kyng Henries army, but they mete with some that they loked not for, and were attrapped or they were ware. For the lord Clifforde, either for heat or payne, putting of his gorget, sodainly wt an arrowe, (as some say) without an hedde, was striken into the throte, and incontinent rendered hys spirite, and the erle of Westmerlandes brother and all his company almost were there slayn, at a place called Dintingdale, not farr fro Towton. This ende had he, which slew the yong erle of Rutland, kneling on his knees: whose yong sonne Thomas Clifford was brought vp wt a shepperd, in poore habite, and dissimuled behauior euer in feare, to publish his lignage or degre, till kyng Henry the. vii. obteyned the croune, and gat the diademe: by whome he was restored to his name and

11. EDWARD, EARL OF MARCH, afterwards King Edward IV., was born April 29th, 1442. He derived the earldom of March from his grandmother, Anne Mortimer. (See I. Henry VI. note 13.) He seems to have displayed considerable military talent and great personal courage from a very early age. He was little more than eighteen when, on 10th July, 1460, he helped to defeat the Lancastrians at Northampton. On the 24th December, in the same year, his father was killed at the battle of Wakefield, at which time Edward was raising forces in Wales, so that he could not, as Shakespeare represents him, have been assisting his father in that battle. On 2nd February, in the next year, 1461, he defeated Jasper Tudor at the battle of Mortimer's Cross, after which he rapidly advanced on London. The Lancastrians, under Queen Margaret, having defeated the Earl of Warwick and his forces on the 17th of the same month, failed to follow up their success; and Edward, trusting to his own popularity and to the renown of his father, boldly marched on London; he was received by the citizens with great joy. and on March 4th was proclaimed king at Westminster Hall. On the 29th of the same month he confirmed his title to the throne by his victory at Towton, and his coro nation took place at Westminster Abbey on June 29th in the same year. On May 1st, 1464, he was privately married to Elizabeth, daughter of Richard Woodville, Earl Rivers, and Jacqueline, the widow of the Duke of Bedford. (See I. Henry VI. note 2.) She was the widow of Sir John Grey, and a very beautiful woman. Her husband, who died of his wounds after the second battle of St. Albans, was in command of the cavalry on the Lancastrian side. Edward's marriage to this lady gave very great offence, not only to his two brothers, but also to the Earl of Warwick, who would have liked him to have married his own daughter. There is no doubt that Edward would never have married Lady Grey had she consented to listen to his dishonourable proposals; but his passion got the better of his prudence, and his im patience would not allow him even to wait for a public marriage. At first every effort was made to conceal the union. Fabyan says (p. 654): "And so this maryage was a season kept secret after, tyll nedely it muste be discoueryd & disclosed, by meane of other whiche were offeryd vnto the kynge, as the quene of Scottes and other." Stories were invented that the king had been bewitched by philtres and magic; but, to do Edward justice, he seems to have insisted upon his queen being treated with proper respect; while to all her family he showed the greatest favour, thus increasing the jealousy of those who were before opposed to the marriage. This enmity soon made itself felt in a serious manner. In spite of the opposition of Edward, Warwick, with the assistance of his brother the Archbishop of York, secured the marriage of Clarence, who, in consequence of the queen not having borne any son to Edward, was still heir