A cheonicle history of the life and work of William Shakespeare, player, poet, and playmaker

v '

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE

PLAYER, POET, AND PLAy MAKER

EDWARD ALLEYN

A CHRONICLE HISTORY

OF THE

LIFE AND WORK

OF

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE

PLAYER, POET, AND PL AY MAKER

BY
FREDERICK CARD FLEAY

LONDON

JOHN C. NIMMO
14, KING WILLIAM STREET, STRAND, W.C.

1886
[All rights reserved]

Pss

Dedication,

TO

THE SHAKESPEARE OF OUR DAYS,

ROBERT BROWNING,

A PERMITTED TRIBUTE

FROM
HIS EVER-DEVOTED LIEGEMAN,

FREDERICK CARD FLEAY.

To him, whose craft, so subtly terse,

(While lesser minds, for music's sake,
From single thoughts whole cantos make),

Includes a poem in a verse ; —

To him, whose penetrative art,

With spheric knowledge only his,
Dissects by keen analysis

The wiliest secrets of the heart ; —

To him, who rounds us perfect wholes,

Where wisdom, wit, and love combine ;
Chief praise be this : — he wrote no line

That could cause pain in childlike souls.

CONTENTS.

PACK
INTRODUCTION » * • . 1^

SECTION I.

THE PUBLIC CAREER OF SHAKESPEARE . . . . 7

SECTION II.

THE PERSONAL CONNECTIONS OF S-HAKESPEARE WITH

OTHER POETS . . . . . . . . 73

SECTION III.

ANNALS ON WHICH THE PRECEDING SECTIONS ARE

FOUNDED . 83

SECTION IV.

THE CHRONOLOGICAL SUCCESSION OF SHAKESPEARE'S PLAYS 175

SECTION V.

ON THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS 2$$

SECTION VI.

ON THE PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS ACTED BY SHAKE
SPEARE'S COMPANY 284

viii CONTENTS.

SECTION VII.

PAGE

EARLY ENGLISH PLAYS IN GERMANY 307

APPENDIX 319

TABLES . . . 324

I. QUARTO EDITIONS OF SHAKESPEARE'S PLAYS . . 324
II. QUARTO EDITIONS OF OTHER PLAYS PERFORMED BY

SHAKESPEARE'S COMPANY 326

III. NUMBER OF PERFORMANCES AT COURT, 1584-1616 . 327

IV. ENTRIES OF PLAYS IN THE STATIONERS' REGISTERS,

1584-1640 328

V. TRANSFERS OF COPYRIGHT IN PLAYS, 1584-1640 . 350
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLE OF MOSELEY'S ENTRIES IN

1653 AND 1660, AND WARBURTON'S LIST . . 358

INDEX .361

NOTE ON ETCHINGS 364

INTRODUCTION.

IT is due to the reader of a new work on a sub
ject already so often handled as the Life of Shake
speare to tell him at the outset what he may expect
to find therein, and to state the reasons for which
I have thought it worth while to devote nearly ten
years to its production. Previous investigators have
with industrious minuteness already ascertained
for us every detail that can reasonably be expected
of Shakespeare's private life. With laborious
research they have raked together the records of
petty debts, of parish assessments, of scandalous
traditions, of idle gossip ; and they have shown
beyond doubt that Shakespeare was born at Strat-
ford-on-Avon, was married, had three children, left
his home, made money as an actor and play-maker
in London, returned to his native town, invested his
savings there, and died. I do not think that when
stript of verbiage, and what the slang of the day

2 INTRODUCTION.

calls padding, much more than this can be claimed
as the result of the voluminous writings on this
side of his career. For one I am thankful that
things are so ; I have little sympathy with the
modern inquisitiveness that peeps over the garden
wall to see in what array the great man smokes
his pipe, and chronicles the shape and colour of his
head-covering. But on the public side of Shake
speare's career little has been adequately ascer
tained ; and with this we are deeply concerned.
Not for a mere personal interest, but in its bearings
on the history of English literature, we ought to
ascertain so far as is possible what companies of
actors Shakespeare belonged to, at what theatres
they acted, in what plays besides his own he was
a performer, what authors this brought him into
personal contact with, what influence he exerted
on or received from them, what relations, friendly
or unfriendly, they had with rival companies, and
finally, in what order his own works were produced,
and what if any share other hands had in their
production. All these matters have been treated
carelessly and inaccurately by biographers of the
peeping school ; and in the last of these we are
gravely referred for the chronology of Shake
speare's plays to a schoolboy compilation the author
of which is so ignorant as to speak of Lust's Domi-

INTRODUCTION. 3

nion as a play of Jonson's, the News from He!!
as a play of Dekker's, and Achilles as Laertes'
son. This marvel of inefficiency we are told is the
best work on the subject ; and this while Malone
and Drake are accessible to any student. In the
present treatise this hitherto neglected side of
Shakespeare's career has been chiefly dwelt on.
The facts of his private life are also given ; but
not the documents on which they are founded,
these having been excellently well collected and
arranged in the recent Outlines of the Life of
Shakespeare, by J. O. Halliwell-Phillipps, F.R.S.,
F.S.A., Hon. M.R.S.L., Hon. M.R.I.A. This
book is a treasure-house of documents, and it is
greatly to be regretted that they are not published
by themselves, apart from hypotheses founded on
idle rumour or fallacious mis-reasoning. I do not
know any work so full of fanciful theories and " ignes
fatui" likely to entice "a deluded traveller out of
the beaten path into strange quagmires." * There
is much else besides documents not given in the
present treatise ; discussions as to who might have
been Shakespeare's schoolmaster, whether he was
apprenticed to a butcher, whether he stole a deer
out of a non-existent park, whether he held horses

* " These phrases to their owner I resign,

For God's sake, reader, take them not for mine."

4 INTRODUCTION.

at the theatre door or " was employed in any other
equine capacity," whether he went to Denmark
or to Venice, and whether Lord Bacon wrote his
plays for him. On all these points I must refer
to earlier and less sceptical treatises. What the
reader will find here is — (i.) A continuous narra
tive in which the statements are mostly taken for
granted in accordance with my own view of the
evidence accessible to us ; (2.) Annals or chronolo
gical arrangement of the same facts, with discussion
of their mutual interrelations ; (3.) Discussion of the
evidence on which the chronological succession of
Shakespeare's plays is based ; (4.) Similar discus
sions for plays in which he was not main author but
only " coadjutor, novice, journeyman, tutor," or even
merely one of the possible actors; (5.) A few re
marks on the German versions of his plays acted on
the Continent; and (6.) Tables of quarto editions
of his plays, &c., with a list of all plays entered
on the Stationers' Registers from the first opening
of theatres to their closing in 1640—42. This last
item may seem to be somewhat beyond the scope
of this book, but it is greatly needed, and it is
better that so difficult a task should be performed
by one acquainted with dramatic literature than
by some scissors-and-paste compiler who cannot
distinguish a play from a prose tract. As to the

INTRODUCTION. 5

preparation for the whole work it has been to me
a labour of love, not, I trust, altogether lost. I have
read and re-read for it every play accessible to me
that dates earlier than 1640, have compiled annals
for every known writer of that period and discus
sions of the dates of his plays, and have compared
the results and corrected and re-corrected until a
consistent whole has been obtained. Of this whole
only the part relating to Shakespeare is here
issued. I have to thank the editors of Anglia
Englische Studien and Shakespeariana for enabling
me to print some portions relating to other authors,
which will, however, require some minor correc
tions. I have also to thank Dr. Furnivall and Mr.
Swinburne for some wholesome criticism upon my
earlier work ; Dr. Ingleby, Miss Lee, Mr. Boyle,
Mr. A. H. Bullen, and especially Dr. H. H. Furness,
for kindly sympathy and copies of their own
writings, some of which might otherwise have
escaped my notice ; and above all Mr. P. A. Daniel,
for ever-ready help when asked for, and for judicious
strictures on received hypotheses or points debat
able. The main regret for the earnest student is
that so many of these still exist ; as any attempt
to give a biography of Shakespeare the form which
is aesthetically its due must fail so long as the true
order of the facts on which it rests is still esteemed

6 INTRODUCTION.

matter of argument. If the reader would wish to
judge before proceeding further of the quality of
such argument in the present work I would refer
him to the discussion on Mucedorus or that on
Henry VI. in subsequent Sections.

One other point requires notice, if not apology.
The plan followed in this volume requires much
repetition in order that the separate arguments as
to the chronological succession of the plays, and
as to the order of events in Shakespeare's life,
should be presented in intelligible sequence. This
is an evil only to be avoided either by mixing
up the two, as is usually done, or by numerous
cross-references. Either of these methods leads
to greater evils, both by interrupting the logical
connection of each series (for unfortunately the
evidences are mostly independent of each other),
and, which is still more important, by obliterating
the mutual support given to the arguments in the
twofold lines of evidence by their leading in each
division to compatible results. The inconvenience
of these repetitions has therefore been submitted to.

LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

SECTION I.

THE PUBLIC CAREER OF SHAKESPEARE.

ON or about Saturday 22d April 1564, William
Shakespeare, son of John Shakespeare, glover and
dealer in wool, and his wife Mary, nde Arden, was
born in Henley Street, Stratford - on - Avon, and
was baptized on the 26th. Nothing whatever is
known of his early life, and the few meagre details
ascertained as to the condition of his family will be
found in a subsequent division of this work. Tra
dition and imagination have supplied untrustworthy
materials, with which his biographers have endea
voured to fill up the gap in our information ; but
it is not until 28th November 1582 that we find
any further reliable fact established concerning
him. On that day his marriage bond is dated, he
being in his nineteenth year, and his bride, Anne

8 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Hathaway, in her twenty-sixth. Their first child,
Susanna, was baptized 26th May 1583. To account
for this young lady's premature arrival a pre-con
tract is assumed, but not proved, by recent writers.
On 2d February 1585 their twin children, Hamnet
and Judith, were baptized; and in 1587, in the
spring, Shakespeare gave his assent to a proposed
settlement of a mortgage on his mother's Asbies
estate. For ten years after there is no vestige of
any communication with his family. It is at this
point that his public life begins.

In 1587 Leicester's players visited Stratford for
the first time. The company, under the same
name, that had performed there in 1576 had as
well as Warwick's been dissolved in 1583, in order
that the Queen's men might be selected from them.
In 1586, during the prevalence of the plague in
London, this more recent company had been tra
velling on the Continent, and on their return to
England made a provincial tour. Shakespeare
probably joined them during or immediately after
their visit to Stratford, and during their travels re
ceived his earliest instruction in comic acting from
Kempe and Pope, who soon after became noted
performers ; Bryan also belonged to the company
at this date. They probably acted mere interludes,
not regular five-act plays. On 4th September 1588

HIS PUBLIC CAREER, 9

the Earl of Leicester died ; and his players soon
after found a new patron in Lord Strange. They
then settled in London, and acted at the Cross
Keys in Bishopsgate Street. The head of the
company, in its altered constitution, was " Famous
Ned Allen," who on 3d January 1588-9 bought
up for £37, IDs. Richard Jones' share of "playing
apparels, play- books, instruments, &c.," in order to
set up his new company. These properties had
Belonged to Worcester's men under Robert Brown,
and were no longer needed by him, as he and his
players were about to visit the Continent.

It was in this way that Shakespeare came to
London as a poor strolling player, but nevertheless
his position was not without its advantages ; he
was associated already with the most noted come
dians of the time, Kempe and Pope ; and in Alleyn
he had the advantage of studying the method of
the greatest tragic actor that had yet trod the Eng
lish stage. But he did not remain content with
merely acting ; he now commenced as author. In
order to ascertain under what conditions, it will be
necessary to briefly state what was the position of
the companies and authors in London in 1589.

At that date there were two theatres in London:
the better of the two, the Theater, was occupied by
the Queen's men, for whom Greene was the prin-

io LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

cipal play-writer. Marlowe, Kyd, and R. Wilson
had also contributed plays to their repertoire, but
just at this time left them and joined Pembroke's,
which, like Leicester's, had been a strolling com
pany, but were now settling in London. On the
other hand, Peele and Lodge, who had previously
written for the Admiral's company, acting at the
other theatre, the Curtain, had also joined, and still
remained with, the Queen's. Nearly all these
writers, if not quite all, were actors as well as
authors. Greene, the Johannes Factotum of the
Queen's men, had evidently expected to establish a
monopoly of play-acting in their favour, and was
indignant at the arrival of vagrant troops of
Thespians from the country, just when he had
practically succeeded in crippling the rival company
in London, by enlisting some of their best authors
in the service of his own. Hence on 23d August
1589 his publication of Menaphon, with Nash's
address, containing a virulent attack on Kyd and
Marlowe, then writing for Pembroke's men, to
gether with a glorification of Peele, then writing
in conjunction with Greene. The absence of any
allusion in this tract to Shakespeare or Lord
Strange's company conclusively proves that they
were not as yet dangerous rivals to the Queen's.
Pembroke's men were, and there is indirect evi-

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. n

dence that they had from their first settlement in
London obtained possession of the second theatre,
the Curtain. This evidence is connected with
the first direct mention which is extant of Shake
speare's company. For in this same year, 1589, the
Martinist controversy had been raging in London ;
Lyly, Nash, Greene, Monday, and Cooper were the
anti-Martinist champions ; the Martinists had been
ridiculed on the stage in April, probably by Greene
at the Theater, possibly by the Paul's children in
some play of Lyly's, or by the Earl of Oxford's
boys in one of Monday's. The authorities did not
interfere. But in November certain players " within
the city," to wit, Lord Strange's and the Admiral's,
were silenced for " abuses or indecent reflexions "
(Strype). A comparison of the worthies in Love's
Labour's Lost with the anti-Martinist writers, of the
Euphuist Armado with Lyly, the boy-satirist Mote
with Nash, the curate with the Reverend Robert
Greene, the schoolmaster-pedant with the pedagogue
Cooper, and Antony Dull with Antony Monday,
will I think confirm the theory developed by me
in a separate essay, that this was the play sup
pressed on this occasion. It is characteristic of
the independence of action shown by Shakespeare's
company throughout the reign of Elizabeth that
they refused to obey the injunction, and went and

12 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

played at the Cross-Keys that same afternoon, while
the subservient Admiral's company dutifully sub
mitted. I do not suppose, however, that the play
as then performed was in all parts from the hand
of Shakespeare. It is extremely unlikely that he
should have commenced his career by independent
writing, and there is not a play of his that can be
referred even on the rashest conjecture to a date
anterior to 1594, which does not bear the plainest
internal evidence to its having been refashioned at
a later time. In all probability he began to com
pose plays, as we know so many of his contem
poraries did, as an assistant to some experienced
dramatist. It may seem idle, in the absence of any
positive evidence, to guess who was his original
tutor in composition, and yet, as the careers of
Peele, Greene, and Marlowe conclusively show that
none of them were in 1589 connected with Lord
Strange's company, I venture to suggest that
it was Robert Wilson. That dramatist is not
heard of in connection with Pembroke's or any
other company after August 1589, and he cer
tainly continued to write for the stage. That
Shakespeare was greatly influenced by him and
Peele is evident from the metrical character of
Shakespeare's earliest work, which abounds in
heroic rhyme like Peek's in tragedy, and in doggerel

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 13

and stanza like Wilson's in comedy. It is not till
the Historic plays that the influence of Marlowe's
blank verse is fully perceptible, and in the earliest of
these, Richard IL, rhyme is still dominant. Wilson
was in this view a better teacher for the inexperi
enced Shakespeare than a greater man. Marlowe,
for instance, might have biassed him on the tragic
side, and deferred or prevented his comedy from its
earlier pastoral development. Love's Labour's Won
must have been written at about the same time as
Love's Labour's Lost, and before the end of 1590
The Comedy of Errors probably appeared in its
original form. In this same year was produced a
play in which, although I cannot detect Shake
speare's hand as coadjutor with its probable author,
R. Wilson, he most likely appeared as an actor —
Fair Em; and that this comedy contained a sati
rical attack on Greene is evident from the offence
he took at it, as shown in his virulent address pre
fixed to his Farewell to Folly. Up to this date
Greene's chief attacks had been directed against
Kyd in Menaphon and in Never too late, but as yet
there has been found no allusion to Shakespeare in
his writings anterior to 1592. Yet Shakespeare
must have been known to him as at least part
author of the plays acted by Lord Strange's men
in 1589 and 1590. Of Romeo and Juliet, originally

i4 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

acted in 1591, we also possess a version anterior
to Shakespeare's final remodelling, which palpably
contains scenes not written by him. These scenes,
however, seem due to a finer artist than Kyd, and
there is independent evidence that George Peele
had by 1591 also become a playwright for Lord
Strange's men. One of the plays acted by them
in this year was probably Peek's Edward /., here
mentioned on account of a curious allusion which
would seem to fix the character performed by
Shakespeare. In scene 3 Elinor says to Baliol —

" Shake [thou] thy spear in honour of his name
Under whose royalty thou wear'st the same."

Shakespeare is known to have acted " kingly
parts," and this of Edward I. was probably one of
them. To this same year may probably be assigned
the original production of The Two Gentlemen of
Verona.

The Court festivities of Christmas 1591—2 mark
an important epoch in the fortunes of Lord Strange's
company, and consequently of Shakespeare, now
rapidly coming to the front as their chief writer.
During the period we have been considering, 1587-
1591, the Queen's and the Admiral's were the only
men's companies who performed at Court, but at
Christmas 1591—2 the Admiral's did not act at all,

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 15

and the Queen's, after one performance, gave place
to Lord Strange's, and until the death of that
nobleman in 1594, his players enjoyed almost a
monopoly of Court performances. One presenta
tion by the Earl of Hertford's men, of whom
nothing else is recorded, one by the Earl of Sussex',
and two by the Earl of Pembroke's, are all that
can be balanced with six by Lord Strange's in
1591—2, and three in 1592—3. This pre-eminence
at Court was retained by the company under all
its changes of constitution far beyond Shakespeare's
time, until the closing of the theatres in 1642.
Possibly the influence of Lord Southampton, who
had come to town and entered at Gray's Inn in
1590, and was stepson to Sir Thomas Heneage,
the treasurer, may have had something to do with
this. He does not yet, however, appear to have
come into direct communication with Shakespeare.
Immediately after this first appearance at Court,
Alleyn arranged with Henslow, his father-in-law, to
give his company a local habitation in a permanent
theatre. This was of no small importance to them ;
they had hitherto had to play in the inn-yard at
the Cross-Keys. Henslow's new theatre was the
Rose on the Bankside, which opened in February
1591 2. The singular fact that every old play
(i.e., every play that had been previously performed)

1 6 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

there acted in this season had been with one
possible exception derived from the Queen's
players, shows that the hitherto most successful
company were reduced to sell their copies, and
were probably on the verge of bankruptcy.
Among these we find Greene's Orlando and Friar
Bacon, Greene and Lodge's Looking-glass for
London, Marlowe's Jew of Malta, and Kyd's two
plays of Jeronymo. The only play traceable to
another company is Peele's Battle of Alcazar, called
by Henslow Mulomorco. In fact, the Queen's com
pany were now practically without a play-writer.
Of their formerly numerous staff Marlowe was
writing for Pembroke's men, Kyd and Peele for
Lord Strange's, Lodge was abroad, Wilson had
left them, and Greene had also quitted them for the
Earl of Sussex'. Besides the plays above enume
rated, Lord Strange's players acted a dozen others
of which only the titles are known, and produced
as new plays the following : — On March 3, Henry
VI. (a re-fashioning by Shakespeare of an old
Queen's play, into which he introduced the Talbot
scenes, celebrated by Nash, which drew such crowded
audiences); on April n, Titus and Vespasian (a
version of the Andronicus story extant in a Ger
man translation, and probably written by Kyd ;
on April 28, the second part of Tamburlane (not

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 17

extant); on June 10, A Merry Knack to Know a
Knave (probably by Peele and Wilson); and after
an interval, during which the theatres were closed
on account of the plague, on 5th January 1592—3,
The Jealous Comedy (probably The Merry Wives
of Windsor) ; and finally, January 30, The Guise
(Marlowe's Massacre of Paris).

I have brought together this enumeration of the
new plays of Strange's men that the reader may
better appreciate the often quoted but sadly mis
understood address by Greene to his fellow-dra
matists in his Groatsworth of Wit, not published
till September after its author's death, but mani
festly written and probably circulated in manuscript
in the early months of 1592. Its aim is directed
against a company of players, " burs, puppets,
antics, apes, grooms, painted monsters, peasants,"
among whom is " an upstart crow, a Johannes
Factotum, a Shakescene," who supposes he can bom
bast out a blank verse. This is palpably directed
against Shakespeare and Lord Strange's players,
for whom he was then writing and with whom he
was then acting. But Greene also says that they
had all been beholding to him and to his fellow
writers whom he addresses; that is, to Marlowe,
Peele, "young Juvenal" (Lodge), and two more (Kyd
and Wilson) " that both have writ," whom he might

i8 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

" insert against these buckram gentlemen." This
can only apply to the Queen's players, for which
company alone Greene had written up to 1591,
having supplied them with a play every quarter
and purveyed more plays for them than other four
(Marlowe, Peele, Kyd, and Lodge), as Nash tells us
in his Piers Penniless. There must then have
been an amalgamation of the better portions of the
two companies, the Queen's and Lord Strange's,
just before the opening of the Rose Theatre, a con
clusion confirmed by the fact that the Queen's
plays had passed into the hands of the other com
pany, and, as will be seen when I treat of the
Henry VI. plays, deduced by me on other and inde
pendent grounds. This attack of Greene's was, I
think, answered by Shakespeare in his Midsummer
Night's Dream, produced in its first form c. June
1592. Bottom and his scratch company have long
been recognised as a personal satire, and the follow
ing marks would seem to indicate that Greene and
the Sussex' company were the butts at which it
was aimed. Bottom is a Johannes Factotum who
expects a pension for his playing ; his comrades
are unlettered rustics who once obtain an audience
at Theseus' court. The Earl of Sussex' men were
so inferior a company that they acted at Court
but once, viz., in January 1591— 2, and the only new

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 19

play which can be traced to them at this date is
George a Greene, in which Greene acted the part
of the Pinner himself. This only shows that the
circumstances of the fictitious and real events are
not discrepant ; but when we find Bottom saying
that he will get a ballad written on his adventure,
and " it shall be called Bottom's Dream, because
it hath no bottom" (iv. i. 212) and that peradven-
ture he shall " sing it at her (?) death," we surely
may infer an allusion to Greene's Maideris Dream
(S. R. 6th December 1591), apparently so called
because it hath no maiden in it, and sung at the
death of Sir Christopher Hatton. This play of
Midsummer Nighfs Dream was produced after the
closing of the theatres, c. I2th June 1592, on
account of the plague ; it and the Jealous Comedy t
produced 5th January 1592—3, when the theatres
reopened for that month only, were almost the last
in which Shakespeare worked as a journeyman or
with a coadjutor. When he revived these earlier
plays for the Chamberlain's men he carefully re
placed in almost every instance the work of his
quondam companions by other and certainly not
weaker lines of his own. Some of his own work
of this date, apparently left unfinished on account
of the sudden closure of the playhouses, he appears
to have taken up and completed in his 1601— 2

20 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

plays. But no doubt the greater part of this
autumn was occupied in writing Venus and Adorns,
dedicated to Lord Southampton (S. R. i8th April
1593) as " the first heir of his invention," a product
of " idle hours : " idle because during the plague
no new plays were required of him, nor even re
hearsals ; the players travelled and acted old plays
only. In these circuits a whole company did not
usually journey together ; it was more profitable to
separate into parties of half-a-dozen, and of course
to cut down their plays so as to be capable of
representation by this small body of actors. One
part of Lord Strange's men, consisting of Alleyn,
Pope, Bryan, Hemings, Phillips, and Kempe, so
travelled in 1593 ; but no document has been pre
served respecting the remainder of the company,
which included probably Burbadge, Sly, Condell,
Holland, Cowley, and Shakespeare. It appears from
Alleyn's correspondence that Cowley was the bearer
of a letter to him from London to Bristol ; that his
section of the company had been at Chelmsford in
May, were at Bristol in August, and afterwards
visited Shrewsbury, Chester, and York. Meanwhile,
on June I, Marlowe had been killed in a brawl,
and his version of the Andronicus story was acted
by Sussex' men at the Rose, 2$d January 1594.
From their hands this play passed to Pembroke's

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 21

men c. 8th February, when Sussex' company broke
up and went into the country, and from them to
the Earl of Derby's before i6th April. But this
company of Derby's was no other than Lord
Strange's. After Henry Earl of Derby died, 25th
September 1593, Ferdinand, his son, who succeeded
him, and who had previously borne the title of
Lord Strange, was called either Strange or Derby
indifferently, he having no son to whom the title of
Lord Strange could be, in accordance with custom,
assigned in courtesy, although by strict right this
title appertained to the Earls of Derby and not to
their sons. Along with this Andronicus play the
following can be traced as passing from Pembroke's
company to Lord Strange's at this date : The Taming
of a Shrew, Edward III., Hamlet, j Henry VI.; and
besides this transfer of playbooks there was also a
partial transfer of the company itself. Beeston,
Cooke, Sinkler, Holland, and others were among
these new members. The cause of this arrange
ment was no doubt poverty ; already on 28th Sep
tember 1593 they could not "save their charges to
travel, and were fain to pawn their apparel." So
writes Henslowe to Alleyn.

I must now recur to 1593. Immediately after
Christmas the theatres reopened ; but at the Rose
the Earl of Sussex' men acted instead of Lord

22 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Strange's, who played about the city, at the Cross-
Keys for example. When Sussex' men broke up, on
the 8th April, the Rose remained empty except for
three days, 14— 1 6th May, when the Admiral's com
pany acted there, no doubt under Alleyn, who was
servant to the Admiral as well as to Lord Strange.
The Admiral, however, had himself laid a restraint
on the Rose theatre (probably c. 8th April), and
ordered that Lord Strange's players should play
11 three days " (i.e., three days a week) at Newing-
ton Butts. This was petitioned against by the
watermen, whose calling was greatly in request
when the Rose was open, and by Lord Strange's
players themselves. No redress appears to have
been granted during the life of Lord Strange, who
died on 1 6th April, but when the company had
found a new patron in Lord Hunsdon the Chamber
lain, and had submitted to the order by playing on
alternate days with the Admiral's at Newington
Butts, then the restraint on the Rose was removed.
The Chamberlain's players, however, did not act
there, but under Shakespeare and Burbadge re
opened the old Theater, while Alleyn left them and
acted with the Admiral's at the Rose.

Before passing to notice the poems written by
Shakespeare during this period of "travelling," I
may note that these plays acquired from Pembroke's

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 23

men appear to have been written by Marlowe or
Kyd. Edward III., by Marlowe, was, with altera
tions by Shakespeare, acted about the city in 1594.
Titus Andronicus and j Henry VI. were also acted
by the Chamberlain's company ; but they show no
evidence of extensive alterations at Shakespeare's
hand ; he probably merely corrected them. Another
play of this date, Richard ///., bears strong internal
evidence of Marlowe's craftmanship, but was no
doubt completed and partly rewritten by Shake
speare. The Kyd plays, on the other hand, were
not utilised in this way. New plays on the same
plots as the old Hamlet and The Taming of a Shrew
were afterwards produced by the Chamberlain's
men — Hamlet by Shakespeare, The Taming of the
Shrew by Lodge (most likely), but greatly altered
by Shakespeare some years after. Another play
performed by Derby's men contemporaneously with
these was The Seven Deadly Sins. This play had
not been derived from Pembroke's men, but from
the Queen's, for whom Tarleton had originally
plotted it. The plot as acted in 1594 still exists,
and is especially valuable as showing the compo
sition of Lord Strange's company at that date.
Shakespeare, however, took no part in it. The large
number of performers singularly agrees with the
statement in the players' petition above alluded to

24 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

that " our company is great." There was also a
play Locrine, published S. R. 2Oth July 1594, as re
vised by W. S., which has been interpreted William
Shakespeare. I do not think he could in any way
have been concerned in this revival of Peele and
Tilney's stilted performance, and suspect that W. S.
means William Sly ; nor do I think that any other
play of Shakespeare's, save those already mentioned,
can be assigned to a date anterior to the formation
of the Chamberlain's company except Troylus and
Cressida in its original form, which was probably
acted c. 1593. In fact, Shakespeare was from the
breaking out of the plague in 1592 until the settle
ment of his reconstituted company in 1594 chiefly
occupied, not with plays, but with poems. His
Venus and Adonis has already been noticed, and on
9th May 1594 his Rape of Lucrece was published.
In the Dedication to Lord Southampton, Shake
speare speaks of " the warrant I have of your
honourable disposition : " in what especial way
Southampton had shown his favour to Shakespeare
has been the subject of many conjectures. My own
opinion is that he had introduced him as repre
sentative of his fellow-actors to Lord Hunsdon, and
procured them their new patron ; but in a scandalous
book called Willobie his Avisa, published 3d Septem
ber 1594, the version of the connection between the

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 25

nobleman and the " old player " is that W. S. had
parted with a mistress to H. W. and been rewarded
accordingly ; and it would be useless to deny that
the Sonnets written between 1594 and 1598 dis
tinctly allude to some circumstance of this kind.
The Avisa book was, however, suppressed or " called
in " on 4th June 1599, as a libellous production.

This year may be regarded as the turning-point
in Shakespeare's public career. Until the estab
lishment of the Chamberlain's company, he had
been an actor gradually rising in the esteem of his
fellows, but often obliged to travel and to act about
town in inn-yards, and his play-writing had been
confined to vamping old plays by other men, or at
best to assisting such writers as Wilson or Peele
in producing new ones. He had served, as it were,
a seven years' apprenticeship. But henceforward
he takes his place as one of the chief actors in the
principal company in London, acting in a licensed
theatre ; he is also, with occasional assistance, the
sole purveyor of plays to this company, and he is
the acknowledged writer of the most popular love
poems of his time. For it is to the author of
Lucrece and Adonis that his contemporaries assign
their praises far more than to the writer of Lear or
Hamlet. Poems were in their opinion fit work for
a prince ; but plays were only congruous with

26 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

strolling vagabondism. It is just at this turning-
point that the first nominal mention of Shakespeare
is found as acting before the Court at Greenwich
on December 26 and 28, along with Kempe and
Burbadge.

The performance on 26th December was on the
same day that Shakespeare and his company had
acted The Comedy of Errors at Gray's Inn — the
earliest of his plays in their present form, but
founded on a previous version, in which another
pen was concerned.

On 26th January 1594-5, Midsummer Night's
Dream was, I conjecture, acted at Greenwich at the
marriage of W. Stanley, Earl of Derby, and after
wards on the public stage ; it was evidently written
for a marriage, but, like the preceding play, had
been altered for this special occasion. Its original
production was probably in 1592, at the marriage
of Robert Carey, afterwards Earl of Monmouth.
In both instances the bridegrooms were close con
nections of the patrons of the actors ; W. Stanley
being brother to Ferdinand, Lord Strange, and
Robert Carey son to Henry, Lord Hunsdon, the
Chamberlain. Another 1595 play was Richard II. ,
evidently an imitation of Marlowe's Edward II.

Marlowe was Shakespeare's first model in His
torical Plays, as Kyd was in Tragedy and Lyly in

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 27

Comedy, but he followed Marlowe much more
closely than either of the other two. If any other
author contributed plays to the Chamberlain's com
pany this year it must have been Lodge, to whom
Mucedorus and A Larum for London may probably
be attributed. At Christmas they acted five plays
at Court.

In 1596, there is little doubt that Shakespeare
produced his King John, founded on two old plays
on the same subject which were written for the
Queen's men in 1589 by Peele, Marlowe, and
Lodge. Their plot has been very closely followed
by Shakespeare and a few lines borrowed. At
some time between 23d July 1596 and 5th
March 1597 he also revived Romeo and Juliet, at
the Theater; this new version was founded on
the old play of 1591, in which Shakespeare was
only part writer. Of plays by other authors only
one can be traced to his company in this year,
namely, Sir Thomas More (? by Drayton and
Lodge). This play was severely handled by the
Master of the Revels for its allusions to contem
porary events, and the alterations made by him
afford instructive study to dramatic critics. On
August 5, immediately after the appearance of
Romeo and Juliet, a ballad on the story was entered
S. R., and on August 27, T. Millington was fined

28 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

for printing ballads on The Taming of a Shrew and
Macbeth. This indicates the existence of a Mac
beth play at this time, but probably, like the older
Hamlet and Lear, one in whose production Shake
speare had no share. Kempe mentions the Macbeth
ballad as the first production of its author in
his Nine Days1 Wonder. In February this same
year James Burbadge bought the property in Black-
friars, on which he began in November to build
the Blackfriars Theatre, wherein in 1597, after
some opposition, he succeeded in establishing the
Chapel children under Evans. The Chamberlain's
company did not act at this theatre in Shake
speare's time. There were six Court performances
at Christmas 1596-7.

It is necessary now to recur to Shakespeare's
private life. On 5th August 1596 his son Hamnet
died, and he unquestionably visited Stratford and
renewed relations with his family at this time.
John Shakespeare having applied to the Heralds'
College for a grant of arms, obtained this conces
sion in October, and in the Easter term 1597
William Shakespeare purchased the property called
New Place in Stratford. In November 1597 the
Asbies business was revived in a Chancery suit
brought by Shakespeare's parents against John
Lambert, son of Edmond. In the bill of complaint

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 29

the Shakespeares describe themselves as " of small
wealth, and very few friends ; " but it is clear that
their wealth must have had a recent accession, or
they would not now have renewed a dispute which,
on their own statement, had lain in abeyance since
1580. All these proceedings alike, the acquisition
of a residence in Stratford, the obtaining a grant
of arms, the endeavour to establish old claims to
family property, point to Shakespeare's desire, now
that he had succeeded in London and made money,
to settle in Stratford as a country gentleman, and
found a family. He may have hoped for the birth
of another son, his wife being in 1596 still under
forty years of age. But the inferences usually
drawn from the incidents of this time, that Shake
speare had constantly held communication with his
family, whom he had supported during his theat
rical career in London, and that he was, on this
occasion, largely indebted to the bounty of Lord
Southampton, are mere fancies. The natural in
terpretation of such records as have reached us is
that it was not till touched by the hand of the
great reconciler Death, in the person of the ex
pected heir to his new-founded fortunes, that he ever
visited his family at all during the nine years since
he left them to carve his own way as a strolling
player. If conjecture is to be allowed at all, I

3o LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

would rather suggest that his family were offended
at his choice of an occupation, and that it was not
till he had made a marked success that they were
reconciled to him.

Returning to Shakespeare's public career — on
5th March 1597 George Carey, Lord Hunsdon, was
created Chamberlain, and his players resumed the
title of " The Lord Chamberlain's." Early in this
year was almost certainly produced The Merchant

J of Venice, founded on an old play of Dekker's called
Joseph the Jew of Venice, written c. 1592, and acted
in 1594 by the Admiral's men, but not now extant.
In the same year was performed / Henry IV. The
comic powers of Shakespeare appear in these plays
in their highest development in Shylock and Fal-
staff, and endeavours have been made by several
(myself included) to mark this as the beginning of
a new period in his manner of work. In such
attempts, however, it is necessary to assign specific
single dates to each play, and consequently to
neglect the proved fact of frequent alterations of
considerable extent having been made at revivals.
I think it better to regard as Shakespeare's first
period the time anterior to the formation of the

^ Chamberlain's company, 1587-93, during which he
was employed only as "journeyman or coadjutor,"
and not to separate the series of Comedies and

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 31

Histories which were produced in their perfected
forms from 1594 to 1602. It may, however, be
noted that at this time, 1597, he had entirely dis
carded the doggerel couplets and the excessive use
of rhyme that mark his early work, and that this
fact is useful in analysing plays which, though
produced later in the form in which they have
reached us, were founded on earlier versions in
which he was probably only a part writer. An
other play acted by Shakespeare's company this
year was Dray ton's Merry Devil of Edmonton. In
this, as well as in Henry IV., Sir John Oldcastle
was originally one of the characters. This name was
adopted from the old Queen's play of The Famous
Victories of Henry V.t from which the main plot
of Shakespeare's Henry V. series was taken, and
certainly was not intended to give offence to the
Cobhams, his descendants. They took offence, how
ever, and the name was altered to that of Sir John
Falstaff, taken from another Queen's play, / Henry
VI. , which I have already noticed, and which, with
the addition of the scene of the Temple Garden,
was acted by the Chamberlain's company.

Between August and October, the Theater having
become ruinous, and litigation between James Bur-
badge, its lessee, and Giles Alleyn, the ground land
lord, being imminent, the Chamberlain's company

32 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

removed to the Curtain. The Earl of Pembroke's
company, who have for controversial purposes
been unjustifiably confused with the Chamberlain's,
in August acted as strollers at Rye, in Sep
tember at Dover, and on their return to London
amalgamated with the Admiral's, and acted at the
Rose. Among the plays acted by Shakespeare's
company at the Curtain was Romeo and Juliet, as
appears from a singular allusion in Marston's
Satires, which also serves to show that this play
then, as now, was one of the most popular of
his productions. But his popularity is shown
in another way this year. Coincidently with the
removal to the Curtain, we find the first appearance
of authorised publication of his plays, Richard II.
having been entered S. R. on 29th August, and
Richard HI. on 2Oth October. The Romeo and
Juliet printed this year was neither entered nor
authorised. On 26th December Love's Labour's
Lost was acted at Court, being one of four plays
provided for the Christmas festivities by this
company. It was probably specially commanded,
and the alterations from the 1589 version, which
were very hurriedly done, were almost certainly
made on this occasion.

On 25th February 1598, the first part of Henry
IV. was printed, and the second part was acted

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 33

soon after. The popularity of these plays caused a
re-issue in this year of the old Queen's play of
The Famous Victories of Henry V., brought out in
order that the purchaser might imagine he was
procuring a copy of Shakespeare's plays. The
genuine Henry IV. , for this and reasons alluded to
above connected with the elimination of Oldcastle's
name, was published earlier after its production on
the stage than usual. For the same reason this
alteration was expressly alluded to in the Epilogue
to 2 Henry IV., " Oldcastle is not the man." In
this same year Much Ado about Nothing (probably
a recast of Love's Labour's Won) was performed.
On /th September was entered S. R., Meres' Wifs
Treasury, which contains, among many encomiums
of Shakespeare, a list of twelve of his plays. This
tract was demonstrably not written till June, and the
plays are manifestly those that had been produced
by Shakespeare during the existence of the Cham
berlain's company. These are : Gentlemen of Verona
(1595), Errors (1594), Love's Labour's Lost (1597),
Love's Labour's Won (1598), Midsummer Night's
Dream (1595), and Merchant of Venice (1597);
Richard II. (1595), Richard HI. (1594), Henry IV.
(1597), King John (1596), Titus Andronicus (1594),
and Romeo and Juliet (1596). Plays produced

before or in 1594 that had not been recast after that

c

34 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

year are not mentioned ; for instance, / Henry VI.
(1592), Troylus and Cressida (1593), The Merry
Wives of Windsor (1592), and Edward HI. (1594).
This list is of the highest value, when rightly
understood, in determining the order of production
of the plays. Another event, important to the
welfare of the Chamberlain's company, was the
introduction of Ben Jonson as a play-writer for
their stage. This took place in September, and
there is no reason for doubting the tradition that he
was introduced to them by Shakespeare, who acted
in Every Man in his Humour, as it was published
in the Quarto, before the end of the year. The
fact that the Chamberlain's men acted three plays
at Court during the Christmas festivities, closes the
theatrical record for 1598, but one or two other
details remain to be noticed. The establishment
of peace on May 2 by the treaty of Vervins, com
pared with Sonnet 107, "olives of endless age,"
fixes the conclusion of these effusions as about this
time, and Southampton's marriage at the end of
the year precluded the need of their continuance.
They probably were finished before Meres' mention
of them in Wifs Treasury (written c. July) as
Shakespeare's " sugared sonnets among his private
friends." Little details of evidence are also extant,
showing that since his purchase of New Place,

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 35

Shakespeare's residence was partly in the country.
On 4th February he appears as third largest owner
of corn in his ward at Stratford, and in October we
find him procuring a loan of £30 in London, for
his friend and countryman Richard Quiney. His
London residence at this time was in St. Helen's,
Bishopsgate ; but still earlier than this, on 24th
January, he was in negotiation about the purchase
of some thirty acres of land at Shottery, and Abra
ham Sturley wrote from Stratford to his brother-
in-law, the same Richard Quiney, urging him to
suggest to Shakespeare the purchase of the corpora
tion tithe-lease; it "would advance him indeed, and
would do us much good," says Sturley.

In January 1598-9 James Burbadge brought
his dispute with Giles Alleyn about the Theater
to a practical conclusion by removing the materials
of that structure from Shoreditch to the Bankside,
and erecting the Globe with them. This " round "
was opened in the spring, and in it all the plays
of Shakespeare not hitherto noticed were originally
produced. Before quitting the Curtain, however,
A Warning for Fair Women was there acted by
the Chamberlain's men. This was in my opinion
Lodge's last play. Another play of the same date
was Shakespeare's Henry V., reproduced, with addi
tions and alterations, at the Globe in the autumn

36 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

of the same year. Other Globe plays of this year
were As You Like If, and Jonson's Every Man out
of his Humour. This latter was the first of his
comical satires, in which he introduces on the stage
Marston, Dekker, Monday, the Globe players, &c.
Only this one was acted by Shakespeare's company,
and it is specially remarkable that Shakespeare did
not take a part in it, although he had acted in
Every Man in his Humour in 1598. It is pretty
clear that he disliked Jonson's personalities, and it
is certain that Jonson had to remove them from
the Globe Theatre to the Blackfriars, where the
Children of the Revels acted under Evans The Case
is Altered (1599), Cynthia's Revels (1600), and The
Poetaster (1601). Chapman supported Johnson with
Sir Giles Goosecap (1601). The Paul's Children
retaliated with Marston's Jack Drum's Entertain
ment (1600), and Antonio and Mellida (1600) ; the
Admiral's at the Rose with Marston's Histriomastix>
and Patient Grissel by Dekker, Haughton, and
Chettle (December 1599); and the Chamberlain's
with Dekker's Satiromastix (1601). All these plays,
and the list is not exhaustive, are filled with
personal allusions. The quarrel was known as the
"War of the theatres." The prevalent dislike to
regard Shakespeare as less than angelic has pre
vented due attention being given to the direct state-

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 37

ment in The Return from Parnassus (acted 1602—3)
that he had put down all the playwrights of the
University press and administered a purge to Jonson
in return for the emetic which he administers to
Marston in The Poetaster. Shakespeare certainly
did take part in this controversy, and it is in the
plays dating 1599-1602 that we must look for his
contributions to it. One thing, however, is certain,
that he did not act as a violent partisan. If he
purged Jonson he did not spare Dekker, who had
written for his own company in this quarrel ;
" when rank Thersites opes his Mastick jaws "
(Troy/us, i. 3) identifies him clearly enough. In
fact, when the Globe company wanted a thorough
party advocate in this matter it was not to Shake
speare that they applied. They took the very
unusual course of hiring a poet from a rival com
pany, and hence Dekker's Satiromastix was written
for them. I venture to add that this would not
have been allowed by Shakespeare had he been in
London at the time, and that it had to be trans
ferred to the sole use of the Paul's children,
probably at his instance. Recurring to Every Man
out of his Humour, the beginning of all this strife, a
comparison of the actor list with that of Jonson's
preceding play shows that Kempe, Beeston, and
others had left the Chamberlain's company on the

38 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

opening of the Globe. They no doubt remained at
the Curtain, where a company called Lord Derby's
soon began to act. This secession did not injure
the Globe men, who became very popular. In
October, for instance, we hear of Lord South
ampton going to plays every day, of course at his
old player protege's house. But that some serious
quarrel had taken place is, I think, evident from
the exclusion of so important a name as Beeston's
from the list of chief actors in the first Folio
edition of Shakespeare. Duke, Pallant, &c., who
seceded at the same time with Beeston, are equally
excluded, so that the omission is not accidental.

In this year a perfect edition of Romeo and Juliet
was published, probably on leaving the Curtain ;
and The Passionate Pilgrim was impudently issued
by W. Jaggard as by William Shakespeare. Be
yond two sonnets and a few lines from Love's
Labours Lost, published in 1598, there is nothing in
this book that can be shown to be Shakespeare's,
but much that cannot. Somewhere about this date
an unsuccessful application was made to impale the
arms of Shakespeare with those of Arden. The
Chamberlain's men performed three plays at Court
during the Christmas festivities, viz. : on 26th
December, probably As You Like It; 5th January,
probably Henry V.; and another play on 4th Feb-

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 39

ruary. I think this was the occasion for which
The Merry Wives of Windsor was written, or rather
rewritten on the foundation of The Jealous Comedy
of 1592. The Queen, whose admiration for the
character of Falstaff is well known, was sorely dis
appointed that Shakespeare had not fulfilled his
promise made in the Epilogue to 2 Henry IV. , that
he would again introduce him on the stage ; and
there is no reason to doubt the tradition that, wish
ing to see him under new conditions, she ordered
Shakespeare to represent him in love, which order
he obeyed by writing The Merry Wives within a
fortnight. The dates all suit this hypothesis, and
in any case there can be no doubt that this comedy
stands apart from the Henry V. histories, and was
last in point of time. Another play of this year
was Julius Ccesar. There is no evidence of any
other writer than Shakespeare for the company
this year, in which the 2 and j Henry VI. (alluded
to as recast in Jonson's Prologue to his revised
version of Every Man in his Humour, acted by the
Chapel children early in 1601) were revised and
partly rewritten by him. As usual in such cases,
the old abridged acting copies of the plays in their
earlier shape were reprinted. But there is more
interesting matter connected with the publishers
in the 1600 entries. On August 4, As You Like It,

40 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Henry V., Much Ado about Nothing, and Every Man
in his Humour, all Chamberlain's plays, were ordered
to be " stayed ; " they were probably suspected of
being libellous, and reserved for further exami
nation. Since the " war of the theatres " was at
its height, they may have been restrained as not
having obtained the consent of the Chamberlain,
on behalf of his company, to their publication.
Subsequently, Every Man in his Humour was
licensed on 1 4th August, but not printed till 1601.
Much Ado was also licensed 23d August, and
printed ; As You Like It was not allowed to appear,
the company probably objecting that it had only
been on the stage for one year, but Henry V.
was printed surreptitiously by T. Millington and
T. Busby before 1 4th August, on which date it
appears in S. R. as the property of T. Pavier,
who reprinted it in 1602. The peculiarity of this
Quarto issue is, that it contains no matter which
does not also appear in the complete Folio version,
whereas, in the somewhat similar cases of Romeo
and Juliet, The Merry Wives, and Hamlet, there is
in every instance some portion of the Quarto which
is palpably by another hand. This agrees with
my view that these three plays, as in the Folio,
were founded on earlier plays, in which Shake
speare was at most a coadjutor, while the Folio

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 41

Henry V. is a revision of his own play, produced
not long before. Another entry in S. R. is interest
ing. On October 28, The Merchant of Venice was
entered to T. Hayes, with Pavier's consent; Roberts
had already entered it 22d July 1598, but it had
not been allowed to appear, probably because, like
those mentioned above, it had then been only one
year on the stage. On October 8, Midsummer
Nighfs Dream was also entered. Of the editions
of these two plays published in this year informa
tion will be found in another part of this book. On
1 1 th August the two plays on Sir John Oldcastle,
of which only one has reached us, were entered.
They had been acted in 1599 at the Rose by the
Admiral's men, and were directed against the pre
sumed scandal thrown on the " martyr " in Shake
speare's Henry V. series. It should be especially
noted that the principal author of these plays was
Drayton, formerly fellow-worker with Shakespeare
for the Chamberlain's men, and introducer of Sir
John Oldcastle as a profligate parson in The Merry
Devil of Edmonton. . Of Shakespeare's personal
movements during this year we merely know that
he was in London in April recovering a debt of
£f of one Clayton, and no doubt acting in the
three plays performed at Court in the winter.

In March 1601 the Chamberlain's company were

42 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

in disgrace for having publicly acted " the outdated
play of Richard II." no doubt inclusive of the de
position scene (which had been omitted in the pub
lished copies, under the censorship of the Master
of the Revels), for the entertainment of the Essex
conspirators. They consequently " travelled/' hav
ing previously produced Shakespeare's All's Well
that Ends Well, a considerable portion of which is
of much earlier date (c. 1592), but which, in the
Parolles scenes, has distinct allusion to Marston's
Jack Drum's Entertainment of the preceding year,
and to the " war of the theatres," not yet concluded.
They also acted the play of Cromwell, Earl of
Essex, by W. S., in which the parallel between
the careers of Cromwell and the lately executed
Earl is strongly brought out. I believe W. S. to
have been William Sly, the well-known actor of
the Chamberlain's company. In their travels this
year the company visited the Universities of Oxford
and Cambridge, where they performed Julius Ccesar
and Hamlet. The version of this last play so acted
was not the old play by Kyd, but one hurriedly
remodelled by Shakespeare, which we possess in
an imperfect form in the first Quarto. Among the
Shakespearian additions occur passages alluding to
the theatrical war and the popularity of the Chapel
Children, to which the travelling of the company

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 43

is attributed. This proves that Shakespeare was
one of the strolling detachment. Jonson seized on
this defence in his Poetaster, and represented that
the travelling was due to the inefficiency of their
play-writers, and makes Tucca tell Histrio, the
Globe player, that if they will employ Marston,
who "pens high lofty in a new stalking strain,"
they " shall not need to travel with thy pumps full
of gravel after a blind jade and a hamper, and stalk
upon boards and barrel-heads to an old cracked
trumpet." The travels, however, were not confined
to England. In October they had reached Aber
deen, where they received the title of " the King's
Servants," and Laurence Fletcher, their manager,
was admitted burgess of guild of the borough.
In all probability a version of the old Macbeth play
was produced before King James — such a version
as that of Hamlet acted at the Universities. Its
plot would fit more aptly with the circumstances
of the Gowry conspiracy of 1600 than that of
Richard II. would with Essex, and anything more
pleasing to the King and people of Scotland could
not have been selected. During the absence of
this strolling detachment Jonson's Poetaster was pro
duced, containing a vigorous attack on the Globe
company ; and they, in Shakespeare's absence, hired
Dekker to reply in his Satiromastix, which, with

44 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

the aid of the Paul's children, they represented in
the public theatre of the Globe, and in the private
convocation-room of Paul's. During this same ab
sence, on 8th September Shakespeare's father was
buried at Stratford. He apparently died intestate.
After the return from Scotland, the appearance
of Shakespeare's name, as fellow-contributor to
Chester's Love's Martyr with Jonson, Marston, and
Chapman, marks the conclusion of the theatrical
quarrel, and the reconciliation of all the principal
combatants, except Dekker. But although this
book bears the date 1601, it could not, I think,
have been issued earlier than March 1 60 1— 2, after
the production of Twelfth Night on February 2 at
the Middle Temple. Such presentations as this
at Inns of Court were usually of new plays ; and
there is in this play fairly conclusive internal evi
dence that the theatrical quarrel was not over when
it was acted. With regard to Shakespeare's other
play of this year, Troylus and Cressida, it was
as clearly produced after the reconciliation. The
entry in S. R., " as it is acted by the Lord Chamber
lain's men," is absolutely conclusive that it was still
on the stage on 1st February 1602—3, and was
therefore produced, in all probability, in the later
half of 1602. In this play the Prologue, the love
story of Troylus, and all the scenes after v. 4, are

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 45

taken from the old play of c. 1593, in which Shake
speare only wrote as a coadjutor. The Prologue
and the later scenes — v. 5-10— are manifestly by
the second pen in the main, and printed by mis
take, the end of the revised version being shown
by the repetition of the lines " Why, but hear you,"
&c., at the end of v. 3. That the 1602 version
of the play was intended to refer to the theatrical
quarrel of 1599—1602 is clear from the line "Rank
Thersites with his mastick tooth," who is evidently
Dekker, of whom Jonson says in the Poetaster
(iii. i), " He has one of the most overflowing rank
wits in Rome ; he will slander any man that
breathes if he disgust him." Dekker had pro
duced the Stf/*r0MASTix shortly before Troylus was
acted ; and it has been noted that he was not one
of the contributors to Chester's Martyr. I believe
the Troylus play to have been the one in which
Shakespeare put down all the University men, and
purged Ben Jonson's pride, as we learn that he
did from the University play of The Return from
Parnassus, acted in January 1602—3 ; the char
acter of Ajax, "Slow as the elephant, into whom
nature hath so crowded humours" &c. (i. 2), hits off
Jonson exactly, and is a good-humoured reply to
Jonson's self-estimate as Crites in Cynthia's Revels
(ii. i), " A creature of a most divine temper, one

46 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

in whom the elements and humours are peaceably
met," &c.

In May 1602 Gilbert Shakespeare (his brother
being probably in London) concluded the purchase
on his behalf of 107 acres of land in Old Stratford,
bought of the Coombes for £320, and on 28th
September Walter Getley transferred to him (not
in person), at a Court Baron of the Manor of
Rowington, a cottage and garden in Chapel Lane.
The lady of the manor retained possession until
personal completion of the purchase. The Cham
berlain's company were re-admitted to act at
Court in the winter, not having performed there in
1 60 1— 2, probably on account of the Richard II.
affair. They acted, however, only two plays. In
the following March, 1603, Shakespeare remodelled
The Taming of the Shrew by the rewriting of the
Katherine and Petruchio scene. The play before
he altered it was one written, I think, by Lodge
about 1596, and founded on the old Kyd play of
1589 acted by Pembroke's men. On March 29
Queen Elizabeth died, and whether it be due to
the different requirements of the new Court, or to
a natural development of Shakespeare's mind, there
can be no doubt that a marked change of style and
method took place at this epoch in his work. It
should not be forgotten that the primary object for

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 47

which theatres were established was that stage-
players " might be the better enabled and prepared
to show such plays to her [or his] Majesty as they
shall be required," and that the "honest recrea
tion " of the citizens was a secondary matter. For
proof of this see the Privy Council documents
quoted by Collier in his Annals, passim, and
specially in i. 309. Hence the succession of a
new sovereign had greater influence on the tone of
the drama than we can well realise. In Shake
speare's case it inaugurated a period in which
Tragedy was predominant in place of Comedy and
History. All his greatest tragedies were produced
during the next four years 1603-6.

Before quitting the reign of Elizabeth, I call atten
tion to the significant fact that the Chamberlain's
company performed at Court before the accession
of James exactly twenty-eight plays, and that the
number of Shakespeare's plays known to have been
produced during the same period by that company
is twenty, and of other men's eight. I do not
press this exact agreement as showing absolute
identity between the two lists ; one or two of the
Court plays may have been merely revivals, one or
two of the stage plays may not have been brought
before her Majesty at all, but I think the following
inferences justifiable. The Queen, evidently as a

48 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

general rule, only allowed new plays, or plays so
largely reconstructed as to be reckoned as new, to
be presented to her. So far as the Chamberlain's
company were concerned, these plays consisted on
an average of two of Shakespeare's and one of
another author's — these numbers, however, being
rather exceeded in the earlier years, and diminished
in the later. Shakespeare consequently was to this
company in the same position as Greene to the
Queen's men before his time, purveying to their
use "more than four other," which explains his
rapid advance in popularity and accumulation of
property. And finally, the number of plays supposed
to have been lost has been grossly exaggerated by
modern critics, who have based their calculations
on the Diary of Henslowe, whose policy was quan
tity rather than quality, and who was continually
deceived by his hack-writers presenting to his illite
rate ignorance old plays new vamped as if they
were completely new.

In 1603 the plague raged in London. In March
before the Queen's death, the theatres were closed,
and in the license of May 19, which adopted the
Chamberlain's men as the King's Servants (a title
already conferred on them in Scotland in 1601),
a special clause was inserted allowing them to act
"when the infection of the plague shall decrease."

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 49

The infection did not decrease, yet the theatres
were reopened, but probably only for a few days.
Doubtless the authorities closed them on account
of the continuance of the sickness. The plays
acted at this reopening were probably The Miseries
of Enforced Marriage, by George Wilkins, a new
author, which was founded on contemporaneous
events in Yorkshire, and certainly the perfected
Hamlet as we now have it in the Folio. The older
version, which had been entered S. R. on 26th July
1602, was now published, having probably been
"stayed," as was frequently the case with plays
printed by J. Roberts (for example The Merchant
of Venice, Troylus and Cressida), but not till the
copyright had been transferred to N. Ling and J.
Trundell. In 1604 Ling issued the second Quarto,
which in some instances supplies passages omitted
in the Folio for stage purposes, and in others
presents alternative versions and additions evi
dently made for the Court performance (one of
nine) in the winter 1603-4. It was a common
practice to utilise the altered copies of plays acted
at Court by allowing their publication. Yet another
play acted by the King's men this year was
Jonson's Sejanus, for which he was accused of
Popery and treason by Northampton. When he
published it (2d November 1604, S. R.), he stated

50 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

that " this book in all numbers is not the same
with that which was acted on the public stage ;
wherein a second pen had good share : in place of
which I have rather chosen to put weaker, and no
doubt less pleasing of mine own, than to defraud
so happy a genius of his right by my loathed
usurpation." The only known writers for the
King's men at this date were Wilkins, W. S.
(? Sly), Shakespeare, and possibly Tourneur. Of
these there can be no doubt that Shakespeare
is the only one that could have been the second
pen alluded to. Not that necessarily he was a
coadjutor to Jonson in this play. It is more likely
that as he acted one of the principal parts in it
he inserted or altered scenes in which he himself
appeared. It is clear that " the second pen," who
ever he was, objected to his share in the play being
published, and no wonder, seeing how its main
author had been accused on account of it. This
probably explains why the book was kept in the
press six months, from November 1604 to April
1605. When it was issued Jonson's Volpone was
just coming on the stage, and it is noticeable that
Shakespeare did not act in that play, and that
immediately after Jonson quitted the King's men
and joined Chapman and Marston in writing East
ward Ho for the Revels children, in which Hamlet

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 51

is ridiculed. All this seems to point to a quarrel
between Jonson and Shakespeare, and certainly
Jonson's behaviour in the Sejanus matter is not, as
Gifford calls it, manly. To drag in unnecessarily
an allusion to a friend whose personality must have
been known to the public of that time, into an
address prefixed to a work accused of Popery and
sedition was unmanly ; and, as his friend had ob
jected to it, was discreditable. No intercourse can
be shown between Shakespeare and Jonson after
1603.

On 3Oth January 1603-4, the new company of
the Revels children replaced the Chapel boys at
Blackfriars. They were, however, in the main
composed of the same actors, and were not unfre-
quently mentioned under their old name. On
March 15, we find that among the King's train, at
his entry into London, were nine of the King's
company, dressed in the scarlet cloth allowed for
the occasion. As these nine are identical with
those in the license of iQth May 1603, which is
statedly incomplete, they must have been in some
way distinguished from the rest of their fellows.
They were, no doubt, shareholders in the Globe.
Cooke and Lowin, who acted in Sejanus and
Volpone, do not appear among them ; nor do
Tooley, Gough, and Sinkler, who were at this

52 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

time members of the company. The nine were
Shakespeare, Phillips, Fletcher, Hemings, Burbadge,
Sly, Lowin, Condell, and Cowley. In July, Shake
speare was in Stratford, recovering in the local
court some £2 odd for malt, &c., sold to one
Rogers. In August he was summoned to London,
the King's men having to attend at Somerset
House to play at the reception of the Spanish
ambassador. During this year he produced Othello
'. and Measure for Measure, which were acted at
Court in the winter festivities, along with five old
plays of his, and two of Jonson's. Hamlet does
not occur in this list, as it undoubtedly would have
done if produced in 1604. It was, in fact, pub
lished this year as it had been acted at Court in
the previous winter. Another play acted by the
King's men was Marston's Malcontent, with an
Induction by Webster, in which the reason of its
appearance is explained. The Blackfriars children
had acted Jeronymo in 1600, an old play of Kyd's,
which had passed to the King's men from Lord
Strange's, by whom it had been purchased of the
Queen's. It had probably been taken from the
Chamberlain's men to the Chapel children by
Jonson, who in 1601, September 25, transferred it
to the Admiral's, and wrote additions to it for
Henslowe. This appropriation of their property

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 53

irritated the Globe players, and when they got the
chance, at the reconstitution of the Blackfriars
children in 1604, they procured The Malcontent,
which had been acted by these pigmies, and pro
duced it on their own stage as " one for another."
They also in December acted " the tragedy of
Gowry with all action and actors," so Chamberlain
writes to Winwood, December 1 8, " with exceeding
concourse of all sorts of people," but he adds,
" some great councillors are much displeased with
it, and so 'tis thought it shall be forbidden." It
probably was forbidden, as the play has disappeared.
Another mysterious play is The Spanish Maz, said
to have been one of the eleven performed in the
winter at Court. Nothing is known of such a
play ; but much is known of forgery connected
with such statements.

In 1605, the tragedy of King Lear was acted
about /th May, when the old Leir, on which it was
founded, but which was a comedy, was entered
S. R. as a " Tragical History " of Leir, &c., " as it
was lately acted." Another play of very dubious
authorship was acted by the King's men before 3d
July, when the ballad on the same events was
entered S. R. ; this was The Yorkshire Tragedy.
It was a continuation of the story of The Miseries
of Enforced Marriage, but treated more realistically

54 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

and more powerfully. It was published 2d May
1608 as by Shakespeare, as in 1605 The London
Prodigal had already been, but in the latter instance
the publication was unlicensed and surreptitious,
while the Yorkshire Tragedy was entered S. R. as
" written by William Shakespeare." The entry,
however, was made for T. Pavier, an unscrupulous
piratic printer, who on other occasions tried . to
establish rights in " Shakespeare's plays " which
were not Shakespeare's ; arfd no weight can be
assigned to his assertions. Another play acted by
the King's men, in March 1605, was Jonson's Volpone,
or The Fox. This was anterior in production to
the plays already mentioned. Immediately after
wards we find Jonson in connection with the Black-
friars children again, and in prison for writing
Eastward Ho. Shakespeare did not act in The
Fox ; perhaps Jonson was offended at this ; he at
any rate did not return to the King's men till 1610.
On 4th May, Phillips, Shakespeare's fellow-actor,
made his will, and died shortly after. We learn
from this document, which gives us many other
valuable particulars respecting the members of the
company, that Shakespeare and Condell were the
two of " his fellows " whom, next to Hemings,
Burbadge, and Sly, his executors, Phillips most
highly appreciated; he left them each a 3Os.-piece

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 55

in gold, but to Fletcher, Armin, Cowley, Cooke,
and Tooley a 2Os.-piece. He also left legacies to
Gilburne and Sands his apprentices, and to Beeston
his servant. " His fellows " here means the share
holders in the Globe, as contrasted with the " hired
servants," to whom he left " £5 amongst them."
There were then in 1605 eleven shareholders,
Cooke and Tooley having been added since 1 5th
March 1604. On 24th July Shakespeare invested
£40 in a lease of the tithes of Stratford, Old
Stratford, Bishopton, and Welcombe, as had been
suggested to him in 1598. In August King James
was at Oxford, and among the entertainments
presented to him were speeches by three young
men of St. John's, who personated the three Sibyls
who had prophesied to Banquo. This interlude
would necessarily recall to the King's mind the
old Macbeth play, which had been probably pre
sented to him in Scotland by the Globe players,
and if, as there is little reason to doubt, he did
write an autograph letter to Shakespeare, it was
most likely on this occasion, commanding a fuller
version of Macbeth. This play was certainly pro
duced at Court, probably at Shrovetide in March
1605-6, but it has been altered since, condensed
and interpolated by dances and songs and a new
scene with Hecate in it, no doubt by Middleton

56 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

in 1622, from whose Witch the songs are taken.
On Qth October the Globe company acted before
the Mayor and Corporation at Oxford, and then,
if not from the King, Shakespeare would be sure
to hear of the Sybils interlude. In all, ten plays
were acted at Court this winter by the Globe
company. Among them was a version of Muce-
dorus, with additions. This version has only come
down to us in imprints of 1610 and later; but
there was an edition in 1606 mentioned in Beau-
clerc's Catalogue, 1781, from which the later title-
pages were copied. From the title it appears that
it had been revived before the King on Shrove-
Sunday night at Whitehall. The original play had
been acted about the city, and therefore not later
than 1594, before the Chamberlain's men settled at
the Theater. The additions are directed against
Jonson, whose strictures on monopolies, and sneer
at " the miraculous effects of the Oglio del Scoto "
in Volpone, ii. I, must have grievously offended
James, who had revived the touching for the king's
evil. Jonson had subsequently joined Chapman
and Marston in writing Eastward Ho for the Chapel
boys, in which the Scots were still more severely
satirised, and was evidently, as may be seen from
the address prefixed to Volpone, at daggers drawn
with the Globe men. Hence, in the Mucedorus

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 57

additions, the allusions to the " meagre cannibal/'
the " scrambling raven with his meagre beard "
(certainly Jonson, the " thin-bearded Hermaphro
dite " in Satiromastix), who had, stirred up by Envy,
written a comedy for the Globe filled with " dark
sentences pleasing to factious brains ; " which would
have led to their restraint, as Eastward Ho did for
the Chapel boys; had not the King's players been
staid and discreet, and begged pardon of His Majesty
on bended knee " for their unwilling error." The
threatened information must have been in the
autumn of 1605.

To 1606 no other play than Macbeth can with
certainty be traced : and the marked change of
metrical style at this epoch points to a period of rest.
In all his subsequent plays, many lines end with
unemphatic words, such as and, if, which, but and
the like, and this change was not introduced gradu
ally but suddenly and decisively. Hence its value
as indisputably separating the Fourth Period plays
from the preceding. On this ground it is pretty
certain that Timon was Shakespeare's next pro
duction ; he only wrote the chief scenes in it, how
ever, and it was finished for the stage by another
hand. At this time also, in my opinion, Shakespeare
began to write Cymbeline, which he afterwards com
pleted himself. This arrangement of his work

58 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

seems natural ; Lear, Macbeth, Cymbeline closing the
series founded on Holinshed, and Timon, Antony,
Coriolanus — the series from Plutarch — succeeding
them. A minuter examination of the question will
be found in a later part of this work. Of other
play-writers' contributions to the Globe in 1606
there is only one — Pericles, as originally produced
by Wilkins, which was ridiculed in The Puritan by
Middleton — acted by the Paul's children of this year.
Wilkins left writing for the King's men, and (1607)
joined the Queen's men at the Curtain. This was
probably rumoured to have been caused by some
quarrel with Shakespeare, for on 6th August 1607,
S. R., The Puritan Widow was published as by
W. S., evidently meaning William Shakespeare.
Of all the instances in which Shakespeare's name
or initials were fraudulently inserted on title-pages,
this play and Sir John Oldcastle were the only two
in which they were prefixed to plays not even acted
by his company. At the Court in the 1606-7
season three Globe plays were presented to the
King of Denmark on the occasion of his visit to
England, and nine others in the usual course.
Antony and Cleopatra may be confidently assigned
to 1607. It was entered for publication S. R. on
2Oth May 1608 with Pericles (no doubt as originally
written by Wilkins), but both plays were stayed ;

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 59

the former as having been on the stage only one
year, the latter to be superseded by the issue in
1609 of the version as altered by Shakespeare. On
22d October The Merry Devil of Edmonton was
entered S. R. for A. Johnson. The entry for
Hunt and Archer on 5th April 1608 is that of
the prose story by Thomas Brewer. The initials
T. B. in this latter entry have misled Mr. Halliwell
and others to assign the authorship of the play to
Tony Brewer. On 26th November Shakespeare's
King Lear was entered S. R. as it was played
before the King on 26th December 1606, " Saint
Stephen's Night at Christmas last." This settles
two important questions ; first, the relation of the
Quarto text to the Folio— the Quarto being the
version played at Court, the Folio that retained by
the players for the public stage ; secondly, the
existence of a custom in the Globe company of
allowing, in cases of altered or revised plays, the
version not required for future stage purposes to
be issued to the public in print. Many instances
of this custom are brought to light in the present
treatise. On October 7, Cyril Tourneur's (?) Re
vengers Tragedy was entered S. R. The date of
production on the stage is uncertain. It had " been
sundry times acted by the King's players." Nor am
I aware of the grounds on which the authorship is

60 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

assigned to Tourneur. It was published anony
mously. On 25th June, Susanna, Shakespeare's
daughter, married John Hall, M.A., physician at
Stratford. There were thirteen performances this
winter at Court by the King's men. In 1608 Shake
speare probably produced Coriolanus. On 2 1st
February Elizabeth Hall was baptized, within eight
months from her parents' marriage. The prospect
of a continuation of his family, though not of his
family name, was some alleviation for Shakespeare
of the loss of his youngest brother Edmund, " a
player," buried at St. Saviour's, South wark, 3ist
December 1607, "with a forenoon knell of the
great bell," cetatis 27. Of Edmund's career in
London we know nothing ; but surely he must
have belonged to the Globe company. His absence
from the actors' lists offers no obstacle to this sup
position ; they are, after that of The Seven Deadly
Sins in 1594, confined to names of shareholders
and principal actors. And if player for the Globe,
why not author ? May he not, for instance, have
written The Yorkshire Tragedy under his brother's
superintendence, and may not this account for its
being published as William Shakespeare's ? All
attempts to assign it to any known author have
egregiously failed. However this may be, and
however poignantly William felt the loss of the

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 61

Benjamin of the family, a severer bereavement
awaited him in the death of his mother, buried at
Stratford Qth September 1608. It has always
been a favourite hypothesis with me that Volumnia
was drawn from her as a model of matronly virtue,
and it is certain that at this date a final change
took place in Shakespeare's manner of writing.
His plays since the accession of James had been,
with scarcely an exception, tragedies ; from this
time they are really, under whatever head they may
have hitherto been classed, tragi-comedies, and all
turn, as I pointed out many years ago, on the re
uniting of separated members of families. The
first of this final group is Marina, the part of
Pericles which replaced Wilkins' work, and which
was written in this winter and hurriedly printed in
1609 as a practical answer to Wilkins' prose ver
sion, published in 1608, in which he claimed the
story as an " infant of his brain." Shakespeare's
version must, I think, be placed after his return
to London from Stratford, where he remained after
his mother's funeral till i6th October, when he
stood godfather for William Walker. The Court
performances this winter were twelve. On 28th
January 1609, Troylus and Cressida was entered
S. R., not for Roberts, whose intended publication in
1603 had been stayed, but for Bonian and Whalley,

62 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

who issued it with a preface stating that it had
never been " staled with the stage." This false
statement was withdrawn in their subsequent re
issue during the same year, but it proves that the
period during which the play had been performed
in 1602 must have been a very short one; such a
statement could not have otherwise been put for
ward with any plausibility. On 2Oth May the
Sonnets were published, with a dedication to their
"only begetter/' Mr. W. H. I think that these
initials designate Sir William Hervey, to whom Lord
Southampton's mother left at her death in November
1607 the greatest part "of her stuff." He was her
third husband, and may have been the original
suggester to Shakespeare, as a friend to Lord
Southampton, that he should write a series of
Sonnets to him recommending marriage in 1594,
when Southampton had not yet become devoted to
" the fair Mrs. Vernon," and was entangled in the
affair of the frail Avisa. In 1609 he was busily
occupied with the Virginian company, and promot
ing voyages for American discovery, an allusion to
which underlies the Dedication " wisheth the well-
wishing adventurer in setting forth," adventurer
being the current phrase for explorer of unknown
regions. On 7th June Shakespeare's cousin,
Thomas Green, then residing at New Place, Strat-

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 63

ford, issued a final precept in his behalf against one
Hornby, who had become bail for John Addenbroke,
in a matter of debt for £6. This litigation had
begun in August 1608 : juries had been summoned
on 2 1st December and 1 5th February, and then
Addenbroke absconded, leaving Hornby to be an
swerable. The plague being prevalent this year,
there were no Christmas performances at Court, and
not many on the public stage. Cymbeline was
Shakespeare's only production. In its present
state it has evidently been subjected to revision and
to alteration for some revival after Shakespeare's
death, when the doggerel in the vision in iv. 4 was
inserted ; originally, no doubt, the ghosts appeared
in dumb show to music. The Globe players
received £30 as a compensation for being restrained
from playing in London during six weeks, i.e.,
during August and September, when the bills of
mortality show the plague to have been at its
height.

In January 1610 the Revels children left the
Blackfriars Theatre, and set up with a new organi
sation under Rossiter at Whitefriars the new pri
vate stage. It appears from the statement of C.
Burbadge, in the 1635 documents discovered by
Mr. Halliwell, that that family then bought up the
remainder of the lease from Evans, and took some

64 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

of the Revels boys, now grown up, to strengthen
the Globe company. Among these were Under
wood and Ostler; but as C. Burbadge also names
Field, who did not join the King's men till 1615 or
1616, his subsequent statement that they set up
men-players, Shakespeare, Hemings, Condell, &c.,
in Blackfriars at that date, is not to be taken as
necessarily exact. The King's men undoubtedly
took possession of Blackfriars for their own per
formances in 1614 or 1615, after the Globe had
been burned and rebuilt ; but there is not a trace
of them until then in connection with this private
house except this ex parte statement of C. Burbadge,
made for a special purpose, in a plea which is
studiously ambiguous. But there is evidence that
other companies acted there. Field's Amends for
Ladies was performed there by the Lady Eliza
beth's company and the Duke of York's (afterwards
Prince Charles'). This performance must have
taken place during a temporary union between the
Prince's men and the Lady Elizabeth's, to which
latter the play and its author were properly attached ;
but that the Duke of York's acted continuously at
Blackfriars from 1610 to 1615, is very probable.
It is not likely that a company under such patronage,
and admitted to Court performances every Christmas,
should have been merely a strolling company, and

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 65

there was no other theatre for them to perform in.
The King's men held the Globe, Prince Henry's
(afterwards the Palgrave's) the Fortune, the Queen's
the Bull and the Curtain, the Queen's Revels'
boys Whitefriars, and Lady Elizabeth's at first
the Swan till 1612, and after its abandonment the
newly renovated Hope in 1614, and then the rebuilt
Cockpit or Phoenix. There is no proof that Shake
speare ever acted at Blackfriars ; there is strong
presumption to the contrary as to his supposed
shares in that theatre : it was the " private inheri
tance " of the Burbadges, and that the King's men
had shares in it at this time rests on the evidence
of forged documents and mischievously fertile imagi
nations, to which the purchase of twenty acres of
land at Stratford by Shakespeare from the Combes
in June seems to require access of capital to make
this new acquisition feasible. Winter's Tale was
certainly produced early this year, before Jonson's
Alchemist, which was acted and entered S. R.,
October 3, but was, however, " stayed " for the
usual reasons, and did not get published till 1612.
The Address to the Reader (no doubt dating 1610)
contains one of Jonson's numerous allusions to the
" dance of antics " in Winter's Tale. Jonson, who
had produced Epicene for the Chapel children in
1609, had returned to the King's men when the

66 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

boys left Blackfriars. Shakespeare's last play this
year, and final finished contribution to the stage, was
The Tempest, produced about November, after the
news that the ships of Sir T. Gates at the Ber
mudas had not been destroyed. This play as we
have it has unfortunately been abridged for Court
performances, probably by Beaumont in 1612 or
1613, to whom the insertion of the Masque may
confidently be attributed. There were fifteen
winter performances at Court in 1610-11.

The loss of Shakespeare was repaired as well
as circumstances would permit by the accession of
Beaumont and Fletcher to the King's company in
1611. In that year they produced their master
pieces Philaster, a King and no King and The Maid's
Tragedy: in 1612 The Woman1 s Prize (by Fletcher
alone), the play of Cardenas (probably the original
form of Love's Pilgrimage), and The Captain. Jon-
son contributed Catiline in 1611, and Webster The
Duchess of Malfi in 1612. The Second Maideris
Tragedy (by the author of The Revenger's Tragedy,
I think) was also produced in 1611. At Court the
unusual number of twenty-two plays was acted in
the 1611 winter and twenty-eight in 1612. These
must have included nearly every play they pos
sessed ; and the fact that the whole, or nearly so,
of Shakespeare's plays were revived at Court in

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 67

these two years makes his retirement in 1610 to
my mind nearly a certainty, and accounts for the
not very felicitous praise of his " copious industry "
by Webster in the Dedication of his White Devil in
1612. Webster couples the retired Shakespeare
with Dekker and Heywood : but Jonson's works
he speaks of as " laboured and understanding/'
Beaumont's and Fletcher's as " no less worthy
composures." This higher praise is given to the
writers who like himself were then contributing to
the Globe repertory. He mentions no one else but
Chapman of " full and heightened style." Are we
to attribute to this mention of him the tradition
that Chapman wrote The Second Maiden's Tragedy ?
On nth September 1611 Shakespeare's name occurs
" in the margin, as if a later insertion " (says Mr.
Halliwell) of a list of Stratford donors " towards
the charge of prosecuting the bill in Parliament for
the better repair of the highways." In 1612 Lane,
Greene, and Shakespeare filed a bill before Lord
Ellesmere complaining that some of the lessees of
the Stratford tithes refused to contribute their
proper shares of a reserved rent. It appears from
this document that Shakespeare's income from this
source was £60. In the same year Heywood, in
his Apology for Actors, complained of W. Jaggard's
having printed in The Passionate Pilgrim, 3d

68 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

edition, two love epistles taken from his Troia
Britanmca, as by W. Shakespeare, "which might
put the world in opinion I might steal them from
him ; " he adds that he knows the author was much
offended for Jaggard's presuming to make bold with
his name. The name was in consequence with
drawn altogether from the title-page. Notwith
standing this, many modern editors print The
Passionate Pilgrim as Shakespeare's. On 4th
February 1613 Richard Shakespeare was buried
at Stratford ; whether the Gilbert Shakespeare,
" adolescens," who was buried 3d February 1612,
was also a brother of William's, is doubtful, but
likely. On loth March 1613 Shakespeare bought
of Henry Walker a house and yard near Black-
friars Theatre for £140, of which £60 remained
on mortgage (one of the trustees being in 1618
John Heming, Shakespeare's fellow-actor) : he leased
the house to John Robinson for ten years. On
2Qth June the Globe was burned down. It caught
fire during the performance of All is True (Henry
VIII.) This was not the play as we have it —
which is a later version by Massinger and Fletcher,
written for the Blackfriars Theatre, and containing
only three scenes that can be attributed to Shake
speare — but a play in which there was a fool's part.
Wotton describes it as " the play of Henry VIII."

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 69

but Lorkin says it was a new play called All is True,
representing some principal pieces of Henry VIII.
Whether new play or not it was probably by Shake
speare, written c. 1609, and portions of it remain
imbedded in that now extant by Fletcher and Mas-
singer c. 1617, the original MS. having perished
in the fire. Just at the same time one Lane had
been maligning Mrs. Hall, Shakespeare's daughter,
in connection with Ralph Smith. Lane was sum
moned before the Ecclesiastical Court at Worcester
on 1 5th July and excommunicated on the 27th.
There were only seven plays performed at Court
by the King's men in the winter 1613-14, all
their principal writers — Fletcher, Beaumont, Jonson,
Webster — having left them after the Globe fire.
Surely this is not consistent with the statement of
C. Burbadge that they had taken the Blackfriars
building to their own use. No new play can be
tfaced to them till 1615, when the Globe had been*
rebuilt, and the Prince Charles' men had gone to the
Curtain. Then they certainly did take the Black-
friars to themselves, and with an excellent staff of
writers — Jonson, Fletcher, Massingef, and Field —
they occupied it as well as the new Globe. A
letter of John Chamberlain's to Sir Dudley Carleton,
5th January 1615, says of the stage in general : " Of

* It had been reopened in June 1614.

70 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

five new plays there is not one that pleases, and
therefore they are driven to furbish over their old."
Yet Jonson's Bartholomew Fair was one of these
1614 plays acted at Court. I suspect that Lady
Elizabeth's players were not so well liked as the
King's, and that Shakespeare and Beaumont were
greatly missed. Fletcher and Massinger were not
yet able to replace them even at Court.

In July 1614 John Combe left a legacy of £$ to
Shakespeare ; this fact disposes of the silly story
of Shakespeare having satirised him in infantile
doggerel. In the autumn William Combe, the squire
of Wilcombe, originated a proposal to enclose com
mon fields in the neighbourhood ; he was supported
by Shakespeare, who had been guaranteed against
prospective loss by Replingham, Combe's agent.
The corporation, through his cousin Greene, the
town-clerk, remonstrated with him in November
when he was in London, and again in December
wrote to him representing the inconveniences and
loss that would be caused. The matter dragged on
to September 1615, and then fell through. This is
the last notice of Shakespeare's action in any public
matter. On loth February 1616 his daughter
Judith was married to Thomas Quiney, vintner,
four years her junior, without licence, whence a fine
and threat of excommunication at the Worcester

HIS PUBLIC CAREER. 71

Ecclesiastical Court : and on 2$th April Shake
speare was buried. His will had been executed
on 25th March. It was not regularly engrossed,
but a corrected draft, originally prepared for copy
ing and completion on 25th January, but evidently
neglected until the sudden emergency of Shake
speare's illness. It appears from this document
that Judith's marriage portion was to have been
£100, on condition of her husband's settling on her
£150 in land; if this condition was fulfilled within
three years he was left £150 to his own use, if not it
was strictly settled on her and her children. This
£150 is independent of £100 in discharge of her
marriage portion, and £50 conditional on her sur
rendering her interest in the Rowington manor to
Susanna Hall. To Joan Hart, his sister, whose
husband had been buried on 1 7th April, was left
wearing apparel, £20, a life-interest in Henley
Street, and £5 each to her sons. To Susanna Hall
he left all his real estate settled in tail male, with
the usual remainders over. To Elizabeth Hall all
his plate except the broad silver-gilt bowl, which
went to Judith Quiney. To his fellows, Hemings,
Burbadge, and Condell, £l, 6s. 8d. each for rings ;
the usual legacies to the executors, poor, &c. ; and
to his wife his second best bed. Of course she
was fully provided for by freebench in the Rowing-

72 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

ton copyhold; and dower on the rest of the property ;
nevertheless, it is strange that she does not appear
as executrix, that she had no life-interest left her
in house or furniture, and that in the draft of the
will, as made in January, her name does not
appear to have been mentioned at all. It is only
in the subsequent interlineations that her bequest
appears.

( 73 )

SECTION II.

THE PERSONAL CONNECTIONS OF SHAKESPEARE WITH
OTHER POETS.

ONE of the objects of the present treatise is to bring
into clearer light the relations of Shakespeare with
contemporary dramatists. Strangely enough this
has scarcely been attempted in earlier biographies.
His dealings in malt have been carefully chronicled :
his connections with poets have been slurred over.
It will be useful, therefore, to gather up the scattered
notices of personal contact between him and his
fellows in dramatic production. Mere allusions
to his works, whether complimentary or otherwise,
will not come under this category. Such will be
found collected, and well collected, in Dr. Ingleby's
Century of Praise; but they consist almost entirely
of slight references to his published works, and
have no bearing of importance on his career. Nor,
indeed, have we any extended material of any kind
to aid us in this investigation ; one source of infor-

74 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

mation, which is abundant for most of his contem
poraries, being in his case entirely absent. Neither
as addressed to him by others, nor by him to others,
do any commendatory verses exist in connection
with any of his or other men's works published in
his lifetime — a notable fact, in whatever way it may
be explained. Nor can he be traced in any per
sonal contact beyond a very limited circle, although
the fanciful might-have-beens so largely indulged
in by his biographers might at first lead us to an
opposite conclusion.

With John Lyly, the founder of English Comedy,
he seems to have had no personal intercourse,
although the reproduction by him of many of Lyly's
puns and conceits, and some few of his dramatic
situations, distinctly prove that he had carefully
examined his published plays. Nor does the
solitary reference to Shakespeare in Greene's Groats-
worth of Wit, however it may display strong personal
feeling, lead us to suppose that there had been any
personal relations between these dramatists ; in fact,
the very wording of the passage properly under
stood distinctly disproves the existence of such
relations. Of all the dramatists who had preceded
him on the London stage the only two with whom
he can be even conjecturally brought in personal
contact before the opening of the Rose Theatre in

HIS PERSONAL CONNECTIONS. 75

1592 are Robert Wilson and George Peele. It is
unlikely that he should have begun his career as
a novice and journeyman independent of tutor or
coadjutor, and a minute examination of the careers
of these two dramatists leads me to infer that
they were connected with the same company as
Shakespeare in 1590-1. In any case, they were
his immediate models in his early work in several
respects. It is from Wilson that his liking for
doggerel rhymes and alternately rhyming stanzas
was derived : it is from Peele that his love tragedy
of Romeo and Juliet — his only early tragedy —
derived, in its earliest form, as acted in 1591, what
ever in it was not Shakespeare's own. Wilson
was probably his tutor or coadjutor in Comedy and
Peele in Tragedy. But this is after all conjecture ;
on the other hand, it is certain that in 1592-3 a
greater than Peele or Wilson was writing for the
same company as Shakespeare, and necessarily in
close connection with him. For Marlowe he cer
tainly had a sincere regard : from his poem of Hero
and Leander Shakespeare makes the only direct
quotation to be found in his plays ; on his historical
plays Shakespeare, after his friend's decease, bestowed
in addition, revision, and completion, a greater
amount of minute work than on his own ; and the
earlier of his own histories were distinctly built on

76 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

lines similar to those of Edward II. and Edward HI.
The relation of Shakespeare's Histories to Marlowe's
is far more intimate than that of his Comedies or
of Romeo to any predecessor's productions. I can
not find a trace of direct connection between Shake
speare and any other poet than these mentioned,
during the life of Lord Strange. His connection
with Lord Southampton seems to have been more
intimate than any with his fellow-poets. In the
Sonnets addressed to him there is mention of other
pens who have dedicated poems to his lordship, and
whom Shakespeare for poetical purposes professes
to regard as dangerous rivals. The only persons
known to have dedicated anything to Southampton
are Nash and Markham, although George Peele
had written a high eulogy of him in his Honour of
the Garter in 1593. Markham's dedication is one
of four prefixed to his poem on The Tragedy of Sir
Richard Grenvile (S. R. 9th September 1595) ; (i.)
to Charles Lord Montjoy (in prose) ; (2.) to Robert
Earl of Sussex (Sonnet) ; (3.) to the Earl of
Southampton (Sonnet) ; (4.) to Sir Edward Wing-
field (Sonnet). I am not aware of any previous
attempt to identify Markham with the rival alluded
to in the Sonnets of Shakespeare, and yet there are
many coincidences of language which would lead
to this conclusion. Take Sonnet 78, for instance.

HIS PERSONAL CONNECTIONS. 77

" Thine eyes . . . have added feathers to the
learned's wing and given grace a double majesty."
In Markham we find in I, " hath given wings to
my youngling Muse ; " and in 3, " whose eyes doth
crown the most victorious pen " (cf. in I, " that
thine eyes may lighten," &c.) ; and in 4, the double
majesty of the grace, " vouchsafe to grace my work
and me, Gracing the soul beloved of heaven and
thee." I do not find in Markham the "affable
familiar ghost " of Sonnet 86, but this and other
allusions may have referred to his Thyrsi's and
Daphne (S. R. 23d April 1593, five days after the
entry of Venus and Adonis) which is now unfor
tunately lost ; and there is something like it in the
Grenvile Tragedy, in which Markham calls on
Grenvile's soul to "sit on his hand" while he
writes, which the ghost apparently does until it is
dismissed to its " rest" at the end of the poem.
Markham was an exceedingly learned man and the
" proud full sail of his great verse " would well
apply to his stilted and conceited effusion. He does
not in it allude to Southampton's beauty, though he
may have done so in his Thyrsis, but he calls him
" Bright lamp of virtue" with which compare Sonnet
79 : " He lends thee virtue, and he stole that word
from thy behaviour." On the whole I incline to
regard Markham as the rival poet of Shakespeare's

78 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Sonnets. As to Nash, his supposed satirical
allusions to Shakespeare, as set forth by the fertile
fancy of Mr. Simpson, have no more real existence
than the allusions discovered by other like imagina
tions in the writings of Spenser. His only notice
of Shakespeare's writings is the well-known mention
of the representation of Talbot on the stage, and that
is highly complimentary. He may be included under
the " every alien pen " of Sonnet 78, but he is not
(as I once thought he was) the rival poet alluded
to. It may be of interest in connection with this
matter to note that in The Dumb Knight, in which
Markham certainly wrote i. 2, ii. I, iii. 4, and iv. 2,
Venus and Adonis is satirised as a lascivious poem.
Of intercourse with other dramatists while a
member of the Chamberlain's company, the first
instance is that with Lodge and Drayton. That
the connection with Drayton terminated in a mis
understanding is clear from the excision of the
favourable notice of Shakespeare's Lucrece from his
Matilda, and from Drayton's taking the chief part in
writing Sir John Oldcastle, the object of which was
to keep alive the ill-feeling produced by the unfor
tunate adoption of that name from the old play of
Henry V. for the character afterwards called Sir
John Falstaff. This connection with Drayton ended
in 1597, that with Lodge in 1599. If I am right

HIS PERSONAL CONNECTIONS. 79

in my attribution of part authorship to Lodge in
Henry VI. and The Taming of the Shrew in its
original form, Shakespeare revised and altered his
plays, but not till after Lodge's retirement from
connection with the Chamberlain's company. Soon
after this, in 1601, he founded his Hamlet on Kyd's,
but with Kyd himself I have not been able to find
that he was at any time personally connected.
Nevertheless, as regards mere outward form, Kyd
was the chief model for the great tragedies of
Hamlet, Lear, &c. Of course, as regards all poetic
essentials, his influence on Shakespeare cannot for
a moment be compared to Marlowe's.

With Marston, Chapman, and Dekker, Shake
speare's relations were ephemeral, in connection
with the great stage quarrel of 1599-1601, and in
no respect personal, unless we suppose that he had
a hand in hiring Dekker to oppose Jonson. My
own belief is that he was away in Scotland when
Satiromastix was produced, and that the division of
the company left in London did this without his
knowledge. With Jonson his relations were evi
dently personal and of very varied nature. He
probably introduced him to the Chamberlain's com
pany in 1598; he certainly acted in his play of
Every Man in his Humour : he did not act in Every
Man out of his Humour — and then Jonson joined the

80 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Chapel children, and entered on his three years'
struggle with Marston, Dekker, &c. In 1601 Shake
speare satirised these children in Hamlet, and about
the same time administered the " purge " to Jonson
mentioned in The Return from Parnassus : at the
end of the same year, he, Jonson, Chapman, and
Marston were contributors to Chester's Love's
Martyr. In 1603 Jonson, who had again joined the
Chamberlain's men, wrote Sejanus in conjunction
with some one (with Shakespeare in my opinion),
and got into trouble for it. Shakespeare certainly
acted in this play, and must at that time have been
on good terms with Jonson. All the allusions to
Shakespeare's Henry V., &c., in the Prologue at the
revival of Every Man in his Humour in 1601 by the
Chapel children, and the purge administered to Jon
son, had been forgiven and forgotten on both sides.
But in 1605 Jonson wrote Volpone, in which Shake
speare did not act, and which gave offence at Court :
and this caused a new disagreement between him
and the King's men (formerly the Chamberlain's).
He left them, and with Chapman and Marston wrote
Eastward Ho, in which Hamlet is ridiculed, and for
allusions to Scotland in which, similar to those in
Volpone, the authors were imprisoned. The King's
men retaliated with the additions to Mucedorus, of
which more elsewhere, and Jonson did not join them

HIS PERSONAL CONNECTIONS. 81

again for years. He wrote for the Chapel children
in 1609, and not till 1610, at the end of the year,
when Shakespeare's dramatic career was just expir
ing, did he produce The Alchemist for them at the
Globe. It is to be hoped that these two great drama
tists were not at open enmity during the later part
of Shakespeare's life ; but all record of any real
friendship between them ends in 1603, and little
value is to be attributed either to the vague tradi
tions of Jonson's visiting him at Stratford, or to
the abundant praise lavished on him by Jonson in
commendatory verses after his death. Much more
important for ascertaining the real relations existing
between them are the allusions to The Tempest and
Winter's Tale so abundantly scattered through all
Jonson's plays from 1609 to 1616, while Shake
speare was yet alive.

Of other dramatists who were connected with
Shakespeare in King James's time I know only of
Tourneur and Wilkins — the former simply as an
author writing for Shakespeare's company, the
latter as the playwright who wrote Pericles in its
original form : the history of the production of this
play has already been given.

As to Beaumont, Fletcher, Webster, &c., who after
1610 wrote for the King's men, and the numerous
contemporaries who wrote for other companies, no

82 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

trace of any intercourse with Shakespeare, personal
or otherwise, remains to us, though abundant guesses
and hypotheses utterly foundationless* will be found
in the voluminous Shakespearian literature already
existing. The truth appears to be that Shake
speare at no time sought for a large circle of
acquaintance, and that his position as almost sole
provider of plays for his company relieved him of
that miscellaneous comradeship which was the bane
of Dekker, Heywood, and many other gifted writers
of the time. Of any one of these a far larger
personal connection can be proved than I believe
ever existed in the case of Shakespeare : and to
this we no doubt are greatly indebted for the depth
and roundness of those great plays, which could
never have been conceived without much solitude,
much suffering, and much concentration.

* The reader should especially beware of a most absurd identifi
cation of Shakespeare with the Crispinus of Jonson's Poetaster,
recently put forth by Mr. J. Feis in his Shakspere and Montaigne.
It is a pity that an essay, of which the first four chapters are so
valuable, should be disfigured by the palpable chronological and
other blunders in the latter portions of the volume.

83

SECTION III.

ANNALS ON WHICH THE PRECEDING SECTIONS
ARE FOUNDED.

Until April 1564.

On 26th April 1564 was baptized William, son of
John Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon and Mary
Arden, at that time an only child, two girls born
previously having died in their infancy. John
Shakespeare was son of Richard Shakespeare of
Snitterfield, where his brother Henry also resided :
he was a glover, who speculated in wool, corn, &c.
He lived in Henley Street, Stratford, as early as
29th April 1552, having left his father about 1550,
and in October 1556 purchased two small estates
in that town — one that is now shown as the birth
place, the other in Greenhill Street. In 1557 he
married Mary Arden, whose father, Robert, a yeo
man, had contracted a second marriage with Agnes
Hill, widow, and in the settlement then made had
reserved to Mary the reversion to estates at Wilme-

84 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

cote and Snitterfield. Some part of this land was
occupied by Richard Shakespeare's grandfather.
Mary Arden also received under her father's will,
dated 24th November 1556, a considerable sum in
money, and the fee-simple of Asbies at Wilme-
cote, a house with sixty acres of land. In 1557
John was a burgess, a member of the corporation,
and by choice of the Court Leet ale-taster to the
borough, sworn to look to the assize and good
ness of bread, ale, or beer. In September 1558
he was one of the four constables under the rules
of the Court Leet. On 6th October 1559 he
was again chosen constable and one of the four
affeerors for determining fines under the borough
bye-laws. In 1561 he was again chosen affeeror,
and one of the borough chamberlains, which office
he held till the end of 1563.

1564.

In July the plague broke out in Stratford, and
continued to December. There died 238 in that
half-year, no Shakespeares among them. John
Shakespeare had had an early lesson in sanita
tion by way of a fine of I2d. in April 1552 for
having a muck heap in front of his door in Henley
Street, within a stone's-throw of one of the public

ANNALS. 85

stores of filth. He now contributed fairly to
relieve the poor and plague-stricken ; about I2d.
per month.

1565-

In March John Shakespeare with his former
colleague made up the chamberlain's accounts from
September 1563 to 1564. Neither of them could
sign their names.

1566.

In February he again made up these accounts,
and was paid £3, 2s. 7d. " for a rest of old debt "
by the corporation. On 1 3th October his son Gilbert
was baptized.

1567-

In September, Ralph Perrot, brewer, John Shake
speare, and Ralph Cawdrey, butcher, were nomi
nated for the office of High Bailiff or Mayor.
Cawdrey was elected. For the first time the
name appears as " Mr." John Shakespeare.

1568.

On 4th September " Mr. John Shaky sper " was
chosen High Bailiff. He was succeeded the next
year by Robert Salisbury.

86 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1569-

On 1 5th April John Shakespeare's third daughter
(named Joan after her deceased elder sister) was
baptized.

1571-

On 28th September John Shakespeare's fourth
daughter Anne was baptized. William was now
seven, then the usual age for the commencement of
grammar-school education, the use of the Absey
book and horn-book having been acquired at
home. Lily's Accidence and the Sententice Pueriles
were the usual text-books for beginners in Latin.
Shakespeare had some knowledge of Latin, and
a little French ; all beyond this is very proble
matical.

1573.

On nth March, Richard, John Shakespeare's third
son, was baptized.

1575-

John Shakespeare bought two houses in Strat
ford. .

1578.

In January John Shakespeare paid only the
amount of borough taxes paid by other aldermen.

ANNALS. 87

William was then fourteen, the usual age for com
mencing apprenticeship. There is a tradition given
by Aubrey that he was apprenticed to a butcher.
I believe this to be a myth, originating in the epithet
" kill-cow," often applied to tragic actors. Some
writers still think that the tradition may be relied
on. Another story traced to the parish clerk of
1693 is tnat ne followed his father's profession.
May be so ; may not be.

I579-

In Easter Term Asbies was mortgaged to Edmund
Lambert for £40, to revert if repayment be made
before Michaelmas 1580.

On 4th July Anne Shakespeare was buried ; in
the chamberlain's accounts occurs this item : " For
the bell and pall for Mr. Shaxper's daughter, 8d.,"
the highest fee in the list.

On 1 5th October John Shakespeare and his
wife convey their interest in Snitterfield to Robert
Webbe. Agnes Arden's will is dated in this
year.

1580.

On 3d May, Edmund, son of John Shakespeare,
was baptized.

On or before 2Qth September, the money in dis-

88 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

charge of the Asbies mortgage was tendered and
refused unless other moneys due were also paid.

1581.

On I Qth January the goods of Agnes Arden,
deceased, were appraised.

On 1st September Richard Hathaway of Shottery
made his will.

1582.

On 28th November the marriage bond between
William Shagspere and Anne Hathway was
given, under condition that neither party had been
precontracted to another person, and that the said
William Shagspere should not proceed to so
lemnization with the said Anne Hathway with
out consent of her friends. They were to be
married with one asking of the banns. The
bondsmen were Fulk Sandells and John Richard
son, — the seal is R. H., which may be Richard
Hathaway's.

1583-

On May 26th Susanna their daughter was
baptized. It is assumed that a precontract existed
between the parents which, according to the cus-

ANNALS. 89

torn of the time, " was not legally recognised, but
it invalidated a subsequent union of either of the
parties with any one else " (Halliwell, Outlines, p. 45).
The reader must form his own opinion. Taking
into consideration the low morality of the time in
such matters, the fact that Anne Hathaway was
twenty-six, and Shakespeare eighteen in 1582, the
practice still not unknown in rural districts of co
habitation under conditional promise of marriage,
should the probable birth of a child make it neces
sary or prudent, the fact that from 1587 to 1597
we have no evidence that Shakespeare even saw
his wife, and the palpable indications in the Sonnets
that during this interval he was intriguing with
another woman — for my own part I cannot help
adopting De Quincey's view that he was entrapped
into some such conditional promise by this lady
and kept his promise honourably. Compare on
the precontract question the plays of The Miseries
of Enforced Marriage by Wilkins, which is founded
on the contemporary history of the same Calverley
who is the murderer in The Yorkshire Tragedy,
with Shakespeare's own views in 1604 in Measure
for Measure; his opinions in Twelfth Night, ii. 4
(early part, c. 1592), and Midsummer Night's
Dream, i. I, on wives that are older than their hus
bands ^ and, by way of showing that his plays do

90 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

discover sometimes his personal feelings, Valen
tine's resignation of Silvia in The Two Gentlemen
of Verona, with the story involved in the Sonnets
of Shakespeare's own transfer of his illicit love.

1585-

February 2. Hamnet and Judith, Shakspeare's
twin children, were baptized at Stratford-on-Avon.
By April 26th he had certainly attained his majority,
and his apprenticeship had probably expired.

1585-7-

Three or four years after his union with Anne
Hathaway, he had, says Rowe, " by a misfortune
common enough to young fellows, fallen into ill
company, and, amongst them, some, that made a
frequent practice of deer stealing, engaged him
with them more than once in robbing a park, that
belonged to Sir Thomas Lucy of Charlecote, near
Stratford ; for this he was prosecuted by that
gentleman, as he thought, somewhat too severely,
and in order to revenge that ill usage made a
ballad upon him, and though this, probably the
first essay of his poetry, be lost, yet it is said to
have been so very bitter that it redoubled the
prosecution against him to that degree that he

ANNALS. 91

was obliged to leave his business and family in
Warwickshire for some time, and shelter himself in
London." Whether this tradition be well founded
or no, we are compelled by subsequent events to
place the date of Shakespeare's leaving Stratford
in or about 1587; and whether there be any truth
in the story traced to Davenant or not, that he
held horses at the play-house door, while their
owners were witnessing performances inside, it is
certain that he was very soon connected with the
stage, first as actor, then as dramatic writer. It
becomes therefore of importance to ascertain if
possible the specific company with which he ori
ginally joined.

In the latter part of 1585 there were two regular
theatres existing in London, the Theater and the
Curtain. It clearly appears from a report by
Recorder Fleetwood preserved in the Lansdown
MSS. that at Whitsuntide 1584 these were
occupied by the Queen's players and those of
Lord Arundel. It is not clear that a third com
pany, that of Lord Hunsdon, acted at the Theater :
although Mr. J. O. H. Phillipps (whom I most
usually refer to under his former and better known
name of Halliwell) assures us that it is so. It
is true that the "owner of the Theater," whom
he takes to be a temporary occupier of that

92 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

building, but whom I regard as the ground land
lord, Giles Alley n, is called a servant of Lord Huns-
don's, and that a company of actors, called Lord
Hunsdon's men, acted at Court 27th December
1582; but it does not follow that these men were
occupiers of the Theater. In fact the only com
panies anyhow known to us as in London in 1585
are the two already mentioned. It is by no means
likely a priori, nor would it agree with the passages
hereafter to be referred to in the writings of Greene
and Nash, that Shakespeare should immediately on
his appearance in London obtain employment in
either. But there was a third company not
noticed in Collier's Annals of the Stage, into which
he may easily have obtained admittance. When
the Queen's company was formed in 8th March
1582-3, by the selection of twelve players from the
companies of the two Dudleys, Earls of Leicester
and Warwick, there must have been sufficient men
left unemployed to form another company. These
were probably still retained by the Earl of Leices
ter : for in a letter from Sir Philip Sidney, dated
Utrecht, 24th March 1575-6, mention is made of
"Will, the Earl of Leicester's jesting player,"
who had gone with the Earl to the Netherlands
in December 1575. Thomas Heywood, in his
Apology for Actors, 1612, tells us that "The

ANNALS. 93

King of Denmark, father to him that now reigneth,
entertained into his service a company of English
comedians, commended unto him by the honour
able Earl of Leicester." This King of Denmark,
Frederick II., died in 1588, and the exact date
of the transaction is fixed by documents dated
October 1586, in which we find that five of these
actors had been transferred from the service of
Frederick II. of Denmark to that of Christian I.,
Duke of Saxony. I am far from wishing to adopt
the conjecture of Mr. Bruce that " jesting Will"
was Shakespeare ; but when among the names of
these five actors — Thomas King, Thomas Stephen,
George Bryan, Thomas Pope, Robert Persie — we
find two, Pope and Bryan, that are identical with
those of two actors in the very first list extant
of the first company with which we can positively
connect Shakespeare as an actor ; when we find
this same company acting at Stratford in 1587,
at the very time that Shakespeare's disappearance
from all known connection with that town for nine
years commences ; when we find among a list of
plays that had been acted by the English in
Germany Hester and Ahasuerus, Titus Andronicus
[and Vespasian], both of which we shall trace to
Shakespeare's company ; when we also find a
version of the Corambis Hamlet existing early in

94 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

the same country — then I think we are justified in
saying that there is great likelihood of this com
pany having been the one in which Shakespeare
found his first employment. If so, he accompanied
it in all its fortunes, and never (as we shall see)
forsook it for another.

1586.

Meanwhile in London the plague had prevailed
to such an extent that the theatres were shut up
during 1586. It was not then during this year
that Shakespeare held horses at stage-doors, or
obtained employment in London theatres. But at
the end of the year Lord Leicester's players re
turned to England, and in January 1586-87 are
mentioned together with the Queen's, the Admiral's,
and the Earl of Oxford's, in a letter to Walsingham
from a spy of his, which is preserved in the Har-
leian MSS.

1587.

This same company, the Earl of Leicester's men,
visited Stratford- on- A von in 1587. I have not
been able to trace their previous presence there
since 1576, although other companies paid frequent
visits to this town. It is singular that in this year,

ANNALS. 95

the only one in which this company visited Strat
ford during the twelve years intervening between
the birth and death of Hamnet Shakespeare, we
find also the only record of the poet's presence in
the place of his nativity. I give this in the words
of Mr. Halliwell. "In 1578 his parents had
borrowed the sum of £40 on the security of his
mother's estate of Asbies, from their connexion,
Edmund Lambert of Barton-on-the-Heath. The
loan remaining unpaid, and the mortgage dying in
March 1587, his son and heir John was naturally
desirous of having the matter settled. John Shake
speare being at that time in prison for debt, and
obviously unable to furnish the money, it was
arranged shortly afterwards that Lambert should,
on cancelling the mortgage and paying also the sum
of £20, receive from the Shakespeares an absolute
title to the estate. His offer would perhaps not
have been made had it not been ascertained that
the eldest son William had a contingent interest,
derived no doubt from a settlement, and that his
assent was essential to the security of a convey
ance. The proposed arrangement was not com
pleted, but " the poet's sanction to it is recorded.
I believe that immediately after this, in 1587,
Shakespeare left Stratford either with or in order
to join Lord Leicester's company.

96 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1588.

The Earl of Leicester died on 4th September
1588. Previously to this date the company of
players acting under his patronage had played in
London, probably at the Cross-Keys in Bishopsgate
Street, and more frequently had travelled in the
country. At the death of Dudley, they had of
course to seek for a new patron, and no doubt
found one in Ferdinando, Lord Strange, whose com
pany (containing as we shall see some of the actors
already known as Leicester's men) are first trace
able in 1589. An earlier company bearing the title
of Lord Strange's men, c. 1582, seem to have been
merely acrobats or posture-mongers. But before
entering on the history of this company under its
new name, of which we know Shakespeare to have
been a member, we must note some particulars re
garding other dramatists, especially Marlowe, Greene,
and Nash, which indirectly concern Shakespeare, and
have hitherto been wrongly interpreted.

In 1587, when the Admiral's men re-opened
after the plague, they produced, in what succession
we need not here determine, Greene's Orlando and
Alphonsus of Arragon, Peek's Battle, of Alcazar,
and Marlowe's Tamberlaine. Those plays are enume
rated in Peek's Farewell, 1589, as —

ANNALS. 97

" Mahomet's pow, and mighty Tamberlaine,
King Charlemagne, Tom Stukeley, and the rest."

" Mahomet's pow " is the head of Mahomet in Alphon-
sus; King Charlemagne was probably a character in
the complete play of Orlando, of which only a muti
lated copy has come down to us ; Tom Stukeley
is the hero of The Battle of Alcazar ; and " the rest "
most likely indicate Lodge's Marius and Sylla and
Marlowe's Faustus. Greene and Peele wrote no
more for this company, but in 1587 removed to the
Queen's men, who had been travelling in the coun
try. On 29th March 1588 Greene's Perimedes the
Blacksmith was entered on the Stationers' Registers.
In the introduction Greene attacks Marlowe and
Lodge, who had remained with the Admiral's men,
in a passage worth quoting : " I keep my old course
still to palter up something in prose, using mine
old posy still, omne tulit punctum; although lately
two gentlemen poets made two madmen of Rome
beat it out of their paper bucklers, and had it in
derision, for that I could not make my verses jet
upon the stage in tragical buskins, every word fill
ing the mouth like the fa-burden of Bow-bell, daring
God out of heaven with that atheist Tamberlaine or
blaspheming with the mad priest of the sun. But
let me rather openly pocket up the ass at Diogenes'

98 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

hand than wantonly set out such impious instances
of intolerable poetry. Such mad and scoffing poets
that have poetical spirits as bred of Merlin's race,
if there be any in England that set the end of
scholarism in an English blank verse, I think
either it is the humour of a novice that tickles
them with self-love, or too much frequenting the
hot-house (to use the German proverb) hath sweat
out all the greatest part of their wits." For the
fuller understanding of this satire it may be noted
that no " priest of the sun " is known in an early
play except in The Looking-glass for London and
England by Lodge and Greene, which is certainly
of later date than Perimedes, yet may indicate
Lodge's liking for that character; that Diogenes is
the name assumed by Lodge in his Catharos, 1591,
and that Marlowe's name was written Merlin as
often as Marlowe. There can be no doubt as to
the persons aimed at, nor of the effect of the satire,
for both of them left off writing for the Admiral's
men ; and Marlowe during the next two years pro
duced The Jew of Malta, which can be traced to the
Queen's company, and together with Greene, Lodge,
and Peele produced the plays of The Troublesome
Reign of King fohn, and The First Part of York
and Lancaster on which 2 Henry VI. is founded.
The internal evidence for the authorship of these

ANNALS. 99

last-mentioned plays is very strong : they were,
however, published anonymously.

1589-

Before the entry of Greene's Menaphon on the
Stationers' Registers on 23d August 1589, Hamlet
and The Taming of a Shrew must have been repre
sented by Pembroke's men, and Marlowe must have
left the Queen's company. As Menaphon is acces
sible in Professor Arber's reprint to the general
reader, it will be sufficient to refer to it here with
out quoting passages in full. That Greene refers
so satirically to Marlowe as to prevent our supposing
that at this date they could be writing jointly for
the same theatre, is clear from a hitherto unnoticed
passage in p. 54 : " Whosoever descanted of that
love told you a Canterbury tale ; some prophetical
fullmouth, that, as he were a Cobler's eldest son,
would by the last tell where another's shoe wrings."
Marlowe or Merlin was a shoemaker's son of Can
terbury. That Doron in the story is meant for the
author of The Taming of a Shrew was shown by Mr.
R. Simpson by comparing Boron's speech in p. 74 :
" White as the hairs that grow on Father Boreas'
chin," and the passage in Nash's introduction, p. 5,
about mechanical mates, servile imitators of vain-

ioo LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

glorious tragedians, who think themselves " more
than initiated in poet's immortality if they but once
get Boreas by the beard," with the words of the
play itself : " whiter than icy hair that grows on
Boreas' chin." Mr. Simpson was, however, entirely
wrong in identifying Doron with Shakespeare, and
did not notice that Doron's entire speech parodies
one of Menaphon's in p. 31, just as The Taming of
a Shrew parodies Marlowe's plays, or " the me
chanical mates " alluded to by Nash imitate the
" idiot art-masters " in the " swelling bombast of
a bragging blank verse," or the " spacious volu
bility of a drumming decasyllabon." The name
Menaphon is taken from Marlowe's Tamberlaine. In
these passages Greene and Nash satirise Kyd, then
writing for Pembroke's company. In another para
graph, p. 9, Nash speaks of "a sort of shifting
companions" that " leave the trade of Noverint
whereto they were born," who get their aphorisms
from translations of Seneca and can " afford you
whole Hamlets of tragical speeches." This passage
is familiar to all students of Shakespeare ; and yet
no one has, I think, pointed out that Nash identi
fies these " famished followers " of Seneca with the
" Kidde in ^Esop, who, enamoured with the Fox's
newfangles, forsook all hopes of life to leap into a
new occupation." This pun in a tractate contain-

ANNALS. 101

ing similar allusions to the names Greene, Lyly, and
Merlin is equivalent to a direct attribution of the
authorship of Hamlet as produced in 1589 to Kyd,
and is also a refutation of those who have seen
in the whole passage an allusion to Shakespeare.

Very shortly after Greene's Menaphon Nash
issued his Anatomy of Absurdities, which had been
entered on the Stationers' Registers iQth Septem
ber 1588, and which contains much of the same
satirical matter as his address in Menaphon.

We have now to pass from the private quarrel
of Greene and Nash, as representing the Queen's
men at the Theater, with Marlowe and Kyd, the
writers for Pembroke's company, to a much more
important controversy in which many of the same
dramatists were concerned. Between October 1588
and October 1589 the Martinists published their
Puritan controversial tracts ; in opposition to them
various writings had appeared, whose authors were
Cooper, formerly schoolmaster, afterwards Bishop ;
Lyly the Euphuist; Nash the satirist; and Elderton
" the bibbing fool " ballad-maker. They had also
been ridiculed on the stage, in April 1589, at the
Theater, most likely by Greene ; at the Paul's school
probably by Lyly ; and either in ballad or interlude
by Antony Munday, even at that early date a
dramatic writer. As the anti-Martinist plays were

102 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

on the side of the clergy and of secular authority
they were not interfered with. But in November
1589, in consequence of certain players in London
handling " matters of Divinity and State without
judgment or decorum " — in other words, having
the impertinence to suppose that there could be two
sides to a question, Mr. Tylney, the Master of the
Revels, suddenly becomes awake to the danger of
allowing such discussions on public stages, and writes
to Lord Burleigh that he " utterly mislikes all plays
within the city." Lord Burleigh sends a letter
to the Lord Mayor to " stay " them. The Theater
and Curtain, where the Queen's men and Pembroke's
were playing, were without the city, so that the
anti-Martinist plays were not interfered with ; the
Paul's boys were for the nonce not regarded as a
company of players : so that the Mayor could only
" hear of " the Admiral's men, who on admonish
ment dutifully forbore playing, and Lord Strange's,
who departed contemptuously, "went to the Cross-
Keys and played that afternoon to the great
offence of the better sort, that knew they were
prohibited." The Mayor then " committed two
of the players to one of the compters." These
players, however, gained their end, for all plays
on either side of the controversy were forthwith
suppressed, and commissioners were appointed to

ANNALS. 103

examine and licence all plays thenceforth " in and
about " the city played by any players " whose
servants soever they be."

It is pleasing to find Shakespeare's company
acting in so spirited a manner in defence of free
thought and free speech : it would be more pleasing
to be able to identity him personally as the chief
leader in movement. And this I believe he was.
The play of Loves Labours Lost, in spite of great
alteration in 1597, is undoubtedly in the main the
earliest example left us of Shakespeare's work : and
the characters in the underplot agree so singularly
even in the play as we have it with the anti-
Martinist writers in their personal peculiarities that
I have little doubt that this play was the one
performed in November 1589. If the absence of
matter of State be objected, I reply that it would
be easy for malice to represent the loss of Love's
labour in the main plot as a satire on the love's
labour in vain of Alencon for Elizabeth. We must
also remember that it is most likely that for some
years at the beginning of his career Shakespeare
wrote in conjunction with other men, and that in
those plays that were revived by him at a later
date their work was replaced by his own. f In
the case of the present play; as the revision was
for a Court performance, we may be sure that

io4 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

great care would be taken to expunge all offensive
matter : the only ground for surprise is that enough
indications remain to enable us to identify the
characters at all.

1590.

Lovers Labour's Lost would no doubt be closely
followed by Love's Labour's Won, which play I
for other reasons attribute to this year.

We must now again refer to Greene. His
Farewell to Folly had been entered on the Stationers'
Registers, nth June 1587, but was not published till
after his Mourning Garment, the entry of which
dates 2d November 1590. In the introduction,
which was certainly written at the time of publica
tion, although the body of the work had been lying
by for some three years and more, Greene dis
tinctly alludes to Fair Em and accuses its author
of " simple abusing of Scripture," because " two
lovers on the stage arguing one another of unkind-
ness, his mistress runs over him with this canonical
sentence ' a man's conscience is a thousand wit
nesses ' ; and her knight again excuseth himself
with that saying of the Apostle, ' Love covereth the
multitude of sins.' " The exact words in the play
are " Love that covers multitude of sins " and
" thy conscience is a thousand witnesses." Greene,

ANNALS. 105

says Mr. R. Simpson, who first drew attention to
this allusion to Fair Em in a paper unfortunately
spoiled by an absurd attempt to identify Mullidor,*
of " great head and little wit/' with Shakespeare,
has parallel plots to those of Fair Em in his
Tully's Love (1589) and Never Too Late (before 2d
November 1590). To me the connexion seems
closer between this satire, by Greene the profligate
parson, based on Scriptural grounds, of a play
written for Lord Strange's company, and the perse
cution they had just endured for venturing to
present a play in favour of the Martinists. And
as if to emphasise his intention in this direction,
Greene says in his Dedication of his tract, " I
cannot Martinize." That Fair Em was the pro
duction of R. Wilson will I think be evident to
those who will read it with careful remembrance.

The Comedy of Errors was also probably acted
this year in its original form.

* A dor, dome, or drone is the lazy male bee that makes no
honey : hence Doron, the dome (pronounce dor'un). There was a
myth that dors or drones were produced by mules, hence Muli-dor
(see Minshew drone). But a drone is also the drone of a bagpipe,
or the bagpipe itself, which was -called chevrau (see Cotgrave,
chevrau) or cheveril : and chevrau is Kyd. It is evident from
Greene's tracts that Doron was meant for the writer of The Taming
of a Shrew, and Mulidor for the same author — there cannot be a
doubt of the identity of the characters. Nash's address identifies
The Taming of a Shrew writer with Kyd.

106 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

I59I-

In this year were most likely produced two plays,
not in the shape in which they have come down
to us, but as originally written by Shakespeare and
some coadjutor, viz., The Two Gentlemen of Verona
and Romeo and Juliet. The question of the dates
of these and all other plays of Shakespeare will be
separately argued further on. It may be just worth
while to note that the " pleasant Willy " of Spenser,
who has been so carelessly identified with Shake
speare, with Kemp, and with Tarleton (!) is certainly
L}dy. The line " doth rather choose to sit in idle
cell " (Tears of the Muses) identifies him with
" slumbering Euphues in his cell at Silexedra "
(Menaphon). Compare " Euphues' golden legacy
found after his death in his cell at Silexedra " (title
of Lodge's Rosalynde).

1591-2.

In the Christmas Records of this year, the
Queen's company made their final appearance at
Court on December 26th. Lord Strange's men
performed at Whitehall on December 27th, 28th,
January 1st, Qth, February 6th, 8th. The import
of this fact has not been fully appreciated. The

ANNALS. 107

exceptionally large number of performances of Lord
Strange's men show a singular amount of Court
favour, and go far to prove that Elizabeth did
not sanction their persecution at the hands of
Burleigh two years before. They henceforth, under
various changes of name and constitution, until
the closing of the theatres in 1642, retain the chief
position in the performances at Court. This date,
1592, is in the history of this company of players,
and therefore in that of Shakespeare, their chief
poet and one of their best actors, of the very
greatest importance.

The old plays of King fohn, on which Shake
speare's was founded, were published this year,
as having been acted by the Queen's company —
an additional indication of an important change in
their internal constitution.

1592.

This year was scarcely less eventful than the
preceding for the company to which Shakespeare
belonged. On iQth February Henslowe opened
the Rose theatre on Bankside for performances
by Lord Strange's men under the management of
the celebrated actor, Edward Alley n. Whether
(and if at all, for how long) Alleyn had been

io8 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

previously connected with the company, we are
not directly informed ; but as he gave up playing
for Worcester's men, c. January 1588-9, the exact
time when the players of the late Earl of Leicester
found a new patron in Lord Strange, that is the
probable date of his joining them. This posses
sion of a settled place for performance gave his
company additional influence and status. At first
they played old plays, among which may be men
tioned Kyd'sjeronymo and Spanish Tragedy, Greene's
Orlando and Friar Bacon, Greene and Lodge's
Looking-glass, Marlowe's Jew of Malta, and Peele's
Battle of Alcazar. This last-named play, may, like
Greene's Orlando, have been originally sold to the
Queen's men, and to the Admiral's afterwards ; but
whether this be so or not, we have the singular
fact to explain that four plays, three by Greene and
one by Marlowe, all belonging to the Queen's men, are
now found in action by Lord Strange's. Combining
this with their sudden disappearance from the Court
Revels, it would seem that some grave displeasure
had been excited against them, and that they had
become disorganised. In fact, although they, or
a part of them, lingered on in some vague connec-
sion with Sussex' players, they now practically
disappear from theatrical history. Of new plays
Lord Strange's men produced on March 3d, Henry

ANNALS. 109

F/., which is by the reference to it in Nash's Piers
Penniless (entered 8th August 1592) identified with
the play now known as The First Part of Henry VI.
It was acted fourteen times to crowded houses
(Nash says to 10,000 spectators), and was the
success of the season. I have no doubt that
this play was written by Marlowe, with the aid of
Peele, Lodge, and Greene, before 1590, and that the
episode of Talbot's death added in 1592 is from
the hand of Shakespeare himself. In this last
opinion it is especially pleasing to me to find
myself supported by the critical judgment of Mr.
Swinburne. On nth April the play of Titus and
Vespasian was first acted. Had it not been for
the existence of a German version (given in full in
Cohn's Shakespeare in Germany) we should not
have been aware that this play was identical in
story with that known as Titus Andronicus. It is
unfortunately lost — a loss the more to be regretted
since it has led to the supposition of the extant
play having proceeded from the hand of Shake
speare. On loth June A Knack to Know a Knave
was performed for the first time. Mr. R. Simpson
without the slightest ground conjectured that this
was the play that Greene says he " lastly writ "
with " young Juvenal." The most successful new
plays in this season were Henry VI. and Titus and

no LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Vespasian (performed seven times in two months) ;
of old plays the Spanish Tragedy (performed thirteen
times), The Battle of Alcazar (eleven performances),
and The Jew of Malta (ten performances).

On June 22 the last performance took place
before the closing of the theatres on account of the
plague.

On August 8 Piers Penniless was entered S. R.,
which contains Nash's reference to / Henry VI.

On September 3 Greene died.

On September 20 his Groatsworth of Wit was
entered in the .Stationers' Registers. This pamphlet
was edited by Chettle, and contains the often quoted
address to Marlowe, "young Juvenal/' and Peele.
In the portion where Greene speaks to all three of
them, he says : " Trust them not, for there is an
upstart crow, beautified with our feathers, that, with
his Tiger's heart wrapt in a player's hide, supposes
he is as well able to bombast out a blank verse as
the best of you, and being an absolute Johannes
Factotum, is in his own conceit the only shake-scene
in our country." Mr. R. Simpson showed that
" beautified with our feathers " meant acting plays
written by us, but " bombast out a blank verse "
undoubtedly refers to Shakespeare as a writer also.
The line " O tiger's heart wrapt in a woman's hide "
occurs in Richard Duke of York (commonly but

ANNALS. IT i

injudiciously referred to as The True Tragedy), a play
written for Pembroke's men, probably in 1590, on
which 3 Hemy VI. was founded. It is almost
certainly by Marlowe, the best of the three whom
Greene addresses. In December Chettle issued his
Kindhearfs Dream, in which he apologises for the
offence given to Marlowe in the Groatsworth of Wity
" because myself have seen his demeanour no less
civil than he excellent in the quality he pro
fesses ; besides divers of worship have reported his
uprightness of dealing, which argues his honesty,
and his facetious grace in writing, which approves
his art." To Peele he makes no apology, nor
indeed was any required. Shakespeare was not
one of those who took offence ; they are expressly
stated to have been two of the three authors
addressed by Greene, the third (Lodge) not being
in England.

There were three plays performed at Hampton
Court this Christmas, on December 26, 31, January
I, by Lord Strange's men, in spite of the plague.

I think the latter part of 1592 the most likely
time for the writing of some scenes in All's Well
that Ends Well and Twelfth Night that show marks
of early date.

ii2 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1593-

On January 5 Lord Strange's company, who had
reopened at the Rose, 2Qth December 1592, pro
duced a new play called The Jealous Comedy; this
I take to have been The Merry Wives of Windsor
in its earliest form.

On January 30 they produced Marlowe's Guise
or Massacre of Paris, which has reached us in an
unusually mutilated condition.

On February I they performed for the last time
this year in Southwark ; the Rose as well as other
theatres being closed because of the plague.

On April 18 Venus and Adonis was entered by
Richard Field for publication. Shakespeare's choice
of a publisher was no doubt influenced by private
connection. R. Field was a son of Henry Field,
tanner, of Stratford -on- A von, who died in 1592.
The inventory of his goods attached to his will had
been taken by Shakespeare's father on 2 1st August
in that year. Venus and Adonis was licensed by
the Archbishop of Canterbury (Whitgift) (at whose
palace near Croydon Nash's play, Summer's Last
Will, was performed in the autumn of 1592), and
was dedicated to Henry Wriothesley, Earl of
Southampton. Shakespeare calls it " The first heir
of my invention/' which may mean his first published

ANNALS. 113

work ; but more probably means the first produc
tion in which he was sole author, his previous plays
having been written in conjunction with others ;
and he vows " to take advantage of all idle hours
till I have honoured you with some graver labour."
He had probably then planned if not begun his
Rape of Lucrece.

On May 6 a precept was issued by the Lords of
the Privy Council authorising Lord Strange's players,
" Edward Alien, William Kempe, Thomas Pope, John
Heminges, Augustine Philipes, and George Brian" to
play " where the infection is not, so it be not within
seven miles of London or of the Court, that they
may be in the better readiness hereafter for her
Majesty's service." This list of names is by no
means a complete one of the company of players ;
but probably does consist of all the shareholders
therein. Shakespeare was not a shareholder yet.
Alleyn is described as servant to the Admiral as
well as to Lord Strange. Accordingly they travelled
and acted in the country — in July at Bristol, after
wards at Shrewsbury. Meanwhile on June I Mar
lowe was killed, leaving unpublished his poem,
Hero and Leander, his play Dido, and in my opinion
other plays ; of which more hereafter.

On 25th September Henry Earl of Derby died,
and Ferdinand Lord Strange succeeded to his

ii4 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

honours. His company of players are consequently
sometimes called the Earl of Derby's for the next
six months. There were no performances at Court
at Christmas on account of the plague.

1594-

On 23d January Titus Andronicus was acted as
a new play by Sussex' men at the Rose. This
company gave up playing there on 6th February.
On 26th February the Andronicus play was entered
on S. R. Langbaine, who professes to have seen
this edition, says it was acted by the players of
" Pembroke, Derby, and Essex." Essex is clearly
a mistake for Sussex, for in the 1600 edition the
companies are given as " Sussex, Pembroke, and
Derby." Halliwell's careless statement that Lord
Strange's players transferred their services to Lord
Hunsdon in 1594, has led me and others into grave
difficulty on this matter. The fact is that Lord
Derby's players became servants to the Chamberlain
between i6th April, when Lord Derby died, and 3d
June, when they played at Newington Butts under
the latter appellation. There was strictly no Lord
Strange's company after 25th September 1593, and
no other Derby's company till 1599. The old name
Strange, however, does sometimes occur instead of

ANNALS. 115

Derby. Hence it seemed that the transfer to
Derby's company must have taken place in 1600.
Indeed so little was the fact known even in 1600,
that Shakespeare's company enjoyed the title of
Derby's men for six months, that although that
name is given on the first page, on the title the
same men reappear as the Lord Chamberlain's.
Why Pembroke's men should have acquired the
play on 6th February, and possibly parted with it by
the 26th, does not appear, nor is there any parallel
instance known : there must have been some great
changes in their constitution at this time. But in
any case Shakespeare did not write the play ; Mr.
Halliwell's theory that he left Lord Strange's men,
who in 1593 enjoyed the highest position of any then
existing, and after having been a member succes
sively of two of the obscurest companies, returned
to his former position within a few months, is utterly
untenable. There is no vestige of evidence that
Shakespeare ever wrote for any company but one.

On 1 2th March York and Lancaster (2 Henry VI.)
was entered on S. R.

From 1st to 8th April Sussex' men and the
Queen's acted at the Rose, among other plays, the
old Leir (April 8), on which Shakespeare's Lear
was founded. Both these companies henceforth
vanish from stage history.

n6 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

On April 16 Lord Derby died.

On May 2 The Taming of a Shrew was entered
on S. R.

On May 9 The Rape of Lucrece was entered.
The difference in tone between the dedication of this
poem to Lord Southampton and that of Venus and
Adonis distinctly points to a personal intercourse
having taken place in the interval. Hence the date
of Shakespeare's first interview with his patron may
be assigned as between April 1593 and May 1594.

On May 14 The Famous Victories of Henry V.
and Leir were entered on S. R.

On May 14 also the Admiral's company, of
which nothing is heard since 1591, began to act
at the Rose, having acted at Newington for three
days only. Alleyn, Henslow's son-in-law, had
left the management of Shakespeare's company
on the death of Lord Derby, and now joined the
Admiral's men.

Between * June 3 and June 13 the Chamberlain's
men played at Newington Butts alternately with
the Admiral's : among the Chamberlain's plays we
notice on June 3, 10, Hester and Ahasuerus, which
exists in a German version of which a translation
ought to be published; June 5, 12, Andronicus;

* These dates are so given by Henslow : they should be June 5
and June 15.

ANNALS. 117

June 9, Hamlet; June II, The Taming of a Shrew.
The intermediate days were occupied by the
Admiral's men: who on the 1 5th [i7th] went to
the Rose, and the Chamberlain's men no doubt
to the Theater, the Burbadges' own house. The
Chamberlain's company at this date included
W. Shakespeare, R. Burbadge, J. Hemings, A.
Phillips, W. Kempe, T. Pope, G. Bryan, all of
whom, with the possible exception of Burbadge,
had been members of Lord Strange's company ;
together with H. Condell, W. Sly, R. Cowley, N.
Tooley, J. Duke, R. Pallant, and T. Goodall, who
had previously been in all probability members
of the Queen's company. C. Beeston must have
joined them soon afterwards. The names of
Richard Hoope, William Ferney, William Black-
way, and Ralph Raye occur in Henslow's Diary
as Chamberlain's men c. January 1595. The
Queen's men came in on the reconstitution of that
company in 1591—2. See on this matter further
on under the head of The Seven Deadly Sins.

On June 19 the old play of Richard III. (with
Shore's wife in it) was entered on S. R., a pretty
sure indication, which tallies with other external
evidence, that the play attributed to Shakespeare
was produced about this time. No one can read the
four plays composing the Henry 6th series without

n8 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

feeling that, however various their authorship, they
form a connected whole in general plan. Margaret
is the central figure, who hovers like a Greek
Chorus over the terrible Destiny that involves
King and people in its meshes. But Margaret is
not Shakespeare's creation ; she is Marlowe's.
Shakespeare had no share in the plays on the
contention of York and Lancaster, and but a slight
one in / Henry VI. Marlowe had a chief hand in
i Henry VI. and York and Lancaster ; probably
wrote the whole of Richard Duke of York, and
laid, in my opinion, the foundation and erected
part of the building of Richard III. At his death
he seems to have left unacted or unpublished his
poem of Hero and Leander, finished afterwards by
Chapman ; Dido, partly by Nash, and produced
(when ?) by the Chapel children ; Andronicus
acted (under Peele's auspices ?) by the Sussex men,
and Richard HI., completed by Shakespeare, and
acted by the Chamberlain's company as we have
it in the Quarto. All these plays were produced
or published in 1594. About the same time ah
earlier play of Marlowe's, originally acted c. 1589,
was altered and revised by Shakespeare. The
date and authorship of the Shakespearian part of
Edward ///., viz., from " Enter King Edward " in the
last scene of act i. to the end of act ii., are proved

ANNALS. 119

by the allusion to the poem of Lucrece ; the repeti
tion of lines from the Sonnets : " Their scarlet
ornaments/' " Lilies that foster smell far worse
than weeds," and many smaller coincidences with
undoubted Shakespearian plays : while the original
date and authorship of the play as a whole will
appear from the following quotations. In the
Address prefixed to Greene's Menaphon, in a'
passage in which Nash has been satirising Kyd
and another as void of scholarship and unable to
read Seneca in the original, he suddenly attacks
Marlowe, whom he has previously held up as the
object of their imitation, and asks what can they
have of him ? in Nash's own words : " What can be
hoped of those that thrust Elysium into Hell, and
have not learned, so long as they have lived in the
spheres, the just measure of the Horizon without
an hexameter ? " Marlowe in Faustus * has " con
found Hell in Elysium," and, in Edward III, horizon
is pronounced horizon. This, however, might occur
in other plays ; but in Greene's Never Too Late
we find Tully addressing the player Roscius, who
certainly represents R. Wilson, in these words :
" Why, Roscius, are thou proud with ^Esop's crow,

* Simpson. But rather in I Tamburlane v. 2 : " Hell and
Elysium swarm with ghosts of men," and similarly a few lines before
" where shaking ghosts," &c.

120 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

being pranked with the glory of others' feathers ?
Of thyself thou canst say nothing : and if the
Cobbler hath taught thee to say Ave Casar, disdain
not thy tutor because thou pratest in a King's
chamber." Unless another play can be produced
with " Ave Caesar " in it, this must be held to allude
to Edward ///., in which play Wilson must have
acted the Prince of Wales (act i. I. 164). The
" cobbler " alludes to Marlowe as a shoemaker's
son.

On July 20, Locrine, an old play written, says
Mr. Simpson, by G. Tylney in 1586, but in which
Peele had certainly a principal hand, was entered on
S. R. It was issued as " newly set forth, overseen
and corrected by W. S." I see no reason to be
lieve that this was Shakespeare. Of course he had
no hand in writing the play ; and in any case Peele
did not probably sanction the publication.

To this year we must assign the production^of
the earliest of Shakespeare's Sonnets. That these
(or rather that portion of them which are con
tinuous, 1-126) were addressed to Lord South
ampton was proved by Drake. The identity of
language between the Dedication of Lucrece and
Sonnet 26, the exact agreement of them with all we
know of the careers of Shakespeare and his patron
during the next four years, and the utter absence

ANNALS. 121

of evidence of his connection with any other patron,
are conclusive on that point. They begin (1-17)
with entreaties to marry, which date about 6th
October 1594, when Southampton attained his
majority, and before he had met Elizabeth Vernon,
and end (117) in a time when " peace proclaiming
olives of endless age," after the treaty of Vervins,
2d May 1598: and before the Earl's marriage at
the end of that year. They involve a story of
some frail lady who had transferred her favours
to the young lord from the older player (40-42).
Far too much has been written on this matter from
a moral point of view. The fact remains, and all
we can say is : Remember these Sonnets were
written " among private friends," and not for
publication. The lady has not hitherto been iden
tified, but is, I think, identifiable. On September
3d was entered on S. R., Wyllobie his Avisa. Dr.
Ingleby has shown in his Shakespeare Allusion-books
that the W. S. in this poem is William Shakespeare,
and that Hadrian Dorrell, the reputed editor, is a
fictitious character. He has, however, missed the
key to this anonymity ; viz., that the book was
known to be a personal satirical libel. P[eter]
C[olse], according to the author of Avisa, " mis
construed " the poem ; and so necessitated the
further figment in the 1605 edition that the

122 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

supposed author, A. Willobie, was dead ; in this
edition the mythical H. D. says : " If you ask me
for the persons, I am altogether ignorant of them,
and have set them down only as I find them
named or disciphered in my author. For the
truth of this action, if you enquire, I will more fully
deliver my opinion hereafter." But independently
of this evidence from the book itself we find in
S. R. (Arber, iii. 678) that when the works of
Marston, Davies, &c., were burnt in the Hall, 4th
June 1599, other books were " stayed ; " viz., Caltha
Poetarum, Hall's Satires, and i( Willobie s Adviso
to be called in." This marks the book as of the
same character as its companions ; viz., libellous,
calumnious, personally abusive. The characters
in the poems were evidently representations of real
living persons. The heroine of the poem is Avisa,
or AvTsa (sometimes written A vis A), that is,
Avice or Avice A. This name was not uncommon
(see Camden's Remaines, p. 93). She lived in
the west of England, " where Austin pitched his
monkish tent," in a house " where hangs the badge
of England's saint." The place is more fully
described thus : —

" At east of this a castle stands

By ancient shepherds built of old,

ANNALS. [23

And lately was in shepherds' hands,

Though now by brothers bought and sold :
At west side springs a crystal well :
There doth this chaste Avisa dwell."

And again : —

" In sea-bred soil on Tempe downs,

Whose silver spring from Neptune's well
With mirth salutes the neighbouring towns."

These descriptions suit the vale of Evesham,
the castle being that of Bengworth and the well that
of Abberton. Austin's oak was traditionally placed
in this part by some, though others put it in
Gloucestershire. Avisa's parents are mentioned as
"of meanest trade." They were, I take it, inn
keepers, and the inn had the sign of St. George.
The other characters are D. B., a Frenchman, with
motto Dudum Beatus; Didymus H., an Anglo-
German, with motto Dum Habui; H. W., Italo His-
palensisy and Wplliam] S[hakespeare]. The story
is that Avisa, the chaste, who " makes up the
mess " of four with Lucrece, Susanna, and Penelope,
has been married at twenty, tempted by a Noble
man, a Cavaliero, a Frenchman, an Anglo-German,
&c., without result, and is consequently England's
rara avis, who matches those of Greece, Palestine,
and Rome. The mottoes of the foreigners, however,

i24 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

point to a different conclusion, and so does this
passage : "If any one, therefore, by this should
take occasion to surmise that the author meant to
note any woman, whose name sounds something like
that name, it is too childish and too absurd, and
not beseeming any deep judgment, considering
there are many things which cannot be applied to
any woman" In plain language, Mr. Dorrell believes
no woman to be chaste. H. W., at first sight of
Avisa, is infected with a fantastical fit, and bewrays
his disease to his familiar friend, W. S., who, not
long before, had tried the courtesy of the like pas
sion, and was now newly recovered [in 1594].
Having been laughed at himself he determined to
see whether it would sort to a happier end for the
new actor than it did for the old player. Doubtless
W. S. is Shakespeare, and Avisa is represented
ironically as a trader who had made a Frenchman
long happy (dudum beatus), been possessed by an
Anglo-German (dum habui), had then passed to
Shakespeare, and finally to H. W. Such was the
slanderous story published in I594J how far true,
whether at all true, I care not to inquire ; but that
it is the same story as that of the Sonnets, that
H. W. is Henry Wriothesley, and that the black
woman of the Sonnets is identical with Avisa, I
regard as indubitable. Of course the Thomas

ANNALS. 125

Willoby, Prater Henrici Willoughby nuper defuncti,
of the 1605 edition is a mere device to blind the
licensers for the press. Similar devices have often
been used, but I know of none so impudently
charming as the " author's conclusion " as to the
man who is nuper defundus. " H. W. was now
again stricken so dead that he hath not yet any
further essayed, nor I think ever will, and whether
he be alive or dead I know not, and therefore I
leave him."

On December 26th and 28th the Chamberlain's
servants performed before the Queen at Greenwich,
apparently in the daytime. Kempe, Shakespeare,
and Burbadge were paid for these performances on
the following March. It is singular that the per
formance of " A comedy of Errors like unto Plautus
his Mencechmi" should have also been performed
apparently by the same company at Gray's Inn,
also on December 26th. This seems to be the first
mention of Shakespeare's play, the true title of
which is simply Errors : but whether it was written
in 1590 or 1593-4, there is no evidence that is
absolutely decisive. The allusion to France fight
ing against her heir, v. ii. 2. 125, would be equally
applicable at any date from July 1589, when Henri
III. was killed, to February 1594, when Henri IV.
was consecrated.

126 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1595.

That the date of Midsummer Night's Dream
should be fixed in the winter of 1594—5 was
long since seen by Malone, the allusions to the
remarkable weather of 1594 being too marked to
be put aside contemptuously. It has also been
attempted to assign other dates on account of the
play's being manifestly written for some marriage
solemnity. It is not needful to alter the date for
that reason. Either the marriage of W. Stanley,
Earl of Derby, at Greenwich, on 24th January,
1594-5, or that of Lord Russel, Earl of Bedford,
to Lucy Harrington (before 5th February, S. R.),
would suit very well in point of time. The former
is the more probable ; because it took place at
Greenwich, where we know the Chamberlain's men
to have performed in the previous month, and be
cause these actors had mostly been servants to
the Earl of Derby's brother in the early part of
the previous year.

There is little, if any doubt, that Shakespeare

produced Richard II. and The Two Gentlemen of

Verona, as we now have it, in this year. A larum

for London, or The Siege of Antwerp, by (?) Lodge,

was acted about this time.

The play of Richard Duke of York was printed

ANNALS. 127

in 1595 ; and on 1st December Edward III. was
entered on S. R.

The performances of the Chamberlain's men,
1594—5, at Court, were on December 26, 27, 28;
January 5 ; February 22. Payment was made to
Hemings and Bryan.

1596.

Early in this year the play of Sir T. More was
produced by the Chamberlain's company. The
name of T. Goodale, who was one of their actors,
occurs in the MS. It appears from the notes of
E. Tylney, then Master of the Revels, that much
revision had to be made in its form in consequence
of its reproducing, under a thin disguise, a narrative
of the Apprentice Riots of June 1595. The im
prisonment of the Earl of Hertford in October of
the same year was too closely paralleled by that
of Sir T. More in the play to be agreeable to the
Government. Another point objected to was satirical
allusion to Frenchmen. The date hitherto assigned
to this play is " 1590 or earlier " (Dyce), which is
palpably wrong.

Soon after Shakespeare's King John was acted.
It contains, in my opinion, an allusion to the
expedition to Cadiz in June (i. 2. 66—75).

128 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

On July 23d Henry Carey died, and the
" Chamberlain's players " became the men of his
son, George Carey L. Hunsdon.

In the same month, or earlier, Romeo and Juliet
was revived in a greatly altered and improved form.
All work by the second hand was cut out and
replaced by Shakespeare's own writing. It was
not, however, acted at this date at the Curtain, but
at the Theater. Lodge's allusion in his Wifs
Misery ', 1596, to Hamlet, as acted in that house, is
inconsistent with any other supposition. On August
5 a ballad on Romeo and Juliet was entered on
S. R. This is taken by Mr. Halliwell as evidence
that the play was then on the stage. On August
27 ballads are also mentioned on Macdobeth and
The Taming of a Shrew. That on Macbeth could
not have been on the play as we now have it,
but that a play on this subject, perhaps an earlier
form of the extant one, was then acted, is very
probable.

On August 1 1 Hamnet Shakespeare was buried
at Stratford : his father undoubtedly was present.
This is the first visit to Stratford on his part since
1587 so far as any evidence exists.

Shakespeare returned to his lodgings " near the
Bear Garden " in Southwark (Alleyn MS. teste
Malone) before October 20, where a draft of a

ANNALS. 129

grant of arms was made to John Shakespeare, no
doubt at his son's expense.

In November, a petition was presented by the
inhabitants of Blackfriars against the transformation
into a theatre of a large house bought by J. Bur-
badge on the preceding February 4. The petition
was ineffectual.

Shakespeare's play The Merchant of Venice, some
times called The Jew of Venice, is generally assigned
to this year. I prefer 1597.

On December 29, Henry Shakespeare, the poet's
uncle, was buried at Snitterfield ; and his wife
Margaret on 9th February 1596—7.

The Court performances of Lord Hunsdon's men
at Whitehall were six in number, two at Christmas,
and others on 1st, 5th January; 6th, 8th February
1596-7.

1597-

Before March 5 a surreptitious edition of Romeo
and Juliet was published, but not entered on S. R.
This consists of an imperfect and abridged copy
of the revised play, with lacunae filled up by
portions of the original version of 1591. See
hereafter in Section IV.

In Easter term, Shakespeare purchased New
Place, a mansion and grounds in Stratford, for £60.

130 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

This was freehold, and henceforth his designation
is, William Shakespeare of New Place, Stratford,
Gentleman. From this time, male heirs failing,
his ambition seems to be to found a family in one
of the female branches ; and Stratford is to be
regarded as his residence.

Soon after 5th March, Lord Hunsdon was ap
pointed Chamberlain vice W. Brooke, Lord Cobham,
deceased, and Lord Hunsdon's men again became
the Lord Chamberlain's.

During this year and the next Shakespeare
undoubtedly produced I and 2 Henry IV. The
name given to the " fat knight " was originally Sir
John Oldcastle. This offended the Cobham family,
who were lineally descended from the great Sir
John Oldcastle, and through their influence the
Queen ordered the name to be altered. The new
name was that of Falstaff, unquestionably identical
with the Fastolfe of history. Shakespeare had
unwittingly adopted the name Oldcastle from the
old play of The Famous Victories of King Henry V.
Mr. Halliwell has pointed out that there must have
been another play in which a Sir John Oldcastle
was represented : he quotes Hey for Honesty, " The
rich rubies and incomparable carbuncles of Sir John
Oldcastle's nose; " and Howell's Letters, ii. 71, "Ale
is thought to be much adulterated, and nothing so

ANNALS. 131

good as Sir John Oldcastle and Smug the Smith
was used to drink." I venture to add that this
last quotation fixes the other play. It was Dray-
ton's Merry Devil of Edmonton, in which Sir John
the priest of Enfield drinks ale with Smug the
Smith, and " carries fire in his face eternally." This
play was probably produced between / Henry IV.
and 2 Henry IV. The words " tickle your catas
trophe " in the latter are more likely to be an
allusion to the " gag " in the Merry Devil than con
versely ; similar ridicule of this phrase is introduced
in Sir Giles Goosecap, which is certainly of later
date. It seems strange that Sir John Oldcastle
should have been used as the name of a priest ;
but the play has been so greatly abridged (all the
part of the story in which Smug replaces St.
George as the sign of the inn, for instance, having
been cut out) that it would be mere guess-work to
try to restore its original form, and without such
restoration we cannot judge of the reasons for so
singular an impersonation. Of course it was
attempted to remove all trace of Oldcastle's name ;
but just as the prefix Old. to one of the speeches
in Shakespeare's play bears evidence to Oldcastle
having been, his original fat knight, so it is pos
sible that in a hitherto unexplained passage there
may be a trace of Oldcastle as Drayton's original

1 32 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

ale-drinking priest. In scene 9 the words italicised
in " My old Jenerts bank my horse, my castle," look
very like a corruption of a stage direction written
in margin of a proof thus —

Old- J. enters
castle

— he is on the scene directly after, and his entrance
is nowhere marked.

T. Lodge, as well as Drayton, was writing about
this date for the Chamberlain's men.

On August 29 Richard II. was entered on
S. R., and on October 20 Richard HI. These
were evidently printed from authentic copies, duly
authorised for publication.

About July 1597 the Theater, with regard to
extension of the lease of which James Burbadge
had been negotiating up to his death in the spring
of that year, was finally closed as a place of per
formance. In October the Chamberlain's men no
doubt began to act at the Curtain, which Pembroke's
men left at that date to join the Admiral's company
at the Rose; some of them, however, probably
Cooke, Belt, Sinkler, and Holland, had already in
1594 joined the Chamberlain's, as we shall see.
About this date Mr. Halliwell says " Shakespeare's
company " were at Rye (in August), at Dover and

ANNALS. 133

Bristol (in September), &c. Pembroke's company
were at these places, but he has given no proof
that the Chamberlain's were. The " Curtain-plau-
dities " of Marston's Scourge of Villany, entered
S. R. 8th September 1598, would certainly seem to
show that they acted at the Curtain in 1598. This
does not, however, involve the inference that they
acted there in 1596, at which time they no doubt
performed at the Theater.

About this same time the play of Wily Beguiled
was acted, which contains distinct parodies of
speeches by Shylock and old Capulet, as well as of
other scenes in the Merchant of Venice, which must
have preceded it. It has been alleged by Steevens
and others that this play existed in 1596, but no
proof has been given of this assertion.

In November John Shakespeare filed a bill
against Lambert for the recovery of the Asbies
estate. There is no trace of his having proceeded
further with this litigation.

At Christmas the Chamberlain's men performed
four plays at Whitehall, one of which was Love's
Labour's Lost. The corrections and augmentations
of the play, as we have it, may be confidently ascribed
to the preparation for this performance.

134 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1598.

On January 24 Abraham Sturley wrote to
Richard Quiney urging him to persuade Shake
speare to make a purchase at Shottery, on the
ground that he would thus obtain friends and
advancement, and at the same time benefit the
Corporation.

On February 25 / Henry IV. was entered on
S. R., and on July 22 The Merchant of Venice.

In this spring or in 1597 Much Ado about
Nothing was probably produced. It was probably
an alteration of Love's Labour's Won.

In September Jonson joined the Chamberlain's
men, and produced his Every Man in his Humour at
the Curtain. This was the Quarto version with
the Italian names. Aubrey has been subjected to
much unfounded abuse for asserting that Jonson
acted at the Curtain. The actors in this play were
Shakespeare, Burbadge, Phillips, Hemings, Condell,
Pope, Sly, Beeston, Kemp, and Duke. Shakespeare,
it will be noted, is first on the list.

On September 7 Meres' Palladia Tamia was
entered on S. R. Among the abundant and often-
quoted praises of Shakespeare in this work the most
important for biographical purposes are the enu
meration of his plays, the lists of tragic and comic

ANNALS. 135

V

dramatists, and this passage, which I shall have to
refer to hereafter. " As the soul of Euphorbias
was thought to live in Pythagoras, so the great
witty soul of Ovid lives in mellifluous and honey-
tongued Shakespeare. Witness his Venus and
Adonis, his Lucrece, his sugared Sonnets among his
private friends," &c. A careful comparison of the
list of dramatists with that of known plays or
titles of plays that have come down to us shows
that the Palladis Tamia could not have been com
pleted for the press till June 1598, and an examina
tion of the list of Shakespeare's plays shows that
it consists of those then in the repertoire of the
Chamberlain's company, that is, of those either
newly written or revived between June 1594 and
June 1598. These plays are : Gentlemen of Verona;
Errors ; Love's Labour's Lost; Love's Labour's Won;
Midsummer- Night's Dream; Merchant of Venice —
comedies. Richard II. ; Richard III. ; Henry IV. ;
John; Titus Andronicus ; Romeo and Juliet — tra
gedies. It is clear that Richard III. and a play
on Andronicus, which I believe to be the one we
have, were attributed to Shakespeare at that time.

On 25th October Richard Quiney wrote from the
Bell in Carter Lane to his " loving good friend and
countryman Mr. William Shakespeare," who was,
according to the subsidy roll discovered by Mr. J.

136 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Hunter, then living in the parish of St. Helen's,
Bishopsgate, asking for the loan of £30. On
the same day he wrote to his brother-in-law Mr.
Sturley at Stratford, that " our countryman Mr.
W. Shakespeare would procure us money." The
former letter was sent evidently by hand, an affir
mative answer obtained, and soon after instructions
given by Shakespeare for the procuring the money.
We could not otherwise account for the letter being
preserved among the documents of the Corporation.

The Famous Victories of Henry V. was reprinted
in 1598 ; as we so often find to be the case with
old plays on which other plays have been founded.
The complaint about the name Oldcastle no doubt
was a special motive for reproducing the old play
in this instance.

There were three plays performed at Court by
Shakespeare's company in the Christmas festivities.

I599-

In April a play of Troylus and Cressida, by
Dekker and Chettle, was written ; no doubt an
opposition play to some revival of Shakespeare's
older one on the same subject.

The Chamberlain's men acted A Warning for
Fair Women about this time. This play appears
to me to come from the hand of Lodge.

ANNALS. 137

In this year The Passionate Pilgrim, " by W.
Shakespeare/' was imprinted by Jaggard. It con
tains two of the Sonnets, two other Sonnets from
Love's Labour's Lost, and one other poem from the
same play by Shakespeare. The remaining poems,
as far as they are known, are by Barnefield and
other inferior authors. There is not a vestige of
reason for reprinting this book as Shakespeare's.

In the spring Shakespeare's company left the
Curtain and went to act at the Globe. This was
a newly erected building on Bankside, made partly
of the materials of the old Theater, which had been
removed by Burbadge at the beginning of the year.
One of the first plays performed in it was Jonson's
Every Man out of his Humour, the chief actors in
which were Burbadge, Hemings, Phillips, Condell,
Sly, and Pope. Kempe, Beeston, Duke, and Pallant
had left the company, and did not act at the Globe.
But Shakespeare's name is also absent in this list,
and this fact, coupled with that of the libellous
nature of this "comical satire," and Jonson's leav
ing the Chamberlain's men immediately after it to
continue his strictures on Dekker, &c., at Black-
friars with the Children of the Chapel, makes it
exceedingly probable that the disagreement which
eventuated in the " purge " given by Shakespeare
to Jonson mentioned in The Return to Parnassus

138 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

had already arisen. It would lead to too long a
digression to do more than touch on this stage
quarrel here. I can only say that it lasted till
1 60 1 ; that Jonson and Chapman on the one side at
Blackfriars, and Shakespeare, Marston, and Dekker
on the other, at first at the Globe, Rose, and Paul's,
afterwards at the Fortune, kept up one continual
warfare for more than three years. Not one of
their plays during this time is free from person
alities and satirical allusions ; nor, indeed, are most
comedies of Elizabeth's time ; it is only because
the allusions have grown obscure and uninteresting
to us, that we fail to see that the Elizabethan
comedy is eminently Aristophanic. It is not till the
reign of James that we find the comedy of manners
and intrigue at all generally developed.

Another play produced after the opening of the
Globe was Henry V., and soon after in this year
As You Like It.

Somewhere about this time an attempt was
made to get a grant to " impale the arms of Shake
speare with those of Arden," ignotum cum ignotiore.
The grant was not obtained.

At this Christmas the Chamberlain's men gave
three performances at Court, viz., on 26th December
at Whitehall, on 5th January 1599-1600 and on
4th February at Richmond.

ANNALS. 139

1600.

Shrovetide, February 4. The play performed at
Court was probably The Merry Wives of Windsor.
This play is assigned by tradition to a command of
the Queen, who wished to see Falstaff represented
in love, and is said to have been written in a fort
night. It was probably an adaptation of the old
Jealous Comedy of 1592, and is more likely to have
come after than before Henry V., in which Shake
speare had failed, according to his implied promise
in the Epilogue to 2 Henry IV., to continue the
story with Falstaff in it. It stands apart altogether
from the historical series.

March 6. The Chamberlain's men acted ''Old-
castle " before their patron, Lord Hunsdon, and
foreign ambassadors at Somerset House. This
could not have been Shakespeare's " Falstaff," for
the obnoxious name of Oldcastle would certainly
not have been revived before such an audience ;
nor could it have been the Sir John Oldcastle, which
belonged to another company ; it may have been
The Merry Devil of Edmonton.

About this time Shakespeare, always attentive to
pecuniary matters, brought an action against one
John Clayton for £7, and obtained a verdict.

The August entries on S. R. are specially in-

140 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

teresting. On the 4th a memorandum (not in the
regular course of entry) appears to the effect that As
You Like It, Henry V., Every Man in his Humour,
and Much Ado about Nothing, were " to be stayed."
On the 1 4th, Every Man in his Humour was
licensed ; on the 23d, Much Ado about Nothing,
and along with it 2 Henry IV., " with the humours
of Sir John Falstaff. Written by Master Shake
speare." On the nth the first and second parts
of the History of the Life of Sir John Oldcastle, Lord
Cobham, " with his Martyrdom," had been licensed.
The " staying " is generally supposed to have
relation to surreptitious printing ; I think it more
likely to have been caused by the supposed satiri
cal nature of the plays. As You Like It was not
printed ; Henry V. was printed in an incomplete
form * without license ; while the emphatic men
tion of Falstaff and the insertion of the author's
name to 2 Henry IV., not customary at that date,
show that the Oldcastle scandal had not yet died
out. This is still further proved by the almost
simultaneous entries of the two plays written
October to December 1599 for the Admiral's men by
Monday, Drayton, Wilson, and Hathaway, on Sir
John Oldcastle. Only one has reached us, which
is plainly satirical of Henry V. It was, however,
Henry V. was transferred to T. Pavier on I4th August.

ANNALS. 141

in one of the editions printed in 1600 ascribed to
William Shakespeare. Drayton, who was the chief
author concerned in its production, had left the
Chamberlain's men in 1597, and been writing for
the Admiral's ever since. It is noticeable that
after 1597 we find the favourable notices of Lodge
and Shakespeare which had been inserted in pre
vious editions expunged from his writings, notably
the lines on Lucrece in the legend of Matilda.
Drayton had probably quarrelled with both his
coadjutors. With the entry here on Oldcastle's
41 martyrdom " compare the Epilogue to 2 Henry IV.
This was not the play acted before Hunsdon on
March 6, which was probably The Merry Devil.

On 8th October Midsummer-Night's Dream was
entered on S. R. ; on 28th October The Merchant
of Venice. Curiously enough, two rival issues of
each of these plays was made this year, although
only one publisher made an entry in each case.
On 22d July 1598, J. Roberts had entered The
Merchant of Venice, but was refused permission to
print unless he could get the Lord Chamberlain's
license, who was the patron of the actors of that
play. He apparently did not get it; but in 1600,
when J. Heyes does get the license, he arranges
with Heyes to print the book for him, but previ
ously prints a slightly differing copy on his own

142 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

account. He makes with Fisher, the publisher of
the other play, a somewhat similar transaction.

There were three Court performances this Christ
mas by the Chamberlain's men, December 26,
January 5, February 24. The payment for these
to Hemings and Cowley indicates that the latter
was a shareholder in the Globe.

2 and j Henry VI. were probably revised and
revived at the Globe about this time.

1601.

In this year Alts Well that Ends Well and
Hamlet were produced. The form in which the
latter appeared is matter of dispute ; but we may
safely assert that it lay between the version of the
first Quarto and that of the Folio ; the variation
of the Quarto from this original form being caused
by the surreptitious nature of that edition, and
that of the Folio by a subsequent revision in 1603.
The' company of " little eyases " satirised in this
play was not of the Paul's children, with whom the
Chamberlain's men were on the most friendly terms,
but of the Chapel children at the Blackfriars, who
were then acting Jonson's " comical satires " against
Dekker, Marston, and Shakespeare. Singularly
enough, they were tenants of the Burbadges, who
were also owners of the Globe.

ANNALS. 143

In the same year 1601, a poem by Shakespeare
appeared along with others by Jonson, Marston, and
Chapman in R. Chester's Lovers Martyr, or Rosalinds
Complaint. This publication, could we ascertain its
exact date, would show the time when the stage
controversy ceased and these four writers could
amicably appear together. Dekker, however, does
not appear among them, and we cannot tell if his
Satiromastix was acted with Shakespeare's approval
or not. It was produced at the Globe by his com
pany as well as by the children of Paul's at some
time between 22d May, up till which day Dekker
was writing for the Admiral's men, and lith
November, when it was entered on S. R. This
bitter satire seems to have been the last open word
in the controversy, but by no means the end of its
history.

The next fact we have to notice may perhaps
explain why, just at this point of Shakespeare's
career, we find in 1602 a cessation of production,
accompanied by a change of manner in outward
form and inward thought when writing was resumed
in 1603. In March 1601, in the Essex trials,
Meyrick was indicted " for having procured the
outdated tragedy of Richard II. to be publicly acted
at his own charge for the entertainment of the con
spirators " (Camden). From Bacon's speech (State

i44 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Trials) it appears that Phillips was the manager
who arranged this performance. This identifies the
company as the Chamberlain's, and therefore the
play as Shakespeare's. It may seem strange that
a play, duly licensed and published in 1597, could
give offence in 1601 ; but the published play did
not contain the deposition scene, iv. I, the acted
play of 1 60 1 certainly did. This point is again
brought forward in Southampton's trial : he calmly
asked the Attorney-General, " What he thought in
his conscience they designed to do with the Queen ? "
" The same," replied he, " that Henry of Lancaster
did with Richard II." The examples of Richard II.
and Edward II. were again quoted by the assistant
judges against Southampton, while Essex in his
defence urged the example of the Duke of Guise in
his favour. From all which it is clear that the
subjects chosen for historical plays by Marlowe and
Shakespeare were unpopular at Court, but approved
of by the Essex faction, and that at last the com
pany incurred the serious displeasure of the Queen.
Accordingly, they did not perform at Court at
Christmas 1601-2 ; * and we find them travelling
in Scotland instead — L. Fletcher with his company
of players being traceable at Aberdeen in October.

* Mr. Halliwell (Outlines, p. 128, 2d edition) says they per
formed four plays at Whitehall, but quotes no authority.

ANNALS. 145

Here the actors would hear of the Gowry conspiracy
instead of Essex', of which we shall find the result
hereafter. Before leaving London, however, or in
the next year after their return, they acted The Life
and Death of Lord Cromwell, Earl of Essex, a play in
which the rise and fall of Robert Devereux, the late
Earl, was pretty closely paralleled. This was entered
on S. R., nth August 1602, "as lately acted."

On September 8 John Shakespeare, the poet's
father, was buried at Stratford.

1602.

On 1 8th January The Merry Wives of Windsor
was entered on S. R. : a surreptitious issue. On
2d February, Twelfth Night was performed at the
Readers' Feast at the (?) Middle Temple, " much
like The Comedy of Errors or the Menechmi in
Plautus, but most like and near to that in Italian,
called Inganni" (Manningham's Diary).

On I Qth April / and 2 Henry VI. (evidently the
Quarto plays on which 2 and j Henry VI. were
founded) were assigned by Millington to Pavier,
salvo jure cujuscumque, S. R. This entry is impor
tant. It shows that the remodelling of the old
Quarto plays under the new name of Henry VI.
instead of The Contention of York and Lancaster had
taken place ; it indicates a doubt or fear as to

K

146 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

whether the copyright might be disputed by some
publisher, authorised by the Chamberlain's men to
produce the amended version.

In May, Shakespeare bought for £320, from the
Combes, 107 acres of arable land in Old Stratford.
The indenture was sealed and delivered in his
absence to his brother Gilbert.

On July 26 the surreptitious Hamlet was entered
on S. R., and on August 1 1 The Life and Death of
the Lord Cromwell.

On 28th September, at a Court Baron of the
Manor of Rowington, Walter Getley transferred to
Shakespeare a cottage and garden in Chapel Lane,
about a quarter of an acre with forty feet frontage,
possession being reserved for the lady of the manor
till suit and service had been personally done for
the same.

Two plays were performed by the Chamberlain's
men at Court this Christmas, one at Whitehall 26th
December, one at Richmond 2d February.

1603.

February 7. Troylus and Cressida, as performed
probably in 1602 by the Chamberlain's men, not the
play by Dekker and Chettle, was entered on S. R.

The Taming of the Shrew as we have it was
probably produced in March.

ANNALS. 147

March 24. THE QUEEN DIED.

On I Qth May a license was granted to L. Fletcher,
W. Shakespeare, R. Burbadge, A. Phillips, J.
Hemings, H. Condell, W. Sly, R. Armin, R. Cowley,
to perform stage plays " within their now usual
house called the Globe," or in any part of the
kingdom. They are henceforth nominated the
King's Players. The functions of Fletcher are not
exactly known : he did not act, and was probably a
sort of general manager ; the other eight were
probably shareholders, among whom it will be
noted that Shakespeare and Burbadge stand first.
In the list of actors in Jonson's Sejanus, Cowley
and Armin are omitted, A. Cook and J. Lowin
appearing instead. This play got Jonson into
trouble. He was accused before the Council for
" Popery and treason " in it. When he published
it next year he no doubt omitted the most objection
able passages, and put forth an excuse that a second
hand had good share in it. This was his usual
way of getting out of a difficulty of this kind.
Even as the play stands there is abundant room
for malice to interpret the quarrel between Sejanus
and Drusus as that between Essex and Blount ;
and to see in Sejanus' poisoning propensities
allusions to the Earl of Leicester. Whalley's
curious notion that Jonson in his argument alluded

148 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

to the Powder plot, ignores the fact that the play
was entered on 2d November 1604 in S. R. It is
Raleigh's plot that is intended.

The London Prodigal, and Wilkins' Miseries of
Enforced Marriage, were written and perhaps acted
(at the Globe ?) this year.

The edition of Hamlet entered in the preceding
year was issued in the autumn.

On December 2 the King's players performed at
the Earl of Pembroke's at Wilton, and at Hamp
ton Court before the King on December 26, 27, 28,
January I [? December 29] ; before the Prince,
December 30, January I ; before the King at
Whitehall, February 2, 18; nine plays in all. A
much larger number of plays were acted at
Christmas festivities at Court in James's reign than
in Elizabeth's. Perhaps the Queen only cared for
new plays. We know that James frequently
ordered a second performance of any one that
specially pleased him, and often had old plays
revived.

On 8th February 1604, there occurs an entry
in the Revels accounts which explains the small
number of public theatrical performances, and the
cessation of work of the principal author for the
King's men in 1603. To R. Burbadge was given
£30, " for the maintenance and relief of himself and

ANNALS. 149

the rest of his company, being prohibited to present
any plays publicly in or near London by reason
of great peril that might grow through the extra
ordinary concourse and assembly of people to a
new increase of the plague, till it shall please God
to settle the city in a more perfect health." From
July 1603 till March 1604 the theatres were
probably closed. Hence my doubt as to whether
The London Prodigal and The Miseries of Enforced
Marriage were performed in London till 1604.
The King's company were most likely travelling in
the provinces till the winter ; but were disappointed
at not being allowed to reopen at Christmas when
the plague had abated.

1604.

The King's men, like those of other companies,
had an allowance for cloaks, &c., to appear at the
entry of King James on i$th March.

The second Quarto of Hamlet was published in
this year — " Newly imprinted and enlarged to
almost as much again as it was, according to the
new and perfect copy." This version was probably
that performed at Court in the Christmas festivities
1603—4. We cannot suppose that among the nine
plays then exhibited Hamlet would not be included.
Of course on such occasions plays were always more

150 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

or less rewritten. In this instance the remodelling
is twofold ; the Quarto version for the Court, 1603-4,
the Folio for the public, of the same date. That
the Folio does not merely reproduce the 1 60 1 play,
as it was acted in London, " in the Universities of
Cambridge and Oxford " (perhaps in going to or
returning from Scotland in 1601), " and elsewhere,"
is clear for many reasons, one of which concerns us
here. In the well-known passage in ii. 2 relating
to the Children's company, an " inhibition " and
" innovation " are mentioned in the 1604 Quarto of
which there is no note in that of 1603. The only
time at which we know of any contemporary in
hibition and innovation was in January-February
1604. The inhibition on account of the plague,
which was going on till nearly 8th February, I
have already noticed ; the innovation was either
the political conspiracy of Raleigh or the attempt
at reformation in religion by the Puritans. The
Children of the Chapel, who under Evans, Burbadge's
lessee, had satirised Shakespeare and other players
in their performances at Blackfriars, were re-
appointed at this time to act in that same theatre
under E. Kirkham, A. Hawkins, T. Kendall, and
R. Payne, with the new appellation of Children of
the Revels. The date of the warrant is 3Oth
January 1604. The King's men acted at Court

ANNALS. 151

2d February, and if Hamlet was then performed
the passage in ii. 2 may have brought their
grievance under the King's notice, and resulted in
the gift of £30 by way of compensation. I do not
insist on this, however, as it is omitted in the Quarto.
No doubt they had expected to get rid of the chil
dren at Blackfriars at the end of seven years from
the date of the original lease, 4th February 1596.
At the end of another seven years they did so, but
only by purchasing the remainder of the lease.

In this summer Marston's Malcontent was ob
tained in some indirect manner from these Black-
friars children, perhaps from one of the children
actors who " left playing " at the time of the new
license, and was played at the Globe, with an
Induction by Webster introducing Sinkler, Sly,
Burbadge, Condell, and Lowin on the stage. This
was a retaliation for the children having in like
fashion previously appropriated Jeronymo (The
Spanish Tragedy), which belonged to the Chamber
lain's men. The curious thing about the transac
tion is that the Malcontent was originally produced
in 1 60 1, containing satirical allusions to Hamlet;
and that in 1604 both plays, revised, were acted
on the same stage, by the same actors.

On 2d November Sejanus was entered on S. R.

On 1 8th December a letter from Chamberlain to

152 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE,

Winwood contains the following notice. " The
tragedy of Gowry, with all action and actors, hath
been twice represented by the King's players, with
exceeding concourse of all sorts of people : but
whether the matter or manner be not well handled,
or that it be thought unfit that princes should be
played on the stage in their lifetime, I hear that
some great councillors are much displeased with
it, and so 'tis thought it shall be forbidden."
Shakespeare's work during this year is shown by
the transcript of the Revels Accounts obtained by
Malone. The King's men acted at Whitehall on
November I The Moor of Venice; November 4,
The Merry Wives of Windsor; December 28,
Measure for Measure, and Errors ; [" Between
January I and January 5 " in the forged copy
of this entry still extant]* Love's Labour's Lost;
January 7, Henry V.; January 8, Every One out of
his Humour; February 2, Every One in his Humour;
February 10, The Merchant of Venice; February
II, The Spanish Maz ; February 12, The Merchant
of Venice again. I have given the full list as in
the forged copy, but Malone is our safe guarantee
for all the Shakespeare plays. It appears then
that in this year Shakespeare must have written

* This performance was at Southampton's house before Queen
Anne,

ANNALS. 153

Measure for Measure and Othello, and, as we have
already seen, produced a revision of Hamlet. How
much of this work was performed in 1603 we
cannot tell ; but it is not likely that Othello was
written till 1604. The only definite dates in this
year relate to other matters.

In May Shakespeare entered an action at Strat
ford against one Philip Rogers for ^"i 153. iod.;
balance of account for malt.

In August the King had a special order issued
that every member of the company should attend at
Somerset House when the Spanish ambassador came
to England (Halliwell, Outlines, p. 136). The Christ
mas Court performances have been noted above.

1605.

On 8th May, the old play on Leir was entered
on S. R.

On 4th May Phillips made his will, which was
proved on the I3th. In it he leaves 303. each to
Shakespeare and Condell, and 2OS. each to Fletcher,
Armin, Cowley, Cook, and Tooley, all his fellows ;
to Beeston, " his servant," 305. ; to Gilburne, his
" late apprentice," 403. and clothes ; to James Sandes,
" his apprentice," 403. and musical instruments ; to
Hemings, Burbadge, and Sly, overseers and exe
cutors, a bowl of silver of £$ apiece.

154 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

On 3d July a ballad on the Yorkshire Tragedy
was entered on S. R. ; the play which has been
erroneously attributed to Shakespeare was no doubt
acted about the same time.

The London Prodigal was published, but not
entered on S. R., this same year, with the name of
William Shakespeare on the title-page.

Jon son's Fox was acted by the King's men ; the
chief actors were the same as those of Sejanus
in 1603, except Phillips, who died in May, and
Shakespeare, a most noteworthy exception.

On 24th July, William Shakespeare, of Stratford-
upon-Avon, bought of Ralph Huband an unexpired
term of thirty-one years of a ninety-two years' lease
of a moiety of the tithes of Stratford, Old Strat
ford, Bishopton, and Welcombe for £440, subject
to a rent payable to the corporation of £17, and
£$ to John Barker. This, at the rate of interest
then prevalent, was a dear purchase. In 1598 his
" purchasing these tithes " had been mooted at
Stratford.

As to Shakespeare's dramatic work during this
year I have no doubt that Lear was on the stage in
May, when the old play was published. I cannot
otherwise account for the description of the latter
in S. R. as a tragical history. Until Shakespeare's
play this story had always been treated as a comedy.

ANNALS. 155

Macbeth was probably produced in the winter,
or in the following year. When James I. was at
Oxford in August, he had been addressed in
Latin by the three witches in this story, at an
entertainment given by the University. No doubt
James would be pleased by their prophecies, and
desirous that they should be promulgated in the
vulgar tongue. No more likely date can be found
for the holograph letter which he is said to have
addressed to Shakespeare. It may possibly be
that that letter was a command to write this play.
But, putting conjecture aside, Oldys says that
Sheffield, Duke of Buckingham, told Lintot that he
had a letter from the King to the dramatist.

On October 9, Shakespeare's company performed
before the Mayor and Corporation of Oxford. It
may have been on this occasion that Shakespeare
made the acquaintance of the Davenants, and
stopped for the first time at the Crown, the license
for which inn had only been taken out by Dave-
nant in the preceding year. Enough has been
written by others as to the scandal about Mrs.
Davenant, and the tradition that William Davenant
the poet, the godson of Shakespeare, was really
his son. No foundation beyond a Joe Miller joke
has been discovered for this report.

At Court, ten plays were acted in the Christmas

156 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

season by the King's men ; among them the revived
Mucedorus, which, as we have seen, was an apology
for Jonson's satire in Volpone.

1606.

In this year, Shakespeare's portion of Timon of
Athens, and that part of Cymbeline which is founded
on so-called British history, were probably written.

A play called The Puritan (Widow), evidently
by Middleton, was acted by the Paul's boys this
year, in which we find direct allusion to Richard
III. and Macbeth, both of which were probably on
the stage. The same scene contains a palpable
parody of the action of the scene in Pericles in
which Thaisa is recovered to life. That play must
then have also been on the stage. It does not
follow that it was the play as we have it. It may
have been, and I believe was, Wilkins' play before
Shakespeare's improvement had been introduced.

During July or August, the King's men had per
formed three plays before the King of Denmark and
his Majesty — two at Greenwich, one at Hampton
Court ; and at Christmas they performed at Court
nine plays : on December 26, 29 ; January 4, 6, 8 ;
February 2, 5, 15, 27. That on 26th December was
Lear, as we have it in the Quarto version. The
Folio is that used on the stage of the same date.

ANNALS. 157

1607.

Anthony and Cleopatra must have been acted
about this time, as well as Cyril Tourneur's Reven
ger's Tragedy.

On 25th June Susanna, Shakespeare's eldest
daughter, married Dr. John Hall, an eminent
physician at Stratford.

On 6th August Middleton's Puritan Widow was
entered on S. R., and imprinted as by W. S.

Twine's Pattern of Painful Adventures, on which
Wilkins' version of Pericles was founded, was re
printed in this year.

On 22d October Drayton's Merry Devil of
Edmonton was entered on S. R. The entry on
5th April under the same title, in which the author
ship is ascribed to TQiomas] B[rewer], refers to
the prose story, not the play.

On 26th November King Lear was entered on
S. R.

On December 31 Shakespeare's brother Edmund
was buried at St. Saviour's, Southwark, aged
twenty-eight, " a player," " with a forenoon knell
of the great bell."

There were thirteen Court performances by the
King's men : on December 26, 27, 28 ; January 2, 6
(two plays), 7, 9, 17 (two plays), 26 ; February 2, 6.

158 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1608.

On February 21 Elizabeth Hall, Shakespeare's
granddaughter, was baptized at Stratford.

The Yorkshire Tragedy was entered on S. R.
May 20, as by William Shakespeare. The author
ship of this play has not been yet ascertained.

On May 20 Anthony and Cleopatra, and Pericles
(not as in the Quarto version with the three last acts
by Shakespeare), were entered on S. R. Wilkins'
prose version of the play was printed this same
year. I take the order of events regarding this
play to have been as follows. Wilkins wrote a
play on Pericles in 1606, which was parodied in
Middleton's Puritan that same year ; in 1607 Twine's
Pattern of Painful Adventures was reprinted ; in
the same year Wilkins left the King's company
and joined the Queen's ; in May 1608 the play
was entered for publication, but not published ;
it may have been " stayed " by the Chamberlain's
company; in the same year Wilkins issued sur
reptitiously (it was not entered on S. R.) his " true
history of the play as it was lately presented by
the poet Gower." Such a proceeding as this, a
printing of a prose narrative founded on an un-
printed play and by the same author, is unparalleled
in the history of Shakespearean drama. It must

ANNALS. 159

be remembered that Wilkins was not even con
nected with the King's company at the time.
Meanwhile Shakespeare had rewritten Acts iii.— v.
In this new shape the play was acted in 1608,
and was, as we know from an allusion in Pimlico,
or Run Redcap (entered S. R. I5th April 1609),
very popular. An edition of the play thus altered
was issued in 1609, not by Blount, who made the
entry in May 1608, but by Gosson, as the 'Mate
much-admired play . . . with the true relation of
the whole history ... as also the no less strange
and worthy accidents in the birth and life of his
daughter Marina/' that is, of the part written by
Shakespeare. This edition is very hurriedly and
carelessly got up.

In August Shakespeare commenced an action
against Addenbroke.

On September 9 Shakespeare's mother was
buried at Stratford. Shakespeare's company had
been shortly before travelling on the southern coast
(Halliwell, who suppresses the exact date as usual).
It is always dangerous to read personal feeling in
a dramatist's work ; but the coincidences in date of
his King John and Hamnet's death, of his Coriolanus
and his mother's death, justify, I think, my opinion
that his wife's grief is apotheosised in Constance,
and his mother's character in Volumnia. This is

160 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

confirmed by the great change that takes place in
his work at this time ; his next four plays are
devoted to subjects of family reunion after separa
tion.

On 1 6th October he was godfather to William
Walker at Stratford.

In this autumn Coriolanus was probably pro
duced.

The Court Christmas performances by the King's
men were twelve, on unknown dates.

1609.

On January 28 Troylus and Cressida was entered
on S. R., and published from a surreptitious copy,
with a preface, stating that it had been " never
staled with the stage." This preface was with
drawn before the close of the year, probably at
the instance of the King's company. It has been,
however, the cause of misleading many modern
critics (myself included), as to the date of the pro
duction of the play. In the new issue the title
states that it is printed "as it was acted by the
King's Majesty's servants."

On February 15, a verdict for £6 and £i, 4$.
costs was given in favour of Shakespeare against
John Addenbroke for debt, and execution issued.
This suit began in August 1608 ; the precept for

ANNALS. 161

a jury is dated 2 1st December, when an adjourn
ment of the trial probably took place. After the
final judgment Addenbroke was non inventus, and
on /th June 1609, Shakespeare proceeded against
his bail, one Horneby. All these proceedings were
conducted not personally, but through his solicitor
and cousin Thomas Greene.

On 2Oth May the Sonnets were entered on S. R.,
and published with dedication to Mr. W. H., who,
in my opinion, was some one connected with Lord
Southampton, who had obtained a copy from him
or his, and possibly may have given Shakespeare
the hint to write them in the first instance, at the
time (1594) when his friends were anxious for
him to marry. Such a person was Sir William
Hervey, the third husband of Southampton's mother:
she died in 1607, and I conjecture that the delay
in publishing the Sonnets was due to the fact that
she wished them to remain in MS, at any rate
during her lifetime. The copy used may have
been found among her papers.

On 2Oth May 1608 had been entered Pericles,
and Antony and Cleopatra, which were not published
by Blount, who made the entry. Pericles, how
ever, was printed surreptitiously in 1609 for another
firm as we have it in the Quarto. This play was

1 62 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

probably then continued on the stage, as we find
another edition required by 1611.

Cymbeline was probably produced in the autumn.
This year being a plague year there was little
dramatic activity; even Jonson did not produce
his Epicene for the King's men, but had it acted
by the Chapel (or Revels) children. For the same
reason there were no stage performances at Court
at Christmas.

1610.

On 4th January a patent was granted to R.
Daborne, P. Rossiter, J. Tarbook, R. Jones, and
R. Browne, to set up a new Children's company
in Whitefriars. Their success was no doubt the
cause that determined the Burbadges to take the
Blackfriars into their own hands.* Accordingly
they arranged to purchase at Lady Day the re
mainder of Evans' lease of the Blackfriars (they
had already taken the boys, " now growing up to
be men," Underwood, f Ostler, &c., to "strengthen
the King's service "), and to place men players

* Mr. Halliwell (Outlines, p. 150) gives December 1609 as the
date of this change. This is certainly not in accordance with other
facts which I shall adduce in the following pages j he gives no autho
rity for his statement.

t Cuthbert Burbadge in 1635 adds Field by a slip of memory.

ANNALS. 163

— Hemings, Condell, Shakespeare, &c., therein.
Before the end of the year we accordingly find the
boys alluded to acting as members of the King's
company in Jonson's Alchemist. The chief players
were Burbadge, Hemings, Lowin, Ostler, Condell,
Underwood, Cooke, Tooley, Armin, and Egglestone.
Of these Tooley and Cooke had been boy actors
in the Chamberlain's company, Underwood and
Ostler in the Revels children. Shakespeare's name
does not occur ; nor do I find any evidence except
Mr. Halliwell's unsupported assertion (Outlines, p.
in), that he continued to act at this date. It is
noticeable that there are ten actors mentioned ;
this is very unusual in these play lists, and suggests
that the number of sharers may have been in
creased from eight to ten. There are certainly
about this time allusions to ten shares scattered
about in contemporary plays. If this be the case,
Shakespeare would no longer be a shareholder :
the whole question of his shares is involved in
difficulty, and this conjecture is only thrown out
to call attention to any allusions in writings of
this date that may throw light on the matter.

The King's men performed fifteen plays at
Court this Christmas.

In this year, in my opinion, Shakespeare having
produced The Winters Tale and The Tempest, retired

164 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

from theatrical work. Malone's hypothesis that
Sir W. Herbert's mention of Sir G. Buck's
" allowing " the former play implies a date sub
sequent to August 1610, is worthless ; Buck had
the "allowing" of plays in his hands from 1607
onwards. There is direct evidence that the Black-
friars Theatre was occupied even after 1611 by
other companies. Field's Amends for Ladies was
acted there by the Prince's and the Lady Eliza
beth's men ; and Charles could not be called Prince
till after the death of Henry, 6th November 1612.
The production of Field's play was probably in the
spring 1613. By careful comparison of the dry
documents concerning shareholders in 1635, with
those of the Blackfriars property in 1596, we ascer
tain that J. Burbadge bought that property 4th
February 1596; that in November the establish
ment of a theatre there was petitioned against, but
carried out soon after ; that a lease of twenty-one
years was granted to Evans, either at Christmas
1596 or Lady Day 1597, most probably the latter;
that at the end of thirteen years the Burbadges
bought the remaining eight years of the lease, pro
bably at Lady Day 1610, and took possession of the
building ; — but that they at the same time took the
boys into the King's company or set up Hemings,
Shakespeare, &c., in the Blackfriars is mere rhetoric

ANNALS. 165

of Cuthbert's. Underwood and Ostler had both
left the Revels children before the performance of
Jonson's Epicene in 1609, and Field did not join
the King's men till 1618-19.

In June Shakespeare purchased twenty acres of
pasture land from the Combes.

At Christmas the King's men performed fifteen
plays at Court.

1611.

In this year unusual efforts seem to have been
made by the King's company to secure authors
of repute to write for their playhouse. Jonson's
Catiline was acted by nearly the same cast as
The Alchemist, the only change being that Robinson
appears in the list instead of Armin. The second
Maideris Tragedy was produced in October, most
likely written by Tourneur, having been preceded
by the first Maid's Tragedy by Beaumont and
Fletcher, who also in this year brought out their
Philaster and King and no King: in all we have
five new plays of the first rank, acted by a com
pany that hitherto appears to have almost entirely
depended on about two plays from Shakespeare,
and occasionally a third by some other hand, as
sufficient novelty to attract a year's full houses.
It is this quasi monopoly in writing for his com-

1 66 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

pany that explains Shakespeare's accumulation of
property ; and it is to me incredible that Macbeth,
The Winters Tale, Cymbeline, and The Tempest
should all have been produced in this year. Yet
this seems to be the belief of practical critics who
believe only what can be supported by what they
term " positive evidence/' the evidence in this
case being that Forman, the astrological charlatan,
entered in his note-book that he had seen acted
Cymbeline, Macbeth, 2Oth April 1610 [1611] ;
Richard I L, 3Oth April 1611 ; Winter's Tale, May 15.
This evidence has, however, value of another kind,
for it shows that a large number of revivals took
place in this year ; indeed, coupling this with the
fact that at this Christmas and the next the un
precedented number of fifty plays were performed
by the King's men at Court, it is likely that all
Shakespeare's plays were revived immediately after
his retirement from the stage. We cannot trace
fifty plays to the possession of his company at this
date without including them.

On September 1 1 Shakespeare's name occurs
in the margin of a folio page of donors (including
all the principal inhabitants of Stratford) to a
subscription list " towards the charge of prosecut
ing the bill in Parliament for the better repair of
the highways." This appears to confirm the view

ANNALS. 167

that Shakespeare was at this time residing in
Stratford.

On December 16 the play of Lord Cromwell was
entered on S. R., and published as by W. S.

The plays at Court were twenty-two : on October
31; November i, 5; December 26; January 5,
February 23, before the King ; on November 9,
19; December 16, 31 ; January 7, 15 ; February
19, 20, 28 ; April 3, 16, before Prince Henry and
Charles, Duke of York ; on February 9, 20 (sic),
before the Prince; on March 28, April 26, before
the Lady Elizabeth.

1612.

On February 3 the burial of Gilbert Shakespeare
" adolescens " was entered in the Stratford Register.
I agree with Mr. French that this was most likely
Shakespeare's brother.

In this year a suit was commenced " Lane
Greene, and Shakespeare complts- " on the ground
that they had to pay too large a proportion of the
reserved rent of the tithes purchased in 1605. It
appears from the draft of the bill filed before Lord
Ellesmere that Shakespeare's income from this
source was £60.

The plays produced by the King's men were
The Woman1 s Prize, Cardenno (i.e., Cardenes, or

1 68 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Love's Pilgrimage), and The Captain, by Fletcher
and his coadjutors, and the Duchess of Malfi by
Webster, who also published The White Devil,
with the remarkable allusion to the "right happy
and copious industry" of Shakespeare, Dekker,
and Heywood. Curiously enough, this is often
referred to even now as a eulogy on Webster's
part ; it is really damning with faint praise the
poet to whom he hoped to be the successor as
provider of plays to the King's company.

The Passionate Pilgrim reached a third edition,
and was reissued as tf certain amorous Sonnets
between Venus and Adonis," by W. Shakespeare ;
" whereunto is added two love epistles " between
Paris and Helen. These were stolen from Hey-
wood's Troja Britannica of 1609. In his Apology
for Actors (1612), he complains of the injury done
him, as it might lead to unjust suspicion of piracy
on his part, and adds, "As I must acknowledge
my lines not worthy his patronage under whom he
hath published them, so the author I know much
offended with M. Jaggard that altogether unknown
to him presumed to make so bold with his name."
In consequence, no doubt, of this remonstrance,
Jaggard had to substitute a new title-page, from
which Shakespeare's name was entirely omitted.
He had allowed his name to be used in the titles

ANNALS. 169

of The London Prodigal in 1605, of The Yorkshire
Tragedy in 1608, of The Passionate Pilgrim of 1609,
and even of Sir John Oldcastle in 1600 without
murmuring ; but directly the interests of another
demand justice at his hands he takes prompt action,
and compels the piratical publisher to withdraw his
name altogether.

The King's men at the Christmas festivities, &c.,
presented at Court fourteen plays before the King
and fourteen before the Prince, the Lady Elizabeth,
and the Prince Palatine. Among the plays so
represented were Philaster, The Knot of Foo/s,
Much Ado about Nothing, The Maid's Tragedy, The
Merry Devil of Edmonton, The Tempest, A King and
no King, The Twins1 Tragedy, The Winter's Tale,
Sir John Falstaff (The Merry Wives of Windsor),
The Moor of Venice, The Nobleman, Cesar's Tragedy,
Love lies a bleeding (Philaster repeated), before the
Prince, Lady Elizabeth, and the Palatine ; A Bad
Beginning makes a Good Ending (? Alfs Well that
Ends Well-, but entered S. R. 1660 as Ford's, and
destroyed in MS. by Warburton's servant ; Ford's
revision must, of course, have been later than
1623), The Captain, The Alchemist, Cardenno, The
Hotspur (/ Henry IV.), Benedicte and Betteris (Much
Ado about Nothing), before the King. See Stan
hope's Accounts (Halliwell, Outlines, p. 597, third

1 70 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

edition, and Revels Accounts, p. xxiii.) Of these
twenty Shakespeare contributes nine, Fletcher (with
Beaumont) six, Jonson one, Tourneur one, Dray-
ton (?) one, and two have not been identified.

1613.

On 4th February Richard Shakespeare, the poet's
only surviving brother, was buried at Stratford.

On loth March Shakespeare purchased in Black-
friars a house with yard and haberdasher's shop
for £140, subject to a mortgage of £60. This
property had greatly increased in value since 1604,
when it was sold for £100, probably in consequence
of the immediate vicinity of the theatre, which drew
large custom for feathers and other articles of
attire to Blackfriars. Shakespeare leased it to
John Robinson, who had by this time seen the
absurdity in a business point of view of his opposi
tion to the establishment of the theatre in 1596. One
of the trustees for the legal estate (the mortgage
remaining unredeemed till 1613) was John Heming,
unquestionably Shakespeare's friend the actor.

On 8th June the King's men played at Court
before the Duke of Savoy's ambassadors.

On 29th June the Globe Theatre was burnt
down, " while Burbadge's company were acting
the play of Henry VIII, , and there shooting off

ANNALS. 171

certain chambers by way of triumph " (T. Lorkin's
letter). Sir H. Wotton says it was " a new play
called All is True, representing some principal
pieces of the reign of Henry VIII." It was of
course Shakespeare's play in its original form. A
Fool must have acted in it, for in the old ballad
about this fire, " the reprobates prayed for the
fool and Henry Condy " (Condell), who were appa
rently the last actors who escaped.

It has been conjectured that at this time Shake
speare retired from the stage, having sold his shares
in the Globe and Blackfriars in order to purchase
the house above mentioned. There is no particle
of evidence that he had not saved the £80 then
paid from his usual economies, or that if he had
wished to sell his shares he could have done so.
It is true that shares in the later Globe (rebuilt
1613—14) were so sold ; but all the evidence as to
the theatre in which Shakespeare was concerned
points the other way. It appears from the 1635
documents that Hemings, Shakespeare, &c., had
their shares without paying any consideration, and
that all the shares held by Pope, Kempe, Bryan,
Shakespeare, Sly, and Cowley had reverted by 1614
into the hands of the surviving shareholders, the
Burbadges, Hemings, and Condell. If we examine
the wills of these men, we find that Pope indeed, in

172 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1603, leaves all his estate or interest in the Globe,
" which I have or ought to have," to Mary Clark
and Thomas Bromley; but that Phillips in 1605,
and Cooke in 1614, make no mention of any shares.
It seems most likely that this will of Pope's raised
the question as to whether these shares were held
during office as actor or absolutely. There can be
little doubt that the former was the case, as is only
reasonable where the shares, as in the first Globe,
were given " without consideration." Purchased
shares, like those in the latter Globe, are in a dif
ferent position. At any rate, the shares left to
Bromley and Clark in fact reverted to the surviv
ing shareholders. Sly's will in 1608, which is in
similar terms to Pope's, leaves his shares to Robert
Brown, who, like Clark and Bromley, disappears
from all future history of these shares. Moreover,
there is no mention of any shares belonging to
Cowley, Beeston, or Kempe : yet there can be no
doubt that Kempe was till 1599 a shareholder.

On 1 5th July, in the Ecclesiastical Court at
Worcester, the case of Dr. John Hall v. John Lane,
for slandering his wife, was heard, and the defendant
excommunicated on the 27th.

There were sixteen plays performed at Court by
the King's men this year, on November 4, 16 ; Jan
uary 10 ; February 4, 8, 10, 18 ; and nine others.

ANNALS. 173

1614.

Fletcher, Webster, and Beaumont had all left the
King's men, and now, 3ist October, Jonson leaves
them too, and produces his Bartholomew Fair at the
Hope, with abundant sneers at Shakespeare's plays,
especially the Tempest and Winter's Tale. He does
not allude to Henry VIII. Fletcher was now, as
well as Jonson, a writer for the Princess Elizabeth's
players.

In July John Combe left Shakespeare £$ as a
legacy.

In the autumn an attempt was made by W.
Combe, the squire of Welcombe, to inclose a large
portion of the neighbouring common fields ; this
attempt was opposed by the Corporation, but sup
ported by Mr. Manwaring and Shakespeare. The
latter clearly acted simply with a view to his own
personal interest. His name as an ancient freeholder
occurs in a list, 5th September, as having claim for
compensation if the inclosure took place. On 1 8th
October, Replingham, Combe's agent, covenanted
to give him full compensation for injury by " any
inclosure or decay of tillage : " on i6th November
he went to London : on 1 7th November his " cousin,"
T. Greene, town clerk of Stratford and at the same
time his own solicitor, called to see him : he said

174 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

the inclosures were to be less than had been repre
sented, that nothing would be done till April, and
that he and Mr. Hall thought nothing would be
done at all. On 23d December letters to Mr. Man-
waring and Shakespeare were written, with " almost
all the company's hands " to them, and a private
letter in addition by Greene to " my cousin," with
copies of all the acts of the Corporation, and notes
of the inconveniences that would result from the
inclosure. The inclosure was not made, and Shake
speare did not get his compensation.

1616.

On 25th January the first draft of Shakespeare's
will was drawn up. On loth February his daughter
Judith was married without a license to T. Quiney,
vintner of Stratford; they were summoned in conse
quence to the Ecclesiastical Court of Worcester a few
weeks after. On 25th March the will was executed,
and on 25th April " Will. Shakspere, gent." was
entered in the burial register at Stratford. He died
just before completing his fifty-fourth year ; but it is
usually supposed on the 23d, his birthday.

( '75 )

SECTION IV.

THE CHRONOLOGICAL SUCCESSION OF SHAKESPEARE'S
PLAYS.

IT is of the greatest importance, in investigating the
chronological succession of an author's works, that
we should start from a definite and certain date.
The neglect of this point, especially in so difficult
an instance as the present, involves us too often in
thorny discussions at the very onset. Such an
epoch is presented us at once by the publication of
Shakespeare's earliest poem. I begin therefore at
this point.

Venus and Adonis was entered on S. R. i8th
April 1593 by Richard Field, printer, son of Henry
Field, tanner, of Stratford-on-Avon, who parted
with his copyright to Mr. Harrison, senior, 25th
June 1594. There were editions in 1593, 1594
(R. Field) ; 1596 (R. Field for J. Harrison); 1599
and 1602, bis (W. Leake) ; 1617 (W. Barrett) ; and
1620 (J. Parker). Harrison had assigned his copy
right to Leake 25th June 1596. It was transferred

176 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

to W. Barrett i6th February 1616-17 ; and again to
J. Parker 8th March 1620. This was " the first
heir of my invention," which means — the first pro
duction in which I have had no co-labourer. Com
pare Ford's expression " the first-fruits of my
leisure " applied to 'Tt's pity she's &c., although he
had certainly at that time written plays in connec
tion with Dekker and others.

Lucrece. Entered on 9th May 1594 in S. R. by
Mr. Harrison, senior. Editions 1594 (R. Field for
J. Harrison); 1598 (P. S. for J. Harrison); 1600
(J. H. for J. Harrison); 1607 (N. O. for J.
Harrison ; 1616 (T. G. for R. Jackson). This
poem is a pendant to the former ; the one exhibiting
woman's chastity, the other her lust. Such oppo
sition of subject in successive productions is very
characteristic of Shakespeare.

A Lover's Complaint, published with the Sonnets
1609, written probably 1593-4, between the Venus
and Lucrece.

Sonnets, entered on S. R. 2Oth May 1609 for T.
Thorpe. I have on pp. 25, 120 already stated my
opinion that these were written during 1594-8.

Titus Andronicus was a new play in 1594, acted
for the first time by Sussex' men at the Rose on
23d January.

Richard III. was no doubt acted this same

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 177

year by the Chamberlain's men ; just before the
old play which had been acted by the Queen's
players was published (S. R. ipth June 1594).
A Richard is alluded to in John Weever's Epigrams,
published 1599, when the author was twenty-three,
but written when he was not twenty; they must
therefore date at latest in 1596 (not 1595 as usu
ally stated). Weever mentions Venus and Adonis,
Lucrece, Romeo, and Richard as the issue of honey-
tongued Shakespeare. We shall see that Romeo, as
referred to here, was acted in 1595-6, and I believe
the Richard referred to is the Richard II. of 1595.
Edward HI. 1 have shown in p. 118 to be an
alteration of an old play of Marlowe's written in
1590, revived in 1594 about the autumn, after
Lucrece was published. It will be most convenient
to defer the consideration of authorship of the pre
ceding plays till I have to treat of Henry VI.;
the dates of editions of all the plays will be exhibited
in tabular form further on, which will save much
repetition and interruption of argument. We now
come to an unquestionable date; and it is from
this, the first recorded date in connection with an
undoubted play, that I wish the reader to regard
our investigation of play dates as beginning.

178 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1594-

December 28. Shakespeare's only farcical comedy
of Errors was acted at Gray's Inn at night : the
same players had acted before the Queen at
Greenwich on that day, very likely in the same
comedy. In April 1595 the English agent in
Edinburgh wrote to Burghley, how ill King James
took it that the comedians in London should scorn
the king and people of Scotland in their plays.
The barrenness of Scotland is mentioned in iii. 2.
Neither would James approve of a play in which
witchcraft and exorcising is so constantly ridiculed.
The opening scene is very like in method to that
of Midsummer-Night's Dream; and the reiterated
allusions by either Dromio to being transformed to
an ass (ii. 2. 201 ; iii. I. 15 ; iv. 4. 28 ; iii. 2. 77)
remind us so strongly of that play as almost to
infer contemporaneity of production ; especially as
in iii, I. 47 the same quibble, an ass and ace, occurs
as in Midsummer-Nights Dream, v. i. 317. Now
in 1593, in his Pierce 's Supererogation, and in 1592
in his Four Letters, Gabriel Harvey had rung the
changes on an ass and a Nash even to wearisome-
ness ; just as Shakespeare in this play puns on an
ell and a Nell (iii. 2. 112). This may seem very
forced ; but I must remind the reader, that s and sh

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 179

were not distinguished in pronunciation except by
pedants at the end of the sixteenth century. It
seems then most likely that in dwelling on this
transformation, Shakespeare meant to recall to his
audience the dyslogistic name inflicted on his old
enemy Nash by Gabriel Harvey. All this points
to a production of the play in 1594, by the
Chamberlain's men ; but there are also indications
of its having been altered from an earlier version.
In the stage directions there are traces of the
name Juliana * for Luciana : in the text Dowsabel
occurs instead of Nell, and in v. i, the prefix Fat.
(Father) has been clearly replaced by Mar. (Mer
chant) in a revision ; note especially v. I. 195, where
both prefixes have by a common printer's error
been inserted at once. The older form, again, had
Antipholus Sereptus for A. of Syracuse, and Erotes
or Erratis for A. of Ephesus ; and it had twenty-
five years of separation between the parents for
thirty-three in the later version. This last differ
ence occurs in i. I, which is throughout written in
a more mechanical and antique style of metre than
the rest of the play ; and indeed seems to be one
of the earliest specimens left us of Shakespeare's
attempts to bombast out a blank verse. There is

* This name occurs in Apollonius and Sylla, of which more
hereafter.

i8o LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

also the name Menaphon (v. i. 368), which is
likely to have been adopted from Greene's Menaphon
(1589), who again took it from Marlowe's Tamber-
laine (1587-8). The Adam "that goes in the
calf-skin," surely alludes to the Adam in the
Looking-glass for London (1590), whose " calf-skin
jests " were even after seven years an object of
ridicule to the playwrights. For all these reasons
I believe that a version of this play was acted c.
1590, perhaps in the winter of that year. It does
not follow that that version was entirely by Shake
speare, as the present play is ; he may have replaced
a coadjutor's work of 1590 by his own of 1594.
The plot, with its time-unity, is not likely to be of
his arranging. As to the pun on the war made by
France against her heir (iii. 2. 126), which is
usually relied on for the date of production, it
merely gives as limits August 1589, when the war
of succession began, and 2/th February 1594, when
Henri IV. was crowned. It does, however, enable us
to say positively that the first performance of the
play was before the formation of the Chamberlain's
company, who only revived it, no doubt in an
amended shape, on 28th December 1594, most likely
for the sake of the Court performance. The original
plot was probably suggested by Plautus' Mencechmi
and Amphitryo ; and perhaps more directly by the

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 181

History of Error performed by the Chapel children
in 1576, which, by the bye, has nothing to do with
the Ferrar of the Earl of Sussex1 men in 1582.
But we cannot assume in these early plays that
Shakespeare was the plotter. It is certain, how
ever, that he did afterwards adopt the likeness of
twins in Twelfth Night as a means of introducing
" errors " on the stage.

1595-

January 26 was the date of the marriage of
William Stanley, Earl of Derby, at Greenwich.
Such events were usually celebrated with the
accompaniment of plays or interludes, masques
written specially for the occasion not having yet
become fashionable. The company of players
employed at these nuptials would certainly be the
Chamberlain's, who had, so lately as the year before,
been in the employ of the Earl's brother Ferdinand.
No play known to us is so fit for the purpose as
Midsummer '-Night's Dream, which in its present
form is certainly of this date. About the same
time Edward Russel, Earl of Bedford, married
Lucy Harrington. Both marriages may have been
enlivened by this performance. This is rendered
more probable by the identity of the Oberon story
with that of Drayton's Nymphidia, whose special

182 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

patroness at this time was the newly married
Countess of Bedford. That poem contains an
allusion to Don Quixote, which could not well have
been written till 1612, and certainly not till 1605 ;
but Drayton is known to have constantly altered
his poems by way of addition and omission, and no
date of original production can in his case be fixed
by allusions of this kind. The date of the play
here given is again confirmed by the description of
the weather in ii. 2. In 1594, and in that year
only, is there on record such an inversion of the
seasons as is there spoken of. Chute's Cephalus
and Procris was entered on S. R., 28th September
1593; Marlowe's Hero and Leander, 22d October
1 593 ; Marlowe and Nash's Dido was printed in
1594. All these stories are alluded to in the play.
The date of the Court performance must be in the
winter of 1594-5. But the traces of the play
having been altered from a version for the stage
are numerous. There is a double ending. Robin's
final speech is palpably a stage epilogue, while what
precedes from " Enter Puck " to " break of day —
Exeunt" is very appropriate for a marriage entertain
ment, but scarcely suited to the stage. In Acts
iv. and v., again, we find in the speech-prefixes
Duke, Duchess, Clown for Theseus, Hippolita, Bottom :
such variations are nearly always marks of altera-

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 183

tion, the unnamed characters being anterior in date.
In the prose scenes speeches are several times
assigned to wrong speakers, another common mark
of alteration. In the Fairies the character of Moth
(Mote) has been excised in the text, though he still
remains among the dramatis personce. It is not, I
think, possible to say which parts of the play were
added for the Court performance; but a careful
examination has convinced me that wherever Robin
occurs in the stage-directions or speech-prefixes
scarcely any, if any, alteration has been made ;
Puck, on the contrary, indicates change. The
date of the stage play may, I think, be put in the
winter of 1592; and if so it was acted, not at
the Rose, but where Lord Strange's company were
travelling. For the allusion in v. I. 52, "The
thrice three Muses mourning for the death of
Learning, late deceased in beggary," to Spenser's
Tears of the Muses (1591), or Greene's death, 3d
September 1592, could not, in either interpretation,
be much later than the autumn of 1592; and the
lines in ii. I. 156 —

" I am a spirit of no common rate ;
The summer still doth tend upon my state,
And I dolovethee"—

are so closely like those in Nash's Summer's Last
Will, where Summer says —

184 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

"Died I had indeed unto the earth,
But that Eliza, England's beauteous Queen,
On whom all seasons prosperously attend,
Forbad the execution of my fate
Until her joyful progress was expired" —

that I think they are alluded to by Shakespeare.
The singularly fine summer of 1592 is attributed
to the influence of Elizabeth, the Fairy Queen.
Nash's play was performed at the Archbishop's
palace at Croydon in Michaelmas term of the same
year by a " number of hammer-handed clowns (for
so it pleaseth them in modesty to name them
selves) ; " but I believe the company originally
satirised in Shakespeare's play was the Earl of
Sussex', Bottom, the chief clown, being intended for
Robert Greene. Thus much for date of produc
tion. For the title of the play, compare the con
clusion of The Taming of a Shrew and Peele's
Old Wife's Tale, the latter of which is performed
in a dream, and the former is supposed by Sly to
be so ; the interpretation that it means a play
performed at midsummer is quite inconsistent with
iv. I. 190, &c., and other passages. The names of
the personages are interesting, because they show
us what books Shakespeare was reading at this
time : from North's Plutarch, Life of Theseus, the
first in the book, he got Periginia (Perigouna),
Aegles, Ariadne, Antiope, and Hippolita ; from

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 185

Chaucer's Knight's Tale, also the first in the printed
editions, which he afterwards dramatised, Philos-
trate ; from Greene's James IV. Oberon. This last
name, with Titania's, also occurs in the Queen's
Entertainment at Lord Hertford's, 1591. The time-
analysis of this play has probably been disturbed
by omissions in producing the Court version. I. I.
128-251 ought to form, and probably did, in the
original play, a separate scene ; it certainly does
not take place in the palace. To the same cause
must be attributed the confusion as to the moon's
age; cf. i. I. 209 with the opening lines : the new
moon was an afterthought, and evidently derived
from a form of the story in which the first day
of the month and the new moon were coincident
after the Greek time-reckoning. It is worth notice
that not only is the title of Preston's Cambyses
parodied in the Pyramus interlude, but his pension
of sixpence a day is ridiculed in iv. 2. Nor must
we quite pass over the fact, which confirms the
1595 date, that on 3Oth August 1594, at the
baptism of Prince Henry (of Scotland), the tame
lion which was to have been brought in in the
triumph was replaced by a Moor, " because his
presence might have brought some fear.'1 The
play is nearly as much an error play (iii. 2. 368)
as the Errors itself, and, like it, has no known

1 86 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

immediate source for the plot. The Pyramus
interlude is clearly based on C. Robinson's Hand-
full oj Pleasant Delights (1584); and some of the
fairy story may have been suggested by Monte-
mayor's Diana. The line ii. 2. 104, is from Peek's
Edward I. (near end), " how nature strove in them
to show her art," and I think the man who dares
not come in the moon because it is in snuff may
allude to the offence given at Court by Lyly's
Endymion in 1588. An absolute downward limit
of date is given by a line imitated in Doctor
Doddypol, a play alluded to in 1596 by Nash, and
spoiled in the imitation —

" Hanging on every leaf an orient pearl,
Which shook together by the silken wind
Of their loose mantles made a silver chime."

This solidification of the dewdrops does not occur in
the Shakespeare parallel, ii. i. 15. Mr. Halliwell's
fancy that Spenser's line in Fairy Queen, vi. —
" Through hills and dales, through bushes and
through briers " must have been imitated by Shake
speare in ii. I. 2, is very flimsy; hill and dale,
bush and brier, are commonplaces of the time.
Nor is there any proof that this song could not
have been transmitted to Ireland in 1593 or 1594.

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 187

1595-

Richard II. cannot be definitely dated by external
evidence, but all competent critics agree that it is
the earliest of Shakespeare's historical plays ; the
question of authorship, &c., of Richard III. being
reserved for the present. It is a tragedy like Mar
lowe's Edward //., not a " life and death " history.
The Civil Wars of Daniel, from which Shakespeare
seems to have derived a few hints, was entered on
S. R. nth October 1594. The play probably was
produced after this date, and before the publication
of the Pope's bull in 1596, inciting the Queen's
subjects to depose her. In consequence of this
bull the abdication scene was omitted in representa
tion, and in the editions during Elizabeth's lifetime.
In like manner, Hayward was imprisoned for pub
lishing in 1599 his History of the First Year of
Henry IV. , which is simply the story of Richard's
abdication. The omitted scene was restored in
1608 under James I. as "new additions." Such
new additions on title-pages are often restorations
of omitted passages. The Folio copy omits a few
other speeches, the play having been evidently found
too long in representation ; but it contains the
abdication scene. This being the first play of
Shakespeare's that passed the press was carelessly

1 88 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

corrected, whence much apparently un Shakespearian
and halting metre, which is easily set right. The
source of the plot is Holinshed's Chronicle; " the
earlier play on Richard II. lately printed " (says Mr.
Stokes in 1878) " I have not seen ; but it concludes
with the murder of the Duke of Gloster." The play
seen at the Globe by Forman in 1611 began with
the rebellion of Wat Tyler. It was not Shake
speare's. There is no prose in this play, in John,
or the Comedy of Errors; a sign of early work.

1595-

The Two Gentlemen of Verona is a striking
instance of the difficulties in which we are involved
if we attempt to assign a single date for the
production of every play, and neglect the fact
that alterations were and are continually made by
authors in their works. Drake and Chalmers date
this play in 1595 ; Gervinus, Delius, and Stokes
1591. Malone at different times adopted both dates.
I believe that all these opinions are reconcilable,
that the play was produced in 1591, with work by
a second hand in it, which was cut out and replaced
by Shakespeare's own in 1595. For a date after
1593 is distinctly indicated in the play as we have
it by the allusions to Hero and Leander in i. I.
21, iii. I. 119; and to the pestilence in ii. I. 20;

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 189

a still closer approximation is shown to the Merchant
of Venice, by the mistake of Padua for Milan in
ii. 5. 2. If Shakespeare had not, at the time when
he finally produced the Two Gentlemen, begun his
study for the Venetian story, whence this name ?
It only occurs there, once in Much Ado, and in
the non-Shakespearian parts of The Taming of the
Shrew. In like manner the mistake of Verona for
Milan in iii. 4. 81, v. 4. 129, indicates that he
had been preparing Romeo and Juliet. That our
play lies between the Errors and the Dream on
one hand and The Merchant on the other, becomes
pretty clear by comparing the development of
character in the Dromios, Launce and Speed,
Lancelot Gobbo ; in Lucetta and Nerissa ; in
Demetrius and Lysander, Valentine and Proteus.
Nor are marks of the twofold date wanting. In
the first two acts we find Valentine at the
Emperor's court, no Duke mentioned ; in the last
three at the Duke's, no Emperor mentioned. The
turning-point is in ii. 4, where, though " Emperor "
occurs in the text, " Duke " is used in the stage
directions. In i. I. 32, "If haply won perhaps
a hapless gain ; if lost, why then a grievous labour
won," there is surely an allusion to Love's Labour's
Won, and Love's Labour's Lost; we shall see here
after that in 1591 these were quite recent plays.

i9o LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

The Eglamour of Verona mentioned in i. 2. 9 is
not the Eglamour of Milan who appears in iv. 3,
v. I. Style and metre require an early date for
i. ii. 1—3 and parts of iii. I ; but in any argument
of an internal nature, Johnson's weighty remark
should be remembered — " From mere inequality, in
works of imagination, nothing can with exactness
be inferred." The immediate origin of the plot
is unknown ; parts of the story are identical with
those of The Shepherdess Filismena in Montemayor's
Diana, translated in MS. by Young, c. 1583, and
of Bandello's Apollonius and Sylla in Rich's Fare
well to Military Profession (1581). Felix and Philio-
mena had been dramatised and acted at Court by
the Queen's players, 1584—5. That the revision
of The Two Gentlemen was hurriedly performed is
clear from the unusually large number of Exits
and Entrances that are not marked. This hurry
accounts, in some degree, for the weakness of the
play, which induces so many critics to insist on an
early date for it as a whole. Yet the special
blemish they discover, v. 4. 83, the yielding up of
Silvia by Valentine, is paralleled in the Dream, where
(iii. 2. 163) Lysander says, "With all my heart, in
Hermia's love I yield you up my part : " and that
Shakespeare felt the unreality of this part of the
plot is clear from Two Gentlemen, v. 4. 25, which to

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 191

me seems a manifest reminiscence of his last play,
" How like a dream is this I see and hear ! " (cf.
Midsummer- Nigh? s Dream, iv. I. 190, "It seems
to me that yet we sleep, we dream "). He had
been reading Chaucer, as we know, and from him
had adopted this method of presenting stories in a
dream. A slighter reminiscence of Chaucer's Knight's
Tale occurs in the mention of Theseus, iv. 4. 173.

1595-6-

Romeo and Juliet was surreptitiously printed by
J. Danter in 1597; "as it hath been often with
great applause played (publicly), by the Rt. Hon.
the L. of Hunsdon, his servants." This edition
must have been printed in 1596 (old reckoning),
for the players would have been called the Cham
berlain's servants except during the tenure of that
office by W. Brooke, Lord Cobham, from 23d July
1596 to 5th March 1597. That it was on the
stage as well as Richard II. in 1595—6, appears
from Weever's Epigrams. A correct edition of
Romeo appeared in 1599. The relation of these
two versions of the play presents a difficult pro
blem. The 1599 Quarto Q2 is unquestionably the
play of 1595-6, as acted by the then Chamberlain's
players at the Theater; for it does not follow, as
Mr. Halliwell supposes, that because they continued

i92 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

to act it when called Lord Hunsdon's players, they
had not ever acted it before. Such reasoning
would compel us to assign all plays published as
" acted by the King's players " to a date subsequent
to 1602 — Hamlet ', for example, and Troylus and
Cressida. Nor does it follow that because it was
acted at the Curtain, where Marston mentions it in
his Scourge of Villany (S. R. 8th September 1598),
that it was produced at that same theatre. Mr. P. A.
Daniel has shown, in his Parallel Text Edition, that
the 1597 Quarto Q1 is a shortened version of the
play, no doubt for stage purposes (compare the
Quartos in i. I ; i. 3 ; iii. i). He has also with
great ingenuity conclusively proved that Q2 is a
revised copy made on a text in many places iden
tical with Qx (see i. I. 122 ; i. 4. 62 ; ii. 3. 1-4;
iii. 2. 85; iii. 3. 38-45; "i- 5- 177-181 ; iv. I.
95-98, 1 10 ; v. 3. 102, 107). But his conclusion
that Q! is partly made up from notes taken during
the performance, is not borne out by any evidence.
There are no " mistakes of the ear " in this play, nor
is this conclusion consistent with his own theory
that Q2 was a revision made on the text of Qr
I owe what I believe to be the real solution to a
hint from my son, a boy of thirteen. When a
play was written and licensed, at least three copies
would be made of it. One, with the Master of

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 193

the Revels' endorsement (which I will call R),
would be kept in the archives of the theatre intact ;
one would be made for the manager (M), which
would have occasional notes of stage direction, &c.,
inserted ; and one, an acting copy, for the prompter
(P), usually much abridged from the original and
always altered : this would contain stage directions,
&c., in full, but in the unaltered passages would
be identical with M. Now Ql shows evident signs
of being printed from a shortened copy P; Q2
is manifestly a revision of a full copy M. The
genealogy of the Quartos then stands thus : —

R (author 's first version).

I I

P M

Q2 is, according to this theory, a revised version
made on a complete copy of an early version of
the play, while Ql is printed from the prompter's
copy of the same early version. When the revi
sion took place this copy would be thrown aside as
worthless ; and any dishonest employe of the theatre
could sell it to an equally dishonest publisher, who
would publish it as the play now acted. If this
solution be correct, and it is the only one yet pro-

194 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

posed that meets all the difficulties of the case, Qx
is specially interesting as being the earliest extant
play (as acted) in which Shakespeare had a share.
For it is clear that some passages in it, especially
ii. 6, the laments in iv. 5, and Paris' dirge in v. 3,
are not only unlike the corresponding passages in
Q2, but unlike anything we have from Shakespeare's
hand. The date of the early form of the play was
1591, eleven years after the earthquake of 1580
(i. 3. 23, 30). As confirmatory of the conclusion
that Q2 was revised from an early play note that
in i. i the servants are nameless in Qv but have
names in the stage directions in Q2; that in I. 3
the servant is called clown in Qx ; that in iii. 5 in
Q2, where the prefixes vary between Lady and Mother,
it is in the unaltered parts that Mother is used as
in Qj, but Lady always where enough alteration
has taken place to require a completely fresh tran
script ; that in v. 3 there is a double entry marked
for the Capulets (a sure sign) ; that in ii. 3. 1-4,
v. 3. 1 08— in, duplicate versions occur. On the
other hand, the printing of the Nurse's speeches in
italics in both Quartos is conclusive for identity of
origin in that scene. Other .points worth noting
are that " Queen Mab, what's she ? " i. 4. 55 in
Q! are omitted in Q2 : Mab had become well known
in 1595, probably through Dray ton's Nymphidia.

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 195

In ii. 2. 144, " I am afraid all this is but a dream/'
reminds us of similar passages in Errors, ii. 2. 184 ;
Two Gentlemen, v. 4. 26; and Dream, iv. i. 199, &c.
W. Kempe acted the part of Peter (see entry in
iv. 5) ; Balthazar is proparoxyton in v. I. The line
in iii. 2, 75, " O serpent heart hid with a flowering
face " (where Qa has " serpent's hate "), is very like
the often-quoted " O tiger's heart wrapt in a woman's
hide " (j Henry VI. i. 4. 137). The play is founded
on Arthur Brooke's poem, The Tragical Histofy of
Romeus and Juliet, containing a rare example of true
constancy. Constancy in love is its main subject.
He took the Italian form of the name Romeo, and
the time of Juliet's sleep forty- two hours (" forty at
least " in the novel) from Rhomeo and Julietta in
Painter's Palace of Pleasure. Much unnecessary
writing has been expended on this forty- two
hours ; the plot requires forty-eight. Daniel, in
his Rosamund (S. R. February 1591-2), and the
author of Doctor Doddypol (c. October 1594), have
passages very like some in this play. A ballad
founded on the play was entered S. R. 1 5th August
1596. On the mention of "the first and second
cause" in ii. 4. 26 and (in Q: only) in iii. I, some
critics base the conclusion that this play must be
subsequent to Saviolo's Book of Honour, &c. (S. R.
I9th November 1594). I believe that the book

196 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

referred to is The Book of Honor and Arms, wherein
is discussed the CAUSES of quarrel, &c. (S. R. 1 3th
December 1589). The same expression occurs in
Love's Labour's Lost, i. 2. 184; in any case it
probably belongs to the revised version of this last
named play. The alteration in ii. 4 from " to
morrow morning "to " this afternoon," shows that
in the revision Shakespeare attended to details in
the time of action.

1596.

King John was founded on the old play acted by
the Queen's men, called The Troublesome Reign of
King John. The lines ii. i. 455—460 are imitated
in Captain Stukeley by Dekker and others, acted at
the Rose, nth December 1596; iii. I. 176—179
refer manifestly to the Pope's bull in 1596, inciting
the English to depose Elizabeth ; Chatillon's speech
ii. I. 71—75 is most applicable to the great fleet sent
against Spain in the same year ; Constance's lamen
tations have been reasonably referred to the death
of Hamnet Shakespeare (buried nth August); the
Iron Age is alluded to in iv. I. 60, and never else
where in Shakespeare. Now, Heywood's play of
that name was on the stage from June 23 to July 16
under the title of Troy. The summer of 1596 is
thus undoubtedly the date of Shakespeare's play.

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 197

There are some indications of the play having been
shortened ; Act ii. in the Folio has only seventy-four
lines, and Essex has a part of only three lines,
although in the older John he appears in five scenes.
I think he was meant to be entirely cut out c. 1 60 1
after Essex' execution, and these three lines should
be given to Salisbury. The rival play of Stukeley
was shortened in the same way ; a whole act was
expunged before its publication in 1605. In i. 2
(Folio) the Citizen on the walls is called Hubert ;
this indicates that the same actor represented both
characters.

1596-7.

The Merchant of Venice, or Jew of Venice, was no
doubt founded on an old play called The Jew of
Venice, by Dekker. It seems, from the title of the
German version of this play, that the Jew's name
was Joseph. The name Fauconbridge in i. 2 (where
Portia's suitors are enumerated, compare Two Gentle
men, i. 2) points to a date soon after John; and the
" merry devil " of ii. 3. 2, a phrase never elsewhere
used in Shakespeare, indicates contemporaneity
with The Merry Devil of Edmonton produced in the
winter of 1596. Again, the manifest imitations of
this play in Wily Beguiled, which I show elsewhere
to date in the summer of 1597, give a posterior

i98 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

limit, which must be decisive. This play has no
sign whatever of having been altered ; the Clarendon
Press guesses, founded on the discrepancy of the
number of suitors (iv. for vi.) are as worthless as
Mr. Hales' proof, referred to by Mr. H alii well (Out
lines, p. 251), of the date of Wily Beguiled. The
conclusive evidence of imitation in this play is the
conjunction of the " In such a night " lines in scene
1 6, with the " My money, my daughter" iterations
of Gripe in scene 8 of the same play. On 22d
July 1598, J. Roberts entered The Merchant or Jew
of Venice on S. R., but had to get the Lord Cham
berlain's license before printing. On 28th October
1600, he consented to the entry of the play for
T. Hayes ; nevertheless, he issued copies of his
own imprint independently.

I597-

' The First Part of Henry IV. was entered on S. R.
2 5th February 1598 ; a genuine and authorised
imprint. The publication of this play was hurried in
order to refute the charge of attacking the Cobham
family in the person of Sir John Oldcastle, the
original name of the character afterwards called
Falstaff (cf. " my old lad of the castle," i. 2. 48).
Moreover, in i. 2. 182, we find in the text the names
Harvey and Russel instead of Peto and Bardolph.

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 199

The name Russel for Bardolph again occurs in a
stage direction in 2 Henry IV. ii. 2. These were
evidently originally the names of the characters,
and were changed at the same time as that of Old-
castle : Russel was the family name of the Bedford
Earls, and Harvey that of the third husband of
Lord Southampton's mother. The new names were
picked up from the second part ; in which Lord
Bardolph and Reto (a distinct personage from the
" humourist " of Part I.) were serious characters.
The play was produced in the spring ; the only
mentions of June in Shakespeare's plays are in ii.

4. 397 (sun F.) ; iii. 2. 75 ; and Anthony, iii. 10. 14.
In ii. 4. 425, Preston's Cambyses is ridiculed (cf.
Dream). There is an imitation of iii. 2. 52 in Lusfs
Dominion (the Spanish Moor's Tragedy, by Dekker,
Haughton, and Day, February 1600, absurdly quoted
by Stokes as Marlowe's). For the "abuses of the
time" i. 2. 174; iv. 3. 81 ; see under Sir T. More,
1596. This play, as well as 2 Henry IV. and
Henry V., is founded on The Famous Victories of
Henry V., an old play produced by the Queen's com
pany ; from which the name Oldcastle was taken.

1597-8.
The Second Part of Henry IV. was entered on

5. R. 23d August 1600. This ^Quarto is much

200 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

abridged in i. 3, ii. 3, iv. I, iv. 4, and a whole
scene, iii. I, is omitted. It abounds in oaths appa
rently foisted in by the players, and is apparently
printed from a prompter's copy. The omissions
arise, I think, from expurgations made by the
Master of the Revels. Plays in which rebellion
was the subject were especially disagreeable at
Court. In the Epilogue there is evidence of altera
tion, the words " if my tongue . . . good-night,"
having been inserted after the first production of
the play, as is clear from their succeeding in Q.
the clause about praying for the Queen, which
must have been final in either version. The newly
inserted words contain the allusion to Oldcastle,
and show that in this play, as well as the former,
that was the original appellation of Falstaff. This
is confirmed by the appearance of Old. in a speech
prefix in i. 2. 137 ; and Russel in a stage direc
tion in ii. 2. Mr. Halliwell's notion that Russel
and Harvey were names of actors, has not the
slightest foundation, nor are such actors known.
Note also that in iii. 2. 29, Falstaff is mentioned
as having been page to the Duke of Norfolk, which
was historically true of Oldcastle (compare the
" serving the good Duke of Norfolk " in The
Merry Devil. The date of that play is 1597.) The
early part i. I, or. ii. 4, was written before the

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 201

entry of / Henry IV. on S. R., 25th February 1598,
in which Falstaff is mentioned. " Sincklo " occurs
in a stage direction in v. I ; he is not known in
connection with Shakespeare's company till this
play was acted ; he was previously a member of
Pembroke's troop, and acted in j Henry VI. when
it belonged to them along with Humfrey [Jeffes],
and Gabriel [Singer]. These two last named, and
others, joined the Admiral's company at the Rose
in October 1597, when Pembroke's men broke and
went into the country. Sinkler, Beeston, Duke,
and Pallant, stayed with the Chamberlain's men
from c. 1594 till they left the Curtain in 1599,
and then Kemp, Duke, Beeston, and Pallant set up
a new company under the patronage of the Earl
of Derby. Not one of these can be shown to
have acted for the Chamberlain's, except between
these dates, and that they left in discontent is
probable from their being all omitted in the list of
the 1623 Folio. Sinkler remained in Shakespeare's
company till 1604. Pistol, in his first appearance
in ii. 4, does not for a while talk in iambics.
Mrs. Quickly (i. 2. 269) appears to be called Ursula
(Nell in Henry V. ) For the changes in the names
of this and other characters in the series of Falstaff
plays, see hereafter in the table given on p. 212.

202 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1597-

Love's Labour's Lost was published in 1598, "as
it was presented before her Highness this last
Christmas." This was undoubtedly the earliest of
Shakespeare's plays that has come down to us,
and was only retouched somewhat hurriedly for
this Court performance. The date of original
production cannot well be put later than 1589.
The characters are in several instances confused.
In ii. I Boyet occurs in place of Berowne in the
prefixes, and Rosaline for Katharine in the text.
In iv. 2, and v. i, there is still greater muddling
of Holofernes and Nathaniel ; now one, now the
other appears, first as Curate, then as Pedant ; in
iv. 2, Berowne is called " one of the strange
Queen's Lords," and Queen for Princess occurs in
the prefixes through the greater part of the play.
It is pretty clear that this lady ambassador was in
the 1589 play called Queen. In ii. I, the lines
21-114 were almost certainly added in 1597. They
begin with a prefix Prin. inserted in the middle of
one of the Queen's (Princess's) speeches ; and in
them only throughout the play is the prefix Nav.
(Navarre) used for King. In iv. 3, the speech of
Berowne. (1. 290—365) must be mostly assigned to
1597 ; the repetition of the lines, " From women's

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 203

eyes . . . Promethean fire " is an unmistakable
indication of revision (see the similar instances in
Romeo). A like instance of substitution of a long
version for a short one, occurs in v. I. 847—879,
which are manifestly the 1597 substitute for v. I.
827-832 ; again, v. 2. 575-590 could not have
conveyed any amusement in the conceit of " Ajax "
till after the publication of Harrington's Meta
morphosis of Ajax in 1596. The mention of
" first and second cause," &c., in i. 2. 171-192, may
imply that this was another of the additions. But
it is in iv. 2 that the greatest changes have been
made. It is clear from v. i. 125, that Sir Holo-
fernes was originally the Curate. Modern editors
either omit Holofernes or substitute Nathaniel ; Sir
Holofernes is also the Curate in iv. 2. 67—156 —
"This is a gift . . . colorable colours." In the rest of
this scene Sir Nathaniel is the Curate, and Master
Holofernes the Pedant. This latter is the 1597
version. I am not aware that this singular change
of character has been noted, or any reason assigned
for it, except my conjecture, that it was intended
to disguise a personal satire which, however per
tinent in 1589, had become obsolete in 1597. For
a full discussion of all these changes made in 1597,
see my article on Shakespeare and Puritanism in
Angh'a, vol. 7.

204 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1597-8.

Much Ado about Nothing is more likely than any
other play to be identical with Love's Labours Won.
The internal evidence has been set forth by Mr.
Brae; but there are points of external evidence
also, that have been overlooked. It is very
frequent, in old plays, to find days of the week
and month mentioned ; and when this is the case,
they nearly always correspond to the almanac of
the year in which the play was written. Now, in
this play alone in Shakespeare is there such a
mark of time ; comparing i. I. 285, and ii. I. 375,
we find that the 6th July came on a Monday ; this
suits the years 1590 and 1601, but none between;
an indication that the original play was written in
1590. Unlike Love's Labour's Lost, it was almost
recomposed at its reproduction, and this day-of-the-
week mention is, I think, a relic of the original plot,
and probably due, not to Shakespeare, but to some
coadjutor. Again, Meres' list in his Palladis Tamia
consists of the following plays : — Gentlemen of
Verona (1595), Errors (1594), Love's Labours Lost
(1597), Love's Labour's Won (?), Midsummer-Night's
Dream (1594-5), Merchant of Venice (1596-7),
Richard II. (1595), Richard HI. (1594), Henry IV.
(1597), King John (1596), Titus Andronicus (1594),

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 205

Romeo and Juliet (1595-6). The dates I have
appended to these may in some instance be slightly
erroneous ; but I think no one will deny that the
plays mentioned by Meres must have constituted
the Shakespeare repertoire of the Chamberlain's
men, and have been played by them between the
dates of their constitution as a company in 1594,
and the publication of Meres' book in 1598. But
there is absolutely no other comedy of Shakespeare's
that can be assigned to such a date. AlFs Well
that Ends Well was certainly not played by his
company so early. Again, Cowley and Kempe
played the constables in this play ; but Kempe had
left the company by the summer of 1599. There
is no argument against this conclusion yet produced.
The main subject of the play had been dramatised
before in Ariodante and Geneuora, acted at Court
by the Merchant Tailors' boys in 1582-3. The old
German play of Jacob Ayrer, The Beautiful Phoenicia
(c. 1595, Cohn) also contains points of similarity
with Shakespeare's play that are not found in the
Bandello novel which Belleforest translated in
1594. Pedro and Leonato are the only names
which Shakespeare retains from the novel ; which
Ayrer follows in this respect. When the title was
altered is doubtful : the play was known as Bene
dick and Beatrice in 1613.

206 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1599-

Henry V. was acted, with the choruses as we
have them in the Folio, between I5th April and
28th September, while Essex was in Ireland ; see
chorus to Act v. That this was the final revision
of the play, I am by no means convinced. The
scene with the Scotch and Irish captains, iii. 2.
69 to end, I take to be an insertion for the Court
performance, Christmas 1605, to please King James,
who had been so annoyed that year by depreciation
of the Scots on the stage. That the Quarto copy
is printed from an abridged version made for acting
purposes, is palpable. By omitting i. I, and sub
stituting one Bishop for two in i. 2 (two being
retained in the stage direction) Ely is disposed of;
by simple omission and transference of a speech in
iv. 3 to Warwick, Westmoreland disappears ; in a
similar way Bedford gives place to Clarence ; in iv.
3. 69 Salisbury is replaced by Gloster, and was
evidently meant to be in 1. 5-9 of the same scene ;
in iv. i Erpingham remains in the stage direction,
but has been cut out in the text. That the version
from which the Quarto was abridged was the 1599
copy, is a separate question to which I am inclined
to say no. I rather hold that it was an earlier one
without choruses, and following the Chronicle his-

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS.

207

torians much more closely. I cannot otherwise
account for the substitution of Gebon for Rambures
in iii. 7, and iv. 5 ; and of Bourbon for Britany in
iii. 5, and for Dolphin in iii. 7, iv. 5. Mr. Daniel's
theory is that the Quarto was later than the Folio
version, that is to say, that Shakespeare wrote a play
historically incorrect, that his errors were corrected
in a stage version before 1600, i.e., while he was still
himself an actor ; that the errors were afterwards
restored, and have kept the stage ever since. I
cannot think this. I believe that the Quarto is (as
we have seen in other instances) a shortened version
of a play written early in 1598 for the Curtain
Theatre, and that the Folio (except such alterations
as were made after James's accession) is a version
enlarged and improved for the Globe Theatre later in
the same year. With regard to this series of Falstaff
plays, the following table may be of interest.

NAMES OF "IRREGULAR HUMOURISTS" IN—

Famous
Victories,

/ Hen. IV.
(original
version).

i Hen. IV.
(altered
version).

2 Hen. IV.
(i. i to ii. 4
altered).

2 Hen. IV.
(ii. 4 to end
unaltered).

Hen. V.
(both
versions).

Merry
Wives.

Gadshill.

Gadshill.

Gadshill.

Ned.

Ned Poins.

Poins.

Poins.

Tom.

Harvey.

Peto.

Peto.

Russell.

Bardolph.

Bardolph.

Bardolph.

Bardolph.

Bardolph.

Oldcastle.

Oldcastle.

Falstaff.

Falstaff.

Falstaff.

F. in text.

Falstaff.

? Hostess.

Quickly.

Quickly.

So!fly-

Suickly.
oil.

Quickly.

Pistol.

Pistol.

Pistol.

Nym.

Nym.

Shallow.

Shallow.

208 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

According to my hypothesis, the original names
Oldcastle, Ned Poins, Gadshill, &c., were chiefly
taken from The Famous Victories of Henry V. ; all
these disappear from the series by ii. 4 of
2 Henry IV. : the later names, Bardolph, Falstaff,
Nym, Pistol, Shallow, persist to the end of the
series, but did not occur in the original forms
of / and 2 Henry IV. The name Falstaff was no
doubt taken from / Henry VI. , in which Shake
speare had been writing on March 1592, and which
we know from the Epilogue to Henry V. to have
been revived by 1598 at latest.

1599-

As You Like It was " stayed " on the 4th August
1600, and was written after " Diana in the fountain "
(iv. I. 154) was set up in Cheapside in 1598 (Stow).
In iii. 5. 83 a line is quoted from Hero and Leander,
published in 1598 ; the only instance in which
Shakespeare directly refers to a contemporary poet.
The date may, I think, be still more exactly fixed
from i. 2. 94, " the little wit that fools have was
silenced," which alludes probably to the burning of
satirical books by public authority 1st June 1599.
Every indication points to the latter part of 1599
as the date of production. This play is a rival to
the Robin Hood plays acted at the Rose in 1598 ;

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 209

Jaques, "the traveller," seems to have been the
origin of Jonson's Amorphus in Cynthia's Revels,
and Touchstone of Cos the whetstone in the same
play ; compare i. 2. 56. The female characters dif
fered considerably in height, as in Much Ado and
The Dream. The remarks of Touchstone on quarrels
and lies in v. 4 should be compared with Love's
Labour's Losf, i. 2 to end ; Romeo and Juliet, ii. 4.
26, &c. The comparison of the world to a stage in
ii. 7 suggests a date subsequent to the building of
the Globe, with its motto of Totus mundus agit
histrionem; and the introduction of a fool proper, in
place of a comic clown such as is found in all the
anterior comedies, confirms this : the " fools " only
occur in plays subsequent to Kempe's leaving the
company. The title is taken from Lodge's address
prefixed to his Rosalynde, on which the play is
founded — " if you like it, so," says Lodge — and it
is alluded to in the Epilogue (which, like that
to 2 Henry IV., is spoken by a female character),
and again by Jonson in the Epilogue to Cynthia's
Revels, which play has much more connection with
the present than is usually supposed. There is a
tradition that Shakespeare took the part of Adam.

210 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1600.

The Merry Wives of Windsor, as we have it in
the Folio, was probably made for the Court per
formance in February 1600; in i. 4, the "King's
English " does not imply that James, not Elizabeth,
was on the throne ; but that the time of action is
under a king, Henry IV. It was written after
Henry V.; perhaps, according to the old tradition, in
obedience to the Queen's command, who wished to
see Falstaff in love, Shakespeare not having ful
filled his promise in the Epilogue to 2 Henry IV.
to introduce him in the Henry V. play ; a failure
probably caused by the defection at this date of the
actor who had taken this part — Kempe, Beeston,
Duke, and Pallant having quitted the King's men
between the production of 2 Henry IV. and that of
this play. The title, The Merry Wives of Windsor,
suggests approximation in subject with The Merry
Devil of Edmonton (i597)> and so does the great
likeness in the characteristics in the Hosts of these
plays ; while the plot of the Anne Page story is
identical with that of Wily Beguiled (1597), Fenton
corresponding to Sophos, Caius to Churms, Simple
to Plodall, Evans to R. Goodfellow. It appears
from the Quarto edition that Ford's assumed name
was originally Brook, not Broome. This was pro-

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 211

bably altered because Brook was the name of the
Lord Cobham, who took offence at the production
of Oldcastle on the stage. The song of Marlowe's
sung by Evans in iii. I was published as Shake
speare's in the Passionate Pilgrim in 1599; not
necessarily by any means in consequence of its
previous introduction in this play. Mr. P. A.
Daniel has rightly pointed out that iii. 5 is really
composed of two scenes, one between Falstaff and
Quickly, the other between Falstaff and Ford ; and
that the latter ought to begin the fourth Act : he
has also shown that in various places the Folio has
inconsistencies not explicable without the aid of
the Quarto. But all this does not prove any
" degradation " of the play at " managerial " hands ;
it rather indicates hurried and careless production,
such as we might expect in a play ordered to be
produced in a fortnight, according to the old tradi
tion. Another internal proof of such hurry, both
in this play and in Much Ado about Nothing, lies in
the fact that they are almost entirely in prose;
which is not the case in any other play by Shake
speare. And this brings us to the question of the
nature of the Quarto version. It has been held to
be merely a first sketch of the play : this theory is
untenable. Mr. P. A. Daniel holds it to be a stolen
version made up by a literary hack from shorthand

212 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

notes obtained at a representation. This hypothesis
gives no explanation of the " cousin-Garmombles "
of iii. 5, nor does it enable us to under
stand how no better a representation of the play
was issued, nor how whole scenes (that of the
fairies for example) appear in quite a different
version from the Folio. My own opinion is that
the case is parallel to that of Romeo and Juliet;
that the Quarto is printed from a partly revised
prompter's copy of the older version of the play,
which became useless when Shakespeare had made
his final version. I believe also that this older
version was produced soon after the visit of the
Count of Mumplegart (Garmombles) to Windsor in
August 1592 ; that it was probably the Jealous
Comedy, acted as a new play by Shakespeare's
company $th January 1593 ; that when Shakespeare
revived this old play, he accommodated the char
acters to Henry IV. as best he could. Mr. Daniel's
argument that The Meny Wives was a later play
than Henry V.} because Nym would otherwise
have had no title to special mention in the title-
page of the Quarto, has not much weight. This
Quarto was printed three years after Henry V.
was produced, and Nym's reputation from either
play was three years old, according to Mr. Daniel
himself. Why then should he not be mentioned ?

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 213

I must add a word on the Fairy scene, v. 5. The
fairies are Nan the Queen (in red?), cf. iv. 4. 71 ;
Will Cricket (in grey ?) ; two other boys, Bede
and Bean, in green and white ; and Evans, Puck
Hobgoblin or Robin Goodfellow, in black. The
prefixes Qu.t Qui., and Pist. are mistakes for Queen
and Puck. Pistol and Quickly cannot be actors
in this scene, nor in the entrance are they placed
with " Evans, Anne Page, Fairies," but at the ends
of the second and third lines, as if by afterthought.
All the Pistol fairy speeches belong to Evans (Puck).
There seems to have arisen some confusion in
the final revision, when this scene was probably
altered. Further confirmation of the original early
date of the play may be found in FalstafPs statement
that the Thames shore was " shelvy and shallow "
(iii. 5. 15); for in 1592 the Thames was so low
as to be fordable at London Bridge, and Falstaff
was thrown in the ford at Datchet. But the
allusions to " three Doctor Faustuses " and Mephis-
topheles are not helpful ; Faustus was on the
boards till 1597 at least. One of Henry Julius'
plays derived from English sources, printed in I594>
The Adulteress, contains the same story as The
Merry Wives. If this was not derived from
Shakespeare's play, whence was it ? The ground of
the English play was probably the story in Tarleton's

214 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

News out of Purgatory (1590). Note that the other
play by Julius distinctly traceable in origin to
the English stage is Vincentius Ladislaus (1594), in
which the similarities to Much Ado (1590), are as
marked as in the present instance. We have
already seen that Evans acts the part of Robin
Goodfellow, and that Will Cricket is another fairy ;
but these are two characters in Wily Beguiled, in
which play Robin Goodfellow means Drayton and
Will Cricket Kempe. I believe that in Shake
speare's play, Evans and Dr. Caius are satirical
representations of Drayton and Lodge. Drayton
is introduced as Evan, a Welsh attorney, by Jonson
in For the Honour of Wales, and Lodge was
frequently satirised on the stage as a French
doctor. The part of Falstaff was acted in Charles
the First's time by Lowin, and there is no reason
why he should not have been the original per
former of it in this play as revised. He was
twenty-four years old in 1600.

1600.

Julius Ccesar is alluded to in Weever's Mirror
of Martyrs (Sir John Oldcastle), 1601 ; and the
actor of Polonius in Hamlet iii. 2. 109 had pro
bably acted the part of Caesar ; at any rate Ccesar
must be anterior to the Quarto Hamlet which was

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 215

produced in 1601. The structure of this play is
remarkable ; the first three acts and last two have
no characters in common except Brutus, Cassius,
Antony, and Lucius ; there are in fact two plays
in one, Ccesar*s Tragedy and Ccesar^s Revenge. Con
temporary plays by other dramatists were produced
in a double pattern : e.g., Marston's Antonio and
Meltida, in two parts ; Chapman's Bussy d'Ambot's,
in two parts ; Kyd's old play of Jeronymo, in two
parts. All these were on the stage at the same
time as Julius Ccesar. Revenge-plays With ghosts
in them were the rage for the next four years.
That the present play has been greatly shortened,
is shown by the singularly large number of instances
in which mute characters are on the stage; which
is totally at variance with Shakespeare's usual prac
tice. The large number of incomplete lines in every
possible position, even in the middle of speeches,
confirms this. That alterations were made we
have the positive testimony of Jonson, who in his
Discoveries tells us that Shakespeare wrote, " Caesar
did never wrong but with just cause " (compare iii.
I. 47). That this original reading stood in the
acting copies till not long before the 1623 Folio
was printed, is clear from the fact that Jonson, in
the Induction to his Staple of News (1625), alludes
to it as a well-known line requiring no explanation

216 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

— " Cry you mercy," says Prologue, " you never did
wrong but with just cause." This would imply
that Shakespeare did not make the alterations
himself; a hypothesis confirmed by the spelling of
Antony without an h : this name occurs in eight
of Shakespeare's plays, and in every instance but
this invariably is spelled Anthony. Jonson himself
is more likely to have been called on to make
this revision than any other author connected with
the King's company c. 1622. The " et tu Brute "
about which so much has been written was probably
taken from Jonson's Every Man out of his Humour
(i. i) ; it is found in the Duke of York (1595) and
elsewhere. Nicholson, in his Acolastus his after
wit (S. R. 8th September 1600), probably took it
from Shakespeare's play, " Et tu Brute ! wilt thou
stab Caesar too ? "

1601.

All's Well that Ends Well manifestly contains pas
sages— i. i. 230-244; i. 3. 130-142; ii. i. 130-214;
ii. 3. 8O-IIO, 132-151 ; iii. 4 letter: v. 3 conclud
ing part — which are of very early date ; certainly
written not later than 1593. It is not, however,
in my opinion, to be identified with Love's Labour's
Won: the allusions to the present title in iv. 4. 35;
v. i. 24; v. 3. 333, 336, all occur in rhyme

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 217

passages, and some of them, at least, belong to the
earlier date. The play, as we have it, was written
after Marston'sjack Drum's Entertainment (1600), to
which there is a palpable allusion in iii. 6. 41 ; and
before The Dutch Courtesan (probably 1602) by the
same author, which contains several allusions to its
title. The name Corambus in iv. 3. 185 suggests
the same date, as this is the appellation of
Polonius in the Quarto Hamlet. The introduction
of Violenta, a mute character, in iii. 5, and the
substitution of the same name in Twelfth Night, i.
5, for Viola, show that this last-named play was
the last written of the two, but not much interval
could have occurred between them. In confirma
tion of this approximation of dates, compare the
name Capilet, v. 3. 147, 159, with Twelfth Night,
iii. 4. 315. In plot this play agrees with Much
Ado in the supposed death of Helen, and the
promise of Bertram to marry Maudlin Lafeu ; with
Measure for Measure, in the substitution of Helen
for Diana; with The Gentlemen of Verona, in
Helen's pilgrim disguise, and her meeting with the
Hostess. In it and Twelfth Night we find a few
slight allusions to the Puritans ; another confirma
tion of date. The only other use even of the
word Puritan is in the late play Winter's Tale,
iv. 3. 46. Compare the doubtful Pericles, iv. 6. 9.

218 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

The way in which the earthquake is mentioned in
*• 3- 91) gives a still further confirmation. There
was an earthquake in London in 1601. I take the
boasting Parolles to be Marston ; born under
Mars, muddied in Fortune's displeasure, an
egregious coward, an accuser of Captain Dumain
of being lousy, he in all points agrees with
Marston, as figured in the other satirical plays of
the time. The charge against Dumain is repeated
against Jonson in Satiromastix; Marston had left
the Admiral's company in 1599, just before the For
tune Theatre was built for them. His cowardice
is dilated on in Jonson's Conversations, and the
allusions to him as Jack Drum are frequent in the
play. Once we find Tom Drum in v. 2 (from
Tom Drum's Vants in Gentle Craft, 1598), a hint
that Thomas Dekker, author of The Shoemaker's
Holiday, or The Gentle Craft (1600), was aiding and
abetting John Marston in his satirical plays.
Helen was acted by a short boy (i. i. 202). The
incident of the King's gift to Helen of his ring,
only referred to in the last scene, seems to point
at the gift of a ring to Essex by Elizabeth in 1596.
Essex was executed in 1601, just before this play
was acted. The older parts pointed out above
were, I think, incorporated from detached scenes
written in 1593 during the plague time, and laid

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 219

by for future use. The plot is from Giktta of
Narbonne in Painter's Palace of Pleasure, a book
used by Shakespeare in 1594 for his alteration of
Edward III. Mr. Stokes says that Eccleston and
Gough acted in this play, on the authority of Mr.
Halliwell ; one of the many ignes fatui that have
misled this unwary compiler.

1601-2.

Twelfth Night, or What You Will, was first
acted 2d February 1602 at one of the Inns of
Court (Manningham's Diary). Its date lies be
tween Marston's Malcontent (1602), (of Malevole in
which play Malvolio is clearly a caricature), and
What You Will (1602) by the same author. This
adoption of the name of his play seems to have
induced Shakespeare to replace it by the now uni
versally adopted title. The appellation Rudesby (v.
I. 55) is from Chapman's Sir Giles Goosecap (1601).
Several minor points have been already noticed
understhe previous play All's Well. In this play,
as. in that, I believe that earlier written scenes have
been incorporated. It is only in similar cases that
we find such contradictions as that between the
three months' sojourn of Viola at the Count's court
(v. i), and the three days' acquaintance with the
Duke in i. 4. In ii. 4 there are palpable signs of

220 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

alteration, and iii. I. 159-176, v. I. 133-148 are
surely of early date. Moreover, the singular agree
ment of the plot with the Comedy of Errors in the
likeness of the twins, and with The Gentlemen of
Verona, or rather with Apollonius andSylla} whence
part of that play was derived, point to a likelihood
that the first conceptions of these plays were not
far apart in time. I think the early portions were
written in 1593, like those of the preceding play.
For the change from Duke (i. 1-4) to Count in the
rest of the play compare The Gentlemen of Verona.
I believe that Sir Toby represents Jonson and
Malvolio Marston ; but that subject requires to be
treated in a separate work from its complexity.

1602.

Troylus and Cressida was published surrepti
tiously in 1609, with an address to the reader
stating that it had been " never staled with the
stage." This statement was withdrawn in the
same year, and a new title-page issued, " as it
was acted by the King's Majesty's servants at the
Globe." It had in fact been entered in S. R. 1603,
February 7, by J. Roberts, and licensed for printing,
" when he hath gotten sufficient authority for it "
— which he evidently did not get. It could not
therefore have been produced later than 1602.

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 221

Nor could it, as we have it, have been earlier ; the
line i. 3. 73, " rank Thersites with his mastic jaws "
evidently alluding to Dekker's SflftVo-MASTix (1601).
I once thought Marston, as Histriomastix or
Theriomastix, was alluded to ; but the character of
Thersites suits Dekker, not Marston. Jonson
describes him in The Poetaster, iii. i, as " one of
the most overflowing rank wits in Rome ; he will
slander any man that breathes if he disgust him."
In 1602, Jonson, Marston, and Shakespeare had
become reconciled ; of reconciliation with Dekker,
at any time, there is no trace. This play is pro
bably the " purge " given by Shakespeare to Jonson
when he put down all those " of the university
pen" (The Return from Parnassus, iv. 3, acted in
the winter 1602-3) ; Ajax representing Jonson,
Achilles Chapman, and Hector Shakespeare : but
whether this conjecture be true or no, Dekker is
certainly Thersites. All this part of the play (the
camp story) splits off from the love story of
Troylus and Cressida, which is of much earlier date,
c. 1593. The two parts are discrepant in minor
points, notably in the existence of a truce (i. 3. 262),
" dull and long-continued " fighting having been
abundant in i. 2. The parts written in 1602 are
i. 3 ; ii. i ; ii. 2 ; ii. 3 ; iii. 3. 34 to end ; iv. 5.
(except lines 12-53) ; v. i ; v. 2 (retains much

222 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

older work ; v. 3. 1-97. All this part bears evident
marks of the reading of Chapman's//*'^ i.-vii. (i 598) ;
the love story is somewhat from the old Troy book
printed by Caxton, but more from Chaucer's Troilus
and Cressid. At the end of v. 3, in the Folio v.
10. 32-34, are repeated ; this shows that the
1602 acting copy was meant to end with v. 3, thus
making the play a comedy ; as it now stands it is
usually classed with the tragedies ; in the Folio,
it is placed unpaged between the Histories and
Tragedies, and is not mentioned in the "Catalogue"
of contents. The prologue and v. 4-10 contain
much work that is unlike Shakespeare's, and are
probably by some coadjutor whose other lines have
been replaced by the 1602 additions. Hey wood in
his Iron Age treated this same subject, and the
date of that play is important in this investigation.
The Ages of Hey wood were acted before 1611
(see his Address to the Reader in The Golden Age ;
The Iron Age was " publicly acted by two com
panies on one stage at once," and " at sundry times
thronged three several theatres." These were the
Rose, the Curtain, and the Bull ; Pembroke's men,
and the Admiral's, acted together at the Rose, October
to November 1597. This must have been the time
when the Iron Age was performed; but not as a new
play. It would otherwise have been entered in

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 223

Henslowe's Diary as such. All the Ages were then
probably old in 1597. In 1595—6 we find them
accordingly entered by Henslowe under other names;
in 1595, March 5, The Golden Age, whose scenes are
in Heaven and Olympus, appears as Steleo(Coelo)and
Olempo ; he subsequently writes Seleo for Steleo ;
The Silver and Brazen Ages on May 7 and May 23,
as the first and second parts of Hercules. These
three plays were produced in succession. The entry
of Galfrido and Bernardo is a forgery, and a clumsy
one, for it necessitates a Sunday performance, which
is a thing unknown in Henslowe's Diary, if the
dates be properly corrected. On 23d June 1596,
Troy was acted, palpably The Iron Age; and on
7th April 1597, Five Plays in One may have been
the second part of that play. About February
1599, Heywood left the Admiral's men, and joined
Lord Derby's; in April, Dekker and Chettle pro
duced their Troylus and Cressida; in May their
Agamemnon, and Dekker his Orestes' Furies. I
believe that all these were merely enlargements
of Heywood's Iron Age. Dekker was a " dresser
of plays " and a shameless plagiarist ; witness the
stealing of Day's work, which he afterwards re
claimed in his Parliament of Bees. At the same
time that Dekker was thus pillaging Heywood, his
friend Marston was satirising Heywood as Post-

224 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

haste in Histriomastix for appropriating Shake
speare's Troylus (of 1593) and bringing out The
Prodigal Child, the old Acolastus of 1540, as a new
play. There can be no doubt that the company
satirised in Histriomastix is Derby's. It was a
" travelling " company, newly set up, with a poet
who extemporises his plays (Heywood had a share
in 220) and uses

" No new luxury of blandishment,

J But plenty of Old England's mother's words."

The allusion to Troylus, 1. 267—275, in which " he
shakes his furious spear," has led some persons
to a very absurd identification of Posthaste with
Shakespeare. I have noticed before the singular
allusion to The Iron Age in John iv. i. 60 (1596).

1603.

The Taming of the Shrew is unlike any play
hitherto considered ; the Shakespearian part of it
being evidently confined to the Katharine and
Petruchio scenes — ii. I. 167—326 ; iii. 2 (except
130-150, 242-254); iv. i; iv. 3; iv. 5 (except
three lines at end) ; v. 2 (except ten lines at con
clusion). The construction of the play shows that
it was not composed by Shakespeare in conjunction
with another author, but that his additions are

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 225

replacements of the original author's work ; altera
tions made hurriedly for some occasion when it
was not thought worth while to write an entirely
new play. Such an occasion was the plague year
of 1603, when the theatres were closed and the
companies had to travel. We shall see, hereafter,
that Shakespeare's other similar alterations of other
men's work were made in like circumstances. This
date is confirmed by the allusions to other taming
plays, of which there were several ; the present
play, in its altered shape, being probably the latest :
ii. I. 297 refers to Patient Grissel, by Dekker,
Chettle, and Haughton, December 1599; "curst"
in ii. i. 187, 294, 307; v. 2. 1 88, to Dekker's
Medicine for a Curst Wife, July 1602 ; and iv. I.
221 to Hey wood's Woman Killed with Kindness,
March 1603. There is nothing but the supposed
inferiority of work to imply an earlier date; and
this, on examination, will be seen to be merely a
subjective inference arising from the reflex action
of the less worthy portion with which Shakespeare's
is associated. Rudesby in iii. 2. 10 is from Sir
Giles Goosecap (1601), and Baptista, as a man's name,
could hardly have come under Shakespeare's notice,
when in his Hamlet he made it a woman's. The
earlier play thus altered probably dates 1596,
when an edition of The Taming of a Shrew was

226 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

reprinted. This last-named play was written for
Pembroke's company in 1588-9. Another limit of
date is given by the name Sincklo in the Induction.
Sinklo was an actor with the Chamberlain's men,
from 1597 to 1604. Nicke in iv. i. is Nicholas
Tooley. The play is not mentioned by Meres in
1598. In the Induction, "The Slys are no rogues :
we came in with Richard Conqueror," is, I think,
an allusion to the stage history of the time. Sly
and Richard the Third (Burbadge) came into Lord
Strange's [company together in 1591. In the Pem
broke play, Don Christophero Sly was probably
acted by Christopher Beeston. The Induction, partly
revised by Shakespeare, seems to have been clumsily
fitted by the players (as, indeed, the whole play is,
especially in the non-appearance of " my cousin
Ferdinand," iv. I. 154, whose place seems to be
taken by Hortensio) : surely Sly ought to have
been replaced, as in the 1588 play; and is it pos
sible that Shakespeare even in a farce should
have made Sly talk blank verse, sc. 2, 1. 60—120 ?
The Taming of a Shrew, as acted in June 1594 at
Newington Butts, was the old play which had
belonged to Pembroke's men, probably by Kyd ;
but the first version of the play, afterwards altered
by Shakespeare, was written, I think, by Lodge,
(? aided by Drayton in the Induction). This

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 227

Induction was, I think, greatly altered by Shake
speare in 1603.

1603.

Hamlet is extant in three forms— the Folio, which
is evidently a stage copy considerably shortened
for acting purposes; the 1604 Quarto, which is a
very fair transcript of the author's complete copy,
with a few omissions; and the 1603 Quarto, im
perfect and inaccurate. The date of the perfect
play is certainly 1603. In "• 2- 34-6, &c., we find
that the tragedians of the city — i.e., Shakespeare's
company— are " travelling," and that "their inhibition
comes of the late innovation." This has been inter
preted in various ways, the most absurd being that
which regards the establishment of the Revels
children in 1604 as the innovation : hardly less so
is Malone's notion that the putting down of the
Curtain players in 1600 is the inhibition referred
to. The Globe company travelled in 1601 in
consequence of Essex' attempt at political innovation,
and their acting Richard II. in connection therewith ;
they travelled again in 1603, the theatres being shut
because of the plague : this latter is the time re
ferred to in the final version, for in the latter part
of that year the Puritan party had by millenary
petitions at Hampton Court conferences, and so

228 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

forth, attempted a religious "innovation;" and
their anxiety to avoid this charge is evident in
their continual protests that it was a reformation,
not an innovation, that they wanted (see Fuller,
Church History, under 1603—4 passim). The imme
diately succeeding passage, 1. 351—379, however,
which also occurs in the earlier version, distinctly
points to 1 60 1. The " berattling of the common
stages by the aery of little eyases," the controversy
between poet and player, ended in that year ; these
lines are not contained in the second Quarto.
The words "if they should grow themselves to
common players," indicate a possible date of writing
c. 1610, when Ostler and Underwood, Chapel boys
in 1 60 1, had grown up and been taken into the
King's men ; but the use of the present tense in
the preceding paragraph shows that the same
Chapel children who had been engaged in the
Jonson and Marston quarrel were still on the stage,
and that the date of writing is anterior to their
replacement by the Revels boys in January 1604.
The growing to common players then must be taken
generally, not specifically ; unless we suppose a
still further revision c. 1610, which on other grounds
is not unlikely. It may be worth noting that the
play of Dido, in rivalry of which the player's speech
in ii. 2 is recited, belonged to these same Chapel

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 229

children. In like manner the Pyrgus in Jonson's
Poetaster recites bits of The Battle of Alcazar in
rivalry with Dekker's Captain Stukeley. But although
the date of the perfect play is almost certainly
1603, Hamlet had certainly been on the stage some
years at that time. Tucca in Satiromastix (1601)
says, " My name's Hamlet Revenge" and he comes
on, " his boy after him, with two pictures under
his cloak." In Marston's Malcontent (1601), " Illo,
ho, ho, ho ! art thou there, old Truepenny ? " must
refer to Hamlet. In iii. 2. 42, " Let those that play
your clowns speak no more than is set down for
them," refers, I think, to extemporising Kempe, who
left Shakespeare's company in 1599. Florio's
Montaigne, which is implicitly referred to throughout
the play (see Mr. Feis, Shakespeare and Montaigne,
1884), was entered S. R. 4th June 1600. On the
title-page of the first Quarto it is said that
the play had been acted in the Universities of
Oxford and Cambridge and elsewhere ; i.e., in the
travelling of 1601. It is pretty clear, then, that
1 60 1 was the date of its production. Polonius (iii.
2. 1 08) had already played Julius Caesar in the
University, which could hardly have been before
1 60 1 ; and Hamlet was entered by Roberts 26th
July 1602, in S. R., "as it was lately acted."
Plays thus produced during " travels," were almost

230 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

always hurried and careless performances ; indeed,
this form of Hamlet seems to have been an un
finished refashioning of the old play by Kyd, that
had so long been performed by the Chamberlain's
men. The names Corambis and Montano for
Polonius and Reynaldo, and a good deal of Acts
iii. and iv., seem to be remnants of this old play.
The name Corambus is found in the German ver
sion, which probably dates c. 1592. It also occurs
in All's Well, iv. 3. 185. The first Quarto is in
this instance, as in those of Romeo, Henry V., and
Merry Wives, in my opinion, printed from a partly
revised prompter's copy of the 1601 play, which
became useless when the fuller version was made.
In this instance there are traces of alterations
having been made on this copy similar to that in
Romeo, iii. 5. 177. The usual explanation of the
peculiar text of imperfect Quartos is, that notes
were taken in shorthand at the theatre, which, eked
out by the vampings of some playdresser, made up
a saleable version, however incorrect. The strong
hold of this theory is the soliloquy in iii. I. 56, &c.
The minor errors of " right done " for " write
down," i. 2. 222 ; " invenom'd speech " for " in
venom steept," ii. 2. 533 ; " honor " for " owner,"
v. I. 121 ; and the like, can be easily paralleled in
the most authentic copies of printed plays of the

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 231

period. But a careful examination of the text of that
speech of Hamlet's in the first Quarto, shows that
its present meaningless shape arises from the dis
placement of two lines only, an error which is most
unlikely to have occurred in shorthand notes, and
is completely subversive of the hack play-writing
botcher hypothesis. I append this soliloquy, as
I suppose it to have stood in the MS. of the
prompter's copy, after the partial 1601 correction :

" To be, or not to be ? Ay, there's the point.
To die— to sleep— is that all ? Ay. All ? No.
To sleep— to dream — ay, marry, there it goes,
g For in that dream of death when we, awake,

| ^ Are doom'd before an everlasting Judge,

•° ^ P The happy smile and the accurst are damn'd.
But for the joyful hope of this, who'ld bear
The scorns and flattery of the world, the right
Scorn'd by the rich, the rich curst of the poor,
>> £ The widow being opprest, the orphan wrong'd,
1 |f The taste of hunger, or a tyrant's reign,
And thousand more calamities besides,
~£ o When that he may his full quietus make
g jj With a bare bodkin ? Who would this endure,
4j ^L But for a hope of something after death,

<! The undiscovered country, from whose bourne
£ No passenger has e'er returrid? Ay that

Puzzles the brain and doth confound the sense ;
Which makes us rather bear the ills we have,
Than fly to others that we know not of.
This conscience makes cowards of us all."

232 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

I have put in italics in the text the marginal cor
rections of " proof " as shown above, inserted in
their proper places ; a comparison with the first
Quarto will show how the printer, not the short
hand man or playdresser, by inserting them in the
wrong places, has produced the nonsense that has
caused so many groundless hypotheses.

" When we awake,

And borne before an everlasting Judge,
From whence no passenger ever returned
The undiscovered country ', at whose sight
The happy smile," &c.

And farther on :

" Ay that O this conscience," &c.

The erroneous notions with regard to these
imperfect Quartos arise, in a great measure, from
their being compared with the carefully edited
later versions ; were they also edited and emended
the differences would appear much smaller than
they do now. The earlier (1601) form of this play
was evidently hurriedly prepared during the journey
to Scotland, in which the company visited the
universities, at a time when the public taste for
revenge-plays had been revived by the reproduc
tion of Kyd's Jeronymo (Spanish Tragedy) by the

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 233

Chapel children, probably at Jonson's suggestion ;
a new version of Kyd's Hamlet naturally followed.
Other such plays were : Marston's Antonio and
Mellida (Paul's, 1599—1600); Shakespeare's Julius
Ccesar (1600) ; Chettle and Hey wood's Hoffman, or
Revenge for a Father, also called Like quits Like
(Admiral's, January 1603) : Chapman's Revenge of
Bussy is of later date. A passage in Ram Alley
(c. 1609), v. I, " The custom of thy sin so lulls
thy sense," &c., is apparently imitated from iii. 4.
161, &c., a passage not found in the Folio. This
would lead to the conjecture that the Folio abridg
ment was made after 1609; on the other hand, the
re-insertion in it of ii. 2. 350—379 points to a date,
about 1610, when Underwood and Ostler had
" grown to common players," and were admitted
among the King's men. It was probably made
then by Shakespeare himself. It is indeed most
unlikely, that were it not so, its text should have
been preferred, by the editors of the Folio, to the
fuller one of the Quarto, which lay ready printed
to their hands. We have, then, in the forms of
this play, an example of Shakespeare's hurried
revision of the work of an earlier writer, but it
must be remembered in a most mutilated form ; of
the full working out of his own conception, in the
shape fittest for private reading ; and finally, of his

234 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

practical adaptation of it to the requirements of
the stage. The date of the printing of the first
Quarto, and, therefore, of the revision made in the
second, is after iQth May 1603, as the actors are
called " King's servants " in the title-page. I. I.
107-125, which surely allude to the death of
Elizabeth, are omitted in the Folio. In iii. 2. 177,
iv. 5. 77, alternative readings —

{" For women fear too much even as they love "
" And women's fear and love hold quantity,'^

r "And now behold"

( " O Gertrard, Gertrard " —

are printed side by side, a sure mark of revision.

1604.

Measure for Measure was written, in my opinion,
in rivalry to Marston's The Fawn, which was
printed March 1606, but produced 1603-4. Ifc
was also subsequent to Chettle and Heywood's
Like quits Like, I4th January 1603 ; v. I. 416.
All the allusions in it suit 1604. The avoidance
of publicity by James I. (i. I. 68-71 ; ii. 4.
27—3°) > tne existing war and expected peace (i.
2. 4, 83) ; the stabbers — four out of ten prisoners —
in iv. 3 ; the stuffed hose, to which Pompey's name

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 235

is appropriate, all agree in this ; peace was con
cluded in the autumn ; the " Act of Stabbing " was
passed in this year, the bombasted breeches
revived with the new reign. But these are more
valuable in showing what reliance can be placed on
such allusions than in fixing the date of the play ;
for it was acted at Court, 26th December 1604. The
title was probably taken from a line in j Henry
VI., ii. 6. 55 ; the plot is like All's Well in the
substitution of Mariana, Twelfth Night in the
Duke's love declaration at the end. It is founded
on Whetstone's Promos and Cassandra (1582). An
order was made in 1603, that no new houses
should be built in the suburbs of London. Com
pare i. 2. 104.

1604.

Othello was acted at Court ist November 1604,
being, no doubt, like Measure for Measure, 26th
December, a new play that year. The Merry
Wives, 4th November, and Henry V., 7th January,
were revised for the same Revels. The Errors, 28th
December, Love's Labour's Lost, between New Year
and Twelfth Day, and The Merchant of Venice,
January 10, 12, were also reproduced. The docu
ment in the Record Office containing these details
is a modern forgery, but Malone possessed a

236 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

transcript of the genuine entry in. the Revels
accounts. It was a bold thing for Shakespeare to
have performed before James I. in two plays on
unfounded jealousy, at a time when the King was
so jealous of the relations of the Queen with Lord
Southampton. The 1622 Quarto copy of this play
is abridged for stage reasons ; by whom we can
not say. The allusion to the "huge eclipse"
(v. 2. 99), points to the total eclipse of 2d October
1605. Shakespeare had probably been reading
Harvey's Discoursive Problem concerning Prophesies
(1588), in which he speaks of " a huge fearful eclipse
of the sun " as to happen on that day. The likeness
of this play in small details to Measure for Measure
indicates close contemporaneity of date, e.g., the
name Angelo (i. 3. 16); the word "grange" (i. I.
106), and " seeming " (iii. 3. 209). This play was
again acted at Court in 1613. It was founded on
Cinthio's novel Hecatomithi, Third Decad, Novel 3.
The " men whose heads do grow beneath their
shoulders" (i. 3. 145) came from Raleigh's narra
tive of The Discovery of Guyana (1600). He was
" resolved " of their credibility. In The Patient Man,
by Dekker, S. R. 9th November 1604, there is a
distinct reference to Othello —

" Thou kill'st her now again,
And art more savage than a barbarous Moor" (i. i).

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 237

1605.

King Lear was probably on the stage when the
old play of Leir on which it was founded was
published. This latter was entered on S. R. 8th
May, as " The Tragical History of King Leir and
his three daughters, as it was lately acted," but
was published as " The true Chronicle History of
King Leir and his three daughters, &c., as it hath
been divers and sundry times lately acted." It
is not tragical in any sense, and ends happily.
Shakespeare was the first person who, in opposition
to the chronicles, made a tragedy on this story.
There can be no doubt that Stafford, the publisher,
meant to pass the old play as Shakespeare's ; the
last trace we have of it on the stage is in April
1594, when it was acted at the Rose by the
Queen's and Sussex' men, who almost immediately
afterwards broke up. That Shakespeare's play
remained on the stage till the end of 1605 is
evident from the words " these late eclipses " (i. 2.
112) which clearly refer to the huge eclipse of the
sun in October 1605, and the immediately pre
ceding eclipse of the moon in September. The
word " late " could not be used, whether in the
original text or by subsequent insertion, till October.
That Shakespeare had been probably reading

238 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Harvey on the subject I have noticed under the
preceding play, to which the present is every way
closely allied. Compare, for instance, the characters
of I ago and Edmund. The Quarto of 1608, entered
S. R. 26th November 1607 as acte^ at Whitehall
St. Stephen's Day, i.e., 26th December 1606, is
abridged and slightly altered for Court representa
tion and carelessly printed ; the Folio is, on the
other hand, somewhat shortened for the public
stage. The names of the spirits in iii. 4 are from
Harsnett's Declaration of Egregious Popish Impos
tures. The two lines at the end of Act i. and the
Merlin's Prophecy (iii. 2. 79-95) are not in Shake
speare's [manner ; they are mere gag, inserted by
the Fool-actor to raise a laugh among the ground
lings. The story of Gloster and his sons is pro
bably founded on Sidney's Arcadia, ii. 133-138,
ed. 1598.

1606.

Macbeth, as we have it, is abridged for the stage
in an unusual degree. Nevertheless it contains
one scene, iii. 5, and a few lines, iv. i. 39—43, which
are not by Shakespeare. The character of Hecate,
and the songs in these passages (Black spirits and
white, and Come away), are from Middleton's Witch,
acted 1621—22. The insertions in Macbeth must have

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 239

been made in 1622 ; they were probably merely
intended to introduce a little singing and music
then popular ; and music has ever since been
an essential ingredient in the stage representations.
Omitting these forty lines, we have ample evidence
of the date of the play as Shakespeare left it. In
the Porter's speech, ii. 3. 1-23, 26-46, the
" expectation of plenty " refers to the abundance
of corn in 1606 ; the allusions to equivocation cer
tainly allude to the trial of Garnet and other Jesuits
in the spring of that year : the " stealing out of a
French hose" agrees with the short and strait fashion
then in vogue, when " the tailors took more than
enough for the new fashion sake " (A. Nixon's Black
Year, 1606) ; the touching for the King's evil, iv. 3.
140—159, implies that James was on the throne.
Camden, in his Remains (1605), a book certainly
known to Shakespeare, refers to it as a "gift
hereditary." The " double balls and treble sceptres "
in iv. I. 1 19—122, necessitate a time of writing subse
quent to 24th October 1604, when the constitution
was changed. The applicability of the circumstances
of the play to the Gowry conspiracy would be
especially pleasing to James, and the predictions of
the weyward sisters had already been presented
to the King at Oxford in Latin in 1605. Warner
added an account of Macbeth to his new edition of

240 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Albion's England in 1606, but the absolute argu
ment against this being a new play when Forman
saw it performed 2Oth April 1610, lies in the dis
tinct allusion in The Puritan by Middleton, acted
1606 — " instead of a jester, we'll ha' th' ghost in
a white sheet sit at upper end o' th' table." This
was Shakespeare's first play without a jester, and
Banquo's ghost sits in Macbeth's place at the
upper end. There is little doubt that Malone was
right in assigning the visit of the King of Denmark
in July and August 1606 as the occasion for the
production of this play at Court. But was this
the date of its first production on the stage ? All
the evidences for it are gathered from ii. 3. 1-23,
26-46; iv. I. 119-122; iv. 3. 140-159; everyone
of which passages bears evident marks of being an
addition to the original text. The description of
Cawdor's death is remarkably like that of the Earl of
Essex in Stow (by Howes, p. 793), who minutely
describes " his asking the Queen's forgiveness, his
confession, repentance, and concern about behaving
with propriety on the scaffold." Steevens (ii. 4)
reminds us of corresponding passages in Hamlet
and Ccesar, to which plays Macbeth is throughout
more closely allied than to Lear or Timon. The
references to Antony, i. 3. 84, in. I. 57, are just
what might be expected from one who had recently

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 241

read Plutarch's life of Antony for writing Julius
Ccesar. Shakespeare's company were in Scotland
in 1 60 1, and were appointed the King's Servants;
Laurence Fletcher being admitted burgess of the
guild of the borough of Aberdeen, 22d October
1 60 1. This, I think, is the date of production of
Macbeth on the stage, 1606 being that of the
revised play at Court. But there are traces of
a still earlier play. In 1596, August 27, there
is, says Mr. Collier, an entry in S. R. (I sup
pose in that portion relating to fines, &c., which
Mr. Arber has not been allowed to reprint)
referring to two ballads, one on Macdobeth, the
other on The Taming of a Shrew. Kempe, in his
Dance from London to Norwich (1600), refers to this
ballad as made by " a penny poet whose first
making was the miserable stolen story of Mac-do-el
or Mac-do-beth or Mac somewhat, for I am sure
a Mac it was, though I never had the maw to see
it ; " he bids the writer " leave writing these beastly
ballads ; make not good wenches prophetesses,
for little or no profit." This ballad was in all
probability founded on a play, as its companion
was; a play probably written some year or two
before. That Shakespeare had some connection
with this early play, is rendered probable by
iv. i. 94—101, in which Dunsin'ane is accented in

Q

242 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

the southern manner ; in the rest of the play it is
always, as in Scotland, Dunsina'ne. This passage,
in which Macbeth speaks of himself in the third
person, and rhymes in a manner which strongly
reminds us of the pre-Shakespearian stage, sug
gests that the old play of c. 1593-4 was used by
Shakespeare in making his 1601 version. I may
ask the reader who doubts the remarkable altera
tions to which this play has been subjected, to
examine the following incomplete lines at points
where compression by omission seems to have
taken place, i. 3. 103 ; i. 4. 35 ; ii. i. 16; ii. I. 24;
ii. 3. 120; iii. 2. 155 ; iv. 3. 15 ; and to compare
the later alterations by Davenant and others, as
given in my article in Anglia, vol. vii.

1606-7.

Timon of Athens unquestionably contains much
matter from another hand. The Shakespearian
part is so like Lear in matter, and Anthony and
Cleopatra in metre, that the conjectural date here
assigned to it cannot be far wrong. It was founded
on the passage in North's Plutarch (Life of Antony),
and perhaps on the story as told in Painter's Palace
of Pleasure, with a hint or two from Lucian's
Dialogues (? at second hand ; no translation of that
time is known). It would be out of proportion in

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 243

this ^work to reproduce my 1868 essay on the
authorship, which awaits some slight corrections
from recent investigation. It will be found in the
New Shakspere Society's Transactions for 1874.
I can only here point out the parts that are
certainly not Shakespeare's, namely, ii. I ; ii. 2.
194-204 ; iii. I ; iii. 2 ; iii. 3 ; iii. 4 (in great part) ;
iii. 5; iii. 6. 116-131; iv. 2; iv. 3. 70-74, 103-
106, 464-545; v. i. 157; v. 3. Delius and Elze
say the second author was George Wilkins.
Perhaps so ; but they are certainly wrong in
regarding the play as an alteration made by Shake
speare of another man's work. Whether Wilkins
completed the unfinished sketch by Shakespeare,
or the actors eked it out with matter taken from a
previous play by him, I cannot tell : but Shake
speare's part is a whole totus feres atque rotundus.
There is no trace of his ever working in conjunc
tion with any author after 1594, although in this play,
in The Shrew, and Pericles there is evidence of his
writing portions of dramas which were fitted into the
work of other men. Wilkins left the King's men in
1607 ar»d wrote for the Queen's. This migration
to an inferior company is so unusual as to indicate
some rupture on unfriendly terms. Perhaps the
insertion of Shakespeare's work in his play offended
him. The unShakespearian characters in the play

244 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

are three Lords — Lucius, Lucullus, and Sem-
pronius; three Servants — Flavius (Steward always
in the Shakespeare part), Flaminius, and Servilius ;
three Strangers ; three Creditors — Hortensius,
Philotus, and 2d Varro ; three Masquers ; and the
Soldier. I have not here assigned to Wilkins all
parts of the play that have been suspected, but only
those with regard to which the evidence is definite,
with entire exclusion of merely aesthetic opinion.

1607.

Anthony and Cleopatra was entered on S. R.
2Oth May 1608 ; and no doubt was written not
much more than a year before that date. Where-
ever we find plays entered but not printed in their
author's lifetime, it is pretty safe to conclude that
they were then still on the stage : compare, for
Shakespeare, the instances of The Merchant of
Venice, Troylus and Cressida, and As You Like it.

1608.

Coriolanus in all probability was produced not
long after Anthony. There is no external evidence
available. Both these Roman plays are founded on
North's Plutarch.

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 245

1608.

Pericles as we now have it was probably on
the stage in 1608, when Wilkins published his
prose version of " the play, as it was lately pre
sented by the worthy and ancient poet John
Gower." He was probably annoyed by the adop
tion of Shakespeare's version of the Marina story
in place of his own. The rest of the play as it
stands — i.e., Acts i. ii. and Gower chorus to Act iii.
— are by Wilkins, in whose novel the only distinctly
traceable piece of Shakespeare's is from iii. I. 28-
31, which is repeated almost verbatim. The play
was published in 1609, probably as an answer to
Wilkins ; whose unaltered play must have been on
the stage as early as 1606, seeing that The Puritan,
acted that year, contains a distinct parody of the
scene of Thaisa's recovery. This original form
of the play was founded on Gower's Confessio
Amantis and Twine's novel of Prince Apollonius,
which was probably, in consequence of the popu
larity of the play, reprinted in 1607. It was, I
think, this Wilkins' play that was entered in S. R.
along with Anthony and Cleopatra 2Oth May 1608,
and the publication of which was stayed. There is
no trace of any transfer of Blount's interest as so
entered to Gosson, who published the altered play.

246 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

To the popularity of this drama there are many
allusions, notably one in Pimlico, or Run Redcap
(1609).

1609.

Cymbeline was probably produced after the
Roman plays and before Winter's Tale; and the
lachimo part was doubtless then written. There
is, however, strong internal evidence that the part
derived from Holinshed, viz., the story of Cymbeline
and his sons, the tribute, &c., in the last three acts,
was written at an earlier time, in 1606 I think, just
after Lear and Macbeth, for which the same chroni
cler had been used. All this older work will be
found in the scenes in which Lucius and Bellarius
enter. A marked instance in the change of treat
ment will be found in the character of Cloten. In
the later version he is a mere fool (see i. 3 ; ii. i) ;
but in the earlier parts he is by no means deficient
in manliness, and the lack of his " counsel " is
regretted by the King in iv. 3. Especially should
iii. 5 be examined from this point of view, in which
the prose part is a subsequent insertion, having
some slight discrepancies with the older parts of
the scene. Philaster, which contains some passages
suggested by this play, was' written in 1611. The
lachimo story is found in Boccaccio's Decameron,

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 247

Day II, Novel 9. The verse of the vision, v. 4.
30-122, is palpably by an inferior hand, and was
probably inserted for some Court performance after
Shakespeare had left the stage. Of course the stage
directions for the dumb show are genuine. This
would not have been worth mentioning but for
the silly arguments of some who defend the Shake
spearian authorship of these lines, and maintain
that the play would be maimed without them.
Forman saw this play acted c. 1610-11 ; which
gives our only posterior limit of date.

1610.

The Winter's Tale was founded on Greene's
Dorastus and Fawnia; it was still on the stage when
Dr. S. Forman saw it, I5th May 161 1 ; but this gives
only a posterior limit. Sir H. Herbert mentions
it as an old play allowed by Sir G. Buck. But
Buck, although not strictly Master of the Revels
till August 1610, had full power to "allow" plays
from 1607 onwards. We are, after all, left in great
measure to internal evidence. One really helpful
fact is that Jonson in Bartholomew Fair links it with
The Tempest : " If there be never a servant monster
in the Fair who can help it ? nor a nest of antics ?
He is loth to make nature afraid in his plays like

248 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

those that beget Tales, Tempests, and such like
drolleries." This was written in 1614, and at that
date he would of course allude to the latest pro
ductions of Shakespeare, if to any. This allusion
occurs in a play written for a rival company, the
Princess Elizabeth's. In his Conversations with
Drummond, Jon son again refers to this play apropos
of Bohemia having no sea-coast. I suspect that
the Bear was a success in Mucedorus, and therefore
revived in this play.

1 6 10.

The Tempest was shown by Malone to contain
many particulars derived from Jourdan's narrative,
1 3th October 1610, A Discovery of the Bermudas,
otherwise called the Isle of Devils; by Sir Thomas
Gates, Sir George Somers, and Captain Newport,
with divers others. He is not equally successful
in showing that Shakespeare used The True Declara
tion of the Colony of Virginia, S. R. 8th November
1610, in which the reference to The Tempest as
a " Tragical Comedy " seems to me to show that
the play was already on the stage. It does not
follow that because the October pamphlet was used
in the storm scenes, that none of the play was
written before that month ; but that the date of

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 249

its first appearance was in October to November
1610, 1 have little doubt. Gonzalo's description of
his ideal republic is from Florio's Montaigne. The
play as we have it is evidently abridged ; one
character, the son of Anthonio the Duke of Milan,
i. 2. 438, has entirely disappeared, unless the
eleven lines assigned to Francisco are the debris
of his part. The lines forming the Masque in
iv. I are palpably an addition, probably made by
Beaumont for the Court performance before the
Prince, the Princess Elizabeth, and the Palatine in
1612-13 ; or else before the King on 1st November
1612 (The Winter's Tale being acted on 5th
November). This addition consists only of the
heroics, 11. 60-105, 129-138; the mythological
personages in the original play having acted in
dumb show. In the stage directions (1. 72) of
the dumb show " Juno descends ; " in the text of
the added verse 1. 102, she " comes," and Ceres
" knows her by her gait." This and the preceding
were surely Shakespeare's last plays ; compare
Prosperous speech, v. I. 50, &c., and the Epilogue.
He began his career with the Chamberlain's com
pany (after his seven years' apprenticeship in
conjunction with others, 1587—94), with a Mid
summer Dream, he finishes with a Winter's Tale ;
and so his playwright's work is rounded ; twenty-

250 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

four years, each year an hour in the brief day
of work, and then the rounding with a sleep.*

1613.

Henry VIII. as we have it is not the play that
was in action at the Globe when that theatre was
burned on Tuesday, 29th June 1613. Howes (Stow,
Chronicles, p. 1003) says, " By negligent discharg
ing of a peal of ordnance, close to the South side
thereof the Thatch took fire, and the wind suddenly
disperst the flame round about, and in a very short
space the whole building was quite consumed and
no man hurt ; the house being filled with people,
to behold the play, viz., of Henry the Eight" A
letter from Thomas Lorkin to Sir Thomas Pucker
ing, 3Oth June 1613, and another from John
Chamberlain to Sir Ralph Winwood, 8th July
1613 (Win wood's Memorials, iii. 469), give similar
accounts. Sir Henry Wotton (Reliquice, p. 475),

* Compare with this Masque, that by Beaumont written for the
Inner Temple, 1613.

1. " Thy banks with pioned and twilled brims " (Tempest}.

" Bordered with sedges and water flowers " (Inner Temple

Masque}.
" Naiades with sedged crowns " ( Tempest}.

2. " Blessing . . . and increasing " ( Tempest}.

" Blessing and increase " ( Inner Temple Masque).

3. The main part played by Iris in both.

4. The dance of the Naiads in both. Many of the properties
could be utilised in both performances.

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 251

in a letter of 2d July 1613, says it was at " a new
play acted by the King's players at the Bankside,
called All is True, representing some principal
pieces of the reign of Henry the Eighth." The
title "All is True" is clearly alluded to in the
Prologue, 11. 9, 18, 21 ; but the same Prologue
shows that the extant play was performed as a
new one at Blackfriars, for the price of entrance, a
" shilling," 1. 12, and the address to " the first and
happiest hearers of the town," 1. 24, are only
applicable to the " private house " in Blackfriars ;
the entrance to the Globe was twopence, and the
audience at this " public house " of a much lower
class. This play is chiefly by Fletcher and Mas-
singer, Shakespeare's share in it being only i. 2 ;
ii. 3 ; ii. 4 ; while Massinger wrote i. I ; iii. 2.
I~I93 ; v- !• It was not, however, written by these
authors in conjunction. Shakespeare appears to
have left it unfinished ; his part is more like The
Winter's Tale than any other play, and was pro
bably written just before that comedy in 1609,
during the prevalence of the plague. I have before
noted the disturbing effect of these plague times,
with the concomitant closing of the theatres, &c.,
on Shakespeare's regular habits of composition.
This play is founded on Holinshed's Chronicle and
Fox's Christian Martyrs (1563). It is worth noting

252 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

that its success called forth new editions of S.
Rowley's When you see me you know me, and the
Lord Cromwell of W. S. in this year ; both plays
on Henry the Eighth's times. On the authorship
question see Mr. Spedding's Essay in The Gentle
man's Magazine, August 1850, Mr. Boyle's Essay
and my own letter in the Athenceum. That the 1613
play (probably finished by Fletcher, and destroyed
in great part in the Globe fire) was not that now
extant is certain, for in a contemporary ballad on
the burning of the Globe we are told that the
"riprobates prayed for the fool/' and there is no
fool in Henry VIII. The extant play was produced
by Fletcher and Massinger in 1617.

1625.

The Two Noble Kinsmen was published in 1634,
as written by Fletcher and Shakespeare. There
is no other evidence that Shakespeare had any
hand in it, except the opinions of Lamb, Coleridge,
Spalding, Dyce, &c. These, on analysis, simply
reiterate the old argument, " It is too good for any
one else." Hazlitt and Hallam held, notwithstand
ing, the opposite opinion. I have myself shown in
The Literary World, loth February 1883 (Boston),
that the play was first acted in 1625. It was
printed from a playhouse MS., with stage direc-

SUCCESSION OF HIS PLAYS. 253

tions, such as i. 3 : " 2 Hearses ready with Pala-
mon and Arcite ; the 3 Queens. Theseus and
his Lords ready ; " and in iii. 5 : " Knock for
Schoole." But in iv. 2, we find an actor named
Curtis taking the part of Messenger. No actor of
that name is known except Curtis Greville, who
joined the King's men between 1622, when he be
longed to the Palsgrave's, and October 1626, when
he performed in Massinger's Roman Actor. More
over, the Prologue tells us this was a new play
performed in a time of losses, and in anticipation of
leaving London. The company did leave London
in 1624, after their trouble in August about Middle-
ton's Game of Chess. On this occasion they tra
velled in the north, and performed at Skipton
three times for £3 ; and again, in July 1625 they
travelled, on account of the plague in London ;
where they ceased to perform in May, when the
deaths from that disease exceeded forty per week.
Greville probably joined the King's men on the
breaking up of the Palsgrave's, of whom the last
notice dates 3d v November 1624. This gives
Easter 1625 as the likeliest date for the play.
But whether in 1624 or 1625 (and it must be one
of these years) it was first acted, the advocates of
Shakespeare's part-authorship are now reduced to
the hypothesis that a play begun by Shakespeare

254 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

was left unnoticed for some dozen years, although
a similarly unfinished play had been finished and
acted twelve seasons before, and a collected edition
of Shakespeare's works had been issued in the
interim, in which had been included every avail
able portion of his writings/* I cannot believe
this ; nor can I think that if Shakespeare were
really concerned in this play it would have been
put forth in 1625 with so modest a Prologue. This
might have suited while he lived, but nine years
after his death, and two years after his collected
works had been published, it is incredible. With
the highest respect then for the eminent aesthetic
critics who hold that Shakespeare did write part of
this play, I must withdraw my adhesion, and state
my present opinion that there is nothing in it above
the reach of Massinger and Fletcher, but that some
things in it (ii. la; iv. 3) are unworthy of either,
and more likely to be by some inferior hand, W.
Rowley for instance. The popular instinct has
always been on this side ; editions containing this
play have not been sought after ; and had it not
been known not to have been Shakespeare's, it
would surely have been gathered up with the
W. S. plays in the Folio of 1663.

* Pericles and Edward III. are no exceptions to this statement ;
the copyrights of both belonged to other publishers, and were
retained by thess after the Folio was issued.

SECTION V.

ON THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS.

/ HENRY VI. was acted as a new play at the
Rose by Lord Strange's men 3d March 1592. It
is evidently written by several hands. No success
ful attempt has yet been made to discriminate
these ; yet it will be found that on this discrimina
tion depends the elucidation of so many difficult
circumstances of Shakespeare's early career, that
no apology is required for giving to this play an
amount of consideration which it would not deserve
on account of its intrinsic merits. It is convenient
to commence our investigation by a brief summary
of the historical parts contained in the play.

A 1422, August 31. Henry VI. succeeded to the throne
at "nine months old."

A 1422, November 7. Henry V. was buried at West
minster (i. i).

A 1425. Gloster was refused admission to the Tower
(i. 3)-

256 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

A 1425, January 19. The Earl of March died at
Trim, leaving Richard Plantagenet his heir. [This
Edmund Mortimer was not imprisoned in the
Tower, as in the play; but his uncle, Sir John
Mortimer, was so, who was executed shortly before.]

(«• 5-)
A 1426, March. A Parliament was held at Leicester

(iii. !).

B 1427 September to 1428 May. Orleans was besieged

(i. 2, 4, 5, 6 ; ii. i, 2, 3).
A 1429. The battle of Patay [called Poitiers, iv. i. 19]

at which Fastolfe [called Falstaff in the play] fled,

and Talbot was taken (i. i. 103-140 ; compare iii. 2.

103-108).

A 1429. Charles was crowned at Rheims (i. i. 92).
A 1429. The French towns revolted (i. i. 60). For

Paris mentioned among them compare v. 2. 2.
E 1430, May. Joan of Arc was taken, and (1431, May)

burned (v. 3. 1-44 ; v. 4. 1-93).
B 1430, December. Henry VI. was crowned at Paris

(iii. 4; iv. i).
C 1435, September. Bedford died at Paris (iii. 2), and

Burgundy made peace with France (iii. 3).
E 1436. Paris submitted to Charles (v. 2. 2).
E 1443. The match between Henry and Margaret was

arranged (v. 3. 45-*95; v. 5).
E 1443. A truce was made for eighteen months (v. 4.

94-175)-
D 1452. Talbot and his son were killed in battle (iv.

2, 3> 4, 5' 6> 7)-
I

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 257

The capital letters prefixed to these dates will
enable us to follow readily the arrangement of
these events in the play. The A. group, com
prising i. i. 3, ii. 5, iii. i, is manifestly by one
writer. The time limits of his scenes are 1422 and
1426 : the first scene contains allusions to events
of a subsequent date, thrust in for dramatic effect
without regard either to historical accuracy or the
internal consistency of the play. Specially the
battle of Patay, the crowning of Charles, and the
revolt of the French towns may be noted. It is
hardly requisite to do more than read the opening
speech to see that the author of these scenes was
Marlowe. It may be noticed, however, that in these
scenes, and in these only, we find Gloster (Gloucester
elsewhere), Reynold (Reignier or Reigneir else
where), and Roan (monosyllabic elsewhere). All
these scenes are laid in London.

The B. group, i. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6, ii. I. 2. 3, iii. 4,
iv. i., contains only events that happened between
1427 and 1430, the scene being laid at Orleans,
Auvergne, or Paris. The bit of the battle of Patay
iii. 2. 103-108, thrust into the midst of scenes at
Rouen in 1435, would probably belong to this
group. It seems to be a preparation for iv. I,
stuck for dramatic purposes in a position historically
most incongruous. The author of these scenes is

258 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

not easy to identify : his work is rather colourless,
yet minor coincidences with the known work of
Robert Greene and Thomas Kyd point to one of
them as the writer. In this group only we find
the spellings : Joane de Puzel (Pucelle elsewhere),
Reigneir (occasionally also Reignier), and Gloucester
(Gloster elsewhere, except in one instance, where
Glocester is probably a misprint). There can be
no doubt that these scenes are all by one author,
and that not the writer of group A., but very far
inferior.

Group C., iii. 2. 3, is very like Group B. in
general handling, but has some marked character
istics : here, and here only, we find Burgonie (Bur
gundy or Burgundie elsewhere) and Roan mono
syllabic ; Pucelle (Puzel in Group B.) and Joane
(Jone in Group D.) also differentiate it from these
groups. The time is 1435, place Rouen. I con
jecture the author to have been George Peele.

Group D. v. 2-5 is made up of the Joan of Arc
story of 1430-1 and the Margaret match of 1443.
This group has Gloucester invariably (Gloster in
Group A.), Jone (Joane in B., C.), Reignier (never
Reigneir, as B.) The author of these scenes is
without doubt Thomas Lodge. His versification is
unmistakable, and the phrase " cooling card " occurs
in Marius and Sylla, the older plays of John and

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 259

Leir (both times in parts by Lodge). It has not been
traced in Greene, Peele, or Marlowe.

Before considering Group E., iv. '2—7, which is
concerned only with Talbot's last fight near Bour-
deaux in 1452, I would draw attention to the
fact that it is clear that this episode did not form
part of the original play : it is merely connected
with it by the two lines, v. 2. 16, 17, which may
have been inserted for that purpose ; belongs chro
nologically to the next play, and is so different from,
as well as so superior to, its surroundings, that
in 1876 I suggested that Shakespeare might have
written it. Mr. Swinburne has since sanctioned
this opinion by adopting it. This, however, is not
evidence ; what follows is. The scenes in the Folio
are not divided in Acts i., ii. ; in the other Acts
the}' are. Acts iii. and iv. I coincide with the modern
division ; but v. I of the modern editors is iv. 2
in the Folio ; v. 2. 3. 4, are iv. 3 in the Folio, and
v. 5 in the Folio is the whole fifth Act. Here
then is the play completed without iv. 2—7, which
are not numbered at all. It is plain that they were
written subsequently to the rest of the play and
inserted at a revival. They had to be inserted in
such a manner as not to break the connection
between this play and 2 Henry VI. , and were put
in the most convenient place, regardless of historic

260 . LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

sequence. I take it for granted that this play in
its original shape was acted before 2 Henry VI.,
the commencement of which was evidently meant
to fit on to the end of the preceding play. It is in
accordance with the hypothesis here announced
(that the play acted 3d March 1592 was new only
in these Talbot scenes,) that we find Nash in his
Piers Penniless (S. R. 8th August 1592) referring
only to the Talbot scenes as new. " How it would
have joyed brave Talbot, the terror of the French,
to think that after he had lain two hundred year
in his tomb, he should triumph again on the stage,
and have his bones embalmed with the tears of
ten thousand spectators at least." It was acted
thirteen times at the Rose between March 3 and
June 22, that is, at least once a week ; was the
most popular play of the season, and was probably
still in action " about the city " or in the country
during the time that the theatres were closed for
the plague, from 22d June 1592 till January 1593,
when it was again played at the Rose. It was,
therefore, in action when Greene's celebrated address
" to those gentlemen, his quondam acquaintance,
that spend their wits in making plays," was written.
This address was published in Greene's Groatsworth
of Wit after 2d September, when Greene died, and
before 8th December, when Chettle's Kind-Harfs

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 261

Dream was entered on S. R., and was probably
written about June. It is addressed to Marlowe,
Lodge, and Peele. Attempts have been made to
show that Nash, not Lodge, was the second play
wright of this trio, on the ground that Lodge was
too old to be called " young Juvenal " or " sweet
boy;" was absent from England; was not a satirist,
and had foresworn writing for the theatre. The
only important argument is that of Lodge's age.
As this is important in other respects, I give here
a table of the known birth dates, matriculations,
B.A. and M.A. degrees, and first appearances as
authors of the University men connected at that
time with the stage : —

Born. B'A' M>A> Author in

Lyly . . .

• 1553-4

1571

1573

1575

1579

Peele . . .

• 1558

1574

1577

1579

1584

Greene . .

.

...

1578

1583

1580

Lodge . . .

.

1573

1577

...

1580

Marlowe . .

. 1564

1581

1583

1587

1587

Nash .... 1567 1582 1585-6 ... 1589

It will be seen from the above table that the
degree of B.A. was usually taken at eighteen or
nineteen ; that Lodge and Greene were probably
of about the same age ; and if we may judge from
Greene's slowness in obtaining his M.A. degree,
that he was not speedy in fulfilling the earlier

262 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

University requirements. Greene was probably
the elder. At any rate, Lodge's age in 1592 was
about thirty-three, surely not too old for one of
about his own age to call " boy." He was a
satirist before 1592. The Looking-glass for London
is bitter enough for any " young Juvenal." On
the other hand, Nash was certainly not the " biting
satyrist that lastly with me [Greene] wrote a
comedy." He had at the time of Greene's death
written no comedy whatever : his first connection
with the stage was his Summer's Last Will, acted
at Archbishop Whitgift's, in November 1592.
Lodge, we know, had written with Greene The
Looking-glass y and there is strong internal evi
dence of his having a hand in George-a-Greene and
James IV. Nor could the statement that " those
puppits that speak from our mouths, those anticks
garnished in our colours," had " all been beholding "
to you, be with any consistency applied to Nash.
Greene was evidently addressing the principal play
wrights of the time, and, if my present view is
a true one, he seized the opportunity of Shake
speare's having made " new additions " to a play in
which all of them had been concerned to endeavour
to create an ill-feeling between " the upstart crow
beautified with our feathers " and those of the
University men, who had hitherto enjoyed a mono-

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 263

poly of writing for the stage, or nearly so. To
have omitted Lodge in such an attempt would
have been weak ; to have included Nash, absurd.
The effect of Greene's address was not what he
desired. Peele had probably already been a coad
jutor of Shakespeare, and Marlowe immediately, and
no doubt Lodge later on, joined Shakespeare's
company and wrote for them. In Greene's excuse
must be considered how galling it must have been
to a man in poverty and bad health to see a play
which, while he was connected with it, had attracted
little notice, suddenly raised to the highest success
by the insertion of a few scenes written by a
" Johannes factotum," a " Shakescene," who was
" able to bombast out a blank verse " without being
" Magister in artibus utriusque universitatis" Con
firmations of my views as to this play will be
found in the succeeding ones. The scene ii. 4
has long been recognised as so far superior to
the rest of the play as to be probably due to the
hand of Shakespeare at a later date, c. 1597—8.

2 Henry VI. — This play exists in two forms :
one in the 1623 Folio, hereafter for convenience
called F. ; the other in Quarto, entered S. R. I2th
March 1594, hereafter called Q. It was published
in 1594 as The First part of the Contention betwixt

264 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

the two Famous Houses of York and Lancaster.
This Quarto version is a mangled and probably
surreptitious copy of the original play, greatly
abbreviated for acting. The play as first written
will be hereafter called O. But F. and O. are not
identical, although in many parts O. was more
like F. than Q. It will be convenient to enter on
the proof that O. was revised and altered before
beginning the discussion of the authorship of either
version, which is the most difficult, if not the most
important, problem in Shakespearian criticism.

In the Folio of 1623 a list is given of the
principal actors in Shakespeare's plays. The me
thod in which this list is arranged has never been
pointed out. It is chronological. The first ten
names are those of the original men actors when
the Chamberlain's company was instituted in 1594;
the next five were added not later than 1603 > tne
next five (excepting Field, who is inserted here from
his early connection with Underwood and Ostler)
c. 1610; the final six after 1617. By a comparison
of this list with the names of the actors in The
Seven Deadly Sins, originally acted before 1588, but
the extant plot of which dates c. 1594, we shall get
the evidence we want. The first seven names in
the Folio list are (i.) W. Shakespeare, (2.) R.
Burbadge, (3.) J. Hemmings, (4.) A. Phillips,

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 265

(5.) W. Kempe, (6.) J. Pope, (7.) G. Bryan. The
last five of these we know to have been members
of Lord Strange's company in 1593. In the 7. D.
S. we find neither Shakespeare nor Hemmings ; but
we do find (2.) R. Burbadge, (4.) Mr. Phillips, (5.)
Will Foole, (6.) Mr. Pope, (7.) Mr. Bryan. It
will be noticed that the prefix Mr. is confined to
members of Lord Strange's company. Next in the
Folio list come (8.) Henry Condell, (9.) William
Sly, (10.) Richard Cowley. These appear in 7.
D. S. as (8.) Harry, (9.) W. Sly, (10.) R. Cowley.
At this point we are struck with the fact that
Harry, Will, and Dick are names of three Cade
conspirators in Q., and naturally try to see if the
other names, Nick, Jack, Robin, Tom, and George,
occur in 7. D. S. For it is certain that in very
early plays up to the end of the sixteenth century
it was frequently the case that the actors in plays
are designated by their proper Christian names.
We do find (11.) Nick (i.e., Nicholas Tooley, a boy-
actor in 1597, but a man c. 1610 in the Folio of
1623), (12.) John Duke, (13.) Robert Pallant,
(14.) Thomas Goodall ; but George, i.e., G. Peele, is
not there discoverable. I may notice that Duke
and Pallant, like Beeston, all three of whom left
the Chamberlain's men for the Earl of Derby's in
1599, are excluded from the Folio list. On turning

266 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

to another play, Sir Thomas More, c. 1596, the only
other one that can give us similar information on
the same scale, I find (8.) Harry, (13.) Robin, (14.)
T. Goodall, (15.) Kit (i.e., Christopher Beeston),
and two boys, (16.) Ned and (17.) a second Robin,
i.e.t Robert Gough, who occurs in the Folio list as
a man c. 1617. In the 7. D. S. these latter corre
spond to (15.) Kitt, (16.) Ned, (17.) R. Go. In Sir
T. More there are two other names of this kind, Giles
and Rafe. Of Giles nothing more is known, but
Rafe Raye is mentioned in Henslowe's Diary as a
Chamberlain's man in 1594. A further examina
tion of older plays leads to little additional informa
tion ; but what is to be found all confirms the
opinion that I had formed (as will be seen), on
other grounds, that 2 Henry VI. was written for the
Queen's men. Thus in plays known to have be
longed to that company, I find in The Famous Vic
tories, (12.) John, (13.) Robin, (14.) Tom, (16.) Ned
and Lawrence; in Orlando, (14.) Tom and Rafe
(Raye); in Friar Bacon, (10.) Dick, (14.) Tom; and in
James IV., Andrew. There is no Andrew in our
lists, but one occurs in Much Ado About Nothing, iv.
2, 1597-8, in place of Kempe : apparently a remnant
of the older form of Love's Labour's Won before
Kempe undertook the part. But our list of the
7. D. S. is not yet exhausted : (18.) Sander (a boy-

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 267

player, but the same as Alexander Cooke, a man in
1603 in the Folio list), (19.) T. Belt, and (20.) Will
(another boy), occur in The Taming of a Shrew,
1588. Of (21.) Vincent, nothing is known; but
(22.) J. Sinkler acted with Gabriel (Spenser) and
Humfrey (Jeffes) in J Henry VI. , which belonged
to Pembroke's company. Now as the last two, with
Antony Jeffes and Robert Shaw, appear in Hen-
slowe's Diary for the first time immediately after
the partial breaking up of Pembroke's company
and their juncture with the Admiral's in October
1597, it is morally certain that Sinkler had gone to
the Chamberlain's, and Spenser Shaw and the two
Jeffes to the Admiral's, at or before that date. I
feel, therefore, justified in concluding that the
7. D. S. gives us a nearly complete list of the
Chamberlain's actors, formed of Lord Strange's
players as a nucleus ; such of the Queen's men as
joined them in 1591-2, when they obtained many
Queen's plays (see p. 108), and such of Pembroke's
as joined them in 1594, when they obtained Pem
broke's plays (see p. 21). I have omitted only
one name, and the absolute coincidence of nearly
every one of the rest with the lists obtained
from other sources is too remarkable to be the
mere effect of accident : in fact, the chances are
many millions to one against this being the

268 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

case. The one name omitted is (23.) John Holland.
This name occurs nowhere else to my knowledge,
but in the 7. D. S. plot and 2 Henry VI. , Act iv. in
the Folio, where he replaces Nick of the Quarto.
There can be no doubt of this being an actor's
name; and its occurrence shows at once that the
Cade part of the play was revised, and that the
revision was probably made after 1594. Had it
been earlier, there would have been two Johns in
the company, Duke and Holland, and Duke would
not have been called simply Jack.

If the above conclusions are well founded, 2
Henry VI. was originally written for the Queen's
men as a continuation of i Henry VI., and, like
the latter-mentioned play, passed into the hands of
Lord Strange's men in 1591—2, but was not, like it,
then revised ; or it may, like George a Greene, have
passed to Sussex' men ; from them, like Titus
Andronicus, to Pembroke's ; and thence to the
Chamberlain's. It is noticeable that although pub
lished in Quarto by the same person, Millington,
who published j Hemy VI. as the True Tragedy of
Richard Duke of York in 1595; ne Pu^ no name
of acting company on the former play, as he did
that of Pembroke's on the latter. This distinctly
shows that the original companies for whom these
plays were written were not identical, and that

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 269

that of 2 Henry VI. was probably unknown to
Millington. As to the authorship of 2 Henry VI.,
it will be well to make F. the basis of investigation,
always having in mind the possibility of passages
having been inserted by the ultimate reviser. The
corruption and omission in Q. caused by the
shortening for stage purposes have been so great,
that the usual plan of beginning with Q. becomes
altogether misleading. The example of / Henry
VI. induces me to attach great weight to the
chronological arrangement of the historical facts.
Henry's marriage in 1445 forms the subject of i. i,
evidently written by Greene originally. The word
" alderliefest " in 1. 28 should specially be noted :
it is used by Greene in his Mourning Garment, and
" aldertruest " in his James IV. Such words are not
found in Marlowe, Peele, Lodge, or Shakespeare ;
yet here one occurs in a passage found in F. but not
in Q., plainly indicating omission in Q., not addition
in F. The next portion, i. 2-ii. 4, is concerned
with the banishment of the Duchess of Gloster,
1441, and the story of Saunder Simcox, 1441,
with which is incorporated the accusation of the
armourer for high treason, 1446. This part (except
i. 3. 45-103) is mainly by George Peele, but much
altered in the F. revision. Peele his mark, " sandy
plains," occurs in i. 4. 39. The Simcox anecdote,

270 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

however, ii. I. 59—153, which is quite unconnected
with the rest of the play, is more like Kyd's work
than Peele's, and may have been written by him.
The exceptional bit, i. 3. 45-103, to the conversation
in which no historical date can be assigned, is
manifest Marlowe; a preparation for iii. I— iv. I,
which is beyond question by him. The events in
this section are (iii. I a) the accusation and (iii. 2)
murder of Gloster in 1447 ; (iii. 3) the banish
ment of Suffolk, 1447 ; (iii. 3) the death of Win
chester in 1447 ; (iii. ib) the Irish insurrection
in 1449; and, finally, (iv. i) the death of Suffolk
in 1450. These scenes are the salt of the play.
The opening lines of iv. I, the description in iii. 2.
1 60, &c., the awful pathos of the death of Winches
ter, are from the same hand as the end of Doctor
Faustus. The differences of Q. and F. in this
portion are mostly due to omissions in Q. : iii. 3,
for instance, could not have been left in the state
in which Q. has it by the meanest of the authors of
the play : it is cut down by some illiterate actor.
That revision there has been is, however, plain from
the singular circumstance that in iii. 2 Elianor is
given for Margaret as the Queen's name. This
is probably due to Marlowe's almost simultaneous
work on the older John, in which Queen Elianor is
a prominent character. It would seem that the

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 271

reviser missed this scene, although correcting Mar
garet properly in the others. It is no printer's error ;
for in 1. 26 we have " Nell," for which some
modern editors euphoniously substitute " Meg."
The rest of the play, iv. 2-v. 3, is by one hand,
and that hand Lodge's. The notion that Greene
wrote it arises from want of discriminating Greene's
work from Lodge's in The Looking-glass for London,
all the better part of which is by Lodge. I fear
that those who underrate the powers of this elegant
and (in his own line) powerful writer estimate him
by his earliest dramatic effort, Marius and Sylla.
He should be read in his Glaucus and Rosalynde;
and his evident wish to avoid being known as a
dramatic writer should be taken into account. That
he did continue to write plays for many years, I
have no doubt, but the evidence is too extensive
to be given here. This part of the play includes
Cade's insurrection, 1450, and the battle of St.
Albans, 1455.

As regards the date, &c., of revision, see under
the next play.

3 Henry VI. is of very different character from
the two preceding plays. If read in the F. version,
no change of authorship is perceptible ; all is con
sistent ; and if the Q. version had not come down

272 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

to us, no one would have suspected a second
author. It is plainly by Marlowe, but the Marlowe
of Edward II., not of Faustus, later in date than
2 Henry VI. F. is nearly if not quite identical
with the original play. Q. is not, as in the case
of the preceding play, an abridgment for the stage
made by the actors, but one made for the same
purpose, carefully and accurately, apparently by the
author himself. The reason for this difference in
the treatment of the plays is manifest. J Henry VI.
was, as we know from the title-page, acted by
Pembroke's men, and F. is printed from a prompter's
copy, in which the names of Gabriel [Spenser],
Humphrey [Jeffes], and [John] Sinkler appear in
the stage directions ; and they were actors for that
company. There is not a particle of evidence
that this stage copy was ever altered in any way
after the Chamberlain's company acquired it. A
careful examination of such passages as ii. 5, the
stronghold of the revision theory, shows too much
coincidence between Q. and F. for any likelihood
of rewriting having taken place, except by way of
abridgment in Q. But in 2 Henry VI. things are
quite different : the Greene and Marlowe parts are
merely abridged in Q., and the Peele a good deal
revised in F. as well as abridged in Q. ; but the
Lodge part at the end is absolutely rewritten in

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 273

the St. Alban's battle, and the very names of the
actors are changed in the Cade insurrection. Who
could have done this but Shakespeare ? Here,
and here only, can we find an explanation of the
inclusion of these plays in the Folio edition of his
works in 1623. In my opinion the history of the
plays is this : About 1588—9, Marlowe plotted, and,
in conjunction with Kyd (or Greene), Peele, and
Lodge, wrote / Henry VI. for the Queen's men.
About 1589 the same authors wrote 2 Henry VI.;
in that year I have ascertained that Marlowe left
the Queen's men, and in 1590 joined Pembroke's,
for whom he alone wrote j Henry VI. In 1591—2
the Queen's men were in distress, and sold, among
other plays, / Henry VI. to Lord Strange's men,
who produced it in 1592 with Shakespeare's Talbot
additions as a new play. In the autumn of that
year or in 1593-4, when the companies travelled
on account of the plague, they cut down their
plays for country representation ; among others,
2 Henry VI. (altered by some illiterate) and j
Henry VI. (abridged by Marlowe himself). On
this point compare the parallel instances of abridged
plays, Hamlet, Orlando, and The Guise. In May 1 593
2 Henry VI. passed to the Sussex' men with Leir,
&c., when the Queen's men broke up ; in February
1594 with Andronicus to Pembroke's; in April,

s

274 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

when Pembroke's company partly dissolved, all three
plays were reunited in the hands of the Chamber
lain's men ; and for them 2 Henry VI. was, c. 1600,
after Lodge had retired, remodelled by Shakespeare,
and j Henry VI. corrected — the other authors,
Peele, Marlowe, (Kyd ?), and Greene, having died
before 1598. Meanwhile Millington published 2
Henry VI. Q. as York and Lancaster, and j Henry
VI. Q. as Richard Duke of York, these abridged
copies having become useless to Pembroke's men
on the ceasing of the plague and of their travels.

I have not noticed here the many parallel pas
sages from the works of Marlowe and others which
confirm the assignment of authorship now advocated.
It would be out of all proportion to give them here
unless imperfectly : the reader will find some in
Dyce's Marlowe, and more in my edition of Edward
II. Nor have I noticed the schoolboy interpreta
tion that explains "their" in Henry V., Epil. 1. 13,
as referring to 2 and J» Henry VI. : " their," more
Shakespeariano, like " they " in the previous line,
refers in form to the "many" of 1. 12, but in
meaning to the actors of / Henry VI. , in which play,
and not in j Henry VI., the loss of France is
treated of. It is also most unlikely that the 1600
edition of The Duke of York should have been issued
as played by Pembroke's servants if the play had

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 275

been previously acted by the Chamberlain's. Com
pare the parallel case of Andronicus. Miss Lee's
statement, " Greene wrote, Nash tells us," more
than four others " for Lord Pembroke's company,"
is absolutely without foundation. Nash says " the
company " (Apology, 1593), and evidently alludes to
the Queen's men, for whom Orlando, Bacon, Sell-
mus, and The Looking-glass were written. In fact,
Greene's only known connection with any other
company was his fraudulent selling of Orlando a
second time to the Admiral's. Marlowe, and he
alone, is known as a writer for Pembroke's : Kyd
may have been, however, and in my opinion was, a
contributor to their stage.

Richard III. is closely connected with j Henry
VI. , and written with direct reference to it. In i.
2. 158, iv. 2. 98, iv. 4. 275, scenes in that play
are plainly alluded to. Nor is it possible, if the
two plays be read in immediate sequence, to avoid
the feeling that they have a common authorship.
On the other hand, a closer analysis shows that in
Richard the Latin quotations, classical allusions,
and peculiar animal similes which are characteristic
of Henry have entirely disappeared. There are
also discrepancies, such as Gray's fighting for the
Lancastrians, i. 3. 130, whereas in j Henry VI. , iii.

276 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

2. 2, he is represented as a Yorkist, which shows a
different hand in the two plays. Richard III. has
always been regarded as entirely Shakespeare's, and
its likeness to j> Henry VI. has more than anything
else kept alive the untenable belief that this last-
named play was also, in part or wholly, written
by our greatest dramatist. Yet the unlikeness of
Richard III. to the other historical plays of Shake
speare, and the impracticability of finding a definite
position for it, metrically or aesthetically, in any
chronological arrangement, have made themselves
felt. Even cautious Mr. Halliwell says, " There are
slight traces of an older play to be observed, pas
sages which belong to an inferior hand ; " and again,
"To the circumstance of an anterior work having been
used do we owe some of its weakness and exces
sively turbulent character " (Outlines, 94). A careful
examination of the editions will be found to confirm
and extend this conclusion. The 1597 Quarto (Qj),
which is evidently an abridged version made for the
stage, and which no doubt was the version acted
during nearly all Elizabeth's reign, differs from the
Folio in a way not to be paralleled in any other
Shakespearian play. Minute alterations have been
made in almost every speech, in a fashion which
could not have been customary with him who
uttered his thoughts so easily as scarcely to make

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 277

a blot (i.e. alteration) in his papers. The question
of anteriority of the Q. and F. versions has been
hotly debated on aesthetic grounds ; but the mere
expurgation of oaths and metrical emendations in
F. are enough to show that it is the later version,
probably made c. 1602 ; while the fact that it was
preferred by the editors of the 1623 Folio shows
that they considered it the authentic copy of
Shakespeare's work. In other instances, Macbeth,
The Tempest, &c., they have indeed given us
abridged editions ; but there is neither proof nor
likelihood that any other were accessible. We do
not know what original copies were destroyed in
the Globe fire of 1613, and should be thankful for
such versions as we have, which were probably the
acting versions used at Blackfriars. But in this
case the editors had at hand the Quartos, and
unless they thought the Folio more authentic, I
cannot see why they preferred it. Furthermore,
the F. version appears to have been defective in
some places; for v. 3. 50, end of play, and iii. I.
17—165, are certainly printed from Q3 (1602).
This has been controverted, but on very insufficient
grounds. Now directly we compare the Folio and
Quarto versions, we meet with evidence that altera
tion and correction have been largely used in both
of them. For instance, Derby is found as a

278 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

character in the play in i. i, ii. i, 2, iv. 5, v. 5,
in both versions ; in iii. I. 2, iv. i, v. 2, he is
called Stanley. This shows correction by a second
hand. In iv. i, while Stanley has been inserted in
the text, Derby remains in the prefixes ; v. 3 is
only partially corrected, and both names occur.
The names were not used indifferently, for in iv. 2,

4, we find Stanley in F. but Derby in Q. This
shows a progressive correction in which Q. precedes
F. It may be noticed that Darby is the original
author's spelling. In like manner, Gloster, the
original prefix, has in i. I, 2, 3, ii. i. 2, iii. 4,

5, 7, been replaced in F. by Richard, but in iii. I,
in the part printed from Q3, and there only, Gloster
remains. So again Margaret is indicated in the
older version by Qu. Mar., Qu. M., &c., but never
Mar., as in F. iv. 4. In F. i. 3 we find by side of
Mar. a remainder of the older form in Q. M. This
is not an exhaustive statement, but sufficient I
think to show that alterations were made, as I
suggest. There can be little doubt that in this,
as in John, Shakespeare derived his plot and part
of his text from an anterior play, the difference
in the two cases being that in Richard III. he
adopted much more of his predecessor's text. I
believe that the anterior play was Marlowe's, partly
written for Lord Strange's company in 1593, but

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 279

left unfinished at Marlowe's death, and completed
and altered by Shakespeare in 1594. It was no
doubt on the stage when, on igth June 1594, the
older play on Richard III., " with the conjunction
of the two Houses of Lancaster and York," was
entered S. R. That was acted by the Queen's
players. The unhistorical but grandly classical
conception of Margaret, the Cassandra prophetess,
the Helen-Ate of the House of Lancaster, which
binds the whole tetralogy into one work, is evidently
due to Marlowe, and the consummate skill with which
he has fused the heterogeneous contributions of his
coadjutors in the two earlier Henry VI. plays is
no less worthy of admiration. I do not think it
possible to separate Marlowe's work from Shake
speare's in this play — it is worked in with too
cunning a hand ; but wherever we find Darby,
Qu. M.y Glo.j &c., we may be sure that some of
his handiwork is left. Could any critic, if the
older John were destroyed, tell us which lines had
been adopted in the later play ? Nor can I enter,
unless in a special monograph, on the relations of
the Quartos to each other. The question is of no
importance, and I need only say that the usual
corruptions take place from Qx to Q5, and that in
Q6 (1622) many readings are found agreeing with F.

280 . LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

which are not in the other Quartos. The same
phenomenon is observed in the 1619 edition of
The Whole Contention, and far too much has been
made of it. It merely indicates correction by
attendance at the theatre and picking up a few
words during the action. The only Quartos
deserving special notice are Q1; as containing
Shakespeare's first " additions," and Q3, as having
been used in printing part of F. I do not think
the allusion in Weever's Epigrams, written 1595-6,
is to this play. It may be so.

Titus Andronicus. — That this play is not by
Shakespeare is pretty certain from internal evidence.
The Latin quotations, classical allusions, use of
pour as prefix in iv. I, manner of versification, and
above all the introduction of rape as a subject
for the stage, would be sufficient to disprove his
authorship. Fortunately we know that it was pro
duced by the Earl of Sussex' men, 23d January
1594, and Shakespeare belonged then to Derby's
(Lord Strange's). It was afterwards, on the breaking
up of that company, acted by Pembroke's and
Derby's before 1 6th April, when Lord Derby died.
Enlargement in the Folio or abridgment in the
Quarto, 1600 (we have no copy extant of the first

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 281

edition, entered S. R. February 1594), appears in
iii. 2, found in F., not in Q., and there is a
distinct continuity between Acts i. and ii. ; at the
end of Act i. we have " manet Moore/' not Exeunt
simply. Whether this play got into the Folio by
some confusion with Titus and Vespasian, played
by Lord Strange's men nth April 1592, which was,
as we know from a German version extant, written
on the same subject, and in which Shakespeare
may have had some share, we cannot tell ; but it
was certainly played and revised (there was another
edition in 1611), while the other play has perished.
That it was written by Marlowe I incline to think.
What other mind but the author of The Jew of
Malta could have conceived Aaron the Moor ?
Mr. Dyce has warned us against attributing too
many plays to the short career of Marlowe, but
he did not consider that Marlowe probably wrote
two plays a year from 1587—1593, and that we
have only at present seven acknowledged as his.
Those now attributed to him, in whole or part, by
me will raise the number to a baker's dozen ; but
in some of these, as the older John and i and 2
Henry VI. , his share was comparatively slight.
Nevertheless, I think the opinion that Kyd wrote
this play of Andronicus worth the examination,
although, with such evidence as has yet been

282 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

adduced, Marlowe has certainly the better claim.
Shakespeare probably never touched this play un
less by inserting iii. 2, which is possible.

Edward III. The Shakespearian part of this play,
i. 3, ii. I. 2 (beginning at "What, are the stealing
foxes "), which contains lines from the then unpub
lished Sonnets, ii. I. 10, 450, and an allusion to the
recently published Lucreece, ii. 2. 194, was clearly
acted in 1594, after 9th May, when Lucreece was
entered on S. R. Edward III. was entered 1st
December 1595. This love-story part is from
Painter's Palace of Pleasure. The original play is
by Marlowe, and was acted in 1590 and is thus
alluded to in Greene's Never too Late, c. December
in that year : " Why, Roscius, art thou proud with
JLsop's crow, being prankt with the glory of others'
feathers ? Of thyself thou canst say nothing ;
and if the Cobler hath taught thee to say Ave
Ccesar, disdain not thy tutor because thou pratest
in a king's chamber." Ave Ccesar occurs in i. I.
164, but not in any other play of this date have
I been able to find it. There are many similarities
between the Marlowe part of this play and Henry VI.
As the Rosc.ius in Greene's pamphlet was the
player who had interpreted the puppets for seven
years, who induced Greene to write for the stage,

THE MARLOWE GROUP OF PLAYS. 283

and had himself written The Moral of Man's Wit
and The Dialogue of Dives, there can be no
doubt that Robert Wilson is Roscius, and that he
was an actor in Edward III. in 1590. It was
acted by Pembroke's company, and must have been
acquired by Lord Strange's men with the other
Pembroke plays in 1594.

284

SECTION VI.

ON THE PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS ACTED BY
SHAKESPEARE'S COMPANY.

DURING Shakespeare's career, 1589-1611, we only
know of some two dozen plays having been produced
by his "fellows/' in addition to the three dozen
included in his works ; and of these, about two-
fifths are anonymous, and have been at some time
or other ascribed, in whole or part, to the great
master. It is evident that he had the management
of the playwriting for his house pretty nearly in
his own hands, and that his method was the polar
opposite to that of which we know most, viz.,
Henslowe's. While the latter employed twelve
poets in a year, who produced for the Admiral's
men a new play every fortnight or so, the Chamber
lain's company depended almost entirely on two
poets at a time, and produced not more than four
new plays a year. Hence the explanation of the
vastly higher character of the Globe plays as

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 285

compared with the Fortune : hence also the ex
planation of the small pay and needy condition of
the latter, and their jealousy of the rapid advance
ment in wealth and position of Shakespeare, who
had virtually a monopoly of play-providing for his
company. It would be out of place to discuss at
length the plays written for it by Jonson, Dekker,
&c., but fuller notice of the anonymous plays is
due to the reader. They have, strange to say,
never yet been treated as a complete group ; and
yet surely as much may be learned by considering
Shakespeare's theatrical surroundings, the plays in
which he acted, and which he probably had more
or less suggested, supervised, or revised, as by
elaborately working out the debtor and creditor
details of his malt-bills. I will treat of these plays
in nearly chronological order.

1590.

Fair Em is the earliest play we certainly know
of as acted by Lord Strange's company. It is
alluded to by Greene in his address prefixed to his
Farewell to Folly. He quotes as abusing of Scripture,
" A man's conscience is a thousand witnesses," and
" Love covereth the multitude of sins," and says
these words were used by "two lovers on the
stage arguing one another of unkindness." Greene's

286 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

tract was written and entered S. R. 1st June 1587,
but not published till 1591, when the address which
mentions his Mourning Garment (S. R. November 2,
1590) was added. Fair Em dates, therefore, late
in 1590. It was probably written by R. Wilson,
and is certainly not a romantic, but a satirical play ;
else why should Greene have been offended at it ?

In Sc. 14 of The Three Ladies of London, pro
duced before 1584, Wilson uses the expression, " I,
Conscience, am a thousand witnesses," and in his
Three Lords and Three Ladies of London, acted at
Court, Christmas 1588-9, Sc. 2, "Love doth cover
heaps of cumbrous evils." In order to explain the
nature of the satire in Fair Em, it is necessary to
investigate a hitherto unnoticed identification of
Worcester's 1586 company with the Admiral's, of the
highest importance for stage history as determining
the actors in Marlowe's early plays. On Twelfth
Day 1585-6, "the servants of the Admiral and the
Lord Chamberlain " acted at Court, i.e. the players
of Lord Charles Howard, who held both these
offices. Mr. Halliwell (Illustrations, p. 31) confused
this Chamberlain with Lord Hunsdon, and takes
the entry to refer to two companies. I sent him a
correction of these and many other blunders, which
he has never rectified, years ago — a fact which I
should not notice had he not publicly complained

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 287

that, with one or two exceptions, of whom I am
not one, he had received no help of this kind. Of
this Admiral's company in the plague year, 1 5 86, there
is no trace in London ; but in that year, and that
year only, a company travelled under the protection
of the Earl of Worcester. They were licensed for
this travel on I4th January, and were at Leicester
in the course of the year (Shakespeare Society's
Papers, iv.) ; their names were R. Browne, J. Tun-
stall (Dunstan), E. Allen, W. Harryson, T. Cooke,
R. Jones, E. Browne, R. Andrews ; all of whom
were licensed, together with hired men, T. Powlton
and W. Paterson, " Lord Harbard's man," i.e. a
member of the company of Herbert Earl of Pem
broke : a scratch company evidently, but containing
names of celebrated London actors. In 1587 and
1588, the Admiral's men acted in London pub
licly, and at Christmas 1588—9 at Court. On 3d
January 1588—9, Alleyn and Jones (acting evidently
for the company) dissolved partnership, and Alleyn
bought up their properties and play-books. In
November the Admiral's men were playing about
the City, and not at the Curtain, where they had
probably produced Tamberlain, Faustus, Orlando,
Alcazar, and Marius and Sylla; and in their Court
performance on 23d December were reduced to
showing "feats of activity." In 1590 R. Brown

288 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

and Jones went abroad and acted at Leyden in
October. They returned, and on December 27
and February 16 the Admiral's men acted at Court
for the last time before the reconstitution of their
company in 1594. Already R. Brown, J. Broad-
street, T. Sackville, and R. Jones had obtained a
pass from Lord C. Howard, the Admiral, their
patron, to travel to Germany by way of Holland,
and a company acted there till 1617 under Sack
ville. Jones returned to England and joined the
reconstituted Admiral's company under Allen in
1594. Alley n had never relinquished the title of
Admiral's servant, even when in Lord Strange's
service in 1593. Putting these facts together, can
there be any doubt that the service under Wor
cester was merely temporary, and that in the list of
1586 we have that of the principal actors in the
Admiral's company ? Mr. R. Simpson, to whom
we owe so much as a discoverer of problems to
be solved, and so little for their solution, rightly
stated that Fair Em was a satirical play, and that
Manvile (or Mandeville, the lying traveller) meant
Greene, and Mounteney the aspiring Marlowe. He
was wrong in identifying Valingford with Shake
speare — he was Peele (valing, an old castle or
peele — Camderi) — and doubly wrong in making
William Conqueror Kempe. Robert of Windsor,

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 289

his travelling name, points to Robert Browne ; and
it was to Browne's company that Marlowe and
Peele had been attached, not to Kempe's. The
names William Conqueror and Marquess Lubeck
were probably names of characters which had been
acted by Browne and Jones, perhaps in the play of
William Conqueror, which was on the stage as an
old play in 1593. Fair Em of Manchester is no
doubt, as Mr. Simpson says, Lord Strange's com
pany of players.

1622 [often, but wrongly, dated c. 1591].

The Birth of Merlin, or The Child hath Found his
Father, was published in 1662 as " written by W.
Shakespeare and W. Rowley." Rowley probably
revised the play for a revival c. 1622, but in the
main it is manifestly by another hand. The comic
scenes with Joan Goto't may be Rowley's, but
the serious parts are palpably Middleton's. I owe
the suggestion of his authorship to Mr. P. A.
Daniel. A ballad on the subject was entered on
loth May 1589, S. R. In ii. 3^ iii. 6 we have
some very interesting imitations of Shakespeare.
Cutting out the Rowley additions in iii. I. 4, I
would ask the reader to carefully compare the
remaining parts of ii. $b, beginning with Aurel.
"Artesia, dearest love," iii. 2. 3. 5. 6, with such

29o LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

passages of Shakespeare as they call to memory :
e.g. iii. 2, " This world is but a mask," &c., with As
You Like It, ii. 7. 139, &c., and iii. 3. 1-6 with
Lear, iii. 2. 1-9. Compare especially the definition
of a crab as " a creature that goes backward " in ii.
3, with Hamlet, ii. 2. 206, " if like a crab you could
go backward." Crab as the name of an animal
does not occur elsewhere in Shakespeare. I be
lieve the early plays on this subject, Vortiger, 4th
December 1596, and Uter Pendragon, 29th April
1597, in Henslowe's Diary, to be alluded to by
Jonson in his Prologue to Every Man in his
Humour, 1601 —

" To make a child now swaddled to proceed
Man : and then shoot up in one beard and weed
Past threescore years."

1592.

June. A [Merry] Knack to Know a Knave was
acted as a new play at the Rose by Edward Alleyn
and his company (i.e. Lord Strange's) "with Kempe's
Merriments of the Men of Gotham" The introduc
tion of Honesty as a principal character points to
R. Wilson the elder as the author. It was certainly
not written by Greene and Nash, as Mr. Simpson
supposes. Besides this play and a number of
revivals, mostly of plays of the Queen's company

PLAYS •BY OTHER AUTHORS. 291

(see my Shakespearian Study, p. 88), Lord Strange's
men acted this season certain new plays : on March
3, / Henry VI.; April II, Titus and Vespasian
(these have been already noticed) : Apri 128, 2d.
Tambercame ; May 23, The Taner of Denmark;
and in 1593, January 5, The Gelyous \Jealious~\
Comedy; January 30, The Guise (i.e. Marlowe's
Massacre of Paris).

1594-

July 24, Locrine was entered S. R. and published
in 1595 as "newly set forth, overseen, and cor
rected by W. S." I see no reason to infer that
W. S. is William Shakespeare. The play was
written, according to Mr. Simpson, by Tilney in
1586. I rather think for him by G. Peele. Shake
speare has no concern with it further than the
letters W. S. indicate.

1595 [Possibly 1599].

A 'Larum for London, or The Siege of Antwerp,
was acted about this time. It was published in
1602, but entered S. R. 29th May 1600. The
title at once points it out as a moralising play,
of the same class as A Looking-Glass for London ;
didactic as to politics. I believe it to be by the
same author, T. Lodge. The fear of a Spanish

292 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

invasion is evident in the play. In July 1595
the Spaniards made a descent on Cornwall and
burned Mouse Hole, Neulin, and Penzance. This
is the most likely time for any real danger to
London from the Spaniards to have been appre
hended. Lodge, probably in the next year, wrote
The Taming of the Shrew (afterwards altered by
Shakespeare) for the Chamberlain's company. The
seldom-used word villiaco, found in this play, occurs
in 2 Henry VI., iv. 8, in the part I assign to
Lodge.

1596.

The Life and Death of Sir Thomas More was
certainly acted in this year. That this also was
a political play is evident from the numerous altera
tions made in the MS. by E. Tylney, Master of
the Revels. He specially objected to all passages
directed against the French ; and cut out entirely
Scene I, the insurrection scene. This must have
alluded too closely to events of the time. Now on
29th June 1595 there was an insurrection of the
London Prentices, suppressed by the then Lord
Mayor just in the same way as that in the play
by Sheriff More. (See Maitland and Stowe under
that date.) Moreover, in October 1595 Hartford
was imprisoned in the Tower for contempt, and

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 293

threatened with loss of his title, just as More is in
the play, which was no doubt acted while he was
in prison (Aikin's Elizabeth, chap, xxiv.) I have
previously noted the certainty of this play being
acted by the Chamberlain's players, T. Goodale
being one of the actors. It was probably written
chiefly by Lodge ; but some scenes, such as Scene
2 with the Lifter and Scenes 9, 10, with Faulkner
and the players, bear unmistakable marks of another
hand, the same, I think, as the author of Lord Crom
well. It is a singular play, containing a comedy,
Scenes i-io, and a tragedy, Scenes 11-18, in one.
This leads me to conjecture that it is the same
play as was played by the Paul's children before
James and the King of Denmark, 3<Dth July 1606.
This contained a comedy and tragedy, and was
called Abuses. I need hardly say that this title is
specially appropriate to Sir T. More. It pleased
the kings, as was to be expected, more than it did
the authorities under Elizabeth. We know that
some plays of the Chamberlain's company passed
into the hands of the Paul's boys, e.g. Satiromastix.
The part of Justice Suresby is probably the one
alluded to in The Return from Parnassus, iv. 3,
where Kempe tells Philomusus (Lodge) that his
face " would be good for a foolish mayor or a
foolish justice of peace." In the same scene,

294 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Studioso (Drayton) is made to recite from Richard
III. andjeronymo, both which plays were still acted
by the Chamberlain's men in 1599 ; so that Drayton
was looked on in 1602 as a tragedian, Lodge as a
comedian. This agrees with Meres' classification
of them in 1598. Nevertheless it is certain that
both of them produced both tragedies and comedies.

1597-9-

The Merry Devil of Edmonton, acted at the Globe,
and therefore still on the stage in 1599, was closely
connected with the early form of I Henry IV., in
which Falstaff was called Oldcastle (see supra,
P' S3)- Coxeter says that it was ascribed in an
old MS. of the play to Michael Drayton. No
doubt it was written by him. The character of
the Host, and indeed all the play, are so like parts
of Sir John Oldcastle, which we know to have been
partly written by Drayton, that it is not possible
to doubt the identity of authorship. That play
was written by Munday (i. I ; v. 2 — end), Wilson
(? i. 2 ; ii. 3 ; iii. 4), Hathaway (? iii. I ; v. i),
and Drayton, who probably was the plotter and
chief composer. The Merry Devil was entered
S. R. 22d October 1607. The entry on 5th April
1608 refers to the prose history by Thomas
Brewer. Nevertheless that entry has been con-

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 295

fidently adduced by Mr. Halliwell and others as
proof that Drayton did not write the play (see
Halliwell's Dictionary of Old Plays under Merry
Devil) : which as printed is evidently greatly ab
ridged. All the part relating to Smug's taking
.the place of St. George as the sign of the inn, for
instance, which is found in the prose story, must
have been cut out, though an allusion to it is left
in the end of the play. This alteration was pro
bably made c. 1603-4, as in the Black Book (S. R.
22d March 1604) a revival of the play contempo
raneous with The Woman Killed with Kindness is
alluded to. It remained popular even to 1616 :
Jonson's prologue to The Devil is an Ass calls it
"your dear delight." That play is of a some
what similar nature, founded on the adventures of a
devil incarnate ; so also are Dekker's If this be not
a Good Play the Devil's in it, and Haughton's Grim
the Cobler of Croydon, or The Devil and his Dame
(6th May 1600). In this last, which gives a
posterior limit of date, Robin Goodfellow calls
himself " merry devil," and is no doubt intended as
a satire on Drayton, as is also the Robin Good-
fellow of Wily Beguiled, 1597. In Sir Giles Goose-
cap by Chapman, the continued usage by Goosecap
of the phrases " tickle the vanity on't " and " we
are all mortal " points to Drayton as the person

296 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

ridiculed under that name ; while in 2 Henry IV.,
ii. I. 66, Falstaff uses the exact phrase of Smug in
scene 3 of " tickling the catastrophe." Another
point of connection with Shakespearian satire of
this date is found in the term Hungarian, scene 8,
which occurs in Merry Wives, i. 3. 23, and nowhere
else in Shakespeare. The great similarity of the
Hosts in these two plays has been often noted.
There is much confusion in the Christian names in
our present version of the Merry Devil, an indica
tion of revision. Drayton's first connection with
the Chamberlain's company was in my opinion his
writing the Induction for The Taming of the Shrew
in 1596, afterwards altered by Shakespeare. The
Merry Devtlwas entered as Shakespeare's on S. R.
9th September 1653, probably on account of the
similarity of title with The Merry Wives of Win
dsor; and this similarity does point to a connec
tion, though not of authorship, between these plays.
The Oldcastle play, acted 6th March 1600 at Lord
Hunsdon's, was probably The Merry Devil.

1594-

The Seven Deadly Sins, an old play plotted for
the Queen's company by Tarleton, was revived.
I have had already occasion to refer to the plot of
this play, which is extant at Dulwich College.

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 297

1598-9.

A Warning for Fair Women was entered S. R.
1 7th November 1599, and printed as " lately
divers times acted " by the Chamberlain's men.
Its title, so like A Looking-Glass for London and
A 'Lamm for London, its didactic character, its
Induction, with History, Tragedy, and Comedy for
actors, so like that to Mucedorus, and its style and
metre all point to Thomas Lodge as the author.
As a murder-play it should be compared with
Arden of Fevers ham, The Yorkshire Tragedy, and
Two Tragedies in One. Plays on similar subjects,
such as Page of Plymouth, by Dekker and Jonson,
September 1599; The Tragedy of Merry, by Haugh-
ton and Day, December 1599; The Tragedy of
Orphans, by Chettle, November 1599; and perhaps
The Stepmother's Tragedy, by Dekker and Chettle,
October 1599, were very abundant just at this time.
This seems to be Lodge's final original production
for the stage.

1598-9.

Every Man in his Humour in its first form, with
the Italian names, in the latter part of 1598, and
his Every Man out of his Humour in the spring
°f J599; both by Jonson, were acted by the

298 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Chamberlain's men. Jonson then left them and
wrote for the children of the Chapel.

1601.

Satiromastix was written by Dekker against
Jonson's Poetaster for the Chamberlain's men, and
acted first by them and afterwards by the Paul's
boys.

1601.

The Chronicle History of Thomas Lord Cromwell
was entered S. R. nth August 1602. This is
clearly a political play, in which the career of
Cromwell Earl of Essex shadows forth another
Earl of Essex, of much greater interest to an
audience of 1601. One scene, iii. 2, reminds us
strongly of scene 9 in Sir T. More; and the whole
play is very like the part of Sir John Oldcastle
assigned by me to Drayton. In Act iv. the Chorus
apologises for the omission of Wolsey's life. That
had, in fact, been treated already by Chettle in
August 1 60 1, and by Chettle, Munday, Drayton,
and Smith in November 1 60 1, in two plays for the
Admiral's men. Drayton's last work for them was
done in May 1602 and Cromwell was probably
acted in June. The second edition, 1613, had
" by W. S." on the title. This was clearly an

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 299

attempt, like the "by W. Sh." in the 1611 edition
of the older John, to father the play on Shake
speare after his retirement from theatrical life. It
has been supposed that Wentworth Smith is in
dicated. This is most unlikely. Smith was a hack
writer for Henslowe, 1601-3, not one scrap of whose
work was ever thought worth publishing ; and that
he, at the same date that he was a " novice " in the
Admiral's, should have been an independent author
for the Chamberlain's, is one of the plausible
figments that will not be received by any one
acquainted with stage history. If W. S. are
authentic initials, W. Sly is a more likely claimant.

1603.

The London Prodigal was published in 1605,
with the name of William Shakespeare on the
title-page. This surely shows some connection
of Shakespeare with its authorship. It is true
that in 1600 his name had been attached to Sir
John Oldcastle in one of the editions then printed,
and that he could not have written, or been con
cerned with the writing of, that play ; but the
peculiar relation in which it stands to his historical
plays places it in a very different category from a
play which was acted by his own company, and
over the publication of which he may be supposed

300 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

to have had some control, direct or indirect.
Perhaps he " plotted " it. At the same time it
should be noticed that the publisher, Butter, was
the same man who issued the Quarto of Lear in
1608, which was certainly derived from an authentic
copy, however carelessly printed ; while Pavier, who
published Oldcastle, was notoriously an issuer of
surreptitious and piratical editions. This play is
certainly by the same hand as the Cromwell. In
iii. 3, " And where nought is the king doth lose
his due," with which compare Cromwell, ii. 3, " And
where nought is the king must lose his right," is
taken from Nash's Unfortunate Traveller (p. 15,
Grosart's reprint), "When it is not to be had the
king must lose his right." Compare, also, " Pardon,
dear father, the follies that are past," v. I, with
Cromwell, iv. chorus, " Pardon the errors are already
past," and the passing of St. George's inn in i. 2
with the Merry Devil plot. The date of production
is certainly 1603. The words " under the King,"
ii. I, and the allusion to Armin the actor, who took
the part of Matthew Flowerdale, " So young an
armin," v. I, forbid an earlier date. This last
allusion, by the bye, has never previously been
explained. On the other hand, the allusions to
Cutting Dick, ii. 2, The Devil and his Dame, iv. 2
(Mar. 1600), and to " wanton Cressid," v. i. (1602),

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 301

would lose much effect at a later date. The name
Greenshield was adopted from this play in the
" comical satire " of Northward Ho, 1605, as Fresco-
bald was in The Honest Whore, 1603, from Cromwell.

1603.

Sejanus, by Jonson, was acted this year. Jonson
had returned to the Chamberlain's men from the
Admiral's, for whom he wrote after leaving the
Chapel children in 1601 ; but this play being a
political satire on Leicester got the company into
trouble, and he again left them for the children of
the Revels. See supra, p. 49.

1604.

The Malcontent, by Marston, was acted " with the
additions played by the King's Majesty's servants "
by Webster, and entered S. R. 25th July. This
play belonged to the Revels' children, and was
appropriated in retaliation for their playing
Jeronymo, which was the property of the King's
men. (See the Induction.) Compare p. 52.

1604.
Gowry, already noticed, was performed this year.

302 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

1603-4.

The Miseries of Enforced Marriage, by George
Wilkins, was entered S. R. 3ist July 1607. It was
founded on the life of Mr. 'Caverley, the hero of
The Yorkshire Tragedy, and the play ends with a
reconciliation before October 1603, when his third
child was born, and dating about January or
February, just before the accession of King
James. This play was written before 1605. Mr.
P. A. Daniel discovered the identity of story in
it and in The Yorkshire Tragedy. The share
of G. Wilkins in the authorship of Timon and
Pericles has already been noticed. He left the
King's company for the Queen's in 1607, before
publishing the present play. He is not the G.
Wilkins who died in 1603 : Mr. W. C. Hazlitt's
statement in his Handbook to that effect is a
mistake.

1605.

A Yorkshire Tragedy, founded on the same story,
was certainly acted soon after the execution of
Caverley, 5th August 1605. The murdered chil
dren were buried in April. The prose account
of Caverley's trial was entered S. R. 24th August,
and the story of his life was printed by V. S.

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 303

(Valentine Simmes) in the same year. The play
was entered S. R. 2d May 1608, and printed as by
William Shakespeare. I cannot think that this
was unauthorised. Compare the parallel instance
of The London Prodigal. Was the author his
brother Edmund ; and did Shakespeare assist in or
revise his work ? (See p. 60.) The " young mis
tress " of Scene I is the Clare Harcup of the
Enforced Marriage, and her decline is inconsistent
with her death in that play, but in accordance with
facts. Together with three other probably similar
short plays it was acted as All's One, or one of
the Four Plays in One.

1605.

Volpone or the Fox, by Jonson, was acted in this
year.

1605-6.

Mucedorus, an old play, originally written, I think,
for the Queen's company by T. Lodge, was revived
under exceptional circumstances, with additions at
Court. From the added part at the end of the play
it appears that "a lean hungry neagre (meagre)
cannibal," "a scrambling raven with a needy
beard," had written " a comedy " for the King's
players, containing " dark sentences pleasing to

304 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

factious brains," and that information had been
given to " a puissant magistrate/' and that the
players feared " great danger or at least restraint "
in consequence. Moreover, this "unwilling error"
had been lately " presented " to the King : never
theless, not being " boys," but " men," they had
avoided the " trap," apologised, and been pardoned.
The only known new comedy, not Shakespeare's,
produced by the King's men between 1604 and
1610 was Jonson's Fox. It contains a good deal,
even in its present state, that must have been
unpalatable at Court, especially on monopolies and
spies ; and Jonson altered his plays so much after
performance for publication, that it is dangerous to
draw conclusions as to what the play may have
originally contained. One thing in it, however,
was particularly " obnoxious to construction," the
miraculous " Oglio del Scoto," which, in the case
of one who was this same year imprisoned for
satirising the Scots in Eastward Ho, might well be
taken as a gird at the Scotch King's miraculous
charisma in treating for the King's evil. It is to
the Eastward Ho affair that the " trap for boys, not
men," alludes ; and the meagreness and " needy
beard " plainly indicate Jonson as the " raven "
(Corbaccio) who wrote the comedy. In accordance
with this view stands the fact that on the Christmas

PLAYS BY OTHER AUTHORS. 305

succeeding this unfortunate performance of 1605-6
there was no Court masque produced by Jonson.
The date hitherto assigned to the " additions " in
Mucedorus has been 1610, because the edition of
that year was issued as it was acted before the
King on Shrove Sunday night. But there was
no Court performance in the 1609-10 winter on
account of the plague. The date 1610 is there
fore impossible ; the words on the title were
probably repeated in the usual way from the 1606
edition, of which, though mentioned in Beauclerc's
Catalogue , 1781, no copy unfortunately is extant.
Of the authorship of the original play, with its
Induction, " cooling-card " mark, and many simi
larities to Marius and Sylla, there can be no doubt :
it was written by Lodge. Who wrote the " addi
tions " in 1605-6 it would be hard to say : perhaps
Wilkins.

1607-11.

The Revenger's Tragedy by Cyril Tourneur (?)
was entered S. R. 7th October 1607, and pro
bably acted not long before. The Second Maiden's
Tragedy, licensed in 1611, which we know to have
been acted by the King's men, was probably by the
same author.

In 1610 Jonson returned to the King's men

306 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

(he had been writing for the Revels' children since
he left, after producing Volpone), and his Alchemist
was acted in that year ; in 161 1 his Cataline, and
Beaumont and Fletcher's Philaster, Maid's Tragedy,
and King and no King; c. 1612 Webster's Duchess
of Malfy was produced. The further prosecution
of this subject belongs to a life of Fletcher rather
than of Shakespeare.

( 307 )

SECTION VII.

EARLY ENGLISH PLAYS IN GERMANY.

THE importance of the performance of English plays
in Germany and its bearings on our own stage
history has never been duly estimated. This is
owing to the fact that the groups of such plays have
not been treated as wholes, only isolated refer
ences to single dramas having been occasionally
made by our critics. I must here confine myself
to such groups as have reference to the productions
of Shakespeare. In 1626-7 a company of English
men acted at Dresden, and a list of their perform
ances has fortunately been preserved (Cohn, Shake
speare in Germany, p. 115). This company ap
pears from their Christian names to have been the
Company of the Revels, which broke up in 1625 in
the plague- time. In the Runaway's Answer, 1625,
to Dekker's Rod for Runaways, which was directed
against those who left London for fear of the
plague, the players say, " We can be bankrupts on

308 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

this side and gentlemen of a company beyond the
sea : we burst at London and are pieced up at
Rotterdam." The 1626 Dresden company were
Robert Pickleherring [R. Lee] and two boys ; Jacob
der Hesse, and Johan Eydtwardtt (two Germans) ;
Aaron the dancer (probably a German Jew) ;
Thomas die Jungfrau [T. Basse], John [Cumber],
William the wardrobe-keeper (probably a German),
the Englishman, the Redhaired, and four boys.
The other members of the Revels' company can be
traced in England ; and although Robert, Thomas,
and John are common Christian names, they are not
to be found in conjunction in any other list of
English players of the date. The plays acted by
these men were the following : —

1. Duke of Mantua and Duke of Verona. Comedy.

2. Christabella. C.

3. Amphitryon. C.

4. Romeo andjulietta. Tragedy. [Founded on Shake

speare's play of 1591 ; extant in German MS., and
printed by Cohn.]

5. Duke of Florence. Tragi-Comedy. [Not Mas-

singer's play, which is of ten years' later date.]

6. King of Spain and ViceRoy of . Portugal. C. [Kyd's

Jeronymo, c. 1588.]

7. Julius Ccesar. T. [Query, the old play men-

EARLY ENGLISH PLAYS IN GERMANY. 309

tioned by Gosson in 1580, or the Admiral's play of
1594, or Shakespeare's, or the Admiral's of 1602,
or the Oxford of 1606, or Chapman's, or the old
play on which Chapman's is founded ? The last
most likely.]

8. Crysella. C.

9. Duke of ' Ferrara. C.

10. Somebody and Nobody. T. C. [Printed in German,

1620 ; extant in an altered form, by Hey wood in
my judgment, as played by Queen Anne's men in
English; published c. 1609. In its original form
acted c. 1591.]

11. King of Denmark and King of Sweden. T. C.

\Clyomon and Clamydes. ? by R. Wilson, c.

1585.]

12. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. T. [From Kyd's

old play, c. 1589 ; extant in modernised MS. in
Germany ; printed in Cohn. The Induction with
Night and the Furies is quite in Kyd's manner.]

13. Orlando Furioso. C. [Greene's play, c. 1587.]

14. King of England and King of Scotland. C. [Greene

(and Lodge)'s James IV., 1591.]

15. Hieronymo, Marshal of Spain. T. [Kyd's Spanish

Tragedy, c. 1588.]

1 6. Haman and Queen Esther. T. C. [Printed in

German, 1620, from an English play acted in
1594 by the Chamberlain's men, but an old play
then ; originally not later than 1591. Compare the

310 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

interlude in Kirkman's Wits, which was probably
founded on it. The German play ought to be
made accessible to English readers.]

17. The Martyr Dorothea. T. [Perhaps from a play by

Dekker and Massinger, revived for the Revels' com
pany between 1619 and 1622. This is the only play
in this list to which I can assign a definite date
later than 1592. But were both taken from an
older play ?]

1 8. Dr. Faust. T. [Marlowe's play, 1588.]

19. King of Arragon. T. C. [Greene's Alphonsus, c.

1588.]

20. Fortunatus, T. [Printed in German, 1620, as

Comedy of Fortunatus and his Purse and Wishing
Cap, in which appear first three dead souls as
spirits, and afterwards the Virtues and Shame.
Evidently from the first part of Fortunalus by
Dekker, as acted, 3d February 1596, as an old
play. It was probably written c. 1591. This
play like (16.) ought to be made accessible to
English readers.]

21. Joseph, the Jew of Venice. C. [From another early

play of Dekker's, c. 1591. The German version is
extant in MS. in the Imperial Library at Vienna,
and ought to be edited and translated. The Jew,
however, is therein called Barabbas, and there are
three suitors, as in Shakespeare's play, but no
caskets. Dekker's play was entered gth Sep
tember 1653 on S. R.]

EARLY ENGLISH PLAYS IN GERMANY. 311

22. The Dextrous Thief. T. C.

23. Duke of Venice. T. C.

24. Barrabas, the Jew of Malta. T. [Marlowe's play,

1589-]

25. OldProculus. C.

26. Lear, King of England. T. [From the old Queen's

play, c. 1589. Yet it is strange that it should be
called a tragedy. It would hardly be Shakespeare's
play, as no other of so late date occurs in the list.]

27. The Godfather. T. C.

28. The Prodigal Son. C. [Printed in German, 1620.

Translated in Simpson's School of Shakespeare.
Probably from an old play revived by Heywood
for Derby's men c. 1599, but originally founded
on Greene's Mourning Garment, 1590, and written
(for what company ?) c. 1591. So I conjecture.]

29. The Graf of Angiers. C.

30. The Rich Man. T. [Acted on iyth September

1646 as The Rich Man and the Poor Lazarus.
Perhaps from a very old play by Ralph Radcliffe
before 1553 \ more likely from the Moral by the
player (? R. Wilson) in Greene's Groatsworth of
Wit, 1592, who wrote the Moral of Man's Wit
and the dialogue of Dives, and played in Delphrigus,
The King of Fairies, The Twelve Labors of Her
cules, and The Highway to Heaven.}

312 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

It appears from this list that while only one, if
any, of these plays, Dorothea, which was probably
taken with them by the Revels' company in 1625,
can be assigned to a comparatively late date with
certainty, the majority are early productions, ante
rior to 1592. Bearing in mind that there were a
large number of plays published before 1626 which
might have been used without fear of any opposi
tion from companies in England, it is clear that in
Germany the preference was given to older plays,
which must have been imported at an early date,
either by Leicester's players in 1586, by Pem
broke's in 1599, or Worcester's [Admiral's] in
1590 and 1592. Leicester's returned to England in
1577 and Pembroke's c. 1601 ; but Worcester's,
or rather a detachment from the Admiral's, were
permanently established in Germany. E. Brown
and R. Jones indeed came back to England ; but
Thomas Sackville and John Broadstreet are trace
able in Germany, the latter^to 1606 and the former
to 1617. There is little doubt that the Hamlet
and Romeo, in their German versions, are from
early plays, anterior to 1592. This conclusion is
confirmed by the list of plays published in Germany
in 1620, "acted by the English in Germany at
Royal, Electoral, and Princely Courts : " —

EARLY ENGLISH PLAYS IN GERMANY. 313

1. Queen Esther and Haughty Haman. C. [16. in

previous list.]

2. The Prodigal Son, " in which Despair and Hope

are cleverly introduced." C. [28. in previous
list]

3. Fortunatus and his Purse and Wishing Cap, "in

which appear first three dead souls as spirits, and
afterwards the Virtues and Shame." C. [20. in
previous list]

4. A King's Son from England and a King's Daughter

from Scotland. C. [Senile and Astraa ; probably
the same as Serule and Hypolita, acted 1631.]

5. Sidonia and Theagine. C.

6. Somebody and Nobody. C. [10. in previous list]

7. Julio and ffypolita. T. [Query, Philippo and Hypo-

lita, acted as an <?/</play at the Rose, 9th July 1594 ;
similar in plot to The Gentlemen of Verona. ,]

8. Titus Andronicus. T. [Not our extant play, but

the Titus and Vespasian acted by Lord Strange's
men, April 1592.]

9. The Beautiful Mary and the Old Cuckold. A merry

jest

10. In which the clown makes merry pastime with a
stone.

I am not acquainted with Ayres's plays ; but it
appears from Cohn (p. 64) that among them are

3i4 LIFE OF SHAKESPEARE.

Mahomet the Turkish Emperor (from Peele's play, c.
1591), The Greek Emperor at Constantinople and his
daughter Pelimperia with the hanged Horatio (Kyd's
Spanish Tragedy, 1588) ; Valentine and Orson (from
an old English play S. R. 23d May 1595);
Edward III., King of England, and Elisa Countess
of Warwick (from Marlowe's play, 1590: Philip
Waimer had already dramatised the same subject
at Danzig in 1591) ; The Beautiful Phenicia (on the
same story as Much Ado, and strongly confirming
the identity of that play with Lovers Labour's Won,
1590: Cupid enters in person, and shoots Count
Tymborus, the Benedick of the German version) ;
The Two Brothers of Syracuse (from the Comedy of
Errors, c. 1590); The Beautiful Sidea (containing
some incidents showing that it came from some
source in common with that of the Tempest, but cer
tainly not from that play direct) ; and King of Cyprus
(founded on the same story as The Dumb Knight
by Machin and Markham, c. 1607). Colin does not
give exact dates of authorship, but is of opinion
that we should not assign to any a year later than
1600 ; and in 1605 Ayres died. Here again we
meet with the same phenomenon — acquaintance with
many English plays of date anterior to 1592; but
not with any one that can be shown to be later.
No doubt Ayres's knowledge of English plays was

EARLY ENGLISH PLAYS IN GERMANY. 315

obtained from the Worcester's (Admiral's) company,
who went over in 1590—2.

Yet further, in the tragedy of An Adulteress by
Duke Henry Julius of Brunswick, printed 1594, we
find the plot of The Merry Wives almost identically
reproduced (see Cohn, p. 45, &c.) I do not see,
however, so much likeness between his Vincentius
Ladislaus and Much Ado.

As regards Shakespearian chronology, it results
from this examination of English plays in Germany
that there is no positive evidence of English plays of
later date than 1592 having been acted there before
1625 ; that there is evidence that many (a score
at least) of date not later than 1592 were acted
between 1592 and 1626; that these plays were
probably among those imported by Worcester's
(Admiral's) players in 1592 ; and that in the list
are contained The Comedy of Errors, Romeo and
Juliet, The Merry Wives, The Gentlemen of Verona,
and Love's Labour's Won, i.e. every play by Shake
speare except Love's Labour's Lost, that is in this
treatise placed at a date not later than 1592;
besides Kyd's Hamlet, Marlowe's Edward III., and
other plays with which Shakespeare was indirectly
connected.

APPENDIX-

TABLES.

APPENDIX.

IN Table I. I give the dates of the Stationers' Registers
entries of Shakespeare's plays as collected in 1623, the
printers and publishers of the earliest extant edition of
each, and the dates of all known subsequent editions
anterior to the 1623 Folio. A. appended to a date
means Anonymous, i.e. published without the author's
name ; F. means that the edition was used by the Folio
editors as copy to print from. The relative popularity
of the plays will be in some measure seen by a glance at
this table. The most popular were Richard III. (six
editions in sixteen years) ; i Henry IV. (six editions) ;
Edward III. (five editions in twenty years) ; Richard II.
(four editions in nineteen years) ; Henry V. (three edi
tions in nine years). All these were Histories. Next to
the Histories rank the Tragedies Hamlet, Romeo and
Juliet, and Pericles: the other great tragedies, Lear,
Othello, and the Comedies being decidedly less to the
popular taste than the Histories. The entries of change
of copyright will be found in their places in Table V.

Table II. gives similar information for every known
extant play not of Shakespeare's authorship in which he

320 APPENDIX.

may have been an actor or reviser. Edward III. appears
in both these tables. The extreme popularity of Muce-
dorns is very noticeable.

Table III. gives the number of Court performances in
each year for such companies as are known to have been
playing in London. From this table it is evident that up
to 1591 the Queen's men were the most important of all ;
in other words, that Greene was the chief Court stage poet,
and held the position formerly occupied by Lyly, who
wrote for the Chapel children before the public theatrical
companies had obtained the prominent place. His chief
rival was Marlowe of the Admiral's company. But after
1591 Lord Strange's company takes the lead and keeps
it, which means that Shakespeare was the principal Court
stage writer till 1611. This throws new light on the
relations of Greene, Shakespeare, and their respective
companies. But this table comprises, in fact, a com
pendium of the whole stage history of the time ; and as
the current versions of this history by Collier, Halliwell,
and others are replete with blunders, it may be well to
give a very short summary of the results of my investiga
tions — proofs, where lengthy, of some minor details being
necessarily reserved for a future publication. Column i.
concerns one company only : as Lord Leicester's it was
acting in London in 1585 ; in 1586 it was acting on the
Continent; in 1587-8 it was travelling about England ;
after Leicester's death it began in 1589 to act in London,
and was patronised by Lord Strange, who became Earl
of Derby in 1593: after his death in 1594, Henry
Carey, Lord Hunsdon, the Lord Chamberlain, became its

APPENDIX. 321

patron, who died in 1596 ; they then passed to his heir,
George Carey : in 1603 they were patented as the King's
men, and retained that title till the closing of the theatres.
Column ii. The Admiral's men were abroad from 1591
to 1594; in 1603 they were assigned to Prince Henry,
and after his death in 1612 to the Palsgrave. The Earl
of Hertford's men, who appear once in this column, were
not a regular London company, but probably invited to
play this once at Court while the Admiral's were abroad,
in consequence of the Queen having been entertained
by Hertford in the preceding year's progress.

Column iii. Queen Elizabeth's company, formed 1583,
took the lead till 1591 : they only reappear in conjunc
tion with Sussex in 1593-4, when both companies vanish
from the London stage. About 1599 Derby's company
appears in London : it became Worcester's in 1602, and
was assigned to Queen Anne in 1603.

Column iv. The Earl of Oxford's "boys" were in
London in 1586; they travelled in the plague year, and
are almost certainly the same company who reappear in
London in 1589 as Pembroke's. By Marlowe's aid they
prospered a year or two, but after his death became
insignificant, and are only dimly traceable to 1600.

In 1597 the Chapel children are stated to have occu
pied Blackfriars, but till 1600 no play is traceable to
them. In 1603-4 they were reorganised as the Chil
dren of the Revels, and again in 1610 as a new company
under the same name: in 1612 they were again reor
ganised as the second Lady Elizabeth's company, the
first of that name, set up in 1611, having broken up.

x

322 APPENDIX.

Column v. The Paul's boys were inhibited c. 1590,
re-established 1600, finally put down 1607.

The Duke of York's men were established 1610, and
at Prince Henry's death in 1612 took the name of the
Prince of Wales' men.

The reader will observe that never more than five
companies existed contemporaneously ; and scarcely ever
more than two of considerable importance. The state
ments of Collier and Halliwell are grossly exaggerated.

In Table IV. every entry of a play that I can find in
the Stationers' Registers is extracted with all necessary
fulness. The only point requiring explanation is that
the capital letters after the publishers' names indicate
the names of the licensers : — T. = Tylney ; B. = Sir G.
Buck ; S. = Segar, his deputy ; A. = Sir John Astley ;
H. = Sir Henry Herbert ; T. = Thomas Herbert, his
deputy ; Bl. = Blagrave, also his deputy. Where the
Master of the Revels or his deputy was not the licenser,
the insertion of the Wardens' names, &c., would have
needlessly encumbered the tables. The spelling has
been modernised, except in proper names, &c., where it
is of advantage to retain the old forms. These tables
afford for the first time complete means of estimating
Shakespeare's influence, in I. on the reading public
positively; in II. as compared with his co-workers; in
III. at Court ; in IV. as compared with writers for other
companies.

Table V., of transfers of copyright, is, I fear, in spite of
much labour, incomplete. Notifications of omission will
be welcome and duly acknowledged with gratitude.

TABLES.

324

APPENDIX.

TABLE I.— QUARTO EDITIONS

Date, S. R.

For whom Entered, S.R.

1
Name of Play.

a
i

1593-4 Feb. 6 7
1593-4 Mar- I23

John Danter
Thomas Myllington

Titus Andronicus
York and Lancaster, I.

1595 Dec. i
IS97 Aug. 29

Cuthbert Burby
Andrew Wise

Richard Duke of York
Edward III. .
Romeo and Juliet (i)
Richard II. .

c
d

t
f

1597 Oct. 20

Andrew Wise

Richard III. .

S

1597-8 Feb. 25
1598 July 22

Andrew Wise
James Roberts

i Henry IV. .
Merchant of Venice .
Love's Labour's Lost
Romeo and Juliet (2)

h
i"

i

1600 Aug. 4

As You Like It

i

1600 Aug. 14 ;

' ' Set over ' ' to Thomas Pavier

Henry V

m

1600 Aug. 23

Andrew Wise and William
Aspley

j Much Ado about Nothing )
t 2 Henry IV. . . .{

n

1600 Oct. 8

Thomas Fisher

Midsummer Night's Dream

o

1600 Oct. 28
1601-2 Jan. 18

1602 April 19
1602 July 26

Thomas Haies
John Busby (with assign
ment to Arthur Johnson)
Thomas Pavier

James Roberts

Merchant of Venice .
Merry Wives of Windsor .

i, 2 Henry VI. and Titus
Andronicus .
Revenge of Hamlet (i)

f
9

r1:
*

1602-3 Feb. 7

James Roberts

Hamlet (2)
Troylus and Cressida

/

v

1607 Nov. 26
1608 May 20
1608-9 Jan. 28

Na. Butter : Jo. Busby
Edward Blount
Ri. Bonion ; Hen. Whalley

King Lear
( Pericles ... . )
\ Anthony and Cleopatra . )
Troylus and Cressida

V

w

X

1621 Oct. 6

Thomas Walkley

Pericles .
Othello ....

y

z

APPENDIX.
OF SHAKESPEARE'S PLAYS.

325

4
b

c
d
t'
f

t

n
i

j
k

I

m
n

0

f
f

T
'• $

t

11

V

w

X

*

Printer and Publisher of Earliest
Edition Extant.

Dates of Extant Editions.

By J. R. for Edward White
By Thomas Creede for Thomas
Millington
By P.S. for Thomas Millington
... for Cuthbert Burby
By John Danter
By Valentine Simmes for An
drew Wise
By Valentine Sims for An
drew Wise
By P. S. for Andrew Wise
By J. Roberts
By W. W. for Cuthbert Burby
By Thomas Creede for Cuth
bert Burby
1 ' Stayed " with the two follow
ing plays. Not printed.
By T. Creede for T. Millington
and J. Busby
By V. S. for Andrew Wise and
William Aspley
( ... for Thomas Fisher
1 By Tames Roberts
By I. R. for Thomas Hayes
By T. C. for Arthur Johnson

By assignment from Thomas
Millington
... for N. L. and John
Trundell
By J. R. for N. L.
' ' To print when he hath gotten
sufficient authority for it."
Not printed.
... for Nathaniel Butter

Not printed.

By G. Eld for R. Bonion and
H. Whalley
... f or H enry Gosson
By N. O. for Thomas Walkley

I594A.!

I595A.
i596A.!
I597A.

1597 A.

I597A.
IS98
1598

i6ooA.
i6ooA.

i6ooA.
1599 A.

1598

1598

r599
1600

1602
1604

i6o9A.
1608
1605
1608

l6l!A.

i6i7A.
1615 F.
1612
i6iSF.

i6i9A.
i62SA.

1622
1622

I599A.

i6o9A.F.

/ ...

i6ooA.

1600 F.

1600
1600

1600 F.
1600 F.
I6O2

1 602 A.

i6o8A.

...

...

...

...

1619

1603

1604

1605
1608 bis

1611

...

:

1609 bis
1609 foy

1611

1619
1622

326

APPENDIX.

£! if Italic I .§•

'^J3rSo[nd-SC'Ora > •"

iil^^sfiias, £g

APPENDIX.

327

vO N O rf ts ts CN OMO O « IOVO VO COvO CO O »O^O lO OOO ex »O M m m\O HI w O

.

1 '

OO HCOCOM M OOOd O MCO^fW OOO
_yi

O

M

^,

^ * *H

I I 1 S||_J

>

MO OOOOOCJ OOO CO H-OHNOOOO OwcOMNMO

J"

m

M

5

iOH5XcO««iOH JX o\ MOv2ONWH°oo>ico':*"0 «OO

~

OH OOMCiw OOONO« CO^ CO ^tCO vO'vO^CO •^•^•H OOO

1 ! : 1 ^ 1 :|

ffi %

73 0) Ti m ^

OO OOOOvOCO OJ 1OVO •'t'COCOCO «O\^J-O«co« iO«00 tsOO

0

~

Ts
Si! «:

•53 £ ^ •§
J W U ^

VOVO txCO O\ ON M N CO rj- lOvO tv.00 OS O M c< CO •* »OvO (SCO OMH H N CO -^ »/>vO
rf "ivo txoo c\ O M w co •* io\o t^oo o\ 6 H w co ^J- "^^Q &*°° s?> O M N ; co ^t1 vo

I

<?0CiOCin(in(i?><i!o S)S^S)S)S)S^2)S)Si Sj^S \SvSv8v8vSN5v8vOv5vOvOvO VQvOvO

j2

3*8

APPENDIX.

El

51

Lyllye :

I ll

22

J3.S

II

I |iJ! ji

* -* -1-1 ^ U c d

!«8i

Sg)'

rt-|^|a^
g^^s^^

is <s g

Nt«M*5

arti
on

e
"

& 2 o

1 ?S

18

8|

"2.
<i§

S2
JS"3

w «2

«IS
&

Ja +» a

*"* &

yed

S|

" « o>

9 °«
s- Ii ^

? Is i!

I U'-Si

Llslfl

Jil^ff

4> _,
**^ ri O^- -

s*ofiSs-g.a

|g^:,§§5

13 i*« ^ *s

"S * " s y

^"S s.^^° y^,

C/3 {!< H P-i •<

p^ rt

ll

M OO « ^- vo ^ tO\O O ^O

^^ d CO HN ' C^ W

• T- ^ Q-" •& ^ r^ tj 0,0.0^

a

oo oo oo ON o\

to *010 IO »0

APPENDIX. 329

JsS-o

<u
o

|S< S

ogjfg-'S

£ V

d

II

*^ -T* *-»

*>*

1

1

»

*i

1

islis

§ o£-oZ

1 S

-i 1

g;l

^£

.£ g

1!-

Ms

d

T3

"o
2

s.

1

9

li
13

°CN-
Q

1

J3^4

§<5

11

i« c
°g «

3^«

p°-§

•s I

° 1

fl tiX

-^
g^1

tj ^2

31 §

s
~v

M

j»
^3

a|

3^

o Jf

^.s 2

I -1

S 2

v*2 S3

aj

t:

r-l A

%

o **

"~ *"^

*^ r^ *^

ci *J3

4J O

1*!

g-5

C- *"*""'

Jij

s

^

11

•c °

QUO

- ^ o

fi(t!.

|a g

<j

o

S

«r!

B

IP

r'-S

^-^-H

<0 0 «->

^^

~ ^3 5

o

<U VH

c3

fi

*** ±i

"30

-^ o .

^75

5.<S g

2-£o> *

HH ..^ 1

c
o

o

r^*^3 U
^<^ «

o> d

CT! o>

1

tfl

«s^

Irf

o 5

s'0
la

•S g£

•a cu^-

e <u °

fiU si

The Chronicle of K. Edward
return out of the Holy Land
in Wales, with the sinking <
The tragedy of Cleopatra.
The life and death of Jack Sti
The history of Orlando Furios
A playbook.
A Knack to Know a Knave,
times been played by Ne<
Kempe's applauded merrim
comedy.
Cornelia : Thomas Kydd bein

A noble Roman history of Ty
The looking glass for Londo
Greene, gent.
The first part of the Content
York and Lancaster, with tl

phrey and the banishment a
and the tragical end of th
with the notable rebellion
York's first claim unto the c
A pleasant conceited history a
The Pedlar's Prophesy. "A
The Famous Victories of Hei
battle of Agincourt.
The Scottish story of James
with a pleasant comedy pres

C

•s

•§

B

c« v

O/]

0

<u v

o

i

4J

gss

•^ fi fl

£»

.s S1
aS.1^

^
S

t3T3
., <u <u

^ V V

oUU

1

U

<3
t— >

^QQ

'S

14WI

3

wS S

J3

3
«t

g C fl

III

1

2

ll||

!2J AH

0

jd

«3 o o

IHH

.q

VOVO*'**'* Wrorfrf

15 tJtJ8 B c -g «* J3 ^^^ ^

O OOQ A A £% 2 2SS S

f*i fO

o\ ov

tr> 10

s

330

APPENDIX.

3 1 !'

°|S3

•5 cs-2»-3

•*•

HH

jl ||||l l|

5 « ^ S-5-5 c tf 5
j-g 3 w a s-g -g-a

\

APPENDIX.

le tragedy of
oursing the war
f Wakefeilde.
ipt called an
inus and Se

">>
S

^
^

on, play

««

2*8

gw-5

^•S o

j^a

•5 C3 rt
- cS !3

IS&

rt S a

^32

2ll

-sis

>> ££

^U3 O.

^ *s

Il^l

I1§2d

\*ft&

'£
KT

.

Richard

y agai
mirth

I s°
o

TD 4)

% * ~~

!* *s 51

CH tn "ti

W | II

J *|

|>

•2-5

II I

11

^ £3
v 'S

^ cu

., with
he Nor

^r="

8 si A
iSll

ia. 1° .SJsl

'o.S cStatS3o*o-

PH " M Cl<tio jj O " o> ^

»« r w'a «£ « ^s

5fc* 3 »^

P4
8

I

i
£

I

III

<o

%

332

APPENDIX.

d.

a -s
"i

II

OO
ON

s

t

APPENDIX.

333

PI, 1113

5 .2* 2 § s s^" 5 2 «* 5 • 3^ Q««
0,3-3 o S o^^°5 w>^ S g^j o
^Sfe-5 SJ3^gg«°g^'3^^o^

fjllj ^BfiPj|lj«<il

SH Ci A H

<E-<J

t. .*

A3 y tn Cu

o
1 1

I

If

I

I

334

APPENDIX.

a 1

£ £

g

Test

.£ ^
?J g

aster
gdon,

^""J

Ilo

Igl

•s?a<S

e3«

O a> VM

•"iSll? §^

w2 s 2 o <u

^3 CJ * C a) _( pj --Q

l^-||P5llrS|'a

*'»«s

by

<o .,

«!

«go

r— i 3 &

sw« a1 'a1

ls| | I

III I I

I

H

11

« ^r
*j >

VO

i

s -g

o

£•§ -2

e.<~

j -sirf a

^^

SU d

rtj ^^ ^ f* • -.

2-s •? II

APPENDIX.

P

I

1

C/2

j

t/i tn rt

3 "g K

** £1

6 ~G

13 <u

£1

o -^

jy o •£ "^ J2

3^ 5

S 5i JS

« -SI

T3 <U ^

KiJH
!f|y

<! ^g w

O w «

335

a-s

W^

c >%

0) •*-»

5 £

II
.'ti w

H E-

H H

"S -S*1
- 1 1

^ 0 »-i !

I "^"i^ j B8x g-5^= §je

lll!|M|iJ!|jll

i i fiii

p/ pq <j ^-H PQ g

I— I T^ C ^ T( ^

? 1 1111

= 0*0

S

<U Wi
*J ±j <U

r^ fv-s ^

1SII

^^ O

^ tf

s *" 3
^ £ •? S

N N Tj-

vo <O *O

336

APPENDIX.

i-1 ° c «

fPl

g '3 o
cxpq £

a s ;°£

UO

* ?

VO

^ 2 22 S-

M

to N m

1

13

a, "a.

"o

o

| g II |

1

ill

IQ

1

I

1

vo
1

APPENDIX.

337

>.

I

-
a

B

-
S

pq pq pqpq'pqpq pq" H pq* pq" pq pq pq pq" pq" pq* pq

E

11 if II III
llUllli

m O

« g

338 APPENDIX.

£

J 1 1

s

i

go^s

H •< ffiH

a

« PQ W tt

M :« M

11 1 II 11 a I

r^ oo

O O
VO VO

APPENDIX.

339

CO CO CO

VO VO t^
N N W

II

II

M

7

340

APPENDIX.

J2 •*-» (1>

s »

Cj

w 1

£

8

2f

-S 1

JS^S.

I jj

P>H .tJ

l!

gu-^feO ^^ ^3 ^ M

°^ S

tf

II? IX-P in

P-ii^ii^

HHH

H en

pq'wcq

P

M ri

M

H

I i

a 1

*2 ^i

^ c

I •§

W H3

e

SJ

*H *

I J
S ^

i !

C4M HH i-i

"^ g M

^ l. ^

1-1 N

M M

vO vo

if) CXD
VO VO

APPENDIX. 341

* * te if I i II

s | s-3 -§.J s g .rs

•i Hs l| u 3 *•£•<

| * SgSg'dft.gUa rf

1 rf |.l -Sii •§ * S SIS 8

- I (2£ p I S 3 K| |

1 I 2.S §3 ^ 8. S -g^S >

W ^ O^ o« ? tS >» O « T3 °.

«s *|ilJB> fi5 8^ 1 til* §s

g.5S °S'3-SS ^^ 2-S -g |°«s 11

^il |e^4 sf III « Jl^ula

< §K 2|jC rfjs. ^- I fllllej

Hc/3 PH H H <J H HH*< c/2 <JS

PQCQ :•«*«'« PQPQW < <J

"S-ISsIl

<-° SH£ |

llll i« lip* nl |&ai*

Msl rtisii m

en oo

*j . . ^

^T1 O, ti a^'P, C C1-

^ <U " i^ « rt <L>

342

APPENDIX.

H

HH H

B'M

iiiijl I I o

* W^j^^ ^^ s

I

0-d

s^«->-^.

00 2 <» ^-00 tx e« ro M

, I . : : : . ; : : : : . : I ill II §'

'r •? *

m ^tvo *>. t>. o\ o\

D M M O M 04 M

VO VO vo VO vo vo vo

APPENDIX.

343

ii^wtfj

S^l^-s

1 JU

o- s |i

K<:

; si 2

> J4 CO

ill

I «.£$

-ill

<K

cS

Is

10

o ^

<*

•3

i iflJiifclfS

-«>., 1 llllft^-llili

M iPPiftf-

lil^li^l^fj

^•*-»Hd>!>CJ4>O ^^ flJ x-i '^^

o a Q a E 41 a o A S AP*

^a <

a j<

K

is

<u

till

*-fa a 2
8.S88

UH <

S K

S

rG

rt

,c
o

2

O vo 1>-NVOOOOOVO O\ fO~ ^ -^, ~ . _

I i I

ft 7

^ o A -

c^ <*o ^o ro

VO O NO VO

344

APPENDIX.

n

11

I

.*

11 I:J l

:

.illlsr 1

^° ^

,2^.

,^.

i

^^ a

EKEEE K'W »" EEEEEKEEE K'W

a .

§_ 8 3

ȣ3S_Sra
WJ^s ^C-S

S

O\ •'J-OCTvror-^

-S SSS"^S
& SS

O O»^

APPENDIX. 345

f3jll**i «)TiKi

y -P. E g *r «r

ffi W KSWKffiS E'E^ES S

8 gg

O O O O ^ ^ O en

<3!<3 S£P| 1 1

g M S PQ £ 3 3 pq >

•5 . S . rt rs ^< !>•

^ C

a° s J'S'raJj -5 ot3,s

O rQ rG " Jr! --H rQ ^C n "1 •-*. o

Tj- ^J-t^. NO

-s a llilll- S ?-sl ?

h < <j^O!5Aw Q fefnA <J

346

APPENDIX.

H' H" HH'H'H' 1

5SI3SS.

isi

ss^sEsg s^gg^gs*

<Ucjr-i<urtrt(-' S C*^ ^ &» % rt "

1 I! II II

ON. _ . »r> co vo 00 moo

NV^OJ m^MiHM

W 11 6 II

II

II

II

APPENDIX.

I

347

^ H

r% 6^

rf C

14

rt^-°

.^^^
«a pq

I

•S Tfl

fr^ Q^«

slUl

.«.a

«>

>%.5

II

a,

<J

I

a.
t3

C3

J

S

"E*

I!

-**-^^«

0^3

121

J^>>

$••§1

•MS?

«<*

III

tit

.1*1

rt* >> 2 >»

£> <

jr
1

s« .s |*z 1.51*1 JJT^iillirl

rt^ rt S 3 gtf"*"-';-';^ S EH^»-lc/2'|'w^JJ^0

^^ ^ fiij,8*P 'E ^|^^&|^^«s

^H^UHH PM <JH^»HH<J^H^<J

>" rt rf £3 C» fl »J5 V^^ C f1

^» O *ooo oo to co

^ ^
s s

•«-! j-J ^^^^^i-

fi tt ooGG*^3rf

O o

O O

348

APPENDIX.

P, a <

.3 ^ £

0 4 I?" I

^ cL » flj

b ^ (H-2

.8 £ ^ 8 la

* *«t i Mj

i

^3 -< « ** ^ . MS

pj

&

5 £ .1 * *j? t B*
^ ^tl< I xl

| su|£ ^ | 1 5 ||

1

»— >

g
S

•

1

&< g-3 ^ * ^S &ft.

S

^

Name of 1

i t ii!i i:pfii

Ij^-Mcli I .gtlli ^

^
tf

1

PH

fa
O

r lliliiiiFiiifi

I =i|l5lflii^^i|2

&* .Jf|flJl*ll2j « Sg -&uO°

5|*ll?l ,ll<5 >- sl|lfr&i
llFillll-Bgll 111 "HI

a||«o5iaSa|i| a ««<.»SC«H

<U'hV)CXi><U*->(U<U4>^'C«5'J <U «*-i(U<U>O(U<U

SHyi^|y e sesame

play.
The Masque of the Gyp

S

^ mi m. ' ~^*r+ ^f-i-^*

t— 1

M

g

"S

8 S "

rH

4>

•^ 3 „, n 2 JJ <%

1

| °^ |S| ^-gjoxi, S^ "S-l

1

u So g"Q^ I'i^ii^'^ 2,J

1

fs

g o>S o"S<u r')'^,^I^^OT §S

cS

&

I l til! WIW ii

fl

1

>— J

N w> OOOO^ro cOrl-TtOCTv i-irf

O

4

tX P< Sr3'7iS<^j"oO(^® rfW

1

P

|

APPENDIX.

<

349

M

p

<ii

II

rr1 *^

.X fr

^'S •'S

t

il
*j

>>

t3

S

0

<U

o

M

«

£
>,

1

«1
P

;H'?

I1 < 1
i»S 41

ti
i-^

II

acq

X

0

c ^,

rt C . •">

<f" >r4

C/3

<

|

'o

ffl

"2 4>

rt t»

L4 V-f O *-^

!ll *

^ ~

sa

1

'M
c/5

^ to

f s

x

tl

JS*

"el

|

|l|

ique of Augurs,
ndicated.
*s Triumphs,
iniversary, or The Shepherd's ]
liamin Tonson.

«a

rt ^

s*°

Jprf

>,55

^2 0

£ rt

&Q
g M

o'|

^U ^ gL-s.

43 -^ ^ 6 ^

xo^ u jK^
l^ltls-

nj£ij|

s^Mr§ St*3
Ifii-l |iT

ajfjrA4fe.fl

i-lIliSt-P

jyiiii-

ictta.
ish Gentleman.
•Vcademy or Exchange,
esick Count,
ent Garden.
;lish Moor, or Mock Marriage

N N ^ t-

CX3 N N
M N N

35°

APPENDIX

I
I

10

J

£X

^ S .a

3<iTsjp-" o£££

ftKflcfrt

ljHl*S*1fS'

l5p;Srf _-£u g .

.SS o_<» P^ t> O.H

^gH~^ ~P-i S"^

lllglli^l
.•tt'S* »«& $.2.3*1

rpi |^- ^ pj >*» • i : ^ -^ ^ 01-'W_<

llfPi

13 S >• P "^

&. « -g •§ « <i: .§o2 rfc g *< R*1*5 »•« «w ^ -5

u gf911 bill bla jfll'Sl .1

S ^ cT^ Wcrt^SockSsS0 °/jO h£ F+, &
P ,2 *^ I'M v SJ_I'JH SS S.2*35 -S *^ M 2

^ -* . . _ r7

»U5;«

•g^^i*

s*l"ji

g'g.gSKg

" =Ssi

-l|s

S'lf^ld

-SI i

S bJ3rt g

3 4-. ^3 1^
* »-• w C ^^ <

« VO ^ 00

a. o< "o g
<^ <3 O H->

ON ^ ^ ON ON O> O

OO O\ ON «

APPENDIX.

351

HI

ago

GiEMfll* *

siw-azsg

*m35?l~*

° S .rt

-: vv ^-^ t — • X H 9f 1 *^ t/) •*-* Li

^c^t: 5o"rt ^ 5 • cfogNs^rs
sS-s^gl;:^ •-» ^g&^PiJ^llS

^i^fe^^S^ ^ »p5o^j3&'3&5««

§^

ii

S^ »M
.2 1

« §1
^cS

II

S

^T rt

ill rtliiiHl

-•8 -a

o d C

O\OiO Tt-f

WWW »

Ow

352

APPENDIX.

m

Killm***

fO
VO .

_• H« C^' r.

912 c/3

(i

.2 t^-g Os- SC^u: & .W SH^O

|!|aialll^f(Sj?*l-a

^ 5 R _ X 8 i— < » •« •• HH ^T

PBfl

c

~ 5*^ « 5^ S5S :3!23>dO p-*3 •a'8 >**

3 « fi ^j '|5 1||| i « « ^ * .^t||| 1 1

^ w

K u g M ^

c ^ t; rt «•§

gQ

SQ

U33

^

APPENDIX.

353

ll

fi

-

sit- i

c pS

*»H g TO

al"3---

..

£•!

«3 .

-•s*

^

'=

« -a c

«r> xo << o> £, PJ >— v'"'

AvcT^ tCggx cRM

CJ _ |_| M h— , t/3'oQ >-4 M

VO VO vo vo vo

vS

B J,

•S'C

P I

f I

§<u >, ^
S'SS-

S 1.^

| 11 |

IH

£ c3 § O 2

1S.*391

0\^. 00

0,

<

+j'Z > >^
o CU O rt

*J >

O O

O ^

354

APPENDIX.

I

fca*S

1 || S ill ft. sill!

!

tn « e*

01 CON

m

ro o\vo •-•i^r^t^.rt-'-ifONu^i-ip^r^i-i
W OO Q O O Q O< •* *C'«O « « >* « «

vO VO VO vo vo vo vo w>vO vOvOvQvOvOvOVO

APPENDIX.

355

o 5 e 052],

Si iig1?';

^^
.«

ii

1^

> a

•K -Q.

S K t--.^,-,
in tn >-> w ,C
CJ rt O en o

^

73

'55 "55

00"

I

o

o 3

<u w 5
£ « 2

8

o

O'S

vo vo VO vo VO

OH -^
W f> fO

£

VO

O\ O N O\
w C4 M CO
^O vQ ^O vO

C3 cJ
AS

o o

COO

VO vo

O

S2£

vg

356

APPENDIX.

O C/3v«

c .S

•* 8

II

& •£ ** . .{£ ^ .cj *»H

» M M »i <-• O .

Brf^-SO--^

-I5III1.

<U±i <U ai >rt fe» ** « « C3

! 1 1 1 i f r§ g I

APPENDIX.

357

b A

358

APPENDIX.

11

*§>

bo bo ?\ bobo bo bo bo

c 5*3 .a .S -B .5 .S

"55 "to S w c/> v) t/3 to

eg w § en w w "2 {2

CH'^H"

the War
MSS.

^ !_,;-!

cj (u <u

bo bo bo

Plays ente

16

i

APPENDIX.

359

"II.

K

O O' h H

6 a a a -s

^§•3

III

.£•§

° lu^

QO 8 ^ rt
C O 0- bfl-d

3«^ils-

fl °^.STJ
,2 » « bp a

I

1

ill b
ood

d S
o, • o
•oUu

o 13
J-si ^

P ^r

'HS

C3 <U
A' C >

8l«j

^ 5 •— • rr* ^y £. '^ ri v^ TO i-^H *-» *"• <-» >*

Silflliiflfos-is ^g^-§^

Hf20H< HH Hh^

fill
«fl*ll

y

I

u
O*

I ,

<s I

H H^

|o g

Fi ^ o

Y,orkshire G
woman and h
The Fatal Lov

a to

^ I,

i«
f^«fai

g mpos
. T. C

s i<

•d S

I ^

? E

c3 o
"

ig. b
14 !

f<: ?

^^

"all

•q||

C °

_W .^

Is

^^!, ^

«S5us

360

APPENDIX.

it* ti tJ

a a s

•a s

II

§ "

jja

£21

'rt <2 bfl

fcS.S

•s g^

2 S°

1

ti

S

bO

I! } 11 1

OO H^ ^_: >-1-

Di^

g E S
>>>>>»

c §

the W
MSS.

te
C.

>r i o <u

i°SS

flt

.w ^>

G,0

^ <2^ ^ '«3 £f

|s|§.s| i

^^o^h^°. o
<H h Hw ^

oice.

P

-S^ls^g -53

gjjlS^ls sli

PilfEOsoiJsl^s

•S •" o <u <u «u o {*•§,« £
* a££22fl **Jsf*X

<HHHhH OHQ

Tis

3 G

'C 3

I" 8

S c S

«a

ill

rt N—,

HQ K ffiW ffi

II

INDEX.

361

INDEX OF PLAYS AND AUTHORS CONNECTED WITH
SHAKESPEARE'S COMPANY BEFORE 1611.

Author.

Play.

Pages.

Anonymous

Alarum for London

See Lodge.

if

Cloth Breeches and Velvet Hose

326.

Cromwell, Earl of Essex

42, 145, 146, 298.

Edward III.

See Shakespeare.

Fair Em ...

See Wilson.

Gowry ....

1 52, ";oi.

Hester and Ahasuerus .

J J 3

93, 1 1 6, 309.

Jealous Comedy .

See Shakespeare.

Knack to Know a Knave

1 6, 109, 290.

Locrine

See Peele.

London Prodigal .

54, 148, 154, 299.

Merry Devil of Edmonton

See Drayton.

Mucedorus .

See Lodge.

Oldcastle

See Drayton.

Richard, Duke of York

See 3 Henry VI.

Seven Deadly Sins

See Tarleton.

Sir Thomas More .

27, 127, 292.

Spanish Maz

S3-

Tambercam, 2d part, acted 28

April 1592.

*

Taming of a Shrew

See Kyd.

Taner of Denmark, acted 23

May 1592.

Titus and Vespasian

16, 109, 313.

Warning for Fair Women

See Lodge.

York and Lancaster

See 2 Henry VI.

Yorkshire Tragedy

53. 54, 154, 158,

302.

Dekker . .

Satiromastix . . . ,

36, 43, 45, 298.

Drayton . .

Merry Devil of Edmonton

31, 58, 131, 139,

157, 294.

»»

Oldcastle, Sir John . ''''""' V

41, 78, 140.

Fletcher . .

Henry VIII.

See Shakespeare.

,,

Two Noble Kinsmen

252.

Jonson . .

Alchemist ....

65, 81, 163.

ii

Every man out of his humour

36, 37, 79, 137, 297-

2 A

362

INDEX.
INDEX OF PLAYS— continued.

Author.

Play.

Pages.

Jonson . .

Every man in his humour

34, 39, 40, 79, 140,

297.

»

Jeronymo (additions)

52.

49, 80, 147, 151,

M

301.

}>

Volpone ....

50, 54, 56, 80, 154,

303-

Kyd .

Hamlet

See Shakespeare.

n>/u
»
jj

Jeronymo (Spanish Tragedy) .
Taming of a Shrew

1 6, 52, 151, 308.
19, 23, 28,99, "6,

117, 129.

Lodge . .

Alarum for London

27, 126, 291.

M

Mucedorus ....

56, 156, 303-

)»

Warning for Fair Women

35, 136,297.

Marlowe

Edward III

See Shakespeare.

»

Guise (Massacre of Paris)

1 6, 112.

»»

Henry VI

See Shakespeare.

»»

Richard, Duke of York .

See 3 Henry VI.

»

Richard III

See Shakespeare.

»»

Titus Andronicus .

See Shakespeare.

» J

York and Lancaster

See 2 Henry VI.

Peele . . .

Edward I

14.

99

Locrine

24, 120, 291.

Rowley . .

Birth of Merlin

289.

Shakespeare

All's well that ends well

42, in, 142, 216.

>»

Anthony and Cleopatra .

58, 157, 158, 161,

244.

>»

As you like it ...

36, 38, 39, 138, 140,

208.

»»

Coriolanus ....

60, 1 60, 244.

»

Cymbeline ....

57, 156, 162, 246.

»»

Edward III

19, 23, 118, 127,

282.

»>

Errors, Comedy of

13, 26, 105, 125,

178.

j>

Hamlet

19, 23, 42, 49, 50,

99, 117, 142, 146,

148,149,227,309.

INDEX.
INDEX OF PLAYS— continued.

363

Author.

Pky.

Pages.

Shakespeare

I Henry IV.. . , .., ,

30, 32, 130, I34,

M

jj

2 Henry IV. .
Henry V

32, 130, 199.

35, 38, 40, 138, 140,

206.

i Henry VI

l6 IOQ, 2SS.

»

»

2 Henry VI
3 Henry VI

39,98,115,145,263.

i9» 23,39, 1 10, 126,

145, 271.

II

Henry VIII

68, 170, 250.

»

Jealous Comedy (Merry Wives)

16, 19, 39, 112.

»

John

27, 127, 196.

||

Julius Caesar ....

39, 42, 214.

>J

Lear

53,58,156,157,237,

311-

J>

Love's Labour's Lost . .

11,32,103,133,202.

II

»

Love's Labour's Won . .
Macbeth . . . .

13, 104.

28, 43, 55» 56, 57,

128, 155, 238.

II

Measure for Measure

52, 153, 234.

||

Merchant of Venice

30, 41, 129, 134,

141, 197.

>»

Merry Wives of Windsor

39, 139, 145, 210.

II

Midsummer Night's Dream .

18, 26, 41, 126, 181.

»

Much Ado about Nothing

33,40,134,140,204.

||

Othello

52, 153, 235.

II

Pericles

58,61,158,161,245.

)>

Richard II

26, 32, 42, 126, 132,

143, 187.

»

Richard III

23, 32, 118, 132,

176, 275.

||

Romeo and Juliet .

13. 27, 32, 38, 106,

128,129,191,308.

II

Taming of the Shrew

23, 46, 146, 224.

|.|

Tempest ....

66, 163, 248.

»>

Timon of Athens .

57, 156, 242.

II

Titus Andronicus .

23, 114, 116, 176,

280.

364

INDEX.
INDEX OF PLAYS— continued.

Author.

Play.

Pages.

Shakespeare

»>
»

Tarleton .
Tourneur .
Tvlnev .

Troylus and Cressida

Twelfth Night
Two Gentlemen of Verona

Winter's Tale
Seven Deadly Sins
Revenger's Tragedy

23,44,61, 136, 146,
1 60, 220.

44, in, 145, 219.
14, 1 06, 126, 1 88,

SIS-
65, 163, 247.
23, 296.

58, 305-
See Peele.

Webster . .
Wilkins . .

Malcontent (Induction) .
Miseries of Enforced Marriage
Pericles . . .

52, 151, 301-
49, 148, 302.
See Shakespeare.

Wilson .

Fair Em ....

13, 104, 285.

NOTE ON THE ETCHINGS.

I have been asked to say a few words on the illustrations to this
volume. The Portrait of Alleyn has been kindly permitted to be
taken from the oil painting preserved at Dulwich College, and has
not, it is believed, been previously engraved as a book illustration.
It was thought that the reader would prefer a representation of this
great actor, the first managing director under whom Shakespeare
performed, to a reproduction of one of the many portraits of the
poet himself, which have now become so hackneyed. For like
reason, the Font in which Shakespeare was baptized has been obtained
from a hitherto unreproduced original : an oil sketch made on the
spot in 1853 by the world- known painter, Mr. Henry Wallis, and
now in the artist's possession. It is with no little satisfaction that
I find my work allowed to be associated with that of a painter so
eminent, and with the name of one of the great poets for all ages,
Mr. Robert Browning.

Printed by Ballantyne, Hanson &> Co. , Edinburgh and London.

KING WILLIAM STREET, STRAND, W.C.,
LONDON, MARCH 1886.

JOHN C. NIMMO'S

LIST OF NEW BOOKS

.

FOR

THE SPRING OF 1886.

Publications of John C. Nimmo.

A New Edition, in Three Volumes, medium 8vo, cloth,
fine paper, price 31s. 6d. net.

BURTON'S

ANATOMY OF MELANCHOLY.

THE ANATOMY OF MELANCHOLY:

WHAT IT IS,

WITH ALL THE KINDS, CAUSES, SYMPTOMS, PROGNOSTICS,
AND SEVERAL CURES OF IT.

5n Gbree {partitions,

WITH THEIR SEVERAL SECTIONS, MEMBERS, AND SUBSECTIONS,

PHILOSOPHICALLY, MEDICINALLY, HISTORICALLY

OPENED AND CUT UP.

By DEMOCBITUS JUNIOR

[ROBERT BURTON].

Burton's Anatomy at the time of its original publication obtained a great
celebrity, which continued more than half a century. During that period few
books were more read or more deservedly applauded. It was the delight of
the learned, the solace of the indolent, and the refuge of the uninformed. It
passed through at least eight editions, by which the bookseller, as Wood
records, got an estate ; and, notwithstanding the objection sometimes opposed
against it, of a quaint style and too great an accumulation of authorities, the
fascination of its wit, fancy, and sterling sense have borne down all censures,
and extorted praise from the first writers in the English language. The grave
Johnson has praised it in the warmest terms, and the ludicrous Sterne has
interwoven many parts of it into his own popular performance. Milton did
not disdain to build two of his finest poems on it ; and a host of inferior
writers have embellished their works with beauties not their own, culled from
a performance which they had not the justice even to mention. Change of
times and the frivolity of fashion suspended, in some degree, that fame
which had lasted nearly a century ; and the succeeding generation affected
indifference towards an author who at length was only looked into by the
plunderers of literature, the poachers in obscure volumes. The plagiarisms
of "Tristram Shandy," so successfully brought to light by Dr. Ferriar, at
length drew the attention of the public towards a writer who, though then
little known, might, without impeachment of modesty, lay claim to every
mark of respect ; and inquiry proved, beyond a doubt, that the calls of justice
had been little attended to by others as well as the facetious Yorick. Wood
observed, more than a century ago, that several authors had unmercifully
stolen matter from Burton without any acknowledgment.

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo.

THE SONG OF SONGS.

SUPER ROYAL QUARTO.

Jilustratefc witb awent£*si£ ffull^page Original
JStcbings from Designs

BY BIDA.

ETCHED BY EDMOND H&DOUIN AND
&M1LE BOILVIN.

Hlso twelve Culs^De^Xampes from Designs
BY GUSTAVE GREUX.

Bound in a new and original rich plush padded binding,
priqe Three Guineas net.

NOTE. — "The Song of Songs" is printed from the REVISED
VERSION, the copyright of which belongs to the authorities
of the Oxford and Cambridge University Presses, who have
courteously granted the publisher permission to use it for this
purpose.

The twenty-six full-page etchings are beautifully printed on
fine Japanese paper, and carefully mounted on white vellum
paper, same as the text is printed on.

No finer specimens than these of BIDA'S wonderful designs
have hitherto appeared.

24 King William Street, Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo.

OCTAVE UZANNE'S NEW WORK.

The Frenchwoman of the Century.

FASHIONS— MANNERS— USAGES.

By OCTAVE UZANNE,

Author of "The Fan," " The Sunshade, Muff, and Glove."

Illustrations in Water Colours by ALBERT LYNCH.
Engraved in Colours by EUGENE GAUJEAN.

Super royal 8vo, elegantly bound in padded Japanese leather,
price Two Guineas net.

Only 500 copies are printed, 300 for England and 200 for America.
Type distributed.

NOTE. — " The Frenchwoman of the Century," written by Octave Uzanne,
gives a description of the principal fashions in France, its customs, manner?,
and usages from the earliest years of the Revolution to the present time.
With the history of the dress is pleasantly intermingled a history of the most
notable people of this eventful period. The book sparkles with vivid allusions
to the principal men and women of the epoch. Napoleon is photographed in
his habit as he lived, and the inner life of the Empress Josephine appears as
in a delicate miniature. The work, comprehensive in extent, is at the same
time minute in detail. The fashions of the Directory and the First Empire
are, as it were, underlined. To the assistance of the letterpress has been
called, not without sufficient reason in description of the intricate complexity
of Parisian fashions, the able pencil of M. Albert Lynch, who has been careful
to supply his water colour illustrations exactly in those places where they
were most wanted. These pictures have been subsequently engraved in
colours by the skilful hand of Eugene Gaujean.

The work, careless and superficial it may seem, is in reality a marvel of
profound research and exact investigations. Though copious it is not pro
digal, though anecdotal it is seldom trifling, though learned it is never dull.
Its expression is polished and lively, its plan precise and duly defined. The
best writers of the time for the subject in hand, such as George Duval,
Madame d'Abrante, Emile de Girardin, and others of equal reputation have
been diligently consulted. The volume is a suitable, almost indeed a neces
sary, appendage to the other works of Uzanne, viz., "The Fan" and "The
Sunshade, Muff, and Glove," recently published.

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo.

An elegant and choicely Illustrated Edition of

The Vicar of Wakefield.

By OLIVER GOLDSMITH.

With Prefatory Memoir by GEORGE SAINTSBURY, and One Hundred and
Fourteen Coloured Illustrations by V. A. PoiRSON (Illustrator of "Gul
liver's Travels ").

Royal 8vo, cloth extra, printed in colours and gilt top, price 123. 6d.

NOTE. — This edition of Oliver Goldsmith's famous English classic is illus
trated and produced in so sumptuous a form and at so moderate a price, the
publisher feels confident the entire edition will be speedily disposed of. It is
uniform in size and style of illustration to "Gulliver's Travels" recently pub
lished, and of which three thousand copies were sold in two months.

Edinburgh and its Neighbourhood

IN THE DAYS OF OUR GRANDFATHERS.

A series of Illustrations of the more remarkable Old and New Buildings
and Picturesque Scenery of Edinburgh, as they appeared about 1830. With
Historical Introduction and Descriptive Sketches by JAMES GOWANS.

Royal 8vo, Eighty Illustrations, fine paper, cloth elegant, price I2s. 6d.

NOTE. — The leading feature of this book will be a series of views of Edin
burgh and its neighbourhood from the original steel plates after drawings by
Mr. Thomas H. Shepherd, and published in 1833. Some of these views are
of special interest, as they give vivid representations of historical and other
edifices now swept away in the course of improvements which have so much
altered the features of " the grey metropolis of the north." A few of the
original descriptions of the views will be preserved, but most of the others
will be superseded by fresh sketches, whilst the original introduction will be
recast, and in great part rewritten. Numerous incidents will be supplied
illustrative of the social life of the period, when Scott was still the typical
representative of the literary life of Scotland, and Christopher North and his
associates were exercising a mighty influence in the domain of literature and
politics by their diatribes and searching yet sympathetic criticisms in the
brilliant pages of Maga.

*/V^^^^^^^^^Xi%<N«'V^(^^^^^%^^^XXX%/VXi^XX<'VXi%<'WWXi'WWi'V^»»

A new and beautiful edition of the "IMITATION OF CHRIST," in demy 8vo,
with the text and quaint borders printed in brown ink, and illustrated
with Fifteen Etchings, ten by J. P. LAURENS and five by CH. WALTNER,
price 2 is. nett bound in full parchment, gilt top.

THE IMITATION OF CHRIST.

FOUR BOOKS.
Translated from the Latin by Rev. W. BENHAM, B.D.,

Rector of St Edmund, King and Martyr ; Lombard Street, London.
NOTE. — The etchings to this new edition of the "IMITATION," fifteen in
number, and printed on fine Japanese paper, make it one of the most beautiful
at present to be had.

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo.

IRew Series of Ibtstorical flftemoirs,
The Autobiography of Edward,

LORD HERBERT OF CHERBURY.

With Introduction, Notes, Appendices, and a Continuation of the Life. By
SYDNEY L. LEE, B.A., Balliol College, Oxford. With Four Etched
Portraits, fine paper, medium 8vo, cloth, 2 is. net.

NOTE. — "Lord Herbert of Cherbury's Autobiography" is one of the most
fascinating and entertaining books of its class. The author is devoid of self-
consciousness, and keeps no secrets from his readers. He dwells as com
placently on his failings as on his virtues ; his childlike vanity keeps his
self-esteem intact in the least promising circumstances. But the book does
more than throw a steady light on an attractive personality, it illustrates the
habits and customs of English and French society at the beginning of the
seventeenth century. No other work so fully describes the contemporary
practice of duelling. Abundant reference is made to politics, and it thus
forms an important commentary on the history of James the First's reign.
Incidentally Lord Herbert enunciates his religious, educational, and meta
physical theories, and substantiates his claim to be regarded as the father of
English deism. The autobiography only carries the writer's life as far as the
year 1624, and Lord Herbert died in 1648. The book has been reprinted
two or three times since its first publication by Horace Walpole in 1764, but
it has never been fully edited. In the present edition the editor endeavours
to explain the allusions to the historical events, and gives brief accounts of the
numerous terms and books mentioned in the text, and interprets the obscure
words and phrases. He will also continue Lord Herbert's life until the date
of his death, print some of his correspondence, and will attempt to define his
place in English literature, philosophy, history, and religion.

MEMOIRS OF

The Life of William Cavendish,

DUKE OF NEWCASTLE,

To which is added the True Relation of My Birth, Breeding, and Life. By
MARGARET, DUCHESS OF NEWCASTLE. Edited by C. H. FIRTH, M.A.
(Editor of "Memoirs of the Life of Colonel Hutchinson.") With Four
Etched Portraits, fine paper, medium 8vo, cloth, price 2 is. net.

NOTE. — The Memoirs of the Duke of Newcastle by the Duchess has
been judged by Charles Lamb a book "both good and rare," "a jewel which
no casket is rich enough to honour or keep safe." The first edition of these
Memoirs is, however, difficult to obtain, and the later reprint in form hardly
worthy of the original. The aim of the present edition is to supply a book
which shall be in type, print, and paper attractive. At the same time,
preface, notes, letters, and an index are added to increase its use to the
student of seventeenth century history, and to all who are interested in the
records of our great civil war. As in the corresponding edition of Mrs.
Hutchinson's Memoirs, the spelling is modernised and explanations of
obsolete words given.

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo.

NEW SERIES OF HISTORICAL MEMOIRS— continued,

The True History of the Life and
Work of William Shakespeare,

PLAYER, POET, AND PLAYMAKER.

By F. G. FLEAY, M.A. With Three Etchings of interest. Fine paper,
medium 8vo, half parchment, gilt top, price 155. net.

NOTE. — The theatrical side of the career of Shakespeare has never yet
received any adequate consideration, his connection with the theatres and
acting companies in his earlier years not having been traced or even investi
gated. His relations with other dramatists, especially with Jonson, have
also been grossly misrepresented. While every idle story of mythical gossip
has been carefully collected, and the pettiest details of his commercial
dealings have been garnered, little attention has hitherto been given to his
dealings with the plays by other men with whom he was fellow-worker, and
a large group of evidences bearing on the chronology of his work, derived
from the early production of English plays in Germany, has been cast aside
as valueless. In this work an attempt is made to collect this neglected
material, to throw new light on the Sonnets, and to determine the dates of
the production of all his works. A complete list of all plays published with
due authority anterior of 1640 by any dramatic writer is given from the
Stationers' Registers. Many unfounded hypotheses of Collier, Halliwell, and
others are for the first time exploded, and the work of ten years investigation
is condensed in a single volume. In many instances one paragraph represents
months of labour, and it is hoped that a permanent addition of value is thus
made to Shakespearian literature. The arrangement of the book is made so as
to appeal not merely to the specialist, but to every one who feels an interest in
the greatest writer of any literature, and the crowning glory of our own.

w*W«V"VSrf>rf'V"V«^VVVV'VVV'V'VV"Sw%^

VOLUMES RECENTLY ISSUED,

MEMOIRS OF THE LIFE OF COLONEL HUTCHINSON. By his

Widow, LUCY. Revised and Edited by CHARLES H. FIRTH, M.A.
With Ten Etched Portraits. Two Volumes, fine paper, medium 8vo,
and handsome binding, 425. net.

NOTE. — Only 500 copies are printed, 300 for England and 200 for America.
Type distributed.

OLD TIMES : A Picture of Social Life at the End of the Eighteenth
Century. Collected and Illustrated from the Satirical and other
Sketches of the Day. By JOHN ASHTON, Author of "Social Life in
the Reign of Queen Anne." One Volume, fine paper, medium 8vo,
handsome binding, Eighty-eight Illustrations, 2is. net.

THE LIFE OF GEORGE BRUMMELL, Esq., commonly called BEAU
BRUMMELL. By Captain JESSE, unattached. Revised and Annotated
Edition from the Author's own Interleaved Copy. With Forty Portraits
in Colour of Brummell and his Contemporaries. Two Volumes, fine
paper, medium 8vo, and handsome cloth binding, 425. net.

NOTE. — Only 500 copies are printed, 300 for England and 200 for America.
Type distributed.

MEMOIRS OF COUNT GRAMMONT. By ANTHONY HAMILTON. A
New Edition, Edited, with Notes, by Sir WALTER SCOTT. With
Sixty-Four Portraits engraved by EDWARD SCRIVEN. Two Volumes,
8vo, Roxburghe binding, gilt top, 305. net.

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo.

HEW SERIES OF HISTORICAL MEMOIRS— continued.

SOME NOTICES OF THE PRESS.
HUTCHINSON. Athenffium.

" Is an excellent edition of a famous book. Mr. Firth presents the ' Memoirs '
with a modernised orthography and a revised scheme of punctuation. He retains
the notes of Julius Hutchinson, and supplements them by annotations — corrective
and explanatory — of his own. Since their publication in 1805, the ' Memoirs ' have
been a kind of classic. To say that this is the best and fullest edition of them in
existence is to say everything."

Times.

"Beautifully printed upon fine paper, with rough edges, and with margins
which will delight the heart of the book-lover, we announce with pleasure a new
edition of Colonel Hutchinson's ' Memoirs,' revised, with additional notes, by Mr.
C. H. Firth. This edition, which is in two handsome volumes, contains ten etched
portraits of eminent personages. As the editor remarks in his introduction, none
of the ' Memoirs ' which relate to the troubled history of the English Civil Wars
have obtained a greater popularity than those of Colonel Hutchinson compiled by
his wife."

OLD TIMES.

— — — Daily Telegraph.

" That is the best and truest history of the past which comes nearest to the life
of the bulk of the people. It is in this spirit that Mr. John Ashton has composed
' Old Times,' intended to be a picture of social life at the end of the eighteenth
century. The illustrations form a very valuable, and at the same time quaint and
amusing, feature of the volume."

Saturday Review.

" ' Old Times,' however, is not only valuable as a book to be taken up for a few
minutes at a time ; a rather careful reading will repay those who wish to brush up
their recollections of the period. To some extent it may serve as a book of refer
ence, and even historians may find in it some useful matter concerning the times of
which it treats. The book is in every respect suited for a hall or library table in a
country house."

BEAU BRUMMELL.

— — Morning Post.

" The editor of the present edition has been enabled to add much new matter
which had been excluded from the original by reason of many of the persons therein
referred to being alive at the time. . . . And readers who plod through these two
handsome volumes will be rewarded with an admirable picture of English and
French society in the days of the Regency."

Notes and Queries.

" The book, which is on beautiful paper, is worthy of a place in most collec
tions, and the privilege of possessing it in a form so artistic and handsome is a
subject for gratitude."

GRAMMONT.

— — — — — Hallam.

"The 'Memoirs of Grammont,' by Anthony Hamilton, scarcely challenge a
place as historical ; but we are now looking more at the style than the intrinsic
importance of books. Every one is aware of the peculiar felicity and fascinating
gaiety which they display."

T. B. Macaulay.

"The artist to whom we owe the most highly finished and vividly coloured
picture of the English Court in the days when the English Court was gayest."

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo.

An Elegant and Choicely Illustrated Edition of

Trave Is

INTO SEVERAL REMOTE NATIONS OF THE WORLD BY LEMUEL GULLIVER,
First a Surgeon and then a Captain of Several Ships. By JONATHAN
SWIFT, Dean of St. Patrick. With Prefatory Memoir by GEORGE
SAINTSBURY, and One Hundred and Eighty Coloured and Sixty Plain
Illustrations. Royal 8vo, cloth extra, price I2s. 6d., 450 pages.

SOME NOTICES OF THE PRESS.

The Saturday Review.

" Mr. Saintsbury, in editing the fascinating volume before us, wisely refrains
from hinting at any matter that may become matter of controversy. The remarks
with which he introduces this beautiful edition of one of the masterpieces of the
world's literature breathe the very spirit of true criticism. . . . But we have barely
alluded to the distinctive features of this edition which make it a book to be
coveted and purchased by all true bibliophiles. M. Poiron's pictures, in their
delicacy and subtle humour, are in every way worthy of the story. Those which
illustrate the Voyage to Lilliput are perhaps the most dainty and delightful in their
quaint poetical design and colouring. But there are some uncoloured head and
tailpieces which, to all true lovers of art, will appear simply delicious."

Daily News.

" No handsomer edition of Swift's renowned work than that which Mr. Nimmo
has just published of ' The Travels into Several Remote Nations of the World,
by Lemuel Gulliver,' is recorded in the annals of bibliography. Mr. George
Saintsbury furnishes a brief biographical and critical introduction."

Scotsman.

" The charm of the book, besides the excellence of the printing and generally
attractive appearance, lies in the illustrations. They are charmingly drawn bits,
some interwoven, so to speak, into the page, others of them occupying the whole
page, and all of them marked by a delicacy and refinement which are delightful.
Take the edition altogether and it is one of the most remarkable books of its kind
that has been published."

Times.

" For this handsome edition of ' Gulliver's Travels ' we have nothing but praise.
Paper and type are unexceptionable, while there is a profusion of quaintly grotesque
illustrations."

The Guardian.

" This is in every respect one of those sumptuous volumes which are now being
devoted to our standard authors. Every luxury of paper and type have been freely
spent upon it, and the numerous illustrations, both plain and coloured, especially
perhaps the latter, display a spirit and humour and wealth of delicate and graceful
fancy which it would be difficult to surpass. Possibly some of our readers may
have a very vague remembrance of what Swift really allowed himself to write. If
so, they will be tolerably certain to be attracted by the grace and beauty of this
edition of his most popular work. "

Spectator.

" Of all Swift's works, ' Gulliver's Travels ' is the most satisfactory and complete,
as it is the most famous ; and it follows, therefore, that all lovers of English literature
will be pleased at the production of so handsome a reprint as that published by Mr.
J. C. Nimmo. A special feature of this edition is the pictures. There is no doubt
that the process by which they are produced is extremely delicate and beautiful,
the colours being as transparent as water colours, and laid with perfect clearness of
outline and precision of detail. And we reinvite those who have not read ' Gulliver's
Travels' since childhood to study once more one of the profoundest and most
brilliant satires, one of the greatest of imaginative creations, and one of the noblest
models of style in the English language."

14 King William Street^ Strand, London^ W. C.

A 2

io Publications of John C. Nimmo.

Ipglbe ^Usabetban ^Dramatists,

NOTE. — This is the first instalment towards a collective edition of the
Dramatists who lived about the time of Shakespeare. The type will be dis
tributed after each work is printed, the impression of which will be four
hundred copies, post 8vo, and one hundred and twenty large fine-paper
copies, medium 8vo, which will be numbered.

One of the chief features of this New Edition of the Elizabethan Drama
tists, besides the handsome and handy size of the volumes, will be the fact that
each Work -will be carefully edited and new notes given throughout.

ALGERNON CHARLES SWINBURNE

(IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY, JANUARY 1866)

ON THE

Elfsabetban ^Dramatists*

" If it be true, as we are told on high authority, that the greatest glory of
England is her literature, and the greatest glory of English literature is its
poetry, it is not less true that the greatest glory of English poetry lies rather
in its dramatic than its epic or its lyric triumphs. The name of Shakespeare
is above the names even of Milton and Coleridge and Shelley ; and the names
of his comrades in art and their immediate successors are above all but the
highest names in any other province of our song. There is such an over
flowing life, such a superb exuberance of abounding and exulting strength, in
the dramatic poetry of the half century extending from 1590 to 1640, that all
other epochs of English literature seem as it were but half awake and half
alive by comparison with this generation of giants and of gods. There is
more sap in this than in any other branch of the national bay-tree ; it has an
energy in fertility which reminds us rather of the forest than the garden or the
park. It is true that the weeds and briars of the underwood are but too likely
to embarrass and offend the feet of the rangers and the gardeners who trim
the level flower-pots or preserve the domestic game of enclosed and ordered
lowlands in the tamer demesnes of literature. The sun is strong and the
wind sharp in the climate which reared the fellows and the followers of
Shakespeare. The extreme inequality and roughness of the ground must
also be taken into account when we are disposed, as I for one have often been
disposed, to wonder beyond measure at the apathetic ignorance of average
students in regard of the abundant treasure to be gathered from this widest
and most fruitful province in the poetic empire of England. And yet, since
Charles Lamb threw open its gates to all comers in the ninth year of the
present century, it cannot but seem strange that comparatively so few should
have availed themselves of the entry to so rich and royal an estate. Mr.
Bullen has taken up a task than which none more arduous and important,
none worthier of thanks and praise, can be undertaken by any English
scholar."

14 King William Street ', Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo. u

^.lisabetban ^Dramatists,
The Works of Christopher Marlowe.

Edited by A. H. BULLEN, B.A.

IN THREE VOLUMES.

Post 8vo, cloth. Published price, 7s. 6d. per volume net ; also large fine-
paper edition, medium 8vo, cloth.

rVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV^VVVVVVVVVVVVV^/VVVVW

The Works of Thomas Middleton.

Edited by A. H. BULLEN, B.A.

In Eight Volumes, post 8vo, 7s. 6d. per volume net ; also large fine-paper
edition, medium 8vo, cloth.

NOTE. — The next issue of this series will be The Works of John Marston,
in Three Volumes, and The Works of Thomas Dekker, in Four Volumes.
The remaining dramatists of this Period will follow in due order.

Some Press Notices of the Elizabethan Dramatists.

Saturday Review.

" Mr. Bullen has discharged his task as editor in all important points satisfac
torily. Marlowe needs no irrelevant partisanship, no ' zeal of the devil's house,' to
support his greatness. . . . Mr. Bullen's introduction is well informed and well
written, and his notes are well chosen and sufficient. . . . We hope it may be his
good forture to give and ours to receive every dramatist, from Peele to Shirley, in
this handsome, convenient, and well-edited form."

Scotsman.

" Never in the history of the world has a period been marked by so much of
literary power and excellence as the Elizabethan period ; and never have the diffi
culties in the way of literature seemed to be greater. The three volumes which Mr.
Nimmo has issued now may be regarded as earnests of more to come, and as proofs
of the excellence which will mark this edition of the Elizabethan Dramatists as
essentially the best that has been published. Mr. Bullen is a competent editor in
every respect."

The Academy.

" Mr. Bullen is known to all those interested in such things as an authority on
most matters connected with old plays. We are not surprised, therefore, to find
these volumes well edited throughout. They are not overburdened with notes."

The Spectator.

" That Marlowe should take precedence in Mr. Bullen's arduous undertaking is
matter of course. He is the father of the English drama, and the first poet who
showed the capabilities of the language when employed in blank verse. His line
is not only mighty ; it is sometimes most musical, giving us a foretaste of what
English verse was to become in the masterful hands of Shakespeare. We cannot
part with Mr. Bullen without congratulating him on his success. "

Contemporary Review.

" Mr. Bullen relates the little that is known of Marlowe's life with much care,
leaving all that he tells us of him beyond the region of doubt ; for with great pains
he has succeeded in verifying his statements. "

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W.C.

12 Publications of John C. Nimmo.

Jplbe J^lfrabetban

SOME PRESS NOTICES— continued.

Athenaeum.

"Mr. Bullen's edition deserves warm recognition. It is intelligent, scholarly,
adequate. His preface is judicious. The elegant edition of the dramatists of which
these volumes are the first is likely to stand high in public estimation. . . . The
completion of the series will be a boon to bibliographers and scholars alike."

Pall Mall Gazette.

"... Marlowe has indeed passed the age of simple eulogy, and has reached
that of comment. The task set before him by Mr. Bullen is that of supplying a
text which shall be as clear and intelligible as the conditions under which plays
were printed in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries render possible. In
this he has been successful. ... If the series is continued as it is begun, by one
of the most careful editors, this set of the English Dramatists will be a coveted
literary possession."

Notes and Queries.

"Passages of Marlowe are as nervous, as pliant, as perfect as anything in
Shakespeare or any succeeding writer. The same may be said of Marlowe's
dramatic inspiration. Much mirth has been made over the grandiloquence of his
early plays. None the less Marlowe is, in a sense, the most representative drama
tist of his epoch. . . . Appropriately, then, the series Mr. Bullen edits and Mr.
Nimmo issues in most attractive guise is headed by Marlowe, the leader, and in
some respects all but the mightiest spirit, of the great army of English Dramatists."

Illustrated London News.

" It is perhaps, a bold venture on the part of the publisher, or would be if he
had chosen an editor less competent than Mr. A. H. Bullen. Marlowe's power was
felt by Shakespeare, and felt also by Goethe ; and Mr. Bullen is not, perhaps, a
rash prophet in saying that, ' so long as high tragedy continues to have interest for
men, Time shall lay no hands on the works of Christopher Marlowe ! ' "

The Standard.

"Throughout Mr. Bullen has done his difficult work remarkably well, and the
publisher has produced it in a form which will make the edition of early dramatists
of which it is a part an almost indispensable addition to a well-stocked library."

The Quarterly Review. — October 1885.

' ' We gladly take this opportunity of directing attention to an edition of Marlowe's
complete works recently edited by Mr. A. H. Bullen. If the volumes which follow
are as carefully edited as this the first instalment of the series is, Mr. Bullen will be
conferring a great boon on all who are interested in the Early English Drama."

The Spectator.— October 17, 1885.

" Probably one of the boldest literary undertakings of our time, on the part of
publisher as well as editor, is the fine edition of the Dramatists which has been
placed in Mr. Bullen's careful hands ; considering the comprehensiveness of the
subject, and the variety of knowledge it demands, the courage of the editor is
remarkable."

The Antiquary.

" Mr. Swinburne calls Marlowe ' the greatest discoverer, the most daring and
inspired pioneer, in all our poetic literature.' "

Manchester Examiner.

"Not Shakespeare, not Milton, not Landor, not our own Tennyson, has
written lines more splendid in movement or more wealthy in sonorous music than
these, from ' The Tragical History of Dr. Faustus ' —

' Have I not made blind Homer sing to me
Of Alexander's love and ^Enon's death ?
And hath not he who built the walls of Thebes,
With ravishing sound of his melodious harp,
Made music with my Mephistophilis ? ' "

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W.C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo. 13

Uniform with " Characters of La Bruyere " and a " Handbook of
Gastronomy. "

Robin Hood:

A COLLECTION OF ALL THE ANCIENT POEMS, SONGS, AND F.ALLADS now
extant relative to that celebrated English Outlaw ;

To which are prefixed Historical Anecdotes of his Life.
By JOSEPH KITSON.

Illustrated with Eighty Wood Engravings by BEWICK, printed on China

Paper.

Also Ten Etchings from Original Paintings by A. II. TOURRIER
and E. BUCKMAN.

8vo, half parchment, gilt top, 423. net.

NOTE. — 300 copies printed, and each numbered. Also 100 copies on fine
imperial paper, with etchings in two states, and richly bound in Lincoln
Green Satin. Each copy numbered. Type distributed.

This edition of " ROBIN HOOD" is printed from that published in 1832,
which was carefully edited and printed from Mr. RITSON'S own annotated
edition of 1795.

The Guardian.

"This reprint of the Robin Hood ballads will be welcome to many who have
loved from childhood the rude romance of the famous outlaw ; it will not be the
less welcome to them by reason of its excellent paper and print and the reproduc
tion in China paper of Bewick's original woodcuts. A novel and interesting feature
of the book is the old musical settings which are appended to some of the songs."

Pall Mall Gazette.

*' Robin Hood has lived in the old ballads of England for many centuries ; his
own exploits and those of his merry men have been sung in every town ; the Eliza*
bet ban dramatists made him the hero of many of their plays. Southey proposed
to write an epic poem on him, Walter Scott delighted in him, Shakespeare brought
a faint echo of his life into 'As You Like It,' his bower is still carried through the
streets on the first of May, while Maid Marian dances on the pavement for pennies,
and still in the pleasant summer afternoons worthy tradesmen flock to the Crystal
Palace in doublets of Lincoln green, and with horns that won't blow and bows
that won't bend wander through the refreshment-room and the Pompeian Court
of that amazing structure in a laudable attempt to combine respectability and pic-
turesqueness."

Notes and Queries.

" The shape in which this work is presented is uniform with La Bruyere and
Brill at-Savarin, the appearance of which has already been noticed. Pickering's
edition of 1832, which contains the additions of Ritson and of his editor and
nephew, including the tale of Robin Hood and the Monk, the existence of whk-h
was ignored by Ritson, has been followed, and the woodcuts of Bewick have been
retained. These are now pnnted upon India paper, with a view of communicating
greater softness. To these indispensable illustrations have been added nine etch
ings which now first see the light, from original paintings by A. H. Tourrier and
E. Buckman. Some of these, which are also on India paper, are very spirited in
design and rich in execution. A handsomer edition of Ritson's Robin Hood, or a
more coveted possession to the bibliophile, is not to be expected."

The Literary World.

"Any who cherish a love for mediaeval lore will find much to delight
them in Ritson's Robin Hood, and an edition more desirable than the one Mr.
Nimmo has given us could hardly be demanded by the most fastidious of book
collectors. The print and paper superb, and the illustrations have all the fresh
ness of originals."

14 King William Sfreef, Strand, London, W.C.

14 Publications of John C. Nimmo.

A. B. FROST'S NEW ILLUSTRATED WORK.

100 Illustrations. Crown 8vo, cloth, gilt top, $s.

Rudder Grange.

By FRANK R. STOCKTON.

The new " Rudder Grange " has not been illustrated in a conventional way.
Mr. Frost has given us a series of interpretations of Mr. Stockton's fancies
which will delight every appreciative reader, — sketches scattered through the
text ; larger pictures of the many great and memorable events, and every-
where quaint ornaments and headpieces. It is, on the whole, one of the
best existing specimens of the complete supplementing of one another by
author and artist.

SOME PRESS NOTICES.

The Times. — " Many of the smaller drawings are wonderfully spirited ; there are sketchy
suggestions of scenery, which recall the pregnant touches of Bewick; and the figures of
animals and of human types are capital, from the row of roosting fowls at the beginning of
the chapter to the dilapidated tramp standing hat in hand. "

Scotsman. — " Externally it is an uncommonly pretty volume, and the pencil of Mr. A. B.
Frost has been employed to brighten its pages with a hundred capital illustrations."

Daily Telegraph. — " Allured by the graphic illustrations, no fewer than a hundred, which
the pencil of Mr. A. B. Frost has furnished, the reader who takes in hand Mr. Frank R.
Stockton's ' Rudder Grange ' will have no reason to regret the fascination, or to wish he had
resisted it ; altogether the book is full of quiet and humorous amusement. "

Morning Post. — " It will be welcomed in its new dress by many who have already made
the acquaintance of Euphemia and Pomona, as well as by many who will now meet those
excellent types of feminine character for the first time. "

Saturday Review. — " The new edition of ' Rudder Grange ' has a hundred illustrations by
Mr. A. B. Frost ; they are extremely good, and worthy of Mr. Stockton's amusing book."

Court and Society Review. — " After looking at the pictures we found ourselves reading the
book again, and enjoying Pomona and her reading, and her adventure with the lightning
rodder, and her dog-fight as much as ever. And to read it twice over is the greatest compli
ment you can pay to a book of American humour."

Figaro. — " The volume contains no less than a hundred illustrations large and small, all
charming, and what is even better, all appropriate. There is no doubt that it will be very
popular."

Society. — " Mr. Stockton's story is quaintly conceived and thoroughly American in style, the
characters being most amusing types, and Mr. Frost has provided a host of quaintly grotesque
illustrations, large and small, adding much to the intrinsic merit of the work."

Guardian. — "The illustrations by Mr. A. B. Frost to the new edition are extremely humorous
and the edition itself is handsome both in type and paper. No one who cares to know what
American humour is at its best should be without a copy of ' Rudder Grange. ' "

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo.

A VERY FUNNY ILLUSTRATED HUMOROUS BOOK.

Stuff and Nonsense.

By A. B. FROST,

The Illustrator of Stockton's " Rudder Grange."
Small 4to, illustrated boards, price 6s.

Mr. Frost has made a wonderfully amusing and clever book. There are
in all more than one hundred pictures, many with droll verses and ludicrous
jingles. Others are unaccompanied by any text, for no one knows better
than Mr. Frost how to tell a funny story, in the funniest way, with his artist's
pencil.

Standard. — " This is a book which will please equally people of all ages. The
illustrations are not only extremely funny, but they are drawn with wonderful
artistic ability, and are full of life and action.

"It is far and away the best book of ' Stuff and Nonsense ' which has appeared
for a long time."

Times. — " It is a most grotesque medley of mad ideas, carried out nevertheless
with a certain regard to consistency, if not to probability."

Figaro. — "The verses and jingles which accompany some of the illustrations
are excellent fooling, but Mr. Frost is also able to tell a ludicrous story with his
pencil only."

Press. — "The most facetious bit of wit that has been penned for many a day,
both in design and text, is Mr. A. B. Frost's 'Stuff and Nonsense.' 'A Tale of a
Cat* is funny, 'The Balloonists' is perhaps rather extravagant, but nothing can
outdo the wit of 'The Powers of the Human Eye,' whilst 'Ye ^Esthete, ye Boy,
and ye Bullfrog' may be described as a 'roarer.' Mr. Frost's pen and pencil know
how to chronicle fun, and their outcomes should not be overlooked."

Graphic. — " Grotesque in the extreme. His jokes will rouse many a laugh."

Daily News.— "There is really a marvellous abundance of fun in this volume
of a harmless kind."

Athenaeum.— "Clever sketches of grotesque incidents."

Literary World — " A hundred and twenty excruciatingly funny sketches."

CONTENTS.

The Fatal Mistake— A Tale of a Cat.
Ye Esthete, ye Boy, and ye Bullfrog.
The Balloonists.
The Powers of the Human Eye.
The Crab-Boy and His Elephant.
The Old Man of Moriches.
The Bald-headed Man.
The Mule and the Crackers.
The Influence of Kindness.
Bobby and the Little Green Apples.
The Awful Comet.
The Tug of War.
The Ironical Flamingo.

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W.C.

1 6 Publications of John C. Nimmo.

LI M ITED EDITIONS

OF

The Two Guinea Half-Bound Parchment
Series of Choice Works.

A Handbook of Gastronomy.

(BRILLAT-SAVARIN'S "Physiologic du Gout.") New and Complete Trans
lation, with 52 original Etchings by A. LALAUZE. Printed on China
Paper. 8vo, half parchment, gilt top, 423. net.
NOTE. — 300 copies printed, and each numbered. Type distributed.

[Out of print.

The Characters of Jean de La Bruyere.

NEWLY RENDERED INTO ENGLISH. With an Introduction, Biographical
Memoir, and Copious Notes, by HENRI VAN LAUN. With Seven
Etched Portraits by B. DAMMAN, and Seventeen Vignettes etched by V.
FOULQUIER, and printed on China paper. 8vo, half parchment, gilt top,
423. net.
NOTE. — 300 copies printed, and each numbered. Type distributed.

[Out of print.

The Complete Angler;

OR, THE CONTEMPLATIVE MAN'S RECREATION, of IZAAK WALTON and
CHARLES COTTON. Edited by JOHN MAJOR. A New Edition, with 8
original Etchings (2 Portraits and 6 Vignettes), two impressions of each,
one on Japanese and one on Whatman paper ; also, 74 Engravings on
Wood, printed on China Paper throughout the text. 8vo, cloth or half
parchment elegant, gilt top, 313. 6d. net.

NOTE. — 500 copies printed.

[Out of print.

Robin Hood:

A COLLECTION OF ALL THE ANCIENT POEMS, SONGS, AND BALLADS now
extant relative to that celebrated English Outlaw ; to which are prefixed
Historical Anecdotes of his Life. By JOSEPH RITSON. Illustrated with
Eighty Wood Engravings by BEWICK, printed on China paper. Also
Ten Etchings from Original Paintings by A. H. TOURRIER and E.
BUCKMAN. 8vo, half parchment, gilt top, 423. net.

NOTE. — 300 copies printed, and each numbered. Also 100 copies on fine
imperial paper, with etchings in two states, and richly bound in Lincoln
Green Satin. Each copy numbered. Type distributed.

This edition of " ROBIN HOOD" is printed from that published in 1832,
which was carefully edited and printed from Mr. RITSON'S own annotated
edition of 1795.

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo. 17

Carols and Poems

FROM THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY TO THE PRESENT TIME.
Edited by A. H. BULLEN, B.A.

Post 8vo, cloth, elegant gilt top, price 55.

NOTE.— 120 copies printed on fine medium 8vo paper, with Seven
Illustrations on Japanese paper. Each copy numbered.

Saturday Review.

"Since the publication of Mr. Sandys' collection there have been many books
issued on carols, but the most complete by far that we have met with is Mr. Bullen's
new volume, ' Carols and Poems from the Fifteenth Century to the Present Time. '
The preface contains an interesting account of Christmas festivities and the use of
carols. Mr. Bullen has exercised great care in verifying and correcting the collec
tions of his predecessors, and he has joined to them two modern poems by Hawker,
two by Mr. William Morris, and others by Mr. Swinburne, Mr. Symonds, and Miss
Rossetti. No one has been more successful than Mr. Morris in imitating the ancient
carol : —

' Outlanders, whence come ye last ?

The snow in the street and the wind on the door.
Through what green sea and great have ye past ?

Minstrels and maids stand forth on the floor.'
Altogether this is one of the most welcome books of the season. "

Morning Post.

" Good Christian people all, and more especially those of artistic or poetic inclina
tions, will feel indebted to the editor and publisher of this fascinating volume, which,
bound as it is in elegant cloth, ornamented with sprigs of holly, may fairly claim to
be considered par excellence the gift-book of the season. ' Carols and Poems ' are
supplemented by voluminous and interesting notes by the editor, who also contributes
some very graceful dedicatory verses."

Spectator.

" Mr. Bullen divides his 'Carols and Poems from the Fifteenth Century to the
Present Time' into three parts — 'Christmas Chants and Carols,' ' Carmina Sacra,'
and ' Christmas Customs and Christmas Cheer. ' These make up together between
seventy and eighty poems of one kind and another. The selection has been carefully
made from a wide range of authors. Indeed, it is curious to see the very mixed
company which the subject of Christmas has brought together — as, indeed, it is quite
right that it should. Altogether the result is a very interesting book."
Notes and Queries.

" Mr. Bullen does not indeed pretend to cater for those who regard carols from
a purely antiquarian point of view. His book is intended to be popular rather than
scholarly. Scholarly none the less it is, and representative also, including as it does
every form of Christmas strain, from early mysteries down to poems so modern as not
previously to have seen the light. "

The Times.

" Is very exceptionally a Christmas book, and a book at which we may cut and
come again through this sentimentally festive season. It forms a ' Christmas Garland '
of the sweetest or the quaintest carols, ancient and modern."

Athenaeum.

"Is an excellent collection of ancient and modern verse, mostly religious and
sentimental, formed with much learning, research, and taste by Mr. A. H. Bullen."

Illustrated London News.

' ' The atmosphere of these plain-speaking songs is of the rarest purity. They come
from the heart, and appeal to it, when the way is not choked up by the thorns and briers
of conventional propriety. The reader accustomed to more artificial strains may not
see the beauty of these songs at first, but it will grow upon him by degrees ; and
possibly he will look with something like regret to the old-world days when verses so
pure and quaint were household words in England."

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W.C.

1 8 Publications of John C. Nimmo.

d>lJ> Jgfpanisb

;Hjpmance0 of JKantae? anb Rumour,

Illustrated with Etchings, crown 8vo, parchment boards or cloth,
75. 6d. per vol.

The Times.

" Among the numerous handsome reprints which the publishers of the day vie
with each other in producing, we have seen nothing of greater merit than this
series of volumes. Those who have read these masterpieces of the last century in
the homely garb of the old editions may be gratified with the opportunity of perusing
them with the advantages of large clear print and illustrations of a quality which is
rarely bestowed on such reissues. The series deserve every commendation."

THE HISTORY OF DON QUIXOTE DE LA MANCHA.

Translated from the Spanish of MIGUEL DE CERVANTES SAAVEDRA by
MOTTEUX. With copious Notes (including the Spanish Ballads), and
an Essay on the Life and Writings of CERVANTES by JOHN G. LOCK-
HART. Preceded by a Short Notice of the Life and Works of PETER
ANTHONY MOTTEUX by HENRI VAN LAUN. Illustrated with Sixteen
Original Etchings by R. DE Los Rios. Four Volumes.

LAZARILLO DE TORMES. By Don DIEGO MENDOZA. Trans
lated by THOMAS ROSCOE. And GUZMAN D'AL FAR ACHE.
By MATEO ALEMAN. Translated by BRADY. Illustrated with Eight
Original Etchings by R. DE Los Rios. Two Volumes.

ASMODEUS. By LE SAGE. Translated from the French. Illustrated
with Four Original Etchings by R. DE Los Rios.

THE BACHELOR OF SALAMANCA. By LE SAGE. Translated
from the French by JAMES TOWNSEND. Illustrated with Four Original
Etchings by R. DE Los Rios.

VANILLO GONZALES; or, The Merry Bachelor. By LE SAGE.
Translated from the French. Illustrated with Four Original Etchings
by R. DE Los Rios.

THE ADVENTURES OF GIL BLAS OF SANTILLANE.
Translated from the French of LE SAGE by TOBIAS SMOLLETT. With
Biographical and Critical Notice of LE SAGE by GEORGE SAINTSBURY.
New Edition, carefully revised. Illustrated with Twelve Original Etch
ings by R. DE Los Rios. Three Volumes. .

THE LIFE AND OPINIONS OF TRISTRAM SHANDY,
GENTLEMAN. By LAURENCE STERNE. In Two Vols. With Eight
Etchings by DAMMAN from Original Drawings by HARRY FURNISS.

THE OLD ENGLISH BARON: A GOTHIC STORY. By CLARA
REEVE. THE CASTLE OF OTRANTO : A GOTHIC STORY.
By HORACE WALPOLE. In One Vol. With Two Portraits and Four
Original Drawings by A. H. TOURRIER, Etched by DAMMAN.

THE ARABIAN NIGHTS ENTERTAINMENTS. In Four
Vols. Carefully Revised and Corrected from the Arabic by JONATHAN
SCOTT, LLD., Oxford. With Nineteen Original Etchings by AD.
LALAUZE.

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W.C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo. 19

ILLUSTRATED ROMANCE SERIES— continued.

THE HISTORY OF THE CALIPH VATHEK. By WM.

BECKFORD. With Notes, Critical and Explanatory. RASSELAS,
PRINCE OF ABYSSINIA. By SAMUEL JOHNSON. In One Vol.
With Portrait of BECKFORD, and Four Original Etchings, designed by
A. H. TOURRIER, and Etched by DAMMAN.

ROBINSON CRUSpE. By DANIEL DEFOE. In Two Vols. With
Biographical Memoir, Illustrative Notes, and Eight Etchings by M.
MOUILLERON, and Portrait by L. FLAMENG.

GULLIVER'S TRAVELS. By JONATHAN SWIFT. With Five
Etchings and Portrait by AD. LALAUZE.

A SENTIMENTAL JOURNEY. By LAURENCE STERNE. A
TALE OF A TUB. By JONATHAN SWIFT. In One Vol. With
Five Etchings and Portrait by ED. HEDOUIN.

THE TALES AND POEMS OF EDGAR ALLAN POE.

With Biographical Essay by JOHN H. INGRAM, and Fourteen Original
Etchings, Three Photogravures, and a Portrait newly etched from a life
like Daguerreotype of the Author. In Four Volumes.

WEIRD TALES. By E. T. W. HOFFMAN. A New Translation
from the German. With Biographical Memoir by J. T. BEALBY, for
merly Scholar of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. With Portrait and
Ten Original Etchings by AD. LALAUZE. In Two Volumes.

Imperial 8vo, Extra Illustrated Edition of

The Complete Angler;

OR, THE CONTEMPLATIVE MAN'S RECREATION OF
IZAAK WALTON AND CHARLES COTTON.

Edited by JOHN MAJOR.

Full bound morocco elegant (Zaehnsdorf's binding), price Five Guineas net.

This Extra-illustrated Edition of THE COMPLETE ANGLER is specially
designed for Collectors of this famous work ; and in order to enable them
either to take from or add to the Illustrations, it is also supplied unbound,
folded and collated.

The Illustrations consist of Fifty Steel Places, designed by T. STOT-
HARD, R.A., JAMES INSKIP, EDWARD HASSELL, DELAMOTTE, BINKEN-
BOOM, W. HIXON, SIR FRANCIS SYKES, Bart., PINE, &c. &c., and engraved
by well-known Engravers. Also Six Original Etchings and Two Portraits,
as well as Seventy-four Engravings on Wood by various Eminent Artists.

To this is added a PRACTICAL TREATISE on FLIES and FLY HOOKS,
by the late JOHN JACKSON, of Tanfield Mill, with Ten Steel Plates, coloured,
representing 120 Flies, natural and artificial.

One Hundred and Twenty copies only are printed, each of which is numbered.
14 King William Street ', Strand, London, W.C.

2O Publications of John C. Nimmo.

The Fan. By OCTAVE UZANNE.

ILLUSTRATED WITH DESIGNS BY PAUL AVRIL.

Royal 8vo, cloth, gilt top, 315. 6d. net.
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV^VVVV^

The Sunshade — The Glove — The Muff.

By OCTAVE UZANNE.

ILLUSTRATED WITH DESIGNS BY PAUL AVRIL.

Royal 8vo, cloth, gilt top, 315. 6d. net.

NOTE. — The above are English Editions of the unique and artistic works,
" L'Eventail" and " L'Ombrelle" recently published in Paris, and now difficult
to be procured, as no new Edition is to be produced, jjoo copies only are printed.

Saturday Review.

"An English counterpart of the well-known French books by Octave Uzanne,
with Paul Avril's charming illustrations."

Standard.

"It gives a complete history of fans of all ages and places ; the illustrations are
dainty in the extreme. Those who wish to make a pretty and appropriate present
to a young lady cannot do better than purchase ' The Fan.' "

Athenaeum.

" The letterpress comprises much amusing ' chit-chat,' and is more solid than it
pretends to be. This brochure is worth reading ; nay, it is worth keeping."

Art Journal.

' ' At first sight it would seem that material could never be found to fill even a
volume ; but the author, in dealing with his first subject alone, 'The Sunshade,'
says he could easily have filled a dozen volumes of this emblem of sovereignty.
The work is delightfully illustrated in a novel manner by Paul Avril, the pictures
which meander about the work being printed in varied colours."

Daily News.

" The pretty adornments of the margin of these artistic volumes, the numerous
ornamental designs, and the pleasant vein of the author's running commentary,
render these the most attractive monographs ever published on a theme which in
terests so many enthusiastic collectors."

Glasgow Herald.

" ' I have but collected a heap of foreign flowers, and brought of my own only
the string which binds them together,' is the fitting quotation with which M. Uzanne
closes the preface to his volume on woman's ornaments. The monograph on the
sunshade, called by the author ' a little tumbled fantasy,' occupies fully one-half of
the volume. It begins with a pleasant invented mythology of the parasol ; glances
at the sunshade in all countries and times ; mentions many famous umbrellas : quotes
a number of clever sayings. ... To these remarks on the spirit of the book it is
necessary to add that the body of it is a dainty marvel of paper, type, and binding,
and that what meaning it has looks out on the reader through a hundred argus-eyes
of many- tinted photogravures, exquisitely designed by M. Paul Avril."

Westminster Review.

" The most striking merit of the book is the entire appropriateness both of the
letterpress and illustrations to the subject treated. M. Uzanne' s style has all the
airy grace and sparkling brilliancy of the petit instrument whose praise he cele
brates, and M. Arvil's drawings seem to conduct us into an enchanted world where
everything but fans are forgotten."

14 King William Street ', Strand^ London^ W. C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo. 21

Copyright Edition, with Ten Etched Portraits. In Ten Vols., demy 8vo,
cloth, £5, 55.

Lingard's History of England.

FROM THE FIRST INVASION BY THE ROMANS TO THE
ACCESSION OF WILLIAM AND MARY IN 1688.

By JOHN LINGARD, D.D.

This New Copyright Library Edition of " Lingard's History of England,"
besides containing all the latest notes and emendations of the Author, with
Memoir, is enriched with Ten Portraits, newly etched by Damman, of the
following personages, viz. : — Dr. Lingard, Edward I., Edward III., Cardinal
Wolsey, Cardinal Pole, Elizabeth, James I., Cromwell, Charles II.,
James II.

The Times.

"No greater service can be rendered to literature than the republication, in a
handsome and attractive form, of works which time and the continued approbation
of the world have made classical. . . . The accuracy of Lingard's statements on
many points of controversy, as well as the genial sobriety of his view, is now
recognised."

The Tablet.

"It is with the greatest satisfaction that we welcome this new edition of Dr.
Lingard's ' History of England.' It has long been a desideratum. . . . No
general history of England has appeared which can at all supply the place of
Lingard, whose painstaking industry and careful research have dispelled many a
popular delusion, whose candour always carries his reader with him, and whose
clear and even style is never fatiguing."

The Spectator.

" We are glad to see that the demand for Dr. Lingard's England still continues.
Few histories give the reader the same impression of exhaustive study. This new
edition is excellently printed, and illustrated with ten portraits of the greatest per
sonages in our history."

Dublin Review.

" It is pleasant to notice that the demand for Lingard continues to be such that
publishers venture on a well-got-up library edition like the one before us. More than
sixty years have gone since the first volume of the first edition was published ; many
equally pretentious histories have appeared during that space, and have more or less
disappeared since, yet Lingard lives — is still a recognised and respected authority."

The Scotsman.

" There is no need, at this time of day, to say anything in'vindication of the im
portance, as a standard work, of Dr. Lingard's ' History of England.' ... Its
intrinsic merits are very great. The style is lucid, pointed, and puts no strain upon
the reader ; and the printer and publisher have neglected nothing that could make
this — what it is likely long to remain — the standard edition of a work of great
historical and literary value."

Daily Telegraph.

" True learning, untiring research, a philosophic temper, and the possession of
a graphic, pleasing style were the qualities which the author brought to his task,
and they are displayed in every chapter of his history."

Weekly Register.

' ' In the full force of the word a scholarly book. Lingard's history is destined to
bear a part of growing importance in English education."

Manchester Examiner.

" He stands alone in his own school ; he is the only representative of his own
phase of thought. The critical reader will do well to compare him with those who
went before and those who came after him."

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W.C.

22 Publications of John C. Nimmo.

Imaginary Conversations.

By WALTER SAVAGE LANDOR.

In Five Vols. crown 8vo, cloth, 303.

FIRST SERIES — CLASSICAL DIALOGUES, GREEK AND ROMAN.
SECOND SERIES— DIALOGUES OF SOVEREIGNS AND STATESMEN.
THIRD SERIES — DIALOGUES OF LITERARY MEN.
FOURTH SERIES — DIALOGUES OF FAMOUS WOMEN.
FIFTH SERIES — MISCELLANEOUS DIALOGUES.

NOTE.— This New Edition is printed from the last Edition of his Works ,
revised and edited by John Forster, and is published by arrangement wit h the
Proprietors of the Copyright of Walter Savage Landor's Works.

The Times.

"The abiding character of the interest excited by the writings of Walter Savage
Landor, and the existence of a numerous band of votaries at the shrine of his
refined genius, have been lately evidenced by the appearance of the most remark
able of Landor's productions, his 'Imaginary Conversations,' taken from the last
edition of his works. To have them in a separate publication will be convenient
to a great number of readers."

The Athenaeum.

"The appearance of this tasteful reprint would seem to indicate that the present
generation is at last waking up to the fact that it has neglected a great writer, and
if so, it is well to begin with Landor's most adequate work. It is difficult to over
praise the ' Imaginary Conversations.' The eulogiums bestowed on the 'Conver
sations ' by Emerson will, it is to be hoped, lead many to buy this book."

Scotsman.

"An excellent service has been done to the reading public by presenting to it, in
five compact volumes, these 'Conversations.' Admirably printed on good paper,
the volumes are handy in shape, and indeed the edition is all that could be desired.
When this has been said, it will be understood what a boon has been conferred on
the reading public ; and it should enable many comparatively poor men to enrich
their libraries with a work that will have an enduring interest."

Literary World.

"That the ' Imaginary Conversations ' of Walter Savage Landor are not better
known is no doubt largely due to their inaccessibility to most readers, by reason of
their cost. This new issue, while handsome enough to find a place in the best of
libraries, is not beyond the reach of the ordinary bookbuyer."

Edinburgh Review.

" How rich in scholarship ! how correct, concise, and pure in style ! how full of
imagination, wit, and humour ! how well informed, how bold in speculation, how
various in interest, how universal in sympathy ! In these dialogues — making
allowance for every shortcoming or excess — the most familiar and the most august
shapes of the past are reanimated with vigour, grace, and beauty. We are in the
high and goodly company of wits and men of letters ; of churchmen, lawyers, and
statesmen ; of party men, soldiers, and kings ; of the most tender, delicate, and
noble women ; and of figures that seem this instant to have left for us the Agora or
the Schools of Athens, the Forum or the Senate of Rome."

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W.C.

Publications of John C. Nimmo. 23

In One Volume, 8vo, cloth, price 73. 6d.

The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles

(AIAAXH TflN AflAEKA AIIOSTOAfiN).

Recently Discovered and Published by PHILOTHEOS BRYENNIOS, Metropolitan

of Nicomedia.
Edited, with a Translation, Introduction, and Notes, by ROSWELL D.

HITCHCOCK and FRANCIS BROWN,

Professors in Union Theological Seminary^ New York,

Revised and Enlarged.

Extract from the Preface.

" Among the special features of this edition may be noticed the discussions as
to the integrity of the text ; as to the relations between the ' Teaching ' and other
early Christian documents, with translations of these in extenso, so far as seemed
desirable for purposes of comparison ; the presentation, entire, with annotations,
of Kramutzcky's now famous reproduction of ' The Two Ways ; ' the sections on
the peculiarities of the Codex, the printed texts, and the recent literature ; and the
care expended on the history of the characteristic Greek words 'of the Teaching.'

"The editors feel sure that continued study will only add to the interest felt by
scholars in this unique product of early Christianity, and enhance their estimate of
its importance."

Westminster Review.

"This enlargement of the hastily prepared edition brought out last year by the
same editors seems to us one of the most complete and valuable of the numerous
commentaries on the ' Teaching.' The matter of the discourse need not again be
dealt with ; it may suffice to say that these introductions and notes show thoroughly
sound and scholarly work, and the reproduction of the conjectural restoration of
4 The Two Ways ' by Kramutzcky, with which our editors incline to identify the
document, may be read with interest, even by non-theologians, as a justification of
'reconstructive criticism.' The commentary, too, though mainly for experts, may
he read with profit by any who are interested in scholarship. We cordially welcome
this new evidence of the activity of America in theological learning."

Spectator.

" Of the several editions of the ' Teaching ' none is more worthy of the student's
attention than this. A very full introduction gives an account of this very remark
able work of Christian antiquity (certainly the first in intrinsic value of the sub-
Apostolic writings), of the circumstances of its discovery, &c. Then follows, first,
the text, with a translation on the opposite pages, then notes, and then an
appendix "

The Scotsman.

"There are few literary discoveries of recent years which have been so interest
ing to ecclesiastical scholars, or which have aroused more discussion, than that by
Bryennios, Metropolitan of Nicomedia, of a manuscript in the library of the
Monastery of the Holy Sepulchre in Constantinople. Found in 1873, it was pub
lished in 1883, and for the first time scholars became acquainted with a work
which they had seen tantalisingly referred to, quoted, and used by early Christian
writers."

The Bookseller.

" If genuine, and apparently there is no reason to doubt its being so, this is one
of che most important documents connected with historical theology that has been
discovered for many years. It professes to be a summary of the Christian religion
as taught by the Apostles themselves. ... If the editors be correct in their con
jectures, the * Teaching ' must have been written about the end of the first century
or very early in the second."

14 King William Street, Strand, London, W.C.

0

BINDING SECT. MAY 1 3 1970

Fleay, Frederick Card

A chronicle history of the
life and work of Willaim
Shakespeare

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY