Life of Cardinal Wolsey, The

Chettle, Henry (1601)Property "Documentary Source" (as page type) with input value "{{{documentarySources}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.Property "Paratext" (as page type) with input value "{{{paratexts}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.Property "Contributor" (as page type) with input value "{{{contributors}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.Property "Partnering Institution" (as page type) with input value "{{{partneringInstitutions}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.

Historical Records

Payments to Playwrights (Henslowe's Diary)

F. 87v (Greg, I.138)

Lent vnto Samwell Rowlye 1601 to paye

vnto harye [S] chettell for writtinge the Boocke

of carnalle wolseye ^lyfe the 5 of June some of . . . . xx^s

F. 91v (Greg, I.143)

Layd owt at the a poyntment of my sonne & the

company vnto harey cheattell for the altrynge of

the booke of carnowlle wolley the 28 of June 1601

the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xx^s

Lent vnto Robart shawe the <t> 4 of Julye

1601 to paye vnto harey cheattell for the

Boocke of carnowlle wollsey in fulle pay

ment the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxx^s

F. 91v (Greg, I.144)

Lent vnto the company the 17 of July

1601 to geue vnto hary chettell for the Boocke

of the carnawlle wollsey to paye vnto m^r

Bromffelld the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xx^s

F. 93 (Greg, I.147)

Lent vnto Robart shawe the 18 of aguste

1601 to paye vnto harey chettell for his

Boocke for carnowlle wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . xx^s

Henslowe's payments to playwrights regarding the two "Cardinal Wolsey" plays have been the cause of some confusion. The division of records between the two plays' respective entries follows the analysis of Greg and Wiggins; however, a summary table of payments relating to both plays is offered below for ease of comparison:

• 5 June 1601: Chettle, for "Cardinal Wolsey Life," 20s.
• 28 June 1601: Chettle, for the altering of "Cardinal Wolsey," 20s.
• 4 July 1601: Chettle, for "Cardinal Wolsey" (in full payment), 40s.
• 17 July 1601: Chettle, for "Cardinal Wolsey" (to pay unto Mr Bromfield), 20s.
• 18 August 1601: Chettle, for "Cardinal Wolsey," 20s.
• 24 August 1601: Chettle, for "The First Part of Cardinal Wolsey," 20s.
• 10 October 1601: Chettle, Munday, and Drayton, for "The Rising of Cardinal Wolsey," 40s.
• 6 November 1601: Chettle, for "The Rising of Cardinal Wolsey," 10s.
• 9 November 1601: Munday and Chettle, for "The Rising of Cardinal Wolsey," 10s.
• 12 November 1601: Munday, Chettle, Drayton, and Smith, for "The First Part of Cardinal Wolsey" (in full payment), £3.
• 15 May 1602: Chettle, for the mending of "The First Part of Cardinal Wolsey," 20s.

Payments for Apparel (Henslowe's Diary)

F. 92v (Greg, I.146)

Lent vnto Robart shawe the 7 of aguste 1601

to bye diuers thinges ^{tayne cottes} for the playe of

carnowle wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxx^s

Lent the same tymes vnto the littell ^tayller for the

same playe of carnowlle wollsey some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vij^s

Bowght of m^r stonne mercer the 10 of aguste

1601 ij pylle velluet of carnadyn at xx^s y^rd

& sattenes at xij^s & tafeties at wij^s & vj^d

w^ch J layd owt for the company some is

for the playe of carnawll wollsey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxj^ll

Layd owt more for the playe of carnowlle

wollsey for tynsell & tyffeney & lynynge

& other thinges the same tyme dd vnto Jewby

the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iij^ll x^s

pd vnto the cope lace man for whit cope

sylluer lace the same tyme the some of . . . . . . . . v^s vj^d

Lent vnto Robart shawe the 11 aguste to

bye cottees for the play of carnowlle

wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xx^s

Layd owt at the apoyntment of the company

the 13 of agust 1601 for ij tayllers billes &

w^m whittes bill after the playe of

carnowells wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viij^ll 4^s

pd vnto the tyer man the 14 of aguste 1601

for mony w^ch he layd owt to bye teffeny

for the playe of carnowlle wollsey some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiiij^d

F. 93 (Greg, I.147)

Lent vnto the company the 20 of agust

1601 to bye a docters gowne for the play

of carnowlle wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . x^s

dd to Radford

Lent vnto Robart shawe the 21 of aguste 1601

for velluet & mackynge of the docters

gowne in carnowlle wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . xx^s

F. 105v (Greg, I.166)

Lent vnto Thomas [ ] downton the 18 of

maij to bye maskyngsewtes ^antycke for the 2 parte

of carnowlle wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iij^ll v^s

F. 106 (Greg, I.167)

Lent vnto thomas downton the 27 of maij

1602 to by w^m someres cotte & other thinges

for the 2 part of wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iij^ll

Lent vnto Thomas downton the 27 of maye

1602 to bye Rebatous & other thinges for the

2 part of carnowlle wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . xxv^s

Lent vnto thomas downton the 2 of June 1602

to paye vnto the copere lace mane in fulle

payment for the lace for the 2 part of wollsey . . . . . . . . xxvj^s

Payments, Miscellaneous (Henslowe's Diary)

F. 92v (Greg, I.146)

Lent vnto Robart shawe the 12 of aguste 1601

to bye diuers thinges for the playe of carnowlle

wollsey the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xx^s

Lent vnto the littell tayller the 12 of agust

to bye diuers thinges for the playe of

carnowlle wollsey at the apoyntment

of my sonne the some of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x^s

F. 93v (Greg, I.148)

Lent vnto the company the 3 of septmber 1601

to paye vnto the m^r of the Revelles for licensynge

of [a]the [Bo] 3 parte of thome strowde & the Remaynder

of carnowlle wollsey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x^s

Correspondence of Richard Hadsor

25 July 1602. To Sir Robert Cecil.

Chettle's play is referred to in a letter written by Richard Hadsor to Sir Robert Cecil on 25 July 1602, in which Hadsor relays the appeal made by the current Earl of Kildare that the Queen recognize his title:

if the title should be denied vnto him ther are other men of good qualitie of his famely that would pretent title not onely to the hono^r but also to landes of great value w^ch fell to the Crowne in England and Ireland vpon the attainder of his grantfather, by the pollicy of Cardinall Wolsy as it [is] set forth and played nowe vpo'n the stadge in London, alledging that they haue an auncient title to the hono^r and landes that hose befo^r.

(Cecil Papers 94/70; cf. HMC Salisbury 12.248)

Hadsor, in this letter and in his later Discourse, was operating as a "legal representative in England" for the house of Kildare and took the opportunity to advance its interests (Hodgers 98).

Richard Hadsor's Discourse (1604)

Chettle's play is mentioned again by Hador in his Discourse concerning Ireland that he sent to King James (National Archives, SP 63/216, fols. 180r–181r). The Discourse was written in 1604 (McLaughlin 340). Again, the context is the Earl of Kildare's family history.

The Earle of Kildare (grandfather to the now Earle of Kildare) who married the marques Dorsett Gray his daughter being Lo: Deputie of that Realme in K. Henry the 8^th tyme, was called into England disgraced and attainted in Ireland after he dyed in prison in England, where he lyved a longe tyme, and his brothers and eldest sonne deprived of their lyves by the synister practizes of Cardynall Wolsey sett forth at lardge in the Irishe Chronicle, and of late acted publiquely vpon the Stage in London, in the Tragidie of the life & death of the said Wolsey to tedious to be reported to yo^r Ma:^tie. By wh^ch attainder the howse of Kildare loste landes of good value in England & Ireland.

(National Archives, SP 63/216, fol. 180v; based on McLaughlin 348, with emendations)

The editors of CSP Ireland proposed that this passage did not, in fact, refer to Chettle's play on the grounds that it "would hardly, at this date, be spoken of as 'of late acted publicly on the stage in London'" (Russell and Prendergast [cxi]). They preferred to believe it was evidence for an early composition date of Shakespeare and Fletcher's Henry VIII, a view repeated by McLaughlin (348).

Theatrical Provenance

Admiral's Men at the Fortune.

Probable Genre(s)

History. The play is referred to as a "Tragidie" by Hadsor (see above).

Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues

Under construction.

References to the Play

Information welcome.

Critical Commentary

General

Malone (259n) interpreted the June 28 alteration payment as evidence that the play "was not written originally by Chettle."

Collier corrected Malone's assessment about authorship by noting the Diary's further payments to Chettle (Diary, 189n). He also observed some notable features of the "Wolsey" payments. One was that the licensing payment is "rather singular," in that the play was "licensed piecemeal by the Master of the Revels; as if he had not seen the whole of it at once, but that the company was in such haste to bring it out that they had sent it to him in portions" (200n). The other, more general, is that that "few plays mentioned in the course of our volume illustrate more strongly […] the expense which companies of old did not hesitate to incur, in order that the characters might be splendidly dressed and caparisoned" (xxiv).

Jenkins

Gurr (185) considers the "Wolsey" plays "planned as pairs from the outset" as opposed to "plays with sequels that were probably afterthoughts to exploit the success of the first play." However, he later suggests that "the payment to Chettle on 28 June [1601] was to divide the original play into two" (259n).

Knutson ("Chettle," 58–59) cites the "Wolsey" plays in her observation that "Chettle worked on some of the biggest productions mounted by the Admiral's Men." With £38 spent on costumes, the "Life" was a significant investment for the company, and the fact that they commissioned a "sequel"—as well as further business with Chettle—serves as "ample evidence of his value as a professional."

"m^r Bromffelld"

Greg (Diary, II.218): "Broomfield was a mercer apparently, and Chettle had for some reason probably pawned part of his MS. to him instead of bringing it to Henslowe, as he certainly did on another occasion also." The other occasion appears in a Diary entry dated 7 March 1603: "pd at the apoyntment of the company […] vnto m^r bromflde for the playe w^ch hary chettell layd vnto hime to pane for xx^s" (fol. 109v; Greg, I.174). (See also Jenkins 26.)

Wiggins (#1293) describes the 17 July 1601 payment as £1 "party to pay Chettle for the play-book […] and partly to pay Bromfield the mercer (which may have been a production expense, or unrelated to the play)."

Source Material

Kewes argues that Chettle would have drawn on Richard Stanyhurst's supplement to the Irish volume of Holinshed's Chronicles as a source for the Wolsey-Kildare altercation: "Stanyhurst's account is itself very theatrical, reproducing as it does Wolsey's charges against Kildare, the earl's spirited defense, and 'his exhortation to his sonne the lord Thomas.' […] Stanyhurst's anti-Wolsey and pro-Kildare bias was probably imported wholesale by Chettle into his dramatic version" (173-74).

Wiggins (#1293) proposes Thomas Storer's 1599 poem The Life and Death of Thomas Wolsey, Cardinal as the source on the grounds that it was the most recent account of its subject and that its tripartite organization into a tragic arc—"Wolseius aspirans," "Wolseius triumphans," and "Wolseius moriens"—informed the structure of the two plays, narratively supplemented by a chronicle history.

(See also "The Rising")

Connections with Other Henrican Histories

Some critics have noted the proximity of the "Wolsey" plays with the comparable works Thomas Lord Cromwell (first published 1602), When You See Me, You Know Me (1605), and Sir Thomas More (British Library, Harley MS 7368, original composition dated c. 1600).

Acheson

Wilson

Maxwell (99-108) noted that Munday and Chettle's involvement in "The Life of Cardinal Wolsey" play can be compared to their participation in Sir Thomas More, another story of Tudor downfall that may date from the same period. While rejecting Acheson's elaborate proposal, Maxwell speculated that the conjunction might be used to argue for Munday's involvement in Thomas Lord Cromwell.

Chillington, making an argument that Sir Thomas More was originally composed for performance by the Admiral's Men, proposes that "Chettle may have planned More as part of a series of plays he was developing to examine the underside of the Tudor experience," which would have included the "Wolsey" plays (460).

Kirwan elaborates further on the resonances between the "Wolsey" plays, More, and Cromwell: "The three [sic] plays are undeniably connected by subject matter, and the two extant plays share a focus on the rise and fall of a public figure that is also likely to have been shared by the lost plays on Wolsey" (91). Kirwan quotes lines from Cromwell, spoken by Stephen Gardiner, that specifically makes the connection between these "tres Thomae":

O, what a dangerous time is this we live in!
There’s Thomas Wolsey, he’s already gone,
And Thomas More, he followed after him:
Another Thomas yet there doth remain,
That is far worse then either of those twain…
(qtd. Kirwan 89)

Kirwan also suggests that the plays' rise-and-fall structure in two parts might have mirrored Tamburlaine (91n).

Wiggins (#1293) notes Will Somers appears as a character in Chettle's "Wolsey" plays and in Rowley's When You See Me, You Know Me, which also features a villainous Wolsey. Wiggins assumes that Rowley's "was not simply Cardinal Wolsey in print," although its use of "recycled material from the earlier play" cannot be ruled out. He also assumes (#1309) that an Elizabethan play about the Henrican court would not have represented Henry VIII himself, so the Admiral's Men may have found reason to restage the same historical moment after Queen Elizabeth's death.

Works Cited

Chillington, Carol A. "Playwrights at Work: Henslowe's, Not Shakespeare's, Book of Sir Thomas More." ELR 10 (1980): 439–79.

Gurr, Andrew. Shakespeare's Opposites: The Admiral's Company 1594–1625. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009.

Hodgers, Don. "Richard Hadsor (c. 1570-1635), the Solicitor for Irish Causes and Crown Counsel for Irish Affairs." Journal of the County Louth Archaeological and Historical Society 26 (2005): 83–106.

Kewes, Paulina. "The Elizabethan History Play: A True Genre?" In A Companion to Shakespeare's Works. Volume II: The Histories. Ed. Richard Dutton and Jean E. Howard. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2003. 170–93.

Kirwan, Peter. Shakespeare and the Idea of Apocrypha: Negotiating the Boundaries of the Dramatic Canon. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2015.

Knutson, Roslyn L. "The Commercial Significance of the Payments for Playtexts in Henslowe's Diary, 1597–1603." Medieval & Renaissance Drama in England 5 (1991): 117–63.

Knutson, Roslyn L. "Henry Chettle, Workaday Playwright." Medieval & Renaissance Drama in England 30 (2017): 52–64.

Maxwell, Baldwin. Studies in the Shakespeare Apocrypha. New York: Columbia UP, 1956.

McLaughlin, Joseph. "Richard Hadsor's 'Discourse' on the Irish State, 1604." Irish Historical Studies 30 (1997): 337–53.

Russell, C. W. and John P. Prendergast, eds. Calendar of the State Papers Relating to Ireland, of the Reign of James I. 1606–1608. London, 1874.

Wiley, Paul L. "Renaissance Exploitation of Cavendish's Life of Wolsey." Studies in Philology 43 (1946): 121–46.

Site created and maintained by Misha Teramura, University of Toronto; updated 9 June 2019.