Riv. The newes is paffing ftrange, I must confeffe; Yet comfort yourselfe, for Edward hath more friends Than Lancaster at this time muft perceive,That fome will fet him in his throne againe.

Queene. God grant they may! but gentle brother, come,
And let me leane upon thine arm a while,
Untill I come unto the fanctuarie;

There to preserve the fruit within my womb,
King Edwards feed, true heir to Englands crowne.

[Exeunt.

KING HENRY VI. PART III. ACT IV. SCENE IV.

Enter the QUEEN, and RIVERS.

Riv. Madam, what makes you in this fudden change? Queen. Why, brother Rivers, are you yet to learn, What late misfortune is befall'n king Edward?

Riv. What, lofs of fome pitch'd battle againft War

wick?

Queen. No, but the lofs of his own royal perfon.
Riv. Then is my fovereign flain?

Queen. Ay, almoft flain, for he is taken prisoner;
Either betray'd by falfhood of his guard,
Or by his foe furpriz'd at unawares:
And, as I further have to understand,

Is new committed to the bishop of York,

Fell Warwick's brother, and by that our foe.

Riv. These news, I must confefs, are full of grief;

Yet gracious madam, bear it as you may;

Warwick may lofe, that now hath won the day.

Queen. Till then, fair hope muft hinder life's decay.

And 1 the rather wean me from despair,

For love of Edward's offspring in my womb:

This is it that makes me bridle paffion,

And bear with mildness my misfortune's cross ;
Ay, ay, for this I draw in many a tear,
And ftop the rifing of blood-fucking fighs,

Left with my fighs or tears I blaft or drown

King Edward's fruit, true heir to the English crown. Riv. But, madam, where is Warwick then become?

Ee3

Queen

Queen. I am informed, that he comes towards London To fet the crown once more on Henry's head:

Guess thou the reft; king Edward's friends must down.
But, to prevent the tyrant's violence,

(For truft not him that once hath broken faith,)
I'll hence forthwith unto the fanctuary,
To fave at least the heir of Edward's right;
There shall I reft fecure from force, and fraud.
Come therefore, let us fly, while we may fly;
If Warwick take us, we are fure to die.

[Exeunt

THE TRUE TRAGEDIE OF RICHARDE DUKE OF YORKE, &c. Sign. G 4. edit. 1600.

Enter the Queene, Prince Edward, Oxford, Somerset, with drumme and fouldiers.

Queene. Welcome to England, my loving friends of France And welcome Somerset and Oxford too.

Once more have we fpread our failes abroad;
And though our tackling be almoft confumde,
And Warwicke as our main-maft overthrowne,
Yet, warlike lordes, raise you that sturdie poft,
That bears the failes to bring us unto reft;
And Ned and I, as willing pilots should,
For once with careful mindes guide on the fterne,
To bear us thorough that dangerous gulfe,
That heretofore hath fwallowed up our friendes.

KING HENRY VI. PART III. ACT V. SCENE IV.
March. Enter Queen MARGARET, Prince EDWARD,
SOMERSET, OXFORD, and Soldiers.

2. Mar. Great lords, wife men ne'er fit and wail their loss,
But cheerly feek how to redrefs their harms.
What though the maft be now blown over-board,
The cable broke, the holding anchor loft,

And half our failors fwallow'd in the flood?
Yet lives our pilot ftill: Is't meet, that he

Should leave the helm, and, like a fearful lad,
With tearful eyes add water to the fea,

And give more ftrength to that which hath too much;

Whiles,

Whiles, in his moan, the fhip fplits on the rock,
Which industry and courage might have fav'd?
Ah, what a fhame! ah, what a fault were this!
Say, Warwick was our anchor; What of that?
And Montague our top-maft; What of him?
Our flaughter'd friends the tackles; What of these ?
Why, is not Oxford here another anchor?
And Somerset another goodly mast?

The friends of France our fhrouds and tacklings?
And, though unfkilful, why not Ned and I
For once allow'd the fkilful pilot's charge?
We will not from the helm, to fit and weep;
But keep our courfe, though the rough wind fay-no,
From fhelves and rocks that threaten us with wreck.
As good to chide the waves, as speak them fair.
And what is Edward, but a ruthless fea?
What Clarence, but a quick-fand of deceit ?
And Richard, but a ragged fatal rock?
All these the enemies to our poor bark.
Say, you can fwim; alas, 'tis but a while :
Tread on the fand; why, there you quickly fink:
Beftride the rock; the tide will wash you off,
Or elfe you famish, that's a threefold death.
This fpeak I, lords, to let you understand,
In cafe fome one of you would fly from us,
That there's no hop'd for mercy with the brothers,
More than with ruthless waves, with fands, and rocks.
Why, courage, then! what cannot be avoided,
Twere childish weakness to lament, or fear 3.

If the reader wishes to compare The first part of the Cona tention of the two houses, &c. with The Second Part of King Henry VI. which was formed upon it, he will find various paffages quoted from the elder drama in the notes on that play. The two celebrated scenes, in which the dead body of the duke of Glofter is described, and the death of Cardinal Beaufort is reprefented, may be worth

5 Compare alfo the account of the death of the duke of York (p. 269) and King Henry's Soliloquy (p. 287) with the old play as quoted in the notes. Sometimes our auther new-verfified the old, without the addition of any new, matter. See p. 335, n. I.

Ес

examining

examining with this view; and will fufficiently afcertain how our author proceeded in new-modelling that play; with what expreffion, animation. and splendour of colouring he filled up the outline that had been sketched by a preceding

writer.

Shakspeare having thus given celebrity to these two old dramas, by altering and writing several parts of them over again, the bookieller, Millington, in 1593-4, to avail himself of the popularity of the new and admired poet, got, perhaps from Peele, who was then living, or from the author, whoever he was, or from fome of the commedians belonging to the earl of Pembroke, the original play on which the Second Part of K.Henry VI. was founded; and entered it on the Stationers' books, certainly with an intention to publish it. Why it did not then appear, cannot be now afcertained. But both that, and the other piece on which The Third Part of King Henry VI. was formed, was printed by the fame bookfeller in 1600, either with a view to lead the common reader to fuppofe that he fhould purchase two plays as altered and newmodelled by Shakspeare, or, without any fuch fraudulent intention, to derive a profit from the exhibition of a work that fo great a writer had thought proper to retouch, and form into thofe dramas which for feveral years before 1600 had without doubt been performed with confiderable applaufe. In the fame manner The old Taming of a Shrew, on which our author formed a play, had been entered at Stationers' Hall in 1594, and was printed in 1607, without doubt with a view to pass it on the publick as the production of Shakspeare.

When William Pavier republifhed The Contention of the two Houfes, &c. in 16197, he omitted the words in the

See p. 185, n. 8; and p. 196, n. 9. Compare alfo Clifford's fpeech to the rebels in p. 229, Buckingham's addrefs to King Henry in p. 249, and Iden's speech in p. 255, with the old play, as quoted in the notes.

7 Pavier's edition has no date, but it is afcertained to have been printed in 1619, by the Signatures; the laft of which is Q. The play of Pericles was printed in 1619, for the fame bookfeller, and its fir fignature is R. The undoubted copy, therefore, of The Whole Contention, &c. and Pericles, muft have been printed at the fame time.

original

original title page,-" as it was acted by the earl of Pembrooke his fervantes ;"-juft as, on the republication of King John in two parts, in 1611, the words,-" as it was acted in the honourable city of London,"-were omitted; because the emitted words in both cafes marked the refpective pieces not to be the production of Shak fpeare. And as in King John the letters W. Sh. were added in 1611 to deceive the purchaser, fo in the republication of The Whole Contention, &c. Pavier, having difmiffed the words above mentioned, inferted thefe: " Newly CORRECTED and ENLARGED by William Shakspeare;" knowing that these pieces had been made the ground work of two other plays; that they had in fact been corrected and enlarged, (though not in that copy which Pavier printed, which is a mere republication from the edition of 1600,) and exhibited under the titles of The Second and Third Part of K. Henry VI.; and hoping that this new edition of the original plays would pafs for those altered and augmented by Shak fpeare, which were then unpublished.

If Shakspeare had originally written these three plays of King Henry VI. would they not probably have been found by the bookfeller in the fame Mf.? Would not the three parts have been procured, whether furreptitiously or otherwife, all together? Would they not in that Mf. have borne the titles of the Firft and Second and Third Part of King Henry VI.? And would not the book feller have entered them on the Stationers' books, and published fuch of them as he he did publish, under thofe titles, and with the name of ShakSpeare? On the other hand, if that which is now diftinguifhed by the name of The First Part of King Henry VI. but which I fuppofe in those times was only called "The biftorical play of King Henry VI." if this was the production of fome old dramatift, if it had appeared on the ftage fome years before 1591, (as from Nafhe's mention of it feems to be implied,) perhaps in 1587 or 1588, if its popularity was in 1594 in its wane, and the attention of the publick was entirely taken up by Shakspeare's alteration of two other plays which had likewife appeared before 1591, would

8 See An Attempt to afcertain the order of Shakspeare's plays, Vol. I. Article, King Jebn.

not