Since the first attribution of Shakespeare as the author of the anonymous Edward III (1596) in 1656, the play has occupied a shifting status in the canon. Over the past twenty years renewed critical interest in questions of the canonicity of Edward III has led to a wider acceptance of Shakespeare's involvement with the play.This study reviews the canonical problems raised by Edward III and reappraises the play as a dramatic text. Chapter One concentrates on issues of the play's publication, dating, and authorship. Chapter Two examines how the playwright uses literary and chronicle sources to present celebratory images of Edward III and of his son the Black Prince. Chapter Three analyzes the "ancestral influence" of the figures of Edward III and the Black Prince on the titular hero of Shakespeare's Henry V. The Chapter directs attention to Edward III as a pre-text for Henry V. The Conclusion summarizes the study and indicates future lines of inquiry.

No description available.

This project explores connections between hero and history, text and context. By engaging Postcolonial theories about the roles that invasion and oppression, play in developing national identity and how colonized people respond to such encounters in literature, I examine how experiences of invasion and hostile interaction as represented in medieval and early modern English literature influenced the creation of specific heroic values. In my first chapter, I analyze The Battle of Maldon and Beowulf as exemplars of the Anglo-Saxon culture, observing that Byrhtnoth and Beowulf work as fictional embodiments of a fantasy of power: men of super-human strength and exceptional resoluteness who, through remarkable sacrifices, inspire men to accomplish phenomenal deeds of their own. Next, I explore Arthur in The Alliterative Morte Arthure and Le Morte Darthur, who embraces his hybridity, fluidly moving between the Anglo-Saxon warrior tradition and the French romance tradition. Last, I consider Shakespeare’s Henry V, which depicts a conquering hero who possesses the prowess and nobility of his heroic predecessors and the ability to succeed where they failed, securing England’s continental dominance. In each era, I contend that the authors created heroes on whom they could project a fantasized identity which defied the realities of their time, heroes who changed based upon the type of threat faced by England. This study samples five hundred years of literature and uses this breadth to explore cross-periodic continuity, finding that the heroes of these texts respond not only to their historical context, but also to each other. This scope allows one to see how the emblem of the hero responds to the reality of the authors and audiences of these texts. The figure of the hero develops over centuries, demonstrating that as the needs of the authors and audiences change, so, too, does the character who represents them. These literary figures provide a unique window into the culture and concerns of the authors and audiences during the medieval and early modern eras. They represent desire for strength, inspiration, glory and triumph. They reflect the agony of anxiety, vulnerability, defeat, and hopelessness. Most importantly, they reimagine, reframe, and redress reality.

The purpose of this essay is to understand the rhetoric presented by Henry V in Shakespeare’s St. Crispin’s day speech. More specifically, it examines the speech from a "dramatistic" point of view, i.e. the way Henry V is labeling agent, scene, act, agency and purpose in the narrative that his rhetoric constitutes. These labels are in themselves strategic spots, allowing the rhetorician to stage a reality that seeks to promote certain ways of thinking, feeling and acting that are beneficial to him. By examining these labels closely, we gain knowledge of their workings and – perhaps more importantly – their interchangeability. The analysis is based on Kenneth Burke’s dramatistic pentad and his ideas on how dialectical transformation can deepen our understanding of certain representations of reality. The methodology used is mostly that of Kenneth Burke when dealing with the elements of the pentad and its transformations, found in his work A grammar of motives. But it is also inspired by Hahn & Morlando’s (1979) Burkean analysis of Abraham Lincoln’s second inaugural address. The main conclusion is that Henry V overcomes his rhetorical obstacles (his men’s lack of motivation and questioning of the war) by reducing his narrative to the purpose. This purpose (and key term) is "honor", treated by Henry V as a term primarily rooted in the act, which is beneficial to his cause, since it allows men of all ranks to view themselves capable of gaining honor by performing the act of fighting. Furthermore, his focus on honor (and its dreaded counterpart – mediocrity and unmanliness) has the added side effect of drawing attention from some of his men’s critique of the war.

When scholars look for a Shakespearean analogue to Queen Elizabeth I, they often look no farther than his Richard II, the deposed and effeminate king with whom Elizabeth was known to compare herself. This report seeks to broaden our reading of Shakespeare's Henriad by arguing that, in fact, there are echoes of Elizabeth in both Henry IV and Henry V, successors to Richard II. These traces of Elizabeth reveal the Henriad's fantasy of a male-dominated political sphere as just that: a fantasy. Moreover, this appropriation of maternal or effeminate characteristics is not limited to the Henriad's rulers, but occurs several times in the Shakespearean canon. This absorption becomes another way for Shakespeare's plays to manage their anxiety over threatening women even as they appropriate the authority of an aging Elizabeth. / text

Shakespeare’s Henriad delves into questions of divine authority, political process, and the role of class in society. Most importantly, however, the text tracks the shifts in leadership and kingly identity. Richard II paints the portrait of a king infatuated with his own divinity. Richard’s journey from anointed king to deposed mortal captures the dissolution of his fantasy of invincibility. Inciting Richard’s demise, Henry IV effectively disturbs the passive obedience which the king’s subjects maintain; in doing so, the kingship begins to shift away from divine authority, moving into a vacuum of rebellion and civil conflict. Meanwhile, the previously profligate Prince Hal turns towards his duties; in proving himself to his father, he begins to accumulate honor, redeeming himself as a capable heir. Hal’s ascension as Henry V and his subsequent success as a king provides a stark contrast to the discontent during Richard’s reign. As the presence of divinity recedes, the theme of honor appears more frequently throughout the Henriad. Prince Hal views honor as an external commodity which can be accumulated by an individual. Honor, as presented by Henry V, seemingly converts an intrinsic trait or virtue into a commodity with economic value, allowing for the establishment of his own political legitimacy. Using the plays in the Henriad as my primary texts, I intend to examine this political and ideological transition by connecting Richard's divine right to Hal's construction of an economy of honor.

No description available.

Staging Medievalisms analyzes how twentieth- and twenty-first century performance constructs the Middle Ages. This work is in conversation with medievalism, the academic field concerned with the diverse ways post-medieval societies have re-imagined medieval narratives and tropes, often in service of their own values. As a result of centuries worth of re-definition, the term "medieval" is unstable, referring simultaneously to a fairytale prehistory and a dark age of oppression. I argue that performance, both in theatrical productions and in medieval-focused tourist spaces, allows an affective connection between the medieval past and the present, casting the Middle Ages as an inherently flexible backdrop for contemporary political and social concerns. In tourist spaces and plays about the Middle Ages, the performing body becomes the site where the medieval and the modern touch. I conduct close readings of six productions and three public spaces which stage the Middle Ages, examining which particular versions of the medieval they create, how they stage moments of historiographical contact, and how each uses the medieval to imagine their own historical contexts. Chapter one provides an overview of medievalism and its connection to performance studies, and subsequent chapters take up contemporary productions of medieval history, legend, and fantasy, respectively. Chapter two examines three recent stagings of Shakespeare's medieval history play Henry V, a work which stages two opposing versions of the medieval simultaneously. The Royal Shakespeare Company (1994), National Theatre (2003), and Austin, Texas (2009) productions offer commentary on modern warfare, using Henry's medieval battles as both evidence and setting. Chapter three analyses representations of the Holy Grail in Mort d'Arthur (2010), Spamalot (2005), and Proof (2001). Each re-imagines the Grail as a symbol of achievement and power, drawing different conclusions about contemporary society's need for the mystical. Chapter four takes up performances of the Middle Ages in the public sphere, examining how Disneyland, Medieval Times, and the Renaissance Faire offer visitors varying degrees of freedom to experience the medieval through their own bodies. Throughout, I argue that performance encourages affective connections to the medieval past as a reflection of contemporary desires. / text

As Shakespeare composed the three history plays discussed here, English culture faced a shift in its dominant belief system from an animistic perspective that valued nature and superstition to a humanistic perspective based on reason and personal relationships. In Richard II, Shakespeare creates characters that fall on either side of this divide, and he shows humanism triumph over animism when Henry deposes Richard. In 1 Henry IV, Shakespeare shows that this binary is not so easily reconciled, and Hal (the future Henry V) creates a dual nature that subsumes the tenets of both animism and humanism. After the death of his father and his rejection of Falstaff in 2 Henry IV, Hal demonstrates that the only solution to the humanism/animism debate is to entirely reject the tenets of both and, instead, blend the two viewpoints together. The result is a newly formed conception of kingship and a hero-king.

This thesis seeks to examine not any single theory of kingship in Shakespeare's 'Henriad', but the evolving methods of its representation from Richard II's assumed embodiment of monarchic authority to Henry V's unapologetic performance of the kingly role. As well, it explores how a shared awareness of authority's performed nature forces the spectator into knowing her own creative authority and in doing so, heightens not only the tension between gazer and gazed-upon, but also lays bare the spectator's need to watch a desired object and the performing object's overarching wish to be watched. The paper's critical foundation ranges from phenomenological approaches to the theatre and gender performance to studies on the spectacle of kingship.