companions, to preserve by cowardly flight such a fair and uncertain life, which, by malice, sickness, or condign punishment, was like shortly to come to confusion."* Sir Thomas More's character would be a guaranty for his truth, if he wrote of what was within his own knowledge. He was not born until five years before Richard's death, but he is supposed to have derived his information from Archbishop Morton, of whom we hear in the play as Bishop of Ely. At the death of this prelate, More was twenty years old; and if we were sure that what is related in his history, as to the personal appearance of the late king, was from Morton's information, we might rely upon it; though not without some allowance for the ill-will of one who had quarrelled with the person of whom he speaks. More thus describes Richard: "In wit and courage he was equal with either of his brothers; in body and prowess far under them both, little of stature, ill-featured of limb, crook-backed, his left shoulder much higher than his right, hard-favoured of visage, and such as is in states called warlie, in other men otherwise.‡ * Hol., 447. + Walpole's Historic Doubts, in Works, ii. 111. ‡ More, in Hol., 362. I do not find the passage in Kennet, who professes to give More's history. For some doubts whether the book was written by More, see Sir Henry Ellis's John Rous, a contemporary, who professes to have seen Richard, says, "He was of low stature, having a short face, unequal shoulders, the right being higher than the left."* On an examination of portraits, Walpole admits the inequality of the shoulders, and he conceives that this was the extent of the deformity. Nor is there, indeed, much difference between Rous and More, though the latter, probably, made the most of the distortion. For the excess of deformity, which Richard is made by Shakspeare to impute to himself, there is no authority. On the other hand, I lay no stress upon the testimony of the old Countess of Desmond, who had danced with Richard, and declared he was the handsomest man in the room, except his brother Edward, and was very well made;"+ because it comes through too many hands. preface to Hardyng, p. xix., and Lingard, 237. If written by Morton himself, it is more like testimony, but is less likely to be impartial. * Hist., p. 236. † Walpole, p. 166. In p. 216, he says, "The Earl of Shaftesbury was so good as to inform me that his ancestor, Lady Ashley, who lived to a great age, had conversed with Lady Desmond, and gave from her the same account that I have given, with this strong addition, that Perkin Warbeck was remarkably like Edward IV." I can find no Lady Ashley, except the widow of Sir Anthony; she died in 1619. It can only have been by tradition, that her account came down to the fourth Earl of Shaftesbury. Richard now avows, in the play, his treacherous plans for setting King Edward and Clarence at variance. “Plots have I laid, inductions dangerous, Of Edward's heirs the murderer shall be." And the result of these plots soon appears, when there "enter Clarence, guarded, and Brackenbury,” who was lieutenant of the Tower, and Richard persuades his brother that his misfortunes are owing to the queen and her relations, through whose influence Lord Hastings also had been sent to the Tower, and subsequently released, on making an humble supplication to her. The incarceration of Clarence is misplaced; it did not occur until the year 1478, whereas it ́ is placed by our poet in 1471. The story of the G is from Holinshed,* and is to be found in Rous.+ But I do not find, even in Holinshed, the insinuation that Edward's jealousy of Clarence, and his consequent proceedings, were brought about or fomented *Hol., 346; Hall, 326. † P. 215. We by Gloucester. It is one of the instances which abound in the play, of that which may, indeed, be almost deemed its design, the blackening of the character of the king, whom the grandfather of Queen Elizabeth had dethroned. It is true that there was jealousy between Edward's two brothers. It arose out of an event which Shakspeare places after the imprisonment of Clarence, namely, the marriage of Richard with the widow of Prince Edward,* sister to the Duchess of Clarence. have seen,† on the occasion of the first marriage of this lady, how jealous Clarence was of a participation in the inheritance of Neville: this jealousy was now removed, but even supposing (for which there is no reason) that the angry feeling was the more violent on the part of the brother whose marriage occasioned it, his interest in the cause of quarrel was not promoted by the death of Clarence five years afterwards. Not even Sir Thomas More, who is so much relied upon by those who have the worst opinion of Richard, imputes to him the disfavour or death of Clarence. * Relying upon the authority given by Lingard (v. 201), I have considered Anne as married to Prince Edward, but I am not quite satisfied. The Croyland Continuation says only that she was betrothed, p. 553. + P. 68. See Lingard, 226, and Fenn, ii. 91, 127. It is remarkable that Shakspeare, while he introduces Gloucester courting the widowed Anne in the public streets, when attending the funeral of her father-in-law, had not heard the circumstances of the marrriage, as related by a cotemporary. This writer tells us, that Clarence concealed his sister-in-law from the pursuit of Gloucester, but that she was at last discovered in London, in the disguise of a cook-maid,* and then placed in sanctuary. How Anne was induced to assume this disguise,—whether Richard had any difficulty in persuading her to marry him, not any where appears. Although the marriages of the fifteenth century - perhaps, the women of that time-are not to be judged by our present notions, I cannot but regard this marriage of Anne as a material point in the evidence which disproves Gloucester's part in the death of Prince Edward and King Henry. We have now the queen and her relatives, Rivers+ and Grey, lamenting the illness of King Edward, and speculating upon the probable consequences of his death, and especially the protectorship of Gloucester. The company is enlarged by the arrival of * Croyl. Cont., 557. † Anthony Widville, the queen's brother. Banks, iii. 316. Richard Grey, the queen's son. Banks, iii. 258. |