Epilogue

A/N: I anticipate that many readers will find fault with the language and grammar herein. Please bear in mind that this play seeks to remain authentic to the style and language of literature produced in the Tudor, Elizabethan and early Jacobean times (c.1485-1615). They had different modes of writing, grammar and spelling. While I have faithfully produced these as far as I could, please understand that I have opted not to replicate the erratic Tudor spelling as most words were spelt phonetically in the Tudor era (c.1485-1603). For example, 'hour' was then spelt 'hower' or 'hour' by the English aristocrats who have had an Oxford or Cambridge education, 'hauer' by the Welsh, Irish aristocrats or Spanish nobility who learnt English, 'hoaeur' by the middle classes who could write and read (ancestors of our modern cockneys), 'youer' by the Scottish aristocrats, because these peoples pronounced the word that way.

In order to be true to the custom of the time, this play is written in a combination of late Mediaeval Latin, as well as Tudor and Elizabethan English. Some English words used then had different of meanings than they do now. While I am aware that this maybe very off-putting to many people, I sincerely hope you will come to see and understand the plot as I intend for it to be read. As far as possible, I have included a glossary when the definitions of words differ from the modern meaning and pronunciations. If you are in doubt, ask and I will answer. Stage directions are given in square brackets, like so [ ] and asides are listed. If asides are not indicated explicitly in the text, they are denoted by round brackets like so ( ).

Numbers at the back of certain lines are line numbers. The right align command does not work with line numbers. When I tried it, the line pagination of my metre was eliminated. Please bear with the numbers that appear there, they are meant as a guide not as a distraction.

TANQUAM OVIS

EPILOGUE

Epilogue

Hogwarts, the Great Hall.

Enter Remus Lupin.

Lupin:

Seen here figures of unequal dignity,

In Hogwarts' grounds and other private scene

You have borne witness to souls' mutiny,

Of natures redeem'd or wilfully unclean.

In this fatal tale of foes against foes 5

You have seen much extinguishment of life,

As differing prejudices and other throes

Serve only the moral egotists' strife.

In that mental wounds can be cur'd by love,

This cautionary tale presages 'gainst rage 10

Which said injustice, reflection will remove

Therefore sets the players upon the stage:

We hope the herein doth not you offend

If 'tis so, our chorus shall strive to mend.

[Enter Chorus of students]

Chorus:

In this tale of slaughter'd lambs, you have heard 15

Of grandeur's delusions and its reward:

In Dumbledore, Potter, Snape, and Granger, seen –

Although assail'd with fortune fierce and keen,

Virtue preserv'd from evil Voldemort's blast,

Led by redemption, good triumph'd at last. 20

In these humble pages may you well descry,

A figure of truth, and faith, and loyalty.

In our revered Half-Blood Prince, it appears

The worth that a weather'd temper'ment wears.

For wicked Bella and Lucius, when fame 25

Had spread their foul deeds and accursed names,

The good name of Severus shall return,

The light of his nobility shall burn:

A last prayer for him to rest content

To wish him freedom from those of foul bent. 30

Thanks on your patience for e'er attending,

Joy wait on you! Here our play hath ending.

[Enter Minerva McGonagall]

Minerva

Thus far, with a chisell'd unmended pen,

Our bending authoress pursu'd the story;

And in her head confin'd women and men, 35

Mangling by starts the full course of our glory,

We that have in another's mind liv'd

Be ill displac'd in this lady's sword.

By which a troubl'd tragedy she achiev'd,

And therefore she hopes you were not ill bored. 40

In this play where there been no tragic kings

She hopes her defence of Snape she succeed;

For th'other paint'd nature left fuming;

In which other state caus'd her pen to bleed:

This drama our stage hast show'd, for her sake, 45

In your fair minds let this acceptance take.

[Exeunt]

Finis

Answers to Queries on Act Five

As many readers have sent me emails with the following questions, I shall address them below:

(a) Who died in Act 5?

Answer: *sigh* Did you read the Act carefully? The answer in no particular order is - Severus,. Hermione, Ron, Ginny, Lucius, Bellatrix, Moody, other members of the Weasley clan, Moody, several Aurors, Neville, other young students (hinted as members of DA), Harry, Voldemort, Draco, Narcissa, Wormtail, the Mcnairs, the Lestrange brothers, the Goyles, the Crabbes.

(b) I can't understand where and how the people died? What happened to Ron, did he die?

(c) You replied that all the people named above died, where is the proof in your story?

Answer: Dear Reader, permit me to ask you some questions in return. Did you actually read the play in its entirety? Did you understand the play? Did you understand Act V? *sigh with roll of eyeballs* References herein will follow this schema – Act, scene, line number.

I stated explicitly in the following sections that people die:

V.i.216, Severus Snape dies (he tried and rejected suicide in Act II).

V.i.217, Hermione Granger contemplates and is stopped from suicide.

Viii.76, Bellatrix Lestrange dies.

V.iii.81, Hermione dies.

V.iv.7-8, Lucius Malfoy dies

V.iv.9, Voldemort states that many Aurors on the OOTP side have died.

V.iv.10, Voldemort states that many members of the Weasley clan are dead.

V.iv.11, Voldemort states that Hermione is dead.

V.iv.11, Voldemort states that the younger two Weasleys, viz., Ginny and Ron are dead.

From V.iv.10-11, we can ascertain that there are other members of the Weasley clan other than Ginny and Ron who are also dead. I leave you to speculate as to their identities. It is up to the director of the play to decide how the 'excursions' (cf. stage directions to V.iv) turn out. For those of you who do not read the footnotes, the stage direction 'Excursion' denotes choreographed fighting on stage.

V.iv.12, Voldemort states that Neville Longbottom and several of his contemporaries, viz., schoolfellows are dead. The schoolfellows I am referring to are other members of the DA.

V.iv.15, Voldemort states that the Lestranges are dead. These include the two brothers and their wives.

V.iv.15, Voldemort states that Malfoys are dead. By this, I mean Draco, Lucius, Narcissa.

V.iv.15, Voldemort states that Wormtail is dead.

V.iv.16, Voldemort states that the Macnairs are dead. Notice I use the plural for Macnairs, use your imagination for the rest.

V.iv.17, Voldemort states that the Goyles are dead, Notice I use the plural for Goyles, use your imagination for the rest.

V.iv.17, Voldemort states that the Crabbes are dead. Notice I use the plural for Crabbes, use your imagination for the rest.

V.iv.74, Voldemort dies.

V.iv.77, Harry Potter dies.

FOOTNOTES & GLOSSARY

Tanquam Ovis is Latin for "like a lamb to the slaughter". I shall leave you to devise the identities of the sacrificial lambs that were slaughtered, why I have opted to slaughter them and why their deaths be significant.

Tanquam Ovis Explanation

I obtained the phrase Tanquam Ovis from my reading on Elizabeth I. Tanquam Ovis appears with the meaning "like a lamb to the slaughter"in John Foxe's Book of Martyrs, published in 1583. All page references in this section refer to the 1583 edition of The Book of Martyrs. In using John Foxe's Book of Martyrs and adopting Sir Philip Sidney's definition of the function of poetry (i.e. fiction) with reference to the Horatian dictum of to teach and delight' (docere et delectare), I am paying homage to the 16th-17th century tradition of literature. In subscribing to Sidney's widely accepted maxim, Foxe positions Book of Martyrs, the title by which his ecclesiastical history was known from the beginning, at the didactic end of the scale. Nevertheless, its array of theological disputations, treatises, heresy examinations, instructive accounts of the painful deaths of martyrs who were burnt alive, and other texts afford frequent moments of aesthetic pleasure through the employment by Foxe or his sources of a diversity of rhetorical schemes, stylistic figures, and devices of characterization. Drawing upon elements of this kind, the Book of Martyrs functions as an encyclopedia of literary genres including many kinds of verse, martyrologies, fables, ballads, beast fables, fanciful tales, romanticized adventure narratives, and many other writings. Tanquam Ovis appears in Book 10 where he discusses the ongoing disputes between Catholics and Protestants. He enjoys using the Tanquam Ovis phrase as an allegory if you like, so much that Elizabeth (when she was just Princess Elizabeth and heir to Mary I) applied the messianic figure of Tanquam Ovis. In the narrative concerning her imprisonment, Princess Elizabeth applies the messianic figure of tanquam ovis ('like a sheep' [led to slaughter], Isa. 53:7; Acts 8:32 – this is more obvious if you read the Vulgate version of the bible where Tanquam Ovis = like a sheep led to the slaughter) to her own endangerment as a Christlike lamb. (p. 2094b). Tanquam Ovis was popular device and saying in Tudor times. Writing from prison, John Bradford declares: 'I am now as a sheep appointed to the slaughter' (p. 1654). In a letter sent from one prisoner to another, John Careless consoles an inmate that he is fortunate not only to testify to his faith in Christ, 'but also to suffer for his sake, as one of his silly [i.e., innocent] sheep appointed to the slaughter' (p. 1928). The narrator of a story about yet another martyr, Julian Palmer, writes that he 'was led away as a lamb to the slaughter' by a prison keeper who was like 'a ravening wolf greedy of his prey' (p. 1937).

Choice of Latin: An Explication

Please bear in mind that the Latin in this play is Mediaeval Latin, i.e. Latin of the High Middle Ages. Henry VIII's reign is considered to fall under the High Middle Ages. Mediaeval Latin is often religious in tone and subject; playwrights, authors, poets and lovers (writing love letters) frequently used such Latin with such overtones in their work. I have written everything in Mediaeval Latin so as to be true to the custom of the time [cf. Author's notes at the start of the play before the title]. It is for this reason that I do not use Roman Latin.

Gentle Warning

Readers and Purists who expect the authoress to remain true to the events of HBP may be offended and displeased with my interpretation of this work. This play is at times anachronistic (as was Shakespeare), idiosyncratic, and singular. Artistic license has been utilised to reinterpret some of the occurrences in HBP. The authoress has also used dramatic license to postulate certain theories in this play. For these reasons, Tanquam Ovis may not be everyone's cup of tea.

Problem Play: An Explication

This is intentionally written as a problem play. Those of you who look on the meaning of "problem plays" as Isben's understanding of 'A type of drama that focuses on a specific social problem', may be disappointed to learn that I follow the Shakespearean style of problem play. To understand what a Shakespearean problem play is, let me quote you W.W. Lawrence's definition; "the essential characteristic of a problem play ... is that a perplexing and distressing complication in human life is presented in a spirit of high seriousness ... the theme is handled so as to arouse not merely interest or excitement, or pity or amusement, but to probe the complicated interrelations of character and action, in a situation admitting of different ethical interpretations .... The 'problem' is not like one in mathematics, to which there is a single true solution, but is one of conduct, as to which there be no fixed and immutable laws. Often it cannot be reduced to any formula, any one question, since human life is too complex to be so neatly simplified" (Shakespeare's Problem Comedies, 1931, p.4).

Alternatively, you may prefer Schanzer's definition, cf. Ernest Schanzer, The Problem Plays of Shakespeare: A Study of "Julius Caesar, Measure for Measure, and Antony and Cleopatra, London, 1963. He says, "The definition of the Shakespearian problems play which I therefore suggest is: 'A play in which we find a concern with a moral problem which is central to it, presented in such a manner that we be unsure of our moral bearings, so that uncertain and divided responses to it in the minds of the audience be possible or even probable' (p. 6)."It will also be noted that, in opposition to Boas, Lawrence, and Tillyard, I do not mark off the problem play from the comedies and tragedies as a separate type. What, to my mind, distinguishes the problem play is a particular mode of presenting moral problems and this can be found in Shakespeare's tragedies and comedies alike' (pp. 6 & 7).

This means that as a Shakespearean problem play, Tanquam Ovis sets out to do the following: (a) forward a refusal or failure to wholly credit the dignity of man, and the significance that that gives the individual in tragedy; (b) place An emphasis (comic, derisive, satiric) on human shortcoming, even when man is engaged in great affairs; (c) suggest that there is usually another side to all human affairs, and that the "other side" to the serious, dignified, noble, famous and so forth, is comic. This implies scepticism of man's worth, importance and value; and may range from the quizzical through the ironical to the cynical; (d) expressing unhappiness, disappointment, resentfulness or bitterness about human life, by inverting these feelings and presenting the causes of them as something ironic; (e) possess a corresponding attitude towards traditionally funny subjects which insinuates that in some way they be serious, or that the stock response to them bypasses pain at human shortcomings or wickedness; or that this stock response depends on a lack of sympathy or insight which an author can make us aware of without abolishing the comic situation (f) Interpolated into the critical analytical patterns we find "ideal" figures who check our prattle of "cynicism," "satire" or "misanthropy"; (g) involve us in discoveries always of a bad reality beneath the fair appearances of things: revelations, painful in the extreme and we be made to feel the pain – of the distressing, disintegrating possibilities of human meanness (ignobility and treachery, craft and selfishness).

All Shakespeare's Problem Plays be profoundly concerned with seeming and being; and this can cover both sex and human worth (as each claims nobility). Combine this with what I have just said about "disintegrating" discoveries, and, with a wider generalisation, you can say that they share a quality which can be called "maskedness" not only because "unmaskng" describes so many of the actions, but because the total effect is to present a world of appearances (very close to a realistically observed reality) capable of opening –like a masque set transformation scene – and disclosing something totally different. This "maskedness" brings doubt, mixed feelings, a "nervous" curiosity and/or a kind of fear.

Whether I have successfully produced a Shakespearean style problem play is for you to decide.

Brief Primer on Tudor and Jacobean English

In Tudor times right up to Jacobean times, "your" and "you" were used either in the plural or to denote a certain formality of speech. "Thee", "thine", "thou" were more intimate and informal. I have kept to this general ruling in this play. This trend of "thou" being singular and "you" as plural started in the 13th century to copy French (vous and tu). It was usual for "you" to be used by inferiors to superiors, such as children to parents, or servants to masters. The superiors will use "thou" or one of its variants to their inferiors. "Thou" was used to invoke the gods and it was usual when lower classes talk to each other, they use "thou". Upper classes used "you" when talking to each other, though this rule may be bent if the parties decide to be informal and use "thou". Thus, changing from "thou" to "you" (and vice versa) in a conversation always conveys special meaning. "Thou" can be used as either a sign of intimacy (among the Upper classes) or as an insult (when the Upper classes speak to the lower classes). It depends how the actor/director wants to play it. Example: Gertrude tells Hamlet, "You have thy father much offended". Hamlet replies, "You have my father much offended." It is clear Hamlet is insulting his mother. Mother, i.e. Gertrude insists that Hamlet has insulted Claudius (notice she uses 'thou' with him. But Hamlet, who alternates between 'thou' and 'you' with his mother, uses "You" in this context as an insult. There be many such examples in Hamlet and Shakespeare in general, look out for it in the play.

In Shakespearean English there is no such thing as "are". You either use "be", "beest", "be'st" or "been".

In Shakespearean English, there is no such thing as "was" or "were", you either use "wert" or "wast".

I'll'd is the Shakespearean way of writing "I will had" or "I would have". It is pronounced with 1 syllable.

They'll'd is the Shakespearean way of writing "they will have" or "I would have". It is pronounced with 1 syllable.

Do not allow your modern pronunciation of words colour your reading of this play. As a rule, anything in past tense that ends with 'ed' (e.g. underlined) is pronounced in Tudor/Elizabethan/Jacobean times with an extra syllable. You must pronounce the 'ed'. For instance, 'underlined' is pronounced as 'un-der-line-nead'. The opposite holds true when a word has a 'd at its end. Let X be a word. When a word with spelt as X'd (e.g. underlin'd), it is pronounced as we would in modern day English, as underlined, with a silent 'nead'.

Brief Primer on Stage Directions used in Tudor-Jacobean Masques and Plays

Stage direction glossary is as follows:

Aside – A speech direction. A speech not heard by other characters on stage. Also has alternative meaning as movement direction.

Above – A movement direction that occurs in the gallery or upper stage.

Aloft – A movement direction that occurs on the upper stage.

Apart – A movement direction that occurs to one side, a short distance away.

Aside – A movement direction that occurs to one side, away from the others.

Below – A movement direction that occurs on the lower stage.

Break in – A movement direction that is burst on to the stage.

Brought out – A movement direction that is brought out on to the stage.

Enter – A movement direction that occurs when one or more characters come on to the stage.

Exeunt – A movement direction that occurs when more than one character leaves the stage.

Exit – A movement direction that occurs when one character leaves the stage.

In – A movement direction that occurs when one or more characters go into the dressing room at the back of the stage.

Manent – A movement direction that occurs when the characters remain on stage.

Off – A movement direction that occurs off-stage.

Severally/several ways – A movement direction that occurs in different directions (said of people arriving or leaving).

Solus – A movement direction denoting that a character enters by himself/herself alone.

Top, on the – A movement direction that occurs on the upper stage.

Within – A movement direction that occurs behind the stage façade (i.e. outside).

Alarum/Alarums – An event direction denoting a call to arms.

Excursions/ excursions, in an – An event direction denoting a bout of fighting across the stage.

Cornet – A music direction denoting a fanfare (as played by cornets, a horn-like wind instrument).

Drum – A music direction denoting drummers are present and playing their drums, usually for wars, coronations and funerals.

Flourish – A music direction denoting a fanfare of trumpets or horns, usually accompanying an exit or entrance.

Hautboys – A music direction denoting the playing of a woodwind double-reed instrument resembling an oboe.

Sennet – A music direction denoting a trumpet call signalling a procession.

Trump / Trumpet – A music direction denoting a trumpeter playing.

Tucket – A music direction denoting a personal trumpet call.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On account of the email reviews I have received, my betas advised me to explain heroic couplets and sonnets.

Definition of Heroic couplets.

The 'Heroic couplet' is a verse form introduced into English by Chaucer in the fourteenth century, its name derives from its use in seventeenth-century "heroic" (epic) drama and poetry. In closed couplets, each pair of lines is self-contained, even if they are part of a larger grammatical structure. Heroic couplets are lines of iambic pentameters that rhyme in pairs (aa, bb, cc).

Definition of Sonnet

A sonnet is a fourteen-line lyric poem in a single stanza, in which lines of iambic pentameter are linked by an elaborate rhyme scheme. There are many kinds of sonnets. The ones I use here are Shakespearean or English sonnets. There is also the Petrarchan or Italian sonnet. The Petrarchan or Italian sonnet Divides into an octave (eight lines) and a sestet (six lines); the first part rhymes abbaabba, and the second part cdecde (sometimes with only two rhymes, cdccdc). Ordinarily, the octave establishes a problem or situation which is resolved in the sestet. In sonnet sequences, or cycles, a series of sonnets are linked by a common theme. Though sonnets began as love poetry and were introduced to England as such by Thomas Wyatt, the form was extended to other subjects and other structures by the metaphysical poets.

Explanation of Shakespearean Sonnet

The Shakespearean or English sonnet divides into three quatrains (four-line groupings) and a final couplet, rhyming abab cdcd efef gg. The structure of the English sonnet usually follows the Petrarchan, or explores variations on a theme in the first three quatrains and concludes with an epigrammatic couplet.

Explicatory Notes and Glossary Proper

Explanatory notations for lines in the specific act, scene and lines will be denoted thus: Act, scene, line. This means that Act 1, scene 4, line 48 will be noted as I.iv.48.

Line 7 - "moral egotist is mentioned. What is moral egoism? It cannot be explained with a definition. It requires a mini lecture, so bear with me...

Obligations. Favours. These are things that result in slavery. Don't believe me? Read Thomas Hobbes. Oh, surely you see it – X does a favour for Y, placing Y in his debt. Y is obliged to X. X realises it and extends more favours and kindness towards Y, Y becomes further beholden unto X. By continuing to this, X is manifesting his tyranny over subject Y. Y, of course, tries to repay the "debt", he feels he owes to X. But he never quite manages to do so. And in attempting to repay X, Y "becomes" (as it were) X's "slave". Well, Nicky separates this into three types of gifts: (1) one type of gift is precious to the giver, (and you are willing to part to with it), (2) the other type of gift is the type you think the receiver really enjoys. And Machiavelli says that this is customary. In other words, it falls under the category of what the person desires – whether they need it or desire it, it doesn't make a difference because it's your understanding if what the other person desires and needs. But Nicky wrote, "It is customary of those who desire acquire favour from a prince to meet him with either of these types of gifts." The context of gift giving in the letter is one of exchange for the sake of mutual benefit. You desire to acquire something that only the prince can dispense, that's why you give the gift. The gift is not a free gift – this is the 3rd type of gift then: given freely without perhaps any expectations of return. Hobbes takes this one step further, he acknowledges that all human relationships are reciprocal and that's why we are all made use of and using others, hence the "gifts" and slavery thesis. Gifts are not necessarily tangible; they can be emotions too. Then there are those who do not like being in debt to others.

Usually the "tyrant" as the gift giver and kindness dispenser must be called claims that he/she is not a tyrant but a moral egoist. Oh, very well – I concede that. Such people do exist. Egoistic altruism is everywhere; one can observe it in both the most private and public of places. I dare say that all of us have been thus one time or another. "Happiness is an activity of the soul on accordance with perfect virtue" wrote Aristotle in his Ethics. Therefore the virtues on the own DO NOT mean or lead to happiness/ there are 3 motives for egoistic altruism: (1) You want to put the other in your debt and increase the changes that he may help you. It also helps that he will be better disposed towards you. (2) It will improve your reputation in the eyes of others so that they will be better disposed toward you. (3) the other looks like he needs care and concern.

It is very rare that one makes (AND MEANS) the argument that I help, I give because "a life full of sympathetic concern for others is most rewarding and fulfilling". I have heard this tract before from many, many people whose lifestyles do not match what the sympathy and concern they preach. But this ideal, is what we should aspire to. But then, we must be aware that people would either see you as an idealist or a hypocrite. The 1st motive for egoistic altruism is a Machiavellian one, as is the second one. The 3rd is complex. It does look decent on the surface, n'est ce pas? It presupposes that you actually KNOW what is wrong and what is needed to alleviate his agony, problem etc. It also presupposes that he is incapable of helping himself. Ask yourself then, what makes you think he cannot manage it himself? Do you not think he would have sought your help if he needed it? Are you not patronising him in this case then? By this then, it necessarily means that you cultivate these so-called altruistic virtues as a means to your interests. But in so doing, one cultivates them as states of yourself, rather than for its own sake.

So the question arises – how can one attain one's own happiness and the needs of others. Get out of the rut! Try to be less occupied the self – this only impoverishes one's experience. In thinking that you are taking care of others, you give play to your own sympathetic responses – you want people to see you as a victim. How to remedy that? I do not know – perhaps, one ought to self-reflect, dust the chips off one's shoulders and found justice within one's soul.

Line 24 – Temper'ment is the abbreviated form of 'Temperament', shortened for the metre.

Line 35 – Bending here means headstrong.

Line 41 – "Be" is used in lieu of "are" in Shakespearean English. In this case, if you want to convert this to past tense, you may, but it becomes "been".

Line 45 – "Show'd" or "Showed" is Tudor/Elizabethan English for "shown".

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The kind indulgence of my readers and reviewers in remaining steadfast to this story has overwhelmed me. I know that I am not the easiest writer to read, and I can be at times overbearing and impatient when replying to reviews. One of my greatest flaws in writing is intellectual vanity – I have the habit of assuming that my readers know everything I do about certain things. For that highhandedness, I apologise. If not for my touchstones, my betas, the footnotation would have been non-existent. My betas in this play, who have opted not to be named (you know who you are), deserve commendations for graciously reading the final few permutations of this work. Their comments and criticisms were always just, useful and insightful. Their understanding in my frequent usage of dramatic and artistic licence to change what I thought needed alteration from canon is admirable. My thanks are also extended to two remarkable pair of twins I know in real life: 'Pius' and 'Linus', for helping me with my shaky Latin grammar; and 'Aristophanes' and 'Sophocles' for reading the first few handwritten drafts of this work and making my references consistent. Leandra deserves credit for teaching me to put some space between the line numberings and the

On hindsight, after rereading Tanquam Ovis, I realised the actor playing Severus in this play would, in all likelihood, demand for my blood. His role is a most difficult one to portray as I have written here. The encouragement of the Potter Place ladies allowed me to persevere in this play when I had thoughts of merely keeping it in private circulation; as such, they ought to be acknowledged as well. The kindness shown to me by Keladry Lupin, Gala, Norskie, Southern Witch, Leandra, Laiagarien and Droxy in this play and in The Language of Flowers is very much appreciated.

I hope that you have enjoyed this play. It was a challenge to write and a challenge to edit. However, if you like it and can understand it, I am thankful.

I am, yours &ca,

Lady Strange