The Ends of Fletcherian History

By 1613, John Fletcher had written comedies, tragedies, and pretty much invented the idea of tragicomedy. But he hadn’t broached that unique early modern genre – the history play. However, with All is True, co-written with William Shakespeare, he launched himself into the territory dominated by his newfound collaborator. Aside from this text, most critics though ignore any contributions that Fletcher made to this history play as a genre. However, recent redefinitions outside of the Shakespeare purview, open up a new canon of Fletcherian history plays. By examining the endings of three such texts ( All is True, Bonduca, and Sir John van Olden Barnavelt), I intend to explore how Fletcher added a particularly theatrical sensibility to the conclusions of history plays. Noting the ambiguous endings of all three text and the constructed natures of those ambiguity demonstrates a Fletcherian method of re-presenting the past through the present of performance. Specifically, Fletcher's ends show a tension between progress and statis. Ultimately, it is this double vision within these ends via theatrical methods that demonstrate progress only occurs through stasis, which produces disillusionment. This reading then opens up further understandings to how this genre developed under Fletcher's hand.