Edmund Ironside, or War Hath Made All Friends is an anonymous Elizabethan play that depicts the life of the Anglo-Saxon king Edmund II of England. At least three critics have suggested that it is an early work by William Shakespeare.
Edmund Ironside, or War Hath Made All Friends is an anonymous Elizabethan play that depicts the life of the Anglo-Saxon king Edmund II of England. At least three critics have suggested that it is an early work by William Shakespeare.
The play was never published in its own era; the unique copy of the text was preserved in MS. Egerton 1994, an important collection of play manuscripts now in the collection of the British Library. [1]
E. B. Everitt, Eric Sams, and Peter Ackroyd have argued that this play is perhaps Shakespeare's first drama. According to Sams, Edmund Ironside "contains some 260 words or usages which on the evidence of the Oxford English Dictionary were first used by Shakespeare himself.... Further, it exhibits 635 instances of Shakespeare's rare words including some 300 of the rarest." [2]
Sams dates the play to 1587, noting that the play's presentation after that period until the death of Elizabeth I would have been illegal because of an edict that was passed that would have applied to a scene featuring a brawl between two archbishops. He further argues that the play's strong similarities in both line and plot to Titus Andronicus , and the latter play's high number of mentions of the Roman setting, may indicate that Titus is something of a rewriting of Edmund Ironside. His appendix notes correlations of images and ideas that are found only in Shakespeare's plays and not from any known playwright of the era, such as serpents stinging via their tongues and reporting of Judas Iscariot saying "all hail," which is non-Biblical, but also found in such plays as Henry VI, Part 3 .
Edmund Ironside tells the story of a battle between two men who both want to be king of England: Edmund Ironside, who is a native, and depicted as noble, and Canutus (based on Cnut the Great), who is a Danish prince, and depicted as treacherous. Canutus is preoccupied with the possibility that the native English population will side with Ironside and rebel against Canutus.
A third important figure is Edricus (based on Eadric Streona), who is duplicitous, plays each side against the other, and who also wants the crown. Edricus is occasionally found alone on stage, and frequently boasts about his villainy (in a manner similar to the protagonist of Shakespeare's Richard III).
Stitch, brother to Edricus, is a cobbler, and wants to join the ranks of his brother's supporters. Their mother discloses that Edricus was in fact born the bastard child of a soldier she once met. Edricus calls her a witch, and says that Stitch can enter his service, but first he must banish their parents from town. Stitch does this.
Canutus, angry that two of his supporters have deserted him on the day of his wedding to Southampton's daughter, Egina, decides to get revenge on them by cutting off the hands and noses of their sons. Stitch gets an axe and cuts off the hands of the two boys. News arrives that Ironside has had a victory against Canutus' troops in the north.
Canutus attacks London. Ironside's army fights back.
Edricus attempts to frighten Ironside's men by showing them a severed head and declaring it to be Ironside's. Then Ironside reappears, and in a battle Canutus is again driven back, and Ironside praises his men for the victory.
Canutus rails against his troops and supporters, calling them cowards. After this, Edricus writes to Ironside, asking forgiveness. He then exchanges clothing with Stitch.
Stitch, now dressed in aristocratic clothing, has a scene where he play-acts the part, and is a Falstaffian comic tyrant.
Ironside reads the letter written by Edricus, and delivered by the disguised Edricus. In the letter Edricus claims that he defected because of rumors that Ironside was hunting for him, and he begs for mercy. Ironside is skeptical, and then recognizes Edricus beneath his disguise. Edricus explains that he planned to reveal himself and side with Ironside, or else exile himself. Edricus also claims to have information regarding Canutus' military plans. Ironside is trusting and announces that he will give Edricus a military command. In an aside, Edricus admires the success of his own dissimulation.
Meanwhile, as the Danes are ravaging the country, Emma, the stepmother of Ironside, says goodbye to her two young sons Alfred and Edward, who are about to embark and find safety with her brother, Duke Richard of Normandy.
Canutus receives a letter from Edricus describing his insinuation into Ironside's confidences. Canutus exults at this, and his soldiers look forward to battle. The drums sound.
Edricus meets Canutus and tells him he plans to be absent when Ironside needs him most. When Ironside attacks Canutus, Edricus backs Canutus and Ironside is driven off. Canutus promises to reward Edricus. Edricus then runs after Ironside to try to explain.
Ironside is cursing Edricus, when Edricus enters limping and with his hand wrapped in a scarf, claiming that he had a plan to support Ironside, if only Ironside had not retreated. Edricus points to his “injuries”. Ironside is persuaded and apologizes. Alone Edricus gloats.
Ironside and Canutus meet, each claiming to be king. Canutus, uses his knowledge of the law to argue his point. Ironside, angry, argues in return. They then draw swords, and a battle begins. Edricus has an idea to resolve the issue. He suggest that they either split the kingdom or that Canutus and Ironside fight one-on-one. The idea is accepted and the fight between the two men begins. Ironside seems to be winning, and Canutus yields, offering his hand to Ironside, who receives it honorably. Ironside wants the Danes to select which side, east or west, of England they want. Canutus and Ironside leave to go celebrate. Edricus, in an aside, speaks the last words of the play: “By heaven I'll be revenged on both of you.” [3]
Edmund Ironside was King of the English from 23 April to 30 November 1016. He was the son of King Æthelred the Unready and his first wife, Ælfgifu of York. Edmund's reign was marred by a war he had inherited from his father; his cognomen "Ironside" was given to him "because of his valour" in resisting the Danish invasion led by Cnut the Great.
Titus Andronicus is a tragedy by William Shakespeare believed to have been written between 1588 and 1593. It is thought to be Shakespeare's first tragedy and is often seen as his attempt to emulate the violent and bloody revenge plays of his contemporaries, which were extremely popular with audiences throughout the 16th century.
The Raigne of King Edward the Third, commonly shortened to Edward III, is an Elizabethan play printed anonymously in 1596, and at least partly written by William Shakespeare. It began to be included in publications of the complete works of Shakespeare only in the late 1990s. Scholars who have supported this attribution include Jonathan Bate, Edward Capell, Eliot Slater, Eric Sams, Giorgio Melchiori, and Brian Vickers. The play's co-author remains the subject of debate: suggestions have included Thomas Kyd, Christopher Marlowe, Michael Drayton, Thomas Nashe, and George Peele.
Henry VI, Part 1, often referred to as 1 Henry VI, is a history play by William Shakespeare—possibly in collaboration with Thomas Kyd and Thomas Nashe or Christopher Marlowe — believed to have been written in 1591. It is set during the lifetime of King Henry VI of England.
Henry VI, Part 2 is a history play by William Shakespeare believed to have been written in 1591 and set during the lifetime of King Henry VI of England. Whereas Henry VI, Part 1 deals primarily with the loss of England's French territories and the political machinations leading up to the Wars of the Roses, and Henry VI, Part 3 deals with the horrors of that conflict, 2 Henry VI focuses on the King's inability to quell the bickering of his nobles, the death of his trusted adviser Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, the rise of the Duke of York and the inevitability of armed conflict. As such, the play culminates with the opening battle of the War, the First Battle of St Albans (1455).
Henry VI, Part 3 is a history play by William Shakespeare believed to have been written in 1591 and set during the lifetime of King Henry VI of England. Whereas 1 Henry VI deals with the loss of England's French territories and the political machinations leading up to the Wars of the Roses and 2 Henry VI focuses on the King's inability to quell the bickering of his nobles, and the inevitability of armed conflict, 3 Henry VI deals primarily with the horrors of that conflict, with the once stable nation thrown into chaos and barbarism as families break down and moral codes are subverted in the pursuit of revenge and power.
In the First Folio, the plays of William Shakespeare were grouped into three categories: comedies, histories, and tragedies. The histories—along with those of contemporary Renaissance playwrights—help define the genre of history plays. The Shakespearean histories are biographies of English kings of the previous four centuries and include the standalones King John, Edward III and Henry VIII as well as a continuous sequence of eight plays. These last are considered to have been composed in two cycles. The so-called first tetralogy, apparently written in the early 1590s, covers the Wars of the Roses saga and includes Henry VI, Parts I, II & III and Richard III. The second tetralogy, finished in 1599 and including Richard II, Henry IV, Parts I & II and Henry V, is frequently called the Henriad after its protagonist Prince Hal, the future Henry V.
The Two Gentlemen of Verona is a comedy by William Shakespeare, believed to have been written between 1589 and 1593. It is considered by some to be Shakespeare's first play, and is often seen as showing his first tentative steps in laying out some of the themes and motifs with which he would later deal in more detail; for example, it is the first of his plays in which a heroine dresses as a boy. The play deals with the themes of friendship and infidelity, the conflict between friendship and love, and the foolish behaviour of people in love. The highlight of the play is considered by some to be Launce, the clownish servant of Proteus, and his dog Crab, to whom "the most scene-stealing non-speaking role in the canon" has been attributed.
The Shakespeare apocrypha is a group of plays and poems that have sometimes been attributed to William Shakespeare, but whose attribution is questionable for various reasons. The issue is separate from the debate on Shakespearean authorship, which addresses the authorship of the works traditionally attributed to Shakespeare.
Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey was an English magistrate whose mysterious death caused anti-Catholic uproar in England. Contemporary documents also spell the name Edmundbury Godfrey.
Thomas of Woodstock and Richard the Second Part One are two names for an untitled, anonymous and apparently incomplete manuscript of an Elizabethan play depicting events in the reign of King Richard II. Attributions of the play to William Shakespeare have been nearly universally rejected, and it does not appear in major editions of the Shakespeare apocrypha. The play has been often cited as a possible influence on Shakespeare's Richard II, as well as Henry IV, Parts 1 and 2, but new dating of the text brings that relationship into question.
Like most playwrights of his period, William Shakespeare did not always write alone. A number of his surviving plays are collaborative, or were revised by others after their original composition, although the exact number is open to debate. Some of the following attributions, such as The Two Noble Kinsmen, have well-attested contemporary documentation; others, such as Titus Andronicus, are dependent on linguistic analysis by modern scholars; recent work on computer analysis of textual style has given reason to believe that parts of some of the plays ascribed to Shakespeare are actually by other writers.
The Battle of Assandun was fought between Danish and English armies on 18 October 1016. There is disagreement whether Assandun may be Ashdon near Saffron Walden in north Essex, England, or, as long supposed and better evidenced, Ashingdon near Rochford in south-east Essex. It ended in victory for the Danes, led by King Cnut, who triumphed over the English army led by King Edmund Ironside. The battle was the conclusion to the Danish conquest of England.
The Battle of Brentford was fought in 1016 between invading forces of the Kingdom of Denmark under Cnut and the defending forces of the Kingdom of England led by Edmund Ironside. The battle was fought as part of a campaign by Cnut to conquer England. The battle was a victory for the English, who nevertheless lost a large number of men.
The Baconian theory of Shakespearean authorship holds that Sir Francis Bacon, philosopher, essayist and scientist, wrote the plays, which were publicly attributed to William Shakespeare. Various explanations are offered for this alleged subterfuge, most commonly that, Bacon's rise to high office might have been hindered if it became known that he wrote plays for the public stage. Thus the plays were credited to Shakespeare, who was merely a front to shield the identity of Bacon.
Eric Sams was a British musicologist and Shakespeare scholar.
The religious views of William Shakespeare are the subject of an ongoing scholarly debate dating back more than 150 years. The general assumption about William Shakespeare's religious affiliation is that he was a conforming member of the established Church of England. However, many scholars have speculated about his personal religious beliefs, based on analysis of the historical record and of his published work, with claims that Shakespeare's family may have had Catholic sympathies and that he himself was a secret Catholic.
The Peacham drawing, or 'Longleat manuscript', is the only surviving contemporary Shakespearean illustration, now in the library of the Marquess of Bath at Longleat in Wiltshire. The drawing appears to depict a performance of Titus Andronicus, under which is quoted some dialogue. Eugene M. Waith argues of the illustration that "the gestures and costumes give us a more vivid impression of the visual impact of Elizabethan acting than we get from any other source."
Although traditionally Titus Andronicus has been seen as one of Shakespeare's least respected plays, its fortunes have changed somewhat in the latter half of the twentieth century, with numerous scholars arguing that the play is more accomplished than has hitherto been allowed for. In particular, scholars have argued that the play is far more thematically complex than has traditionally been thought, and features profound insights into ancient Rome, Elizabethan society, and the human condition. Such scholars tend to argue that these previously unacknowledged insights have only become apparent during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries as only now has the ultraviolent content of the play achieved a sense of relevance. For example, in his 1987 edition of the play for the Contemporary Shakespeare series, A.L. Rowse writes; "in the civilised Victorian age the play could not be performed because it could not be believed. Such is the horror of our own age, with the appalling barbarities of prison camps and resistance movements paralleling the torture and mutilation and feeding on human flesh of the play, that it has ceased to be improbable." Similarly, director Julie Taymor, who staged a production Off-Broadway in 1994 and directed a film version in 1999, says she was drawn to the play because she found it to be the most "relevant of Shakespeare's plays for the modern era". She feels that the play has more relevance for contemporary audiences than it had for the Victorians; "it seems like a play written for today, it reeks of now." Because of this newfound relevance, previously unrecognised thematic strands have thus come to the forefront.
The authorship of Titus Andronicus has been debated since the late 17th century. Titus Andronicus, probably written between 1588 and 1593, appeared in three quarto editions from 1594 to 1601 with no named author. It was first published under William Shakespeare's name in the 1623 First Folio of his plays. However, as with some of his early and late plays, scholars have long surmised that Shakespeare might have collaborated with another playwright. Other plays have also been examined for evidence of co-authorship, but none has been as closely scrutinised or as consistently questioned than Titus. The principal contender for the co-authorship is George Peele.
