Skip to content

Chapter VI: Section III (2)

Text size

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 imprisonment 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).

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 _Wit's Miserv_, 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 11 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 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. Burbadge on the preceding February 4. The petition was ineffectual.

Shakespeare's play _The Merchant of Venice_, sometimes 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 lacunæ 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. 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 appointed 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 _1_ 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 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 Drayton'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 _1 Henry IV._ and _2 Henry IV._ The words "tickle your catastrophe" in the latter are more likely to be an allusion to the "gag" in the _Merry Devil_ than conversely; 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 possible that in a hitherto unexplained passage there may be a trace of Oldcastle as Drayton's original 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 III._ 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 performance. 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 Bristol (in September), &c. Pembroke's company were at these places, but he has given no proof that the Chamberlain's were. The "Curtain-plaudities" 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.

1598.

On January 24 Abraham Sturley wrote to Richard Quiney urging him to persuade Shakespeare 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 _1 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' _Palladis 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 enumeration of his plays, the lists of tragic and comic dramatists, and this passage, which I shall have to refer to hereafter. "As the soul of Euphorbus 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 completed for the press till June 1598, and an examination 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_--tragedies. 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. 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 affirmative 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.

1599.

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.

In this year _The Passionate Pilgrim_, "by W. Shakespeare," was imprinted by Jaggard. It contains 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 leaving the Chamberlain's men immediately after it to continue his strictures on Dekker, &c., at Blackfriars 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_ 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 1601; 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 personalities 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 Shakespeare 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.

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 fortnight. 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 Shakespeare 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 "Oldcastle" 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 interesting. 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 14th, _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 Shakespeare." On the 11th 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 satirical nature of the plays. _As You Like It_ was not printed; _Henry V._ was printed in an incomplete form[7] without license; while the emphatic mention 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, 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 previous 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 "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 previously prints a slightly differing copy on his own account. He makes with Fisher, the publisher of the other play, a somewhat similar transaction.

There were three Court performances this Christmas 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 _3 Henry VI._ were probably revised and revived at the Globe about this time.

1601.

In this year _All's 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.

In the same year 1601, a poem by Shakespeare appeared along with others by Jonson, Marston, and Chapman in R. Chester's _Love's Martyr, or Rosalin's 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 company 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 11th 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 conspirators" (Camden). From Bacon's speech (_State 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. 1, the acted play of 1601 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 company incurred the serious displeasure of the Queen. Accordingly, they did not perform at Court at Christmas 1601-2;[8] and we find them travelling in Scotland instead--L. Fletcher with his company of players being traceable at Aberdeen in October. 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., 11th August 1602, "as lately acted."

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

1602.

On 18th 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 19th April _1_ and _2 Henry VI._ (evidently the Quarto plays on which _2_ and _3 Henry VI._ were founded) were assigned by Millington to Pavier, _salvo jure cujuscumque_, S. R. This entry is important. 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 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 11 _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.

March 24. THE QUEEN DIED.

On 19th 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 objectionable 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 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 Hampton Court before the King on December 26, 27, 28, January 1 [? December 29]; before the Prince, December 30, January 1; 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 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 extraordinary 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 15th 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 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 1601 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 inhibition 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 reappointed 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 30th January 1604. The King's men acted at Court 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 children 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 obtained in some indirect manner from these Blackfriars 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 Chamberlain's men. The curious thing about the transaction is that the _Malcontent_ was originally produced in 1601, 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 18th December a letter from Chamberlain to 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 1 _The Moor of Venice_; November 4, _The Merry Wives of Windsor_; December 28, _Measure for Measure_, and _Errors_; ["Between January 1 and January 5" in the forged copy of this entry still extant][9] _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 11, _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 _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 Stratford against one Philip Rogers for £1 15s. 10d., 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 Christmas 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 13th. In it he leaves 30s. each to Shakespeare and Condell, and 20s. each to Fletcher, Armin, Cowley, Cook, and Tooley, all his fellows; to Beeston, "his servant," 30s.; to Gilburne, his "late apprentice," 40s. and clothes; to James Sandes, "his apprentice," 40s. and musical instruments; to Hemings, Burbadge, and Sly, overseers and executors, a bowl of silver of £5 apiece.

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.

Jonson'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 Stratford, Bishopton, and Welcombe for £440, subject to a rent payable to the corporation of £17, and £5 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.

_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 Davenant 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 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 performed 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.

1607.

_Anthony and Cleopatra_ must have been acted about this time, as well as Cyril Tourneur's _Revenger'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 reprinted 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 authorship is ascribed to T[homas] 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.

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 authorship 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 surreptitiously (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 unprinted play and by the same author, is unparalleled in the history of Shakespearean drama. It must be remembered that Wilkins was not even connected 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. 15th 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 "late 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 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 separation.

On 16th October he was godfather to William Walker at Stratford.

In this autumn _Coriolanus_ was probably produced.

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 withdrawn 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 production 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 £1, 4s. costs was given in favour of Shakespeare against John Addenbroke for debt, and execution issued. This suit began in August 1608; the precept for a jury is dated 21st December, when an adjournment of the trial probably took place. After the final judgment Addenbroke was _non inventus_, and on 7th 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 20th 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 20th May 1608 had been entered _Pericles_, and _Antony and Cleopatra_, which were not published by Blount, who made the entry. _Pericles_, however, was printed surreptitiously in 1609 for another firm as we have it in the Quarto. This play was 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.[10] Accordingly they arranged to purchase at Lady Day the remainder of Evans' lease of the Blackfriars (they had already taken the boys, "now growing up to be men," Underwood,[11] Ostler, &c., to "strengthen the King's service"), and to place men players--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. 111), 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 increased 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 from theatrical work. Malone's hypothesis that Sir W. Herbert's mention of Sir G. Buck's "allowing" the former play implies a date subsequent to August 1610, is worthless; Buck had the "allowing" of plays in his hands from 1607 onwards. There is direct evidence that the Blackfriars Theatre was occupied even after 1611 by other companies. Field's _Amends for Ladies_ was acted there by the Prince's and the Lady Elizabeth'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 ascertain that J. Burbadge bought that property 4th February 1596; that in November the establishment 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, probably 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 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 _Maiden's 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 company 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 company that explains Shakespeare's accumulation of property; and it is to me incredible that _Macbeth_, _The Winter's 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_, 20th April 1610 [1611]; _Richard II._, 30th 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 unprecedented 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 11 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 prosecuting the bill in Parliament for the better repair of the highways." This appears to confirm the view 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 1, 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 compl^{ts.}" 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 Woman's Prize_, _Cardenno_ (_i.e._, _Cardenes, or Loves 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 "certain amorous Sonnets between Venus and Adonis," by W. Shakespeare; "whereunto is added two love epistles" between Paris and Helen. These were stolen from Heywood'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 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 Fools_, _Much Ado about Nothing_, _The Maid's Tragedy_, _The Merry Devil of Edmonton_, _The Tempest_, _A King and no King_, _The Twins' 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_ (? _All's 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_ (_1 Henry IV._), _Benedicte and Betteris_ (_Much Ado about Nothing_), before the King. See Stanhope's Accounts (Halliwell, _Outlines_, p. 597, third edition, and _Revels Accounts_, p. xxiii.) Of these twenty Shakespeare contributes nine, Fletcher (with Beaumont) six, Jonson one, Tourneur one, Drayton (?) one, and two have not been identified.

1613.

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

Comments

Log in to leave a comment.

A Chronicle History of the Life and Work of William ShakespeareChapter VI: Section III (2)

0%37 min left in chapter