Edward III (play)
The
Raigne of King Edward the Third,
commonly shortened to Edward III, is an Elizabethan play
printed anonymously in 1596, and partly written by William Shakespeare.
It has recently become accepted as part of Shakespeare's canon of plays. In the
late 1990s it began to be included in publications of the complete works as
co-authored by Shakespeare. Scholars who have supported this attribution
include Jonathan Bate,
Edward Capell,
Eliot
Slater, Eric
Sams, Giorgio
Melchiori, Brian Vickers, and others. The play was co-authored by another
playwright: Thomas Kyd,
Christopher Marlowe,
Michael Drayton,
Thomas
Nashe, and George
Peele have been suggested.
The
play contains several gibes at Scotland and the Scottish
people, which has led some critics to
think that it is the work that incited George Nicolson, Queen Elizabeth's
agent in Edinburgh,
to protest against the portrayal of Scots on the London stage in a 1598 letter to William Cecil, Lord Burghley. This could explain why the play was not
included in the First Folio
of Shakespeare's works, which was published after the Scottish King James
had succeeded to the English throne in 1603.
Characters
The
English
- King Edward III
- Queen Philippa – his wife
- Edward, the Black Prince – their son
- Earl of Salisbury – partially based on Sir Walter de Manny; Salisbury was deceased by the events of the second half of the play
- Countess of Salisbury – Salisbury's wife (although the story of Edward III's infatuation with her is based on an incident involving Alice of Norfolk, Salisbury's sister-in-law)
- Earl of Warwick – her father (fictitiously)
- Sir William Montague – Salisbury's nephew
- Earl of Derby
- Lord Audley – portrayed as an old man, though he was historically no older than 30 at the time of the play
- Lord Percy
- John Copland – esquire, later Sir John Copland
- Lodwick or Lodowick – King Edward's secretary
- Two Esquires
- Herald
Supporters
of the English
- Robert, Count of Artois – partially based on Sir Godfrey de Harcourt; Artois was deceased by the events of the second half of the play
- Lord Mountford – Duke of Brittany
- Gobin de Grace – French prisoner
The
French
- King John II – some of his actions in the play were actually undertaken by his predecessors King Charles IV and King Philip VI
- Prince Charles – Duke of Normandy, his son
- Prince Philip – his youngest son (historically not yet born)
- Duke of Lorraine
- Villiers – Norman lord
- Captain of Calais
- Another Captain
- Mariner
- Three Heralds
- Two Citizens from Crécy
- Three other Frenchmen
- Woman with two children
- Six wealthy citizens of Calais
- Six poor citizens of Calais
Supporters
of the French
- King of Bohemia
- Polonian Captain
- Danish troops
The
Scots
- King David the Bruce of Scotland
- Sir William Douglas
- Two Messengers
Synopsis
King
Edward III is informed by the Count of Artois
that he, Edward, was the true heir to the previous king of France. A French
ambassador arrives to insist that Edward do homage to the new French king for
his lands in Guyenne.
Edward defies him, insisting he will invade to enforce his rights. A messenger
arrives to say that the Scots are besieging a castle in the north of England.
Edward decides to deal with this problem first. The castle is being held by the
beautiful Countess of
Salisbury, the wife of the Earl of Salisbury. As Edward's army arrives, the rampaging Scots flee. Edward immediately falls for the Countess, and
proceeds to woo her for himself. She rebuffs him, but he persists. In an
attempted bluff, the Countess vows to take the life of her husband if Edward
will take the life of his wife. However, when she sees that Edward finds the
plan morally acceptable, she ultimately threatens to take her own life if he
does not stop his pursuit. Finally, Edward expresses great shame, admits his
fault and acquiesces. He dedicates himself to use his energies to pursue his
rights and duties as king.
In
the second part of the play, in several scenes reminiscent of Henry
V, Edward joins his army in France,
fighting a war to claim the French throne. He and the French king exchange
arguments for their claims before the Battle of Crécy.
King Edward's son, Edward, the Black Prince, is knighted and sent into battle.
The king refuses to send help to his son when it appears that the young man's
life is in danger. Prince Edward proves himself in battle after defeating the
king of Bohemia. The English win the battle and the French flee to Poitiers.
Edward sends the prince to pursue them, while he besieges Calais.
In
Poitiers the prince finds himself outnumbered and apparently surrounded. The
play switches between the French and English camps, where the apparent
hopelessness of the English campaign is contrasted with the arrogance of the
French. Prince Edward broods on the morality of war before achieving victory in
the Battle of Poitiers
against seemingly insurmountable odds. He captures the French king.
In
Calais the citizens realise they will have to surrender to King Edward. Edward
demands that six of the leading citizens be sent out to face punishment.
Edward's wife, Queen Philippa, arrives and persuades him to pardon them. Sir
John Copland brings Edward the king of the Scots, captured in battle, and a messenger
informs Edward that the English have secured Brittany. However, the successes
are undercut when news arrives that Prince Edward was facing certain defeat at
Poitiers. King Edward declares he will take revenge. Prince Edward arrives with
news of his victory, bringing with him the captured French king. The English
enter Calais in triumph.
Sources
Like
most of Shakespeare's history plays, the source is Raphael
Holinshed's Chronicles, while Jean
Froissart's Chronicles is also a major
source for this play. Roger Prior has argued that the playwright had access to
Lord Hunsdon's personal copy of Froissart and quoted some of Hunsdon's
annotations. A significant portion of the part usually attributed to
Shakespeare, the wooing of the Countess of
Salisbury, is based on the tale "The
Countesse of Salesberrie" (no. 46) in the story-collection Palace of Pleasure by William Painter. Painter's version of the story, derived from Froissart, portrays Edward as a bachelor and the Countess as a widow,
and concludes with the couple marrying. Painter's preface indicates that he
knew that this was "altogether untrue", since Edward had only one
wife, "the sayde vertuous Queene Philip", but reproduces Froissart's version
with all its "defaults". The author of the play is aware that both
were married at the time. Melchiori (p. 104) points out the similarity of
the playwright's language to that of Painter in spite of the plotting
differences.
The
play radically compresses the action and historical events, placing the Battle of Poitiers
(1356) immediately after the Battle
of Crecy (1346), and before the capture of
Calais. In fact, Poitiers took place ten years after the earlier victory and
capture of Calais. The compression necessitates that characters are merged.
Thus the French king throughout the play is John
II of France. In fact, Crecy had been fought
against his predecessor, Philip VI of France.
Many other characters are freely depicted at events when they could not have
been present. William Montague, 1st
Earl of Salisbury and John
de Montfort were both dead even before Crecy.
While Sir John Copland did capture the Scottish King David and bring him to
Calais in 1346, shortly after Crecy, complete Anglo-Montfort victory in
Brittany, alluded in the same scene, was not achieved until the Battle
of Auray in 1364.
Edward
III has recently been accepted into the
canon of plays written by Shakespeare. In 1596, it was published anonymously,
which was common practice in the 1590s (the first Quarto editions of Titus
Andronicus and Richard III
also appeared anonymously). Additionally, Elizabethan theatre often paid
professional writers of the time to perform minor additions
and emendations to problematic or overly brief scripts (the additions to the popular but brief Doctor Faustus and Shakespeare's own additions on the unperformed Sir Thomas More being some of the best known). No holographic manuscript of
Edward III is extant.
The
principal arguments against Shakespeare's authorship are its non-inclusion in
the First Folio of Shakespeare's plays in 1623 and being unmentioned in Francis
Meres' Palladis Tamia (1598), a
work that lists many (but not all) of Shakespeare's early plays. Some critics
view the play as not up to the quality of Shakespeare's ability, and they
attribute passages resembling his style to imitation or plagiarism. Despite
this, many critics have seen some passages as having an authentic Shakespearean
ring. In 1760, noted Shakespearean editor Edward
Capell included the play in his Prolusions;
or, Select Pieces of Ancient Poetry, Compil'd with great Care from their
several Originals, and Offer'd to the Publicke as Specimens of the Integrity
that should be Found in the Editions of worthy Authors, and concluded that
it had been written by Shakespeare. However, Capell's conclusion was, at the
time, only supported by mostly German scholars.
In
recent years, professional Shakespeare scholars have increasingly reviewed the
work with a new eye, and have concluded that some passages are as sophisticated
as any of Shakespeare's early histories, especially King John and the Henry
VI plays. In addition, passages in the
play are direct quotes from Shakespeare's sonnets, most notably the line "lilies that fester smell far
worse than weeds" (sonnet 94)
and the phrase "scarlet ornaments", used in sonnet
142.
Stylistic analysis has also produced evidence that at least some
scenes were written by Shakespeare.[15][note
1] In the Textual Companion to
the Oxford Complete Works of Shakespeare, Gary Taylor states that "of all the non-canonical plays, Edward
III has the strongest claim to inclusion in the Complete Works"[16] (the play was subsequently edited by William Montgomery and
included in the second edition of the Oxford Complete Works, 2005). The first
major publishing house to produce an edition of the play was Yale University
Press, in 1996; Cambridge University Press published an edition two years later as part of its New Cambridge Shakespeare series. Since then, an edition of the Riverside Shakespeare has included the play, as has the Arden
Shakespeare in its Third Series (2017). The Oxford Shakespeare
series has published an edition.
Giorgio
Melchiori, editor of the New Cambridge edition, asserts that the play's
disappearance from the canon is probably due to a 1598 protest at the play's
portrayal of the Scottish. According to Melchiori, scholars have often assumed
that this play, the title of which was not stated in the letter of 15 April
1598 from George Nicolson (Elizabeth I's
Edinburgh agent) to Lord
Burghley noting the public unrest, was a
comedy (one that does not survive), but the play's portrayal of Scots is so
virulent that it is likely that the play was banned—officially or
unofficially—and left forgotten by Heminges and Condell.
The
events and monarchs in the play would, along with the two history
tetralogies and Henry VIII,
extend Shakespeare's chronicle to include all the monarchs from Edward III
to Shakespeare's near-contemporary Henry VIII.
Some scholars, notably Eric Sams,
have argued that the play is entirely by Shakespeare, but today,
scholarly opinion is divided, with many researchers asserting that the play is
an early collaborative work, of which Shakespeare wrote only a few scenes.
In
2009, Brian Vickers published the results of a computer analysis using a
program designed to detect plagiarism, which suggests that 40% of the play was
written by Shakespeare with the other scenes written by Thomas
Kyd (1558–1594). John
Jowett and Richard Proudfoot and Nicola Bennett, while not rejecting the possibility of Kyd's authorship,
find that the evidence is insufficient. Citing Jowett's Shakespeare and the
Text, Proud foot and Bennett identify multiple assumptions made in the
attribution, crediting the first three to Jowett: that Kyd's known oeuvre (consisting of only The Spanish Tragedy, Soliman and Perseda, and an English translation of French playwright Robert
Garnier's Cornelia) is a sufficient body of evidence for comparison, that
"rarity" of n-gram
patterns is definable and doubtlessly characteristic, and that scenes within
collaborative plays are always by one author acting alone. Proudfoot and
Bennett add to these that selection bias prejudges outcome, making the
methodology only somewhat more sophisticated than "parallel passage"
strategies of old despite the inclusion of more text in the analysis. They cite
in-progress work by Martin Mueller to digitally analyse 548 plays published
between 1562 and 1662 for n-grams, but also note that some playwrights and
plays of the era are known only by their names, that anonymous plays could be
written by authors whose work is unknown to scholars of drama of the period,
and that there was a dramatic increase in the publication of plays starting in
1593, when the practice became normalized for successful plays. Based on
Mueller's work, the top ten plays with n-gram links to Edward III range
from 6% to 4%:
- Henry VI, Part 3 (Shakespeare)
- Edward II (Marlowe)
- Henry VI, Part 1 (Shakespeare, possibly with Thomas Nashe, Kyd, and/or Marlowe)
- Alphonsus, King of Aragon (Robert Greene)
- Richard III (Shakespeare)
- Tamburlaine, Part 1 (Marlowe)
- King John (Shakespeare)
- A Knack to Know a Knave (anonymous)
- Tamburlaine, Part 2 (Marlowe)
- The Massacre at Paris (Marlowe)
This
suggests to them that genre is more significant than author. They also note
that Kyd's plays don't score that high on Mueller's scale, The Spanish Tragedy at 24th, Soliman and Perseda at 33, and Cornelia at 121. They also note that Vickers was working on a wider
project to expand the canon of Kyd to include Edward III, Arden of Faversham, Fair Em,
King
Leir, and parts of Henry VI, Part 1.
Marcus Dahl did n-gram research on Nashe's works and found seven links in Summer's Last Will
and Testament, 24 links in Christ's
Tears Over Jerusalem, thirteen
links in The Unfortunate Traveller, and four links in The
Terrors of the Night.
Proudfoot and Bennett argue that Nashe's access to the library of Sir Robert Cotton,
1st Baronet, of Connington would
have given Nashe access to Froissart and other sources of the play. They note
that the only reference to Froissart in all of Shakespeare's canonical work is
in the first act of Henry VI, Part 1, which many scholars now attribute
to Nashe. Nashe was known primarily as a playwright, but Summer's Last Will
and Testament is his only theatrical work of undisputed authorship still
extant. Proudfoot and Bennett also suggest that Nashe's possible co-authorship
need not have been dialogue writing, but structuring the plot. "It will be
apparent," they write, however,
that
the attempt to identify Nashe as a putative partner in writing Edward III
is wholly conjectural, anchored to the few known facts of his familiarity with
Froissart and perhaps by phrasal links with the verbal text of Edward III.
If this hypothesis has any interest, then it may be in confronting the question
of how the selection of material from Froissart for Edward III came to
be as it is and not otherwise. The fact that it is purely speculative may serve
to illustrate the tantalizing gap that still yawns between the playtext that
has survived and the attempt to locate it among what little is known of the
writers and players who brought it into being.
Charles R. Forker's analysis of The Troublesome
Reign of John, King of England
(2011) assesses that anonymous play as being by George
Peele, and Edward III as
stylistically different from that of Peele. Nevertheless, Tucker Brooke identified Peele as the author of Edward III in
1908, and Lois Potter did so in 2012. "Any case for Peele," write
Proudfoot and Bennett, "would take as its point of departure the fact that
his known plays share several concerns with Edward III: David and Bethsabe revolves around adulterous love and its consequences; the
action of Edward I
dramatizes the creation of the title of Prince
of Wales (of which the Black Prince was only
the third holder); while The Battle of Alcazar dramatizes sixteenth-century warfare—the anachronistic
model for the battle narratives in Edward III, with their pikes and naval gunnery."
Harold
Bloom rejects the theory that Shakespeare
wrote Edward III, on the grounds that he finds "nothing in the play
is representative of the dramatist who had written Richard III."
Attributions
- William Shakespeare – Edward Capell (1760)
- George Peele – Tucker Brooke (1908)
- Christopher Marlowe, with Robert Greene, George Peele, and Thomas Kyd – J. M. Robertson (1924)
- Michael Drayton – E.A. Gerard (1928)
- Robert Wilson – S.R. Golding (1929)
- William Shakespeare – A.S. Cairncross (1935)
- Michael Drayton – H.W. Crundell (1939)
- Thomas Kyd – William Wells (1940)
- Thomas Kyd – Guy Lambrechts (1963)
- Robert Greene – R.G. Howarth (1964)
- Thomas Heywood – Moelwyn Merchant (1967)
- William Shakespeare – Eliot Slater (1988)
- William Shakespeare and one other – Jonathan Hope (1994)
- William Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe – Robert A.J. Matthews and Thomas V.N. Merriam (1994)
- William Shakespeare – Eric Sams (1996)
- William Shakespeare and others (not Marlowe) – Giorgio Melchiori (1998)[33][note 3]
- Christopher Marlowe (Acts I, III, and V) and William Shakespeare (Acts II and IV) – Thomas Merriam (2000)
- Thomas Kyd (60%) and William Shakespeare (40%) – Brian Vickers (2009)[21]
- George Peele – Lois Potter (2012)
- William Shakespeare (Scenes 2, 3, and 12) and others (principal consideration is given to Marlowe, Kyd, Peele, and Thomas Nashe, but qualified as "purely speculative" and insisting that even Shakespeare's involvement is conjectural) – Richard Proudfoot and Nicola Bennett (2017)
Performance history
The
first modern performance of the play was on 6 March 1911, when the Elizabethan Stage Society performed Act 2 at the Little Theatre in London. Following
this, the BBC broadcast an abridged version of the play in 1963, with complete
performances taking place in Los Angeles in 1986 (as part of a season of
Shakespeare Apocrypha) and Mold in 1987.
In
1977, the play was incorporated into the marathon BBC Radio dramatic series Vivat
Rex as Episodes Three: "Obsession" and Four: "The Black
Prince" with Keith Michell
as "Edward III", Christopher
Neame as "Edward the Black
Prince" and Richard Burton
as "The Narrator".
In
1998, Cambridge University Press became the first major publisher to produce an
edition of the play under Shakespeare's name, and shortly afterward the Royal
Shakespeare Company performed the play (to mixed reviews).
In
2001, the American professional premiere was staged by Hope Theatre, Inc. at
the Bank Street Theater in Greenwich Village, New York City, which received
mixed reviews. Later in 2001, it was produced again by Pacific Repertory Theatre's Carmel Shakespeare Festival, which received positive reviews for the endeavor.
In
2002, The Royal Shakespeare Company's production was performed as part of a season of little
done plays by Shakespeare's contemporaries along with such titles as The
Roman Actor by Philip
Massinger and Eastward
Ho by Ben
Jonson. The production was directed by
Anthony Clarke and starred David
Rintoul as King Edward and Caroline
Faber as the Countess. It was performed
at the Swan Theatre in Stratford-upon-Avon,
a venue known for tackling more non-mainstream titles. The production mixed
costuming and set elements that included medieval armor and weaponry with 19th
century style military uniforms.
In
2009, Director Donna Northcott of St. Louis Shakespeare produced a
traditionally set production on a multi-tiered set at the Orthwein Theater.
In
2011, the Atlanta Shakespeare Company presented a production in repertory with The Two Noble Kinsmen at their Shakespeare Tavern Theater. In his director's
note, Director Troy Willis stressed the various elements of honor and chivalry
found in the play were often taught to the nobility by characters who were
lower in social station than themselves. This is notable in the Countess
instructing King Edward and Audley instructing the young prince.
In
2014, The Hawai'i Shakespeare Festival (HSF) presented an anime/video game style production that was notable for using
dancers as stand ins for King Edward and King John as they controlled the
dancers from the sides of the stage.
In
2016, The Hudson Shakespeare Company presented a production as part of their Shakespeare in the Park series and their history cycle treatment of Shakespeare's
second or major cycle producing it along with Richard II
and Henry IV, Part 1 and Henry
IV, Part 2. As Edward III takes place
two generations before Richard II, which was done in a late medieval
style, Edward III was placed in an early medieval/Viking setting to depict an earlier time. Other notable features
included by Artistic Director Jon Ciccarelli were a Viking party scene that
bridged the Edward-Countess meeting scene with the Lodowick monologue and
included an historical dramatization of Edward's founding of the "Order of the Garter"
stressing the mutual attraction between Edward (Ben Forer) and the Countess
(Rachel Matusewicz).
In
2016, The Flock Theater in New London, Connecticut, featured a decidedly older
King Edward and much younger Countess.
In
2016, the Chicago Shakespeare Theater presented Edward III as part of a 3-play history
cycle that included Henry
V and Henry
VI, Part 1. The cycle was called Tug of
War: Foreign Fire and concluded in a follow up cycle called Tug of War:
Civil Strife which included Henry
VI, Part 2, Henry
VI, Part 3 and Richard
III.
No comments:
Post a Comment