Hickson, who had been investigating the matter independently (Notes and Queries, II. p. 198; III. p. 33), and later on by Mr. Fleay and others, who subjected the various portions of the play to the metrical tests.*

The Sources. There were four main sources used for the historical facts of the play :-(i.) Hall's Union of the Families of Lancaster and York (1st ed. 1548), (ii.) Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland (1st ed. 1577; 2nd ed. 1586); (iii.) The Life of Cardinal Wolsey, by George Cavendish, his gentlemanusher (first printed in 1641; MSS. of the work were common); (iv.) Foxe's Acts and Monuments of the Church (1st ed. 1563). The last-named book afforded the materials for the Fifth Act.

Chronology of the Play. Though the play keeps in many places the very diction of the authorities, yet its chronology is altogether capricious; as will be seen from divided authorship. In the Transactions of the New Shak. Soc. for 1880-5, there is a paper by Mr. Robert Boyle, putting forth the theory that the play was written by Fletcher and Massinger, and that the original Shakespearian play perished altogether in the Globe fire.

*These tests seem decisive against Shakespeare's sole authorship. Dr. Abbott (Shakespearian Grammar, p. 331) states emphatically::-"The fact that in Henry VIII., and in no other play of Shakespeare's, constant exceptions are formed to this rule (that an extra syllable at the end of a line is rarely a monosyllable) seems to me a sufficient proof that Shakespeare did not write that play." The following table will show at a glance the metrical characteristics of the parts:—

the following table of historic dates, arranged in the order

of the play :-*

1520. June. Field of the Cloth of Gold.

1522. March. War declared with France.

May-July. Visit of the Emperor to the English
Court.

1521. April 16th. Buckingham brought to the Tower. 1527. Henry becomes acquainted with Anne Bullen. 1521. May. Arraignment of Buckingham.

May 17th. His Execution.

1527. August. Commencement of proceedings for the divorce.

1528. October. Cardinal Campeius arrives in London. 1532. September. Anne Bullen created Marchioness of Pembroke.

1529. May. Assembly of the Court at Blackfriars to try the case of the divorce.

1529} Cranmer abroad working for the divorce.

1533.

1529. Return of Cardinal Campeius to Rome.

1533. January. Marriage of Henry with Anne Bullen. 1529. October. Wolsey deprived of the great seal. Sir Thomas More chosen Lord Chancellor.

1533. March 30th.

Cranmer consecrated Archbishop of Canterbury.

May 23rd. Nullity of the marriage with Katharine declared.

1530. November 29th. Death of Cardinal Wolsey. 1533. June Ist. Coronation of Anne.

1536. January 8th. Death of Queen Katharine. 1533. September 7th. Birth of Elizabeth.

1544. Cranmer called before the Council.

1533. September. Christening of Elizabeth.

*Vide P. A. Daniel's Time Analysis, Trans. of New Shak. Soc., 1877-79; cp. Courtenay's Commentaries on the Historical Plays; Warner's English History in Shakespeare.

Duration of Action. From the above it is clear that the historical events of the play cover a period of twentyfour years; the time of the play, however, is seven days, represented on the stage, with intervals:-Day 1, Act I. Sc. i.-iv. Interval. Day 2, Act II. Sc. i.-iii. Day 3, Act II. Sc. iv. Day 4, Act III. Sc. i. Interval. Day 5, Act III. Sc. ii. Interval. Day 6, Act IV. Sc. i., ii. Interval. Day 7, Act V. Sc. i.-iv.

Critical Comments.

I.

Argument.

I. Soon after the return of the English court from the Field of the Cloth of Gold the Duke of Buckingham has the misfortune to embroil himself with Cardinal Wolsey, chancellor to Henry VIII. The cardinal suborns some discontented servants of the duke to accuse their master of treasonable purposes; Wolsey's desire to work Buckingham's downfall probably being strengthened to jealousy of his power.

Wolsey gives a great supper to the court, which is attended by the King and his lords masked. Henry is greatly attracted by the beauty of Anne Bullen, a maid of honour.

II. Buckingham is brought to trial, convicted of high treason and led to execution.

The charms of Anne Bullen awaken in the King a long dormant scruple of conscience regarding the legality of his marriage with Katharine, the widow of his deceased brother. He resolves to divorce the Queen and calls her to public trial. She attends, but refuses to submit to the court. She will not accept Wolsey for judge, and appeals to the pope.

III. The cardinal, now seeing the drift of Henry's purpose, and dismayed at the prospect of his union with. a Protestant, takes the side of Queen Katharine and sends private instructions to the papal court that her divorce may be delayed. But the Queen still mistrusts him for her enemy. The King meanwhile becoming im

patient at Rome's delay, takes matters into his own hands, puts away Queen Katharine, and secretly espouses Anne Bullen. At this juncture he by chance gains possession of the cardinal's papers-the letter to the pope, and inventory of the chancellor's enormous wealth. The enraged monarch deprives Wolsey of his civil offices, and the fallen favourite is saved from a charge of high treason only by the interposition of death.

IV. The divorced Queen Katharine shortly follows Wolsey to the grave. Anne Bullen is publicly crowned as Queen amid much ceremony, being anointed by Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury.

V. After Wolsey's death Cranmer enjoys a great share of the King's favour. This arouses the jealousy of powerful nobles, who form a conspiracy against the prelate. He is brought to trial and threatened with imprisonment in the Tower, when the opportune arrival of Henry himself enables him to triumph over his rivals. Cranmer evinces his gratitude for the royal friendship by taking part in the christening of Queen Anne's infant daughter, Elizabeth, for whom he prophesies a career of great splendour.

MCSPADDEN: Shakespearian Synopses.

II.

Henry and Anne.

Shakspeare has, it is true, not spared Henry's character: he appears everywhere as the obstinate, capricious, selfish and heartless man that he was a slave to his favourites and to his passions. That Shakspeare has not expressly described him as such, that he has rather characterised him tacitly through his own actions, and no doubt sedulously pushed his good points into the foreground, could not-without injustice-have been expected otherwise from a national poet who wrote in the reign of Henry's daughter, the universally honoured