Two extant traditions bearing on the subject, being ill authenticated, are of little biographical value, except perhaps as reflections of contemporary tavern gossip. One of these, recounting the joke played upon his fellow-actor, Burbage—the only anecdote now known to have been related of Shakespeare in his lifetime—was considered by Manningham to be worthy of record in his diary. The second, the Davenant scandal, may be regarded as the revival of an ancient jest, which, with a change in the names of persons and places, served to amuse successive generations. It was perhaps connected with Shakespeare's name by the wits of his day upon a report that he was William Davenant's godfather and during his visits to Oxford had a preference for the comfort and jovial company to be found at the Crown Tavern.2 Sir William Davenant's boast, contemptible enough if he meant blood-relationship, that he was Shakespeare's son, has also given some colour to the story. The particular reasons given for the supposed discords of Shakespeare's married life are insufficient. In the absence of clearer evidence of offence on his part or on that of his wife it would be unfair to both to take the assumed facts for granted or to place much reliance upon the inferences drawn from them.

There seems little doubt that Shakespeare barred his wife's dower as far as he could; but, as has been suggested by Halliwell-Phillipps,5 the state of her health may have rendered it necessary that she should be relieved from the care of the management of property. The apparent insignificance of the only bequest made by Shakespeare to his wife and its interlineation in the will, as if an afterthought, are open to comment; but the explanation that in his lifetime full provision had been made for her comfort will commend itself as open to no objection which can be based upon our knowledge of the facts. It is difficult to believe that the bequest of the 1 Diary of John Manningham, Edited by John Bruce for the Camden Society, p. 39.

2 Formerly 3 Cornmarket Street, near Carfax. Sidney Lee, Life, p. 31. 3 See Appendix, No. I. Also Outlines, i. 215–8.

Sidney Lee, Life, p. 274.

See a letter from Halliwell-Phillipps to Karl Elze in Shakespeariana (New York), vii. 17-8.

SHAKESPEARE'S RELIGION

141

"second best bed" was intended for a slight, as is sometimes asserted. Even if feelings of dislike had been rankling in his mind, it is questionable whether he would have adopted such a contemptible method of expressing them. The only tradition which indicates Anne Shakespeare's opinion of or regard for her husband is that she "greatly desired to be buried with him." That she played with some discretion her difficult part in a life-partnership with a man of genius is indicated by the probability that if she had been Katherine's prototype her name would have figured more prominently in the traditions preserved at Stratford. Her interpretation of the references in her husband's works which their relationship is supposed to have inspired could not have been that of some modern commentators. A woman of a shrewish or jealous temper, a fault to which their supposed estrangement has been attributed, would not have remained content in the Stratford home while her husband enjoyed life under conditions little calculated to assure her of his fidelity.

There is nothing in Shakespeare's writings to support the contention that his early religious training had made him either a Roman Catholic or a Puritan, and no trustworthy information has been obtained from any other source. The allusion to his faith in the prefatory sentences of his will, which were those in common use after the Reformation, could have been consistently used by Puritan or Prelatist. The Revd. Richard Davies, a minister of the Church of England, who wrote before the year 1708, made the definite statement that Shakespeare "dyed a Papist." This is unsupported by any evidence now available; but it may have been based upon some local tradition of a death-bed act or request prompted by such a re-awakening of early impressions as sometimes precedes dissolution. Absolutely nothing is known as to how much or what part of the religion taught him in the Henley Street home was retained or professed in after 1 Dowdall. See Appendix, No. XXX.

2 The Taming of the Shrew.

3 Compare with the exordium of the will of Robert Arden, Appendix, No. XXXV.

years. He appears to have held himself aloof from the religious intrigues and dissensions of his day, his broad mental outlook disposing him to give little heed to matters of doctrine and to regard the contending sects with good-natured tolerance. His familiarity with the language of the English Bible has been used as an argument against a Roman Catholic training; but no book to which he had access would have long remained closed to him.

In the conduct of the practical affairs of life he seems to have subordinated his genius to the attainment of objects among which the making of a great name in literature formed an insignificant part, although the publication of poems in his own name shows that he was not insensible to the fame they might bring. His supposed indifference to the fate of his plays and neglect of his financial interest in them appears to be inconsistent with his business habits. If, as is probable, the plays became the property of his company, his own share must have been disposed of before his death, for it is not mentioned in the will. That the plays, apart from their stage use, were even then of value is evident from the eagerness with which unauthorized publication was made in his lifetime; and it is strange that his influence as a prominent member of the company was not exercised more effectively to prevent this under the laws then in force, as in the case of some of the plays entered in the registers of the Stationers' Company. Intentions which, if carried out, would have given us more perfect examples of his workmanship may have been frustrated by his premature death.

Some of his traits, both real and imaginary, are considered to be out of character with his intellectual greatness, and much has been made of his appearance in the Stratford Court of Record in the character of suitor; but poets are not usuallythere is no reason why they should be-less tenacious of their rights than others. There is no more incongruity in the greatest of them seeking the aid of the law to recover an overdue malt account than, when engaged upon one of his masterpieces, considering the tastes of the less refined of playgoers with

CONTEMPORARY NOTICES

143

a shrewd anticipation of the financial results. He shared with Richard Burbage and Edward Alleyn the business ability that enabled them to amass wealth by catering for the amusement of the public. Lyric and epic poetry were probably neglected for this more profitable occupation, and indulged in merely as a pastime, or out of deference to the prevailing fashion of writing sonnets.

Beyond some little adverse criticism due to professional jealousy, the contemporary comments upon Shakespeare were in his favour. Ben Jonson, not always an indulgent critic,1 paid a tribute which is of peculiar value on account of the personal knowledge which gave him the right to speak with authority. He affords us one of the very rare occasions upon which we are allowed to gain a clear view of Shakespeare's personality. In his "Timber or Discoveries made upon Men and Matter" Jonson wrote: "for I lov'd the man, and doe honour his memory, on this side idolatry, as much as any. Hee was, indeed, honest, and of an open and free nature; had an excellent phantsie; brave notions and gentle expressions; wherein hee flow'd with that facility that sometime it was necessary he should be stop'd; . . . But hee redeemed his vices with his vertues. There was ever more in him to be

praysed than to be pardoned."

F. Manning (Poems, 1701, p. 28) thus refers to him :—

IX

A CHRONICLE-1552 TO 1670

THE foregoing references to incidents in the life of Shakespeare having been interrupted by comment and arranged without regard to the order of their occurrence, the following summary of events, which can be verified by reference to contemporary documents, is presented for the use of readers who prefer to have the facts without comment or conjecture and in their proper sequence. The chronicle commences with the earliest known reference to a Shakespeare in connection with Stratford-upon-Avon and ends with the burial of Elizabeth Barnard, the poet's grand-daughter and last lineal descendant.

Mr. Richard Savage has kindly verified the information relating to John Shakespeare, as a member of the Corporation, which is recorded in the Miscellaneous Documents or in Council Book A. The dates of baptisms, marriages, and burials are taken, unless otherwise specified, from the transcript of the Stratfordupon-Avon parish register, edited by Mr. Savage, or from his MS. notes. The particulars of proceedings in the local Court of Record are from Selected Extracts from the Ancient Registry of the Causes by Halliwell-Phillipps. The proceedings of the Corporation and the Court of Record are preserved in the Record Room at Shakespeare's Birthplace. The dates of entry of the poems and plays are taken from Dr. Arber's Transcripts. References to Shakespeare by contemporary writers are given in brief extracts :