Shakespere was now parentless, brotherless, and sonless; there was already no near existent male relative to bear his name, and keep alive, by an actual representation, the memory of his family. About this time his energies are said to have slackened, and he is supposed to have ceased to interest himself in the theatre. His hope of founding a family, if ever entertained, was gone, and now he felt-what he had before only said-an indifference to fame. "In so profound abyss I throw all care To critic and to flatterers stopped are." And he could scarcely have felt otherwise than that "unkindly Death" was making the circle closer around him, and bringing the chances nearer to himself, and so have been somewhat solemnized in thought. By an indenture of conveyance, dated March 10, 1612-13, preserved in the City of London Corporation Library, Guildhall, in a glass case, we learn that at this time Shakespere bought a house (with ground attached) near Blackfriars Theatre, "abutting upon a street leading downe to Pudle Wharffe, on the east part, right against the Kinges Majesties Wardrobe." The purchase-money of this house was £140, but Shakespere only paid down £80, and mortgaged the property the next day for the balance, and leased the house to John Robinson for ten years. In 1612 we have the following publication, viz. :-"The passionate Pilgrime. Or Certaine Amorous Sonnets, betweene Venus and Adonis, newly corrected and augmented. By W. Shakespere. The Third Edition. Whereunto is newly added two Love-Epistles, the first from Paris to Hellen, and Hellen's answere backe againe to Paris. Printed by W. Jaggard, 1612." This cunningly contrived title, in which the authorship of the latter part is merely implied, not stated, did not save the tradesman from exposure. In Thomas Heywood's "Apology for Actors," published in 1612, by Nicholas Okes, the following passage occurs in a letter to that bookseller, viz. :-"Here likewise I must necessarily insert a manifest injury done me in that worke, by taking the two Epistles of Paris to Helen and Helen to Paris, and printing them in the name of another, which may put the world in opinion I might steal them from him; and hee to do himselfe right hath since published them in his owne name: but as I must acknowledge my lines not worthy his patronage under whom he hath publisht them, so the Author I know much offended with M. Jaggard that (altogether unknowne to him) presumed to make so bold with his name." That this [and probably other agencies] had some effect is presumed from Malone's having a copy of the book, of date 1612, with two titles, one with, the other without the author's name. N.B.-Though this purports to be the third edition, there is no known intermediate issue between 1599 and 1612, and Jaggard's conduct being suspicious, it is probable there was none. The draft of a bill in Chancery, endorsed "Lane, Greene, and Shakespere, Com[plainants]," intended to be presented to Lord Chancellor Ellesmere, is in the possession of the Shakespere Society, and is referred to date 1613, from which it appears that on the moiety of tithes purchased by Shakespere in 1605 a larger proportion of the reserved rent than was right fell to be paid by him and his fellow complainers, because of the remissness of others, much to the injury of the persons raising the action. Besides this, we gather from the draft that Shakespere's annual income from these tithes was £120. A letter from Thomas Lorkin, dated "London, this last day of June, 1613," says, "No longer since than yesterday, while Bourbege his companie were acting at the Globe the play of Hen[ry] VIII., and there shooting of certaine chambers in way of triumph, the fire catched and fastened upon the thatch of the house and there burned so furiously as it consumed the whole house, and all in lesse than two hours, the people having enough to doe to save themselves." In this fire, most probably, many of Shakespere's MSS. were burnt; if, indeed, he was then no otherwise interested in the property. In some MS. notes to Stow's "Annales" it is stated that the Globe was "newe built up againe in the year 1613 [1614?] at the great charge of King James, and many noblemen and others." A fifth edition of "Henry IV.," part first, was issued (named) in 1613, "by W. W., for Matthew Lawe.” 1613. Among the plays performed during the marriage festivities of Frederick V. and the Princess Elizabeth, before Prince Charles, the Lady Elizabeth, and the Prince Palatine Elector, in 1613, Shakespere's hold no mean prominence, as may be seen from 6 this excerpt from the accounts of Lord Harington, treasurer of the chamber to James I.,-"Paid to John Heminges uppon the Councel's warrant, dated at Whitehall, xxth day of May, 1613, for presentinge before the Princes Highnes, the Lady Elizabeth, and the Prince Pallatyne Elector, fourteene severall playes, viz., one playe called Filaster;' one other, called 'The Knotte of Fooles;' one other, Much adoe aboute Nothinge,' 'The Mayed's Tragedie,' 'The Merye Dyvell of Edmonton,' The Tempest,' A Kinge and no Kinge,' 'The Twins' Tragedie,' ['The Comedy of Errors'?] 'The Winter's Tale,' 'Sir John Falstaffe' [i.e., 'The Merry Wives of Windsor'?] 'The Moor of Venice,' 'The Nobleman,' 'Cæsar's Tragedye,' and one other, called 'Love lyes a-bleeding,' all which playes were played within the tyme of this accompte." Shakespere was, we see from this, equally popular with court and people, a proof not only of the universality of his genius, but also of the truthfulness and accuracy of his representative delineations of human life in all its phases, forms, and modes. 1614. In the summer of 1614, fifty-four houses were burnt down in a great fire in Stratford, and in the same year the town was agitated by some projected enclosures of common lands. The corporation opposed the enclosure. In memoranda of property whose owners would have claims for compensation, of date 5th Sept., 1614, among the "auncient ffreeholders in the fields of Old Stratford and Welcombe," the name of "Mr. Shakspeare occurs.” On 8th Oct., 1614, Shakespere enters into legal covenant for his own safety, "and one Thomas Greene, gent.," with Wm. Replingham, of Great Harborrow, regarding compensation for injury done, "by reason of anie inclosure or decaye of tillage there ment and intended by the said Wm. Replingham." Thomas Greene, clerk to the Corporation, was sent on this business to London, and in notes of his stay, of date 17 Nov., 1614, he says, "My cosen Shakspear comyng yesterday to town, I went to see him how he did. And [with reference to the enclosures ?] he and Mr. Hall say they think ther will be nothing done at all." On 23rd Dec., 1614, there was held "a hall" of the corporation, and there were lettres wrytten, one to Mr. Manyring, another to Mr. Shakspear, with almost all the companies' hands to either;" and Greene adds, “I also wrytte myself to my cosen Shakspeare the coppyes of all our acts, and then also a note of the inconvenyences wold happen in the inclosure." Mark in all these the confidence reposed in Shakespere, the importance attached to his aid, and the seemingly prideful claiming of relationship to him by the clerk. A William Shakespeare is named on the Jury List of 1614, in a MS. copy of the customs of the manor of Rowington. Was this our Shakespere? He had property [see 1602 and 1606] in fee from that manor. In 1614, John Combe, bailiff or factor for the Earl of Warwick, died, and in his will he left as a legacy, "To Mr. William Shackspere, five pounds." In the same will, too, we find mention of Parson's close, alias Shakespere's Close, showing that the popular ear had caught up his name, and used it as a preferential designation of the property thereby meant. In the Stratford Chamberlain's accounts for 1614, we see this"Item: for one quart of sack, and on quart of clarett winne geven to a preacher at the Newe Place, xxa." The 92nd of a collection of epigrams, entitled, "Rubbe and a Great Cast," by Thomas Freeman, Gent. (whom Wood mentions along with George Chapman as among the friends of Shakespere), is addressed, in these words, 66 "TO MASTER WM. SHAKESPERE. 66 Shakespeare! that nimble Mercury thy braine, So fit for all thou fashionest thy veine. At the horse-foote fountaine thou hast drunk fulle deepe; Who loves chaste life, there's Lucrece for a teacher, Who lists read lust, there's Venus and Adonis, True model of a most lascivious leatcher, But to praise thee aright-I want thy store. Then let thine owne works thine own worth upraise, Perhaps the happiest encomium that Shakespere had yet received as a dramatist," is in Mr. Dyce's opinion contained in a rare narrative poem, entitled, "The Ghost of Richard the Third," by C. B, (whom Collier supposes to be Charles Best), published in 1614:— "To him that impt my fame with Clio's quill, Whose nectared veines are drunk by thirstie men;- "Yet if his scenes have not engrosst all grace Nor acts nor chronicles could ere containe The hell-deepe reaches of my soundless braine." 1615. A fourth edition of "Richard II.," with the author's name, was published in 1615. Of the several works of Shakespere-plays and poems-there were, prior to 1616, in circulation in all no fewer than between sixty and sixty-five editions. Some of these reached as many as six editions within a period of not more than twenty-one years. This argues of itself an extensive popularity, especially when we reflect on the small number of the reading public of his day. If we take the lowest estimate of the editions (sixty), and suppose each issue to have consisted of the lowest possible paying number (300, say?) we should have in circulation no fewer than 18,000 copies of the productions of the great dramatist in print, during his lifetime. Besides those plays which were printed, however, there were at least-accepting the ordinary text-eighteen others, which, so far as is known, had not got beyond the semicircle of the footlights, and remained stage-plays only, until seven years after his death. Many of these, we know, were frequently played, and were highly popular. Such facts, when reflected on, place the personal fame of Shakespere among the people in a strong light, and prove the entire impossibility of the Delia Bacon hypothesis, that Shakespere "wore the bays" for Bacon, or Raleigh,-show, indeed, that then, as now, he was England's foremost man in his own walk, as the interpreter of human life and human history. |