Shakespeare" in the Latin entry in the Register, a distinotion he seems to have acquired by having served the office of bailiff two years before. The same observation will apply to the registration of his fifth child, Richard, who was baptized on 11th March, 1573-4, as the son of “Mr. John Shakespeare'." Richard Shakespeare may have been named after his grandfather of Snitterfield, who perhaps was sponsor on the occasion2. The increase of John Shakespeare's family seems, for some time, to have been accompanied by an increase of his means, and in 1574 he gave Edmund and Emma Hall 401. for two freehold houses, with gardens and orchards, in Henley-street. It will not be forgotten that he was already the owner of a copyhold tenement in the same street, which he had bought of Edward West, in 1556, before his marriage with Mary Arden. To one of the two last-purchased dwellings John Shakespeare is supposed to have removed his family; but, for aught we know, he had livedfrom the time of his marriage, and continued to live in 1574, in the house in Henley-street, which had been alienated to him eighteen years before. It does not appear that he had ever parted with West's house, so that in 1574 he was the owner of three houses in Henley-street. Forty pounds, even allowing for great difference in value of money, seems a small sum for the two freehold houses, with gardens and orchards, sold to him by Edmund and Emma Hall. It is, we apprehend, indisputable that soon after this date the tide of John Shakespeare's affairs began to turn, and that he experienced disappointments and losses which seriously affected his pecuniary circumstances. Malone was in possession of several important facts upon this subject, and recently a strong piece of confirmatory testimony has been procured. We will first advert to that which was in the hands of Malone, applicable to the beginning of 1578. At a borough hall on the 29th Jan. in that year, it was ordered that every alderman in Stratford should pay 68. 8d., and every burgess 3s. 4d. towards "the furniture of three pikemen, two billmen, and one archer." Now, although John Shakespeare was not only an alderman, but had been chosen "head alderman" in 1571, he was allowed 1 The baptismal register runs thus: "1573 March 11. Richard sonne to Mr. John Shakspeer." 2 Malone speculated (Shakspeare, by Boswell, vol. ii. p. 106,) that Richard Hill, an alderman of Stratford, had stood godfather to this child, but he was not aware of the existence of any such person as Richard Shakespeare, of Snitterfield, who, there is good ground to believe, was father to John Shakespeare. 3 Malone's Shakspeare, by Boswell," vol. ii. p. 93. to contribute only 3s. 4d., as if he had been merely a burgess: Humphrey Plymley, another alderman, paid 5s., while John Walker, Thomas Brogden, and Anthony Turner contributed 2s. 6d. each, William Brace 2s., and Robert Bratt "nothing in this place." It is possible that Bratt had been called upon to furnish a contribution in some other place, or perhaps the words are to be taken to mean, that he was excused altogether; and it is to be remarked that in the contribution to the poor in Sept. 1564, Bratt was the only individual who gave no more than fourpence. In November, 1578, when it was required that every alderman should "pay weekly to the relief of the poor 4d.," John Shakespeare and Robert Bratt were excepted: they were "not to be taxed to pay any thing," while two others (one of them Alderman Piymley) were rated at 3d. a week. In March, 1578-9, when another call was made upon the town for the purpose of purchasing corslets, calivers, &c., the name of John Shakespeare is found, at the end of the account, in a list of persons whose "sums were unpaid and unaccounted for." Another fact tends strongly to the conclusion that in 1578 John Shakespeare was distressed for money he owed a baker of the name of Roger Sadler 5l., for which Edmund Lambert, and a person of the name of Cornishe, had become security: Sadler died, and in his will, dated 14th November, 1578, he included the following among the debts due to him:-" Item of Edmund Lambert and Cornishe, for the debt of Mr. John Shacksper, 51." Malone conjectured that Edmund Lambert was some relation to Mary Shakespeare, and there can be little doubt of it, as an Edward Lambert had married her sister Joan Arden. To Edmund Lambert John Shakespeare, in 1578, mortgaged his wife's estate in Ashton Cantlowe, called Asbyes, for 407., an additional circumstance to prove that he was in want of money; and so severe the pressure of his necessities about this date seems to have been, that in 1579 he parted with his wife's interest in two tenements in Snitterfield to Robert Webbe for the small sum of 4l. This is a striking confirmation of John Shakespeare's embarrassments, with which Malone was not acquainted; but the original deed, with the bond for the fulfilment of covenants, (both bearing date 15th Oct. 1579) subscribed with the distinct marks of John and Mary Shakespeare, and sealed with their respective seals, is in the hands of the Shakespeare Society. His houses in Stratford descended to his son, but they may have been mortgaged at this period, and it is indisputable that John Shakespeare divested himself, in 1578 and 1579, of the landed property his wife had brought him, being in the end driven to the extremity of raising the trifling sum of 41. by the sale of her share of two messuages in Snitterfield1. It has been supposed that he might not at this time reside in Stratford-upon-Avon, and that for this reason, he only contributed 38. 4d. for pikemen, &c., and nothing to the poor of the town, in 1578. This notion is refuted by the fact, that in the deed for the sale of his wife's property in Snitterfield to Webbe, in 1579, he is called "John Shackspere of Stratford-upon-Avon," and in the bond for the performance of covenants, " Johannem Shackspere de Stratfordupon-Avon, in comitat. Warwici." Had he been resident at Ingon, or at Suitterfield, he would hardly have been described as of Stratford-upon-Avon. Another point requiring notice in connexion with these two newly-discovered documents is, that in both John Shakespeare is termed "yeoman," and not glover: perhaps in 1579, although he continued to occupy a house in Stratford, he had relinquished his original trade, and having embarked in agricultural pursuits, to which he had not been educated, had been unsuccessful. This may appear not an unnatural mode of accounting for some of his difficulties. In the midst of them, in the spring of 1580, another son, named Edmund, (perhaps after Edmund Lambert, the mortgagee of Asbyes) was born, and christened at the parish church3. 1 The property is thus described in the indenture between John Shakespeare and his wife, and Robert Webbe. For and in consideration of the sum of 4. in hand paid, they "give, graunte, bargayne, and sell unto the said Robert Webbe, his heires and assignes for ever, all that theire moitye, parte, and partes, be it more or lesse, of and in two messuages or tenementes, with thappurtennances, sett, lyinge and beynge in Snitterfield aforesaid, in the said county of Warwicke." The deed terminates thus: "In witnesse whereof the parties above said to these present indentures interchangeablie have put theire handes and seales, the day and yeare fyrst above wrytten. "The marke + of John Shackspere. The marke M of Marye Shackspere. "Sealed and delivered in the presens of Nycholas Knoolles, Vicar of Anston, baston, with other moe." The seal affixed by John Shakespeare has his initials I. S. upon it, while that appended to the mark of his wife represents a rudely-engraved horse. The mark of Mary Shakespeare seems to have been intended for an uncouth imitation of the letter M. With reference to the word "moiety," used throughout the indenture, it is to be remembered that at its date the term did not, as now, imply half, but any part, or share. Shakespeare repeatedly so uses it. 2 The register contains the following: "1580. May 3. Edmund sonne to Mr. John Shakspere." CHAPTER IV. Education of William Shakespeare: probably at the freeschool of Stratford. At what time, and under what circumstances, he left school. Possibly an assistant in the school, and afterwards in an attorney's office. His handwriting. His marriage with Anne Hathaway. The preliminary bond given by Fulk Sandells and John Richardson. Birth of Susanna, the first child of William Shakespeare and his wife Anne, in 1583. Shakespeare's opinion on the marriage of persons of disproportionate age. His domestic circumstances. Anne Hathaway's family. Ar the period of the sale of their Snitterfield property by his father and mother, William Shakespeare was in his sixteenth year, and in what way he had been educated is mere matter of conjecture. It is highly probable that he was at the free-school of Stratford, founded by Thomas Jolyffe in the reign of Edward IV., and subsequently. chartered by Edward VI; but we are destitute of all evidence beyond Rowe's assertion. Of course, we know nothing of the time when he might have been first sent there; but if so sent between 1570 and 1578, Walter Roche, Thomas Hunt, and Thomas Jenkins, were successively masters, and from them he must have derived the rudiments of his Latin and Greek. That his father and mother could give him no instruction of the kind is quite certain from the proof we have adduced, that neither of them could write; but this very deficiency might render them more desirous that their eldest son, at least, if not their children in general, should receive the best education circumstances would allow. The free grammar-school of Stratford afforded an opportunity of which, it is not unlikely, the parents of William Shakespeare availed themselves. As we are ignorant of the time when he went to school, we are also in the dark as to the period when he left it. Rowe, indeed, has told us that the poverty of John Shakespeare, and the necessity of employing his son profitably at home, induced him, at an early age, to withdraw him from the place of instruction. Such may have been the case; but, in considering the question, we must not leave out of view the fact, that the education of the son of a member of the corporation would cost nothing; so that, if the boy were removed from school at the period of his father's 1 "The narrowness of his father's circumstances, and the want of his assistance at home, forced his father to withdraw him from thence, and unhappily prevented his farther proficiency."-Rowe's Life. F* embarrassments, the expense of continuing his studies there could not have entered into the calculation: he must have been taken away, as Rowe states, in order to aid his father in the maintenance of his family, consisting, after the death of his daughter Anne in 1579, and the birth of his son Edmund in 1580, of his wife and five children. However, we are without the power of confirming or contradicting Rowe's statement. Aubrey has asserted positively, in his MSS. in the Ashmolean Museum, that "in his younger years Shakespeare had been a schoolmaster in the country;" and the truth may be, though we are not aware that the speculation has ever been hazarded, that being a young man of abilities, and rapid in the acquisition of knowledge, he had been employed by Jenkins (the master of the school from 1577 to 1580, if not for a longer period) to aid him in the instruction of the junior boys. Such a course is certainly not very unusual, and it may serve to account for this part of Aubrey's narrative'. We decidedly concur with Malone in thinking, that after Shakespeare quitted the free-school, he was employed in the office of an attorney. Proofs of something like a legal education are to be found in many of his plays; and it may be safely asserted, that they do not occur anything like so frequently in the dramatic productions of his contemporaries. We doubt if, in the whole works of Marlowe, Greene, Peele, Jonson, Heywood, Chapman, Marston, Dekker, and Webster, so many law terms and allusions are to be found, as in only six or eight plays by Shakespeare; and, moreover, they are applied with much technical exactness and propriety. Malone has accumulated some of these, and it would be easy to multiply them. We may presume 1 Aubrey cites "Mr. Beeston" as his authority, and as persons of that name were connected with theatres before the death of Shakespeare, and long afterwards, we ought to treat the assertion with the more respect. Simon Forman, according to his Diary, was employed in this way in the free-school where he was educated, and was paid by the parents of the boys for his assistance. The same might be the case with Shakespeare. 2 A passage from the epistle of Thomas Nash before Greene's "Menaphon." has been held by some to apply to Shakespeare, to his "Hamlet," and to his early occupation in an attorney's office. The best answer to this supposition is an attention to dates: "Menaphon was not printed for the first time, as has been supposed, in 1589, but in 1587; in all probability before Shakespeare had written any play, much less "Hamlet." The "Hamlet" to which Nash alludes must have been the old drama, which was in existence long before Shakespeare took up the subject. The terms Nash employs are these; and it is to be observed, that by noverint he means an attorney or attor ney's clerk, employed to draw up bonds, &c., commencing Noverint universi, &c. "It is a common practice now-a-dayes, amongst a sort |
