The Shakespeare Code

(It’s best to read Parts One, Two, Three and Four first.)

William Shakespeare’s version of the Richard III story is so much better than that of the Queen’s Men that scholars have assumed the evolutionary principle is at work.

The Queen’s Men version came first, they claim, then Shakespeare improved on it.

But this flies in the face of the facts. We have seen that Thomas Nashe quotes a line from Shakespeare’s The True Tragedy of Richard III and describes the plot of the play in his pamphlet, Pierce Pennilesse. This was printed in 1592.

The Queen’s Men’s version of The True Tragedy of Richard III ‘as it was played by the Queen’s Majesty’s Players’ was printed in 1594.

It might be that the play was performed years before it was publisheed, BUT –

The Shakespeare Code argues that the Queen’s Men version of the play was a ‘State’ reply to Shakespeare’s satire on the life of the Earl of Leicester.

The Queen’s Men version has a character called ‘Truth’ appearing in a Prologue whose job is to present a ‘Tragedy in England’ that will ‘revive the hearts of drooping minds’. It then proceeds to remove as many parallels between the lives of Richard III and the Earl of Leicester as it possibly can.

The King Richard in the Queen’s Men version:

1. Does not kill Prince Edward in order to gain his wife. (Queen Anne does not even appear in the play).
2. Does not kill his wife, Queen Anne, to marry Elizabeth.
3. Does not use ‘black magic’ to gain power over women.
4. And does not assume an air of bogus piety.

The Queen’s Men want its audience to think of King Richard as a tyrant from the past. They do not want ‘drooping minds’ to draw parallels from the present.

We see exactly the same process of ‘Establishment gagging’ at work in the Falstaff plays. Shakespeare originally named the fat knight ‘Sir John Oldcastle’, an historical figure who was the ancestor of the Brooke family. Shakespeare’s motive was to tease the Brookes, who were the arch-enemies of the Earls of Essex and Southampton, Shakespeare’s paymasters.

It was Queen Elizabeth herself, Nicholas Rowe claimed in 1709, who forced Shakespeare to change the name.

Nicholas Rowe

The Brooke family also arranged for the Rose Theatre to present a new play called Sir John Oldcastle (written by four playwrights). This is a white-wash job on the historical Oldcastle – a ‘heretic’ who rebelled against King Henry V.  In this version Oldcastle emerges as a philanthropist and patriot.

●

The Queen’s Men were faced with a problem in staging their version of Richard III. Shakespeare had the huge resources of two aristocratic families to draw on for his staging.  The Queen’s Men had 14 actors. So how do you ‘do’ the eleven ghosts who appear before the Battle of Bosworth Field? Answer: you cut them out!

The Queen’s Men may have had the approbation of the Queen and Privy Council, but the public had seen good drama from the Shakespeare team and wanted more of it. The Queen’s Men waned as Shakespeare waxed. By 1596 they were no more.

The Shakespeare Code has noted how, against their political intentions, the Queen’s Men turn King Richard into a hero at the end of the play. Shakespeare’s ending, where, typically, he sides with the underdog, has been so powerful, the Queen’s Men cannot get it out of their minds. Nor can they get out of their minds Richard’s glorious cry:

A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!

In the hands of the Queen’s Men, it becomes:

A horse! A horse! A fresh horse!

Thank God for Shakespeare!

And the people who supported him….

And the people who performed him….

Sir Laurence Olivier as King Richard III