o redeem the situation, even in the dreadful
moment of John's kneeling supplication to Pandulph, by putting into the
former's mouth 'asides' expressing a heart completely at variance with
the formal penitence; in fact this scene might be understood as a clever
hoodwinking of the enemy to circumvent the Dauphin. With true artistic
and patriotic instinct the author creates the redoubtable Faulconbridge
to demonstrate that Englishmen were stout of heart and loyal to the
throne in its worst perils, whatever might be the temporary failings of
the king and a few nobles. In _The Famous Victories_ the earlier author
had for his central figure a type of character that will always appeal
to an English audience. Here we find in fullest expression that free
introduction of the comic by the side of the serious, and that love for
jovial intercourse between royalty and subjects which are so frequent in
our History Plays. The roistering of Prince Hal among his boon
companions in the tavern, his boxing of the Judge's ears, and his
consequent arrest; these hold the stage for the first six scenes (there
are no acts, in this play or in the other), and contain several touches
and incidents borrowed afterwards by Shakespeare for his _Falstaff_.
Indeed it is surprising to observe how extensively that great genius
appropriated the work of other men. While commonly refining the
language, he was not above borrowing thought as well as incident--even
for the famous lines by the Bastard, Faulconbridge, closing _King John_.
The form of the History Plays is a direct continuation of the methods of
the old Miracles, and does not differ in essentials from that found in
Shakespeare's 'Histories'. Such differences as do occur are due, as a
rule, to minor differences of arrangement and length. The author of _The
Troublesome Reign of King John_ extended his theme into two plays, and
so found room for much that had to be omitted in a single play;
Shakespeare, on the other hand, spread over three plays the royal
character--Henry V--which his predecessor comprehended in one. The
historical method had, however, a certain effect on the English drama.
It made extremely popular, by its patriotic subjects, a form which
disregarded the skilful evolution of a plot, contenting itself with a
succession of scenes, arranged merely in order of time, that should
carry a comprehensive story to its finish. We shall see this influence
operating disastrously in plays other tha
|