Sir John Oldcastle was regarded as an early Protestant martyr. Indeed , he was included as such in the famous book written by John Foxe, The Book of Martyrs.

He was so regarded, particularly so by his descendants, and more especially so by those descendants who were alive at the time Shakespeare was writing his lays.

When Henry IV was first performed at Christmas 1596, the part we now know as Falstaff was not listed under that name, but under that of Sir John Oldcastle. Shakespeare turned him from Protestant martyr to a lying , drunken, wenching, braggart.

Cue outrage by Lord Cobham who was chamberlain to the Queen, and was descended from Oldcastle.

Shakespeare’s enemies commissioned a play from Anthony Munday entitled The True and Honourable History of the Life of Sir John Oldcastle, the Good Lord Cobham, in order to redress the balance.

Michael Wood in his book, In Search of Shakespeare quotes from the preface to this play which shows that it was specifically written with reference to Shakespeare’s character of Falstaff:

It is no pampered glutton we present
Nor aged counsellor to youthful sins;
But one whose virtues shone above the rest,
A valiant Martyr and a virtuous peer.

The preface ended with:

Let fair truth be graced,
Since forged invention former time defaced.

Hmm…..

Michael Wood is certain that the pressure from Lord Cobham to restore his ancestor’s reputation caused Shakespeare to write two epilogues to Henry IV Pat II, in attempts to diffuse the controversy.

Here is a quote from the second of these prologues( with an advert for the forthcoming Henry V!): it makes interesting reading:

One word more I beseech you. If you be not too cloyed with fat meat, our humble author will continue the story with Sir John in it , and make you merry with fair Katherine of France; where , for anything I know, Falstaff will die of a sweat, unless already a be killed with your hard questions: for Oldcastle dies martyr, and this is not the man. My tongue is wary; when my legs are too, I will bid you good night.

As Michael Wood says ,this is probably the first instance of an author attempting to state that any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental …LOL