terms the incredible "assertion of Davies," that Shakespere "dyed a Papist." We cannot suppose impiety in Shakespere. In his works, wherever a holy subject is touched, it is done with an apparently unaffected feeling of deep reverence and sacredness of speech. Shakespere and Massinger are the holiest of the whole race of dramatists, and there are fewer expurgatory sentences in his works than in those of any other playwright of his time. Him you can read aloud-with few skips; many others you dare scarcely open your own eye upon. We incline on this head to regard him as certainly Protestant in tone, sentiment, and feeling. The pulpit literature of Britain is jewelled with quotations from his works. The oath of supremacy required to be taken and kept under pain of præmunire and high treason by all magistrates by the statute of the 1st of Elizabeth, 1558-9. As John Shakespere was chief magistrate of Stratford, viz., high bailiff, in 1568, he must not only have conformed, but been conforming, to the Protestant religion-the religion established by law. His son must have been brought up in the publicly confessed creed of his father, or John Shakespere must have been a conscienceless hypocrite before his own children. The master of the grammar school of Stratford was Thomas Hunt, curate of Luddington-probably the very person who married John Shakespere and Mary Arden. He must have taught the creed he was bound to preach, and Shakespere must have learnt the Scripture tasks set him by the schoolmaster. "Eliza and our James" could scarcely publicly have favoured a recusant, nor could the Pembrokes have given him their patronage had he been an alien from the faith. Such things would certainly have been marked and remarked upon. John Ward, vicar of Stratford, would certainly have noted that fact with some prominence had the case been so. John Milton, the Puritan, whose verses were prefixed to the second folio in 1632-sixteen years after Shakespere's death-could scarcely have been ignorant of an important item like that in the great dramatist's life; and yet, in Edward Philip's "Theatrum Poetarum,” which is held to have been indebted to Milton in much, we find no note of anything of the sort. It is almost impossible that, in the days of Elizabeth, a Roman Catholic could have been the most popular of playwrights. Shakespere's children appear to have been baptized in the church of Stratford, and so he must have been a conformist. Without referring to the passages in his works, from which the question might be further argued, we conclude not only that Halliwell's inferential charge of impiety is unsubstantiated, but also that Shakespere was a Protestant-at least, not a Roman Catholic. The confession of John Shakespere, found, in 1770, between the rafters and the tiling of the house in Henley Street, we, of course, regard as a forgery, and a coarse product of the early age of Shakespere fabrications-before cunning study had made it an adept's art. The faith of Shakespere might easily be gleaned from a careful perusal of his works. There is a breadth and freedom of thought, a religious catholicity in his writings, as in his nature; but there is no servile submissiveness to priestliness at all. At all events, the practical charities of life were pursued by him. We know he was helpful to the poor in their necessities, trusted by the council of his native borough, looked upon as a boast by his kinsmen, and respectfully loved by his wife, children, and sons-in-law. "He was the best of his family." . . "His wife and daughters did earnestly desire," says Dowdall, 10th April, 1693, on the authority of a clerk of the church at Stratford, above eighty years old,—“to be layd in the same grave with him." So they are; and on their tomb. stones special mention is made of their connection with the bard whose monument adorns the church where they too are sepulchred. Does it not seem as if they felt an echo of these words of his arising in their hearts? [and may we not lawfully feel so, too?] "Blessed are you, whose worthinesse gives scope Being had to triumph; being lacked to hope." The facts of his life seem to us to be expressly contradictory of any hypothesis except that which would make him either a Protestant or a hypocrite! the latter a character which his friends, who ought to have known, say he did not merit. Whichever faith was his, however, let us hope that his [and ours] may be found right by Him who is "the Top of Judgment," and that he and we may find acceptance through the merits of Him who was แ Nailed, For our advantage, to the bitter cross!" CHAPTER VI. THE FRIENDS OF SHAKESPERE. "Precious friends, hid in death's dateless night."-Sonnet xxx. "THE basis of friendship," says Dr. Johnson, "is sincerity." "Friendship" has been apostrophized by Blair as the The interfusion of sympathy, and the homogeneity of friends, give pertinence to the common saying, "A man is known by the company he keeps." It is surely not a misleading fancy that we follow, then, if we endeavour to acquire some knowledge, real or inferential, of the nature, disposition, and habits of Shakespere, from bringing into prominence in the view of the mind some of the friends of Shakespere. Was Shakespere one of those friends "whose lives are as if they perpetually plaid upon a stage, disguised to all others, open only to themselves"? Was he amenable to the Swiftian sneer "His friendships, still to few confined, Or did he rather esteem a true friend as a priceless treasure, and fulfil his own maxim,— 66 The friends thou hast, and their adoption tried, Grapple unto thy soul with hooks of steel "? These are not such momentless questions as they may at first sight appear. From the fact that he sedulously abstained from following the fulsome fashion of his age in pouring out complimentary verses upon all and sundry of his associates--an inference has been drawn that he was cold of heart, haughty, and distant. Though this seems at variance with the loveableness of disposition implied in his acquiring and retaining the epithetic designation "Gentle Willie," it has been gravely enunciated; and hence it appears to be advisable to learn something of the friendships he formed and kept, that we may thence, if possible, infer something regarding himself. Besides, his friendships are facts, though our deductions may be merely fancies. Henry Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton, and Baron of Tichfield, is known to posterity chiefly because he was the friend and early patron, as it is believed, of Shakespere; yet Camden says that his love of literature was as great as his renown in warlike exploits. He was born, October 6th, 1573. In his twelfth year, he was entered a student in St. John's, Cambridge, and four years thereafter took his degree in arts. The University of Oxford admitted him by incorporation to the same degree three years afterwards, and he is said to have studied at Lincoln's Inn. He had only completed his twentieth year when Shakespere-nine years his elder-dedicated to him "the first heir" of his invention"Venus and Adonis;" a work which certainly secured his favour, because we find Shakespere in the following year dedicating a second work to him, viz., "Lucrece." He speaks of the warrant he has of his lordship's honourable disposition, as making his work "assured of acceptance." Southampton braved the royal displeasure by conniving at the escape of Sirs Charles and Henry Danvers, accused of manslaughter. In 1597, he volunteered under Essex in the expedition against Spain; in which he commanded a squadron, and for gallantry in which he was knighted. He was General of the Horse to Essex in Ireland, in 1598, but was dismissed from the Royal service because, without Elizabeth's consent, he married Essex's cousin. On the fall of the favourite he was imprisoned, and retained in custody during her Majesty's life. On being released, he was appointed Governor of the Isle of Wight; but being accused of an intrigue with the Royal Consort, James caused him to be arrested. He was innocent, and was discharged. He retired to Spa, disgusted with his king. He took part in the siege of Reis, and in 1619 was chosen a privy councillor; but exposed himself to the wrath of the court by taking the liberal side in politics. He died 10th Nov., 1624, of a fever caught at Bergenop-Zoom, while commanding a small force against the Spaniards. He was a rash, bold, able man, but yet his chief claims to the notice of posterity are his love of learning, and his— Who had a name in arts, in verse or prose." The first folio edition of Shakespere's plays (1623), was dedicated "To the most noble and incomparable paire of Brethren, William Earle of Pembroke, &c.," "and Philip Earle of Montgomery, &c." Heminge and Condell say their lordships “have been pleased to think these triffles something, heretofore, and have prosecquuted both them and their author living with so much favour;" hope they "will use the same indulgence toward them you have done unto their parent;" so much were your lordships' likings of the severall parts when they were acted as before they were published, the volume asked to be yours." They speak also to them of these works as "these remains of your servant Shakespeare." From these premises we are warranted to infer that the Pembrokes were patrons and friends of Shakespere, and of the drama. Proofs of this we proceed briefly to set before our readers : 66 66 Sidney's sister, Pembroke's mother," in 1590, co-operated in the authorship of a play entitled “ Anthony." At Wilton, near Salisbury, the seat of the Pembrokes, Shakespere's company, in 1603, with Heminge as their official manager, performed before the court of James-at perhaps the earliest theatrical performance he witnessed in England. Ben Jonson inscribed a volume of epigrams to him. The first folio of Beaumont and Fletcher's plays were dedicated to Philip. Massinger not only dedicated a play to Philip, but wrote a poem of condolence to him on the death of his son. The Earls of Pembroke kept a company of players of their own at one time; and one of their house, Sir Henry Herbert, was licenser of plays for a long series of years. The position of the family, as patrons of the drama, is clear, and so is also their kindly feeling towards Shakespere. Let us see, then, who and what they were. William, third Earl of Pembroke, born 1580, was the elder son of Henry, second earl, and Mary, sister of Sir Philip Sidney. He succeeded to the earldom on his father's death, 19th January, 1600-1. As K.G. and Chancellor of the University of Oxford, "he was," says Anthony Wood, "not only a favourer of learned and ingenious men, but was himself learned, and endowed to admiration with a poetical geny." He was the author of a "Volume of Poems," which were published after his death, with a dedication by Donne |