Bolingbroke from the throne, and his entire family into the grave. Thus we pass from the Lancastrian to the Yorkian Tetralogy. But we have at present to consider the Lancastrian Tetralogy, whose logical frame-work should be carefully examined. King Richard is deposed — in undermining the law he has undermined his own throne, which rested upon the law; the consequence of his deed has been visited upon him. [But who is to succeed him? Here it is naturally the man who has been most deeply wronged who, in his own person, most adequately represents the majesty of violated justice] Thus a subject has revolted from the king and made himself king; he has obtained the crown by acknowledging and maintaining in arms the right of revolution. The new king has, therefore, called into existence the principle of his own dethronement, and has enforced it as a basis of action for the entire nation. For the conviction of the people must go along with their deed; that deed has been dethronement, and, hence, their conviction is now grounded upon the right of deposing the legal sovereign. This is the difficulty of all revolutions; they are aimed at the stability of institutions - hence they cannot be very stable of themselves. A revolutionary government is logically a contradiction in terms, for its purpose is to upset government to destroy that which is established; hence its success depends entirely upon the speed with which it abandons its own principle. Having seen the right of revolution, we now behold the wrong of revolution which will be brought home to every couna wrong try that attempts revolutionizing, even from the most justifiable causes. A nation has to endure the penalty of - violation, although that violation may be absolutely necessary to preserve a higher element of national existence. It is a genuine conflict of principles; both sides are right, both are wrong, yet in different degrees; the ultimate test of their relative worth is the universality of their principle. The chief characteristic of the Historical Drama is that it rises above the guilt and punishment of the mere individual, and shows the guilt and punishment of whole nations and whole epochs, thus manifesting how the deed in history returns to the land with a whip of scorpions, even after the lapse of generations. [The deposition of Richard, therefore, will not end the conflict; revolution has been let loose in the country, and must, in its turn, be put down.] It was stated that the act of Bolingbroke is in its nature contradictory of itself; that the dethronement of the king, applied as a general principle, must mean his own dethronement. The logic of the situation at once begins to disclose itself; the very men who aided him in acquiring the crown are just as ready to take it away again. Indeed, they must claim. this to be a right of the subject. Thus the government of Bolingbroke inherits rebellion and revolution, which must be put down by force of arms - that is, he is forced to turn around and undo his own work, counteract his own principle, stamp out the doctrine of revolt by which he ascended the throne.] If he is successful, he will restore the nation to harmony, confirm the succession in his family, and solidify the shattered institutions of the land. This is the great work whose accomplishment-is portrayed in the First and Second Parts of Henry the Fourth, a truly national poem, whose theme is the restoration of England to internal peace and greatness. There fore, if Richard the Second showed the right of revolution and its success, Henry the Fourth shows the wrong of revolution and its defeat. Still, there is one deep, underlying principle to both these works it is the right of nationality, which at one time hurls the monarch from his throne and at another time tramples into dust the standard of rebellion. The English nation, united within and confident of its strength, feels an aspiration for its ancient glory. There is nothing to do at home; the national enthusiasm cannot be restrained. Moreover, it finds in a new king a man of heroic mould. Just across the channel are situated the fair domains of France, the hereditary foe of the nation, and a large portion of these domains once lay at the feet of England. The play of Henry the Fifth is the last of this first group; it exhibits the spirit of nationality bursting its limits and going forth to subjugate other peoples. It is an epoch of national glory; England has become the proud conqueress; she seems poised on the very pinnacle of fame and prosperity. Thus ends the great Lancastrian Tetralogy, passing off the stage in a blaze of success and patriotic fervor. But at the same time it must not be forgotten that just here can be traced the source of the unutterable calamities which followed, and which brought on the overthrow of the Lancastrian dynasty. For England, through foreign conquest, is really destroying herself; she is assailing the independence of other nations, and therein is undermining her own principle of nationality, as well as opposing the world-historical movement of modern times, which is to maintain the autonomy of the individual State. She, therefore, is guilty of the deepest wrong against the spirit of the age and against the family of European nations, as well as of a crime against herself; hence bitter will be her retribution. But these considerations will be more fully developed when the Yorkian series comes up for treatment. [The drama of Richard the Second may now be unfolded in its details. Its purely poetic merits are of the highest order; in radiant glow of imagery and in fiery intensity of expression it is unsurpassed. It possesses also the national exaltation of the English Historical Drama generally; it lightens with passages of combined patriotic and poetic enthusiasm. Indeed, the leading character may be justly called a poet, whose own misfortunes inspire utterances of deep passion, mingled with the most brilliant hues of fancy. There is a lyrical coloring diffused over the entire work, and, as a drama exhibiting action and characterization, it can by no means be esteemed as highly as when it is considered simply as a beautiful poem. The action exhibits a double change; it is a stream with two currents sweeping alongside of each other in opposite directions. It shows how to lose a realm and how to acquire a realm; it passes on the one hand from kingship to deprivation, and on the other hand from deprivation to kingship. It will, therefore, be manifest that the drama moves on two threads, having as their respective centers of interest the monarch dethroned and the monarch enthroned. The cause of this reciprocal change of situation is the wrong done to the subject by the king; a subject then defends his own rights, which is the right of the nation against the sovereign, and therein makes himself the representative of nationality. He thus takes the place of the king, since the latter is at the head of the State, whose highest function is to secure justice, and not to be the instrument of wrong. That subject, therefore, who, in his own person, supremely represents justice, and vindicates it when assailed, is in truth the ruler of the people. The present drama will simply show this thought working itself into reality. [There are also two movements in the play—the first of which shows the guilt of the king, the second his retribution. Each movement carries along within itself the two threads above mentioned that of Richard and that of Bolingbroke. [The one falls, the other rises; at the point of crossing, in their descent and ascent, lies in general the dramatic transition. First we are made acquainted with the crimes and follies of Richard-the murder of his uncle, the supremacy of favorites, the banishment of Bolingbroke, the expedition to Ireland. The counter-thread unfolds the scheme of Bolingbroke, his banishment and his return, together with the disaffection of the nobles and commons. The second movement exhibits the downward career of Richard to dethronement and death, as well as the execution of his favorites, while at the same time Bolingbroke ascends the throne with the general consent of the realm. Thus the guilt of Richard is punished by that person upon whom he has inflicted a most wanton injury; hence wrong and its retribution make up the whole action. I. At the beginning of the play the two threads run together for a while, and then separate. The duel shows. the opposing sides, though Richard seems to be playing the part of a mediator. He calls upon his uncle, the venerable John of Gaunt, to bring forward Harry Bolingbroke, Duke of Hereford, who had challenged Thomas |