Obrázky na stránke


chased in 1574; yet, from Malone's loose way of stating meaning ; and thus to render the previuus lame and that in 1555 the lease of a house in Henley Street was lameness expressive of something more than the generai assigned to John Shakspere, it has lieen conjectued self-alasement which they would otherwise ap;rar te that he purchased in 157the house he had occupied imply. In the following lines lame means sometbio, for many years. As he purchased two bonses in 1555 distinct from poor and despised : in difierent parts of the town, it is not likely that he

“ For whether beauty, birth, or wealth, or wit, occupied both; be might not have occupied either. Or any of thrse all, or all, or more, Before lie purchased the two honses in Henley Street, Entitled in thy parts do crowned sit, in 1571, he occupied fourteen acres of meadow-land,

I make my lore engrafted to this store.

So then I am not lame, ponr, nor despis d. with appurtenances, at a very high rent; the property

Whilst that this shadow doth such substance give." is called Ingon meadow in the “ Close Rolls.“ Dus; or one thing, huwever, we may be quite sure—that, it dale calls the place where it was situated “ Inge;" saying that it was a member of the manor of Old Strat- Shakspere were lame, bis infirmity was not such as to ford, “and signifyeth in our old English a meadow or disqualify him for active bodily exertion. The same low ground, the name well agreeing with its situation.” series of verses that have suggested this belief that ize It is about a mile and a quarter from the town of was lame also show that he was a horseman. His Stratford, on the road to Warwick. William Shakspere, entire works exhibit that familiarity with external 1athen, might have been born at either of his father's ture, with rural occupatious, with athletic sports, which copyhold houses, in Greenvill Street, or in Henley is incompatible with an inactive boyhoud. It is not Street; le miglit bave been born at Ingon; or his impossible that some natural defect, or some accidental father might have occupied one of the two freehold injury, may have modified the energy of such a child, houses in Henley Street at the time of the birth of his and beve cherished in him that love of books, and traeldest son.

Tradition says that William Shakspere ditionary !ore, and silent contemplation, without which was boru in one of these houses ; tradition points out

his intellect could not bave been nourished into its the very room in which he was born. Let us not dis- wondrous strength. But we cannot imagine William turb the belief. To look upon that ancient house Sakspere a petted child, chained to home, not breathe perhaps vow one of the oldest in Stratford-pilgrims ing the free air upon his native hills, denied the boy's have come from every region where the name of Shak. privilege to explore every nook of his own river. We spere is known. The property passed into a younger

would imagine him communing from the first sith branch of the poet's family; the descendants of that Nature, as Gray has painted himbranch grew poorer and poorer ; they sold off its orch

“ The dauntless child ards and gardeus ; they divided and subdivided it into

Stretch'd forth his little arms and smil'd." smaller tenements; it became partly a butcher's shop, The only qualifications necessary for the admission partly a little inn. The external appearance was

of a boy into the Free Grammar School of Stratford greatly altered, and its humble front rendered still were, that he should be a resident in the town, of seren humbler. The windows in the roof were remover; years of age, and able to read. The Grainmar Sehwol and the half which had become the inn received a new was essentially connected with the Corporation of Stratbrick casing. The central portion is that which is now ford; and it is impossible to imagine that, when the shown as the birth-place of the illustrious man—" the son of John Shakspere became qualified by age fur myriad-minded."

admission to a school where the best education of the

time was given, literally for nothing, his father, in thaal There is a passage in one of Shakspere's Sonnets, the year, being chief alderman, should not have sent him $9th, which has induced a belief that he had the mis- to the school. We assume, without any hesitation, tbat fortune of a physical defect, which would render him William Shakspere did receive in every just sense of peculiarly the object of maternal solicitude :

the word the education of a scholar; and as such edu• Say that thou didst forsake me for some fault,

cation was to be had at his own door, we also assume And I will comment upon that offence :

that he was brought up at the Free Grammar School of Speak of my lumeness, and I straight will halt; his own town. His earlier instruction would thereft te Against thy reasons making no defence."

be a preparation for this school, and the probability is Again, in the 37th Sonnet:

that such instruction was given him at home. As a decrepit father takes delight

A question arises, did William Shakspere receive To see his active child do deeds of youth,

his elementary justruction in Christianity from the So I, made lume by fortune's dearest spite,

books sanctioned by the Reformed Church! It has Tike all my comfort of thy worth and truth."

been maintained that his father belonged to the Roman These lines have been interpreted to mean that William Catholic persuasion. This belief rests upou the fu lose Shakspere was literally lame, and that his lameness ing foundation. In the year 1770, Thomas Hart, udo was such as to limit nim, when he became an actor, to then inhabited one of the tenements in Henley Street the representation of the parts of old men. We should, which had been bequeathed to his family by William on the contrary, have no doubt whatever that the verses Shakspere's granddaughter, employed a bricklayer lo we have quoted may be most fitly received in a meta- new tile the house; and this bricklayer, by name phorical sense, were there not some subsequent lines in Mosely, found hidden between the rafters and the the 37th Sonnet which really appear to have a literal tiliny a manuscripi consisting of sx lea' es sitched


together, which he gaie to Mr. Peyton, an alderman 1971. His father is at this time, as we have said, chiel of Stratford, who sent it to Mr. Malone, through the alderman of his town; he is a gentleman, now, of repinte Rev. Mr. Deyouport, vicar of Stratford. This paper, and authority; he is Master John Shakspere; and which was first published by Malove in 1790, is printed assuredly the worthy curate of the neighbouring village also in Reed's Shakspeare and in Drake's 'Shakspeare of Luddington, Thomas Hunt, who was also the and his Times.' It consists of fourteen articles, pur schoolmaster, would have received his new scholar with porting to be a confession of faith of “ John Shakspear, some kindness. As bis “shining morning face " first an unworthy member of the holy Catholic religion." passed out of the main street into ibat old court through We have no hesitation whatever in believing this docu- which the upper room of learning was to be reached, a ment to be altogether a fabrication. Malove, when he new life would be opening upon him. The humble first published the paper in his edition of Shakspeare, minister of religion who was his first instructor has left said—“ I have taken some pains to ascertain the au- no memorials of his talents or his acquirements; and in thenticity of this manuscript, and, after a very careful a few years another master came after him, Thomas inquiry, am perfectly satisfied that it is genuine." In Jenkins, also unknown to fame. All praise and honour 1796, however, in his work on the Ireland forgeries, he be to them; for it is impossible to imagine that the asserts —" I have since obtained documents that clearly teachers of William Shakspere were evil instructors-prove it could not have been the composition of any giving the boy husks instead of wholesome aliment. one of our poet's family." We not only do not believe They could not have been harsh and perverse instructors, that it was “ the composition of any one of our poet's for such spoil the gentlest natures, and his was always amily," but we do not believe that it is the work of a gentle :—“My gentle Shakspere " is he called by a Roman Catholic at all. That John Shakspere was rough but noble spirit-one in whom was all honesty what we popularly call a Protestant in the year 1568, and genial friendship under a rude exterior. His won. when his son William was four years old, may be drous abilities could not be spoiled even by ignorant shown by the clearest of proofs. Ile was in that year instructors. the chief magistrale of Stratford; he could not have become so without taking the Oath of Supremacy, ac- The first who attempted to write “Some Account of the cording to the statute of the 1st of Elizabeth, 1558-9. Life of William Shakspeare,' Rove, says, “ His father, To refuse this oath was made punishable with forfeiture who was a considerable dealer in wool, had so large a and imprisonment, with the pains of præmunire and family, ten children in all, that, though he was his high treason. “ The conjecture," says Chalmers (speak- eldest son, he could give him no better education than ing in support of the authenticity of this confession of his own employment. He had bred him, it is true, for faith), “that Shakspeare's family were Roman Ca- some time at a free-school, where, it is probable, lie tholics is strengthened by the fact that his father de- acquired what Latin he was master of; but the narrowclined to attend the corpora:ion meetings, and was at ness of his circumstances, and the want of his assistlast removed from the corporate body." He was re- ance at home, forced his father to withdraw him from moved from the corporate body in 1585, with a distinct thence, and uuhappily prevented his further proficiency statement of the reason for this removal-bis non- in that language." This statement, be it remembered, attendance when summoned to the halls. According was written one hundred and thirty years after the to this reasoning of Chalmers, John Shakspere did not event which it professes to record—the early removal of hesitate to take the Oath of Supremacy when he was William Shakspere from the free-school to which he chief magistrate in 1564, but retired from the cor- had been sent by his father. We have no hesitation in poration in 1585, where he might have remained with saying that the statement is manifestly based upon two out offence to bis own conscience or to others, being, in assumptions, both of which are incorrect :- The first, the language of that day, a Popish recusant, to be that his father had a large family of ten children, and stigmatized as such, persecuted, and subject to the was so narrowed iu bis circumstances that he could not most odious restrictions. If be left or was expelled the spare even the time of his eldest son, he being laugh. corporation for bis religious opinions, he would, of for nothing; and, secondly, that the son, by his early course, not attend the service of the church, for which removal from the school where he acquired “wbai offence he would be liable, in 1595, to a fine of 201. Latin he was master of," was prevented attaining a per month; and then, to crown the whole, in this bis proficiency in that language," his works manifesting last confession, spiritual will, and testament, he calls "an ignorance of the ancients.” It may be convenient upon all his kinsfolks to assist and succour him after that we should in this place endeavour to dispose of Iris death “ with the holy sacrifice of the mass," with a

both these assertions. promise that he “will not be ungrateful unto them for The family of John Snakspere did not consist, as we so great a benefit,” well knowing that by the Act of have already shown, of ten children. In the year 1578, 1581 the saying of mass was punishable by a year's | when the school education of William may be reasonimprisonment and a fine of 200 marks, and the hearing ably supposed to have terminated, and before which of it by a similar imprisonment and a fine of 100 period his “assistance at home" would rather have been marks. The fabrication appears to us as gross as can embarrassing than useful to his father, the family conwell be imagined.

sisted of five children: William, aged fourteen; Gil. To the grammar-school, then, with some preparation, bert, twelve ; Joan, nine ; Anne, seven; and Richard, Ce puid that William Shak spere goes, about the year four. Ame died early in the following year; an, in


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

1380, Edmund, the youngest child, was born ; so that return by the serjeants at mace upon a warrant of dis the family never exceeded five living at the same time. tress is, that John Shakspere has nothing upon which But still the circumstances of John Shakspere, even distress can be levied. There are other corroborative with tive children, might have been straitened. The proofs of John Shakspere's poverty at this period brought assertion of Rowe excited the persevering diligence of forward by Malone. In this precise year, 1578, be Malone; and he has collected together a series of do- mortgages his wife's inheritance of Asbies to Edmund cuments from which he infers, or leaves the reader to Lambert for forty pounds; and, in the same year, the infer, that John Shakspere and his family gradually will of Mr. Roger Sadler of Stratford, to which is sulsunk from their station of respectability at Stratford joined a list of debts due to him, shows that John Shak. into the depths of poverty and ruin. The sixth section spere was indebted to him five pounds, for which sam of Malone's posthumous ' Life' is devoted to a consider- Edmund Lambert was a security,—“ By which," says ation of this subject. It thus commences : “The ma- Malone, “ it appears that John Shakspere was then nufacture of gloves, which was, at this period, a very considered insolvent, if not as one depending rather on fourishing one, both at Stratford and Worcester (in the credit of others than his own."

." It is of little core which latter city it is still carried on with great suc- sequence to the present age to know whether an aldercess), however generally beneficial, should seem, from man of Stratford, nearly three hundred years past, whatever cause, to have afforded our poet's father but a became unequal to maintain his social position; but to scanty maintenance." The assumption that John enable us to form a right estimate of the education of Snakspere depended for his “



“ the William Shakspere, and of the circumstances in which manufacture of gloves" rests entirely and absolutely he was placed at the most influential period of his life, upon one solitary entry in the books of the Bailiff's it may not be unprofitable to consider how far these Court at Stratford. We have seen the original entry; revelations of the private affairs of his father support and though we are not learned enough in palæography the case which Malone holds he has so triumphantly to pronounce whether the abridged word which com- proved. The documents which be has brought forward mences the third line describes the occupation of John certainly do not constitute the whole case; and, with Shakspere, this we know, that it does not consist of the out lending ourselves to a spirit of advocacy, we ha letters Glover, as Malone prints it, he at the same time lieve that the inferences which have been drawn frım abridging the other words which are abbreviations in the them, and adopted by men of higher mark than their record. No other entry in the same book, and there are original promulgator, are altogether gratuitous and inmany, recites the occupation of John Shakspere; but the congruous. We shall detain our readers a very short subjects in dispute which are sometimes mentioned in time, whilst, implicitly adopting all these discoveries these entries look very unlike the litigations of a glover, as they are called), without attempting to infer that whether he be plaintiff or defendant. For example, on some of the circumstances may apply to another Jobn the 19th of November, 1556, the year after the action Shakspere,—we trace what we think a more probable against Malone's glover, John Shakspere is complainant course of the fortunes of the alderman of Stratford, against Henry Field in a plea for unjustly detaining until the period when his illustrious son had himself eighteen quarters of grain. This is scarcely the plea of a become the father of a family. glover. But, glover or not, he was a landed proprietor In the year 1568 John Shakspere was high bailiff of and an occupier of land; and he did not, therefore, in Stratford. In 1571 he was chief alderman. The the year 1578, depend upon the manufacture of gloves duties of the first office demanded a constant residence for “ a scanty maintenance.” However, be his occu- in Stratford. Beyond occasional attendance, the dupation what it may, Malone affirms that " when our ties of the second office would be few. In 1570 he is author was about fourteen years old” the “ distressed the occupier of a small estate at Ingon, in the parish of situation" of bis father was evident: it rests “ upon Stratford, two miles from the town, at a rent which unsurer grounds than conjecture.” The Corporation questionably shows that a house of importance was books have shown that on particular occasions, such as attached to “the meadow." In 1574 be purchased the visitation of the plague in 1564, John Shakspere two freehold houses in Henley Street, with gardens and contributed like others to the relief of the poor; but orchards; and he probably occupied one or both of now, in January, 1577-8, he is taxed for the neces- these. In 1578 he mortgaged the estate of Aslies to sities of the borough only to pay half what other alder- Edmund Lambert, who also appears to have been men pay; and in November of the same year, whilst security for him for the sum of five pounds. At the other aldermen are assessed fourpence weekly towards time, then, when Malone holds that John Shakspere is the relief of the poor, John Shakspere “ shall not be insolvent, because another is his security for fire taxed to pay anything." In 1579 the sum levied upon pounds, and that other the mortgagee of his estate, he is him for providing soldiers at the charge of the borough also excused public payments because he is puor. But is returned, amongst similar sums of other persons, as he is the possessor of two frechold houses in Henley “ unpaid and unaccounted for.” Finally, this un- Street, bought in 1574. Malone, a lawyer by profesquestionable evidence of the books of the borough shows sion, supposes that the money for which Asbies was that this merciful forbearance of his brother townsmen mortgaged went to pay the purchase of the Stratford was unavailing; for, in an action brought against him freebolds; according to which theory, these freeholds in the Bailiff's Court in the year 1586, he during these bad been unpaid for during four years, and the “ gooi seven years having gone on from bad to worse, the and lawful money" was not“ in band" when the

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]





[ocr errors]

rendor parted with the premises. We hold, and we ceding after proceeding being taken upon it, with a think more reasonably, that in 1578, when he mort- pertinacity on the part of the defendant which arpears gaged Asbies, John Shakspere became the purchaser, far more like the dogged resistance of a wealthy man or at any rate the occupier, of lands in the parish of to a demand which he thought unjust, than that of a Stratford, but not in the borough ; and that, in either man in the depths of poverty, seeking to evade a paycase, the money for which Asbies was mortgaged was ment which must be ultimately enforced by the seizure the capital employed in this undertaking. The lands of his goods, or by a prison. The distringas, which which were purchased by William Shakspere of the the officers of the borough of Stratford could not exe. Combe family, in 1601, are described in the deed as cute, was followed by a capias; and then, no doubt, “ lying or being within the parish, fields, or town of the debt was paid, and the heavier fees of the lawyers Old Stretford." But the will of William Shakspere, discharged. Further, in the very year of this action, be having become the heir-at-law of his father, devises John Shakspere ceases to be a member of the corporaall his lands and tenements within the towns, ham- tion; and the circumstances attending his withdrawal lets, villages, fields, and grounds of Stratford-upon- or removal from that body are strongly confirmatory of Avon, Old Stratford, Bishopton, and Welcombe.” Old the view we have taken. “I find,” says Malone, “ on Stratford is a local denomination, essentially different inspecting the records, that our poet's father had not from Bishopton or Welcombe; and, therefore, whilst attended at any hall for the seven preceding years.” the lands purchased by the son in 1601 might be those This is perfectly correct. At these halls, except on the recited in the will as lying in Old Stratford, he might very rarest occasions, the members attending do not have derived from his father the lands of Bishopton and sign their names; but after the entry of the preliminary Welcombe, of the purchase of which by himselt' we have form by the town-clerk,—such as “Stratford Burgus, ad uo record. So, in the same way, the tenements referred aulam ibid. tent. vi. die Septembris anno regni dňa to by the will as being in Stratford-upon-Avon, com- Elizabethæ vicesimo octavo,"—the town-clerk enters prised not only the great house purchased by him, but the names of all the aldermen and burgesses, and there the freeholds in Henley Street which he inherited from is a dot or other mark placed against the names of those his father. Indeed it is expressly stated in a document who are in attendance. The last entry in which the of 1596, a memorandum upon the grant of arms in the

name of John Shakspere is so distinguished as attending Heralds' College to John Shakspere," he bath lands

occurs in 1579. But at the hall held on the 6th of and tenements, of good wealth and substance, 5007." September, in the 28th of Elizabeth, is this entry :The lands of Bishopton and Welcombe are in the parish

“At this hall William Smythe aud Richard Courte are of Stratford, but not in the borongh. Bishopton was a

chosen to be alder men in the place of John Wheler bamlet, having an ancient chapel of ease. We hold, and John Shaxspere; for that Mr. Wheler doth desyer then, that in the year 1578 John Shakspere ceased,

to be put out of the companye, and Mr. Shaxspere doth though perhaps not wholly so, to reside within the not come to the halls when they be warned, nor hath borough of Stratford. Other alılermen are rated to not done of long ty me." Is it not more credible that,

pay towards the furniture of pikemen, billmen, and archers, from the year 1579 till the year 1586, when he was six shillings and eight-pence; whilst John Shakspere is removed from the corporation, in all probability by his to pay three shillings and four-pence. Why less than own consent, John Shakspere was not dwelling in the other aldermen? The next entry but one, which relates borough of Stratford, -that he had ceased to take an to a brother alderman, answers the question

interest in its affairs, although he was unwilling to

forego its dignities ;-than that during these seven years “ Robert Bratt, nothing IN THIS PLACE."

he was struggling with hopeless poverty ; that he allowed Again, ten months after,—“ It is ordained that every his brother aldermen and burgesses to sit in judgment alderman shall pay weekly, towards the relief of the on his means of paying the assessments of the borongh; poor, four-pence, save John Shakspere and Robert that they consented to reduce and altogether to dis. Bratt, who shall not be taxed to pay anything.” Here charge his assessment, although he was the undoubted Johu Shakspere is associated with Robert Bratt, who, possessor of property within the borough; that be proaccording to the previous entry, was to pay nothing in claimed his poverty in the most abject manner, and this place; that is, in the borough of Stratford, to which proclaimed it untruly whilst he held any property at the orders of the council alone apply. The return, in all, and his lands were mortgaged for a very inadequate 1579, of Mr. Shakspere as leaving unpaul the sum of sum, when the first object of an embarrassed man would three shillings and three pence, was the return upon a have been to have upheld his credit by making an effort levy for the borough, in which, although the possessor to meet every public demand? What is the most extraof property, he might have ceased to reside. Seven ordinary thing of all is, that he should have recovered years after this comes the celebrated return to the war- this long humiliation so suddenly that, in 1596, he goes rant of distress, that John Sbakspere has nothing to dis- to the College of Arms for additions to his armorial tra: npon. The jurisdiction of the Bailiff's Court of bearings, and states that he is worth five hundred pounds Siratford is wholly confined to the borough; and out of in lands and tenements. During this period he was the borough the officers could not go. We have traced unquestionably a resident in the parish of Stratford ; the course of this action in the bailiff's books of Strat- for the register of that parish contains the entry of the ford, beyond the entries which Malone gives us. It hurial of a daughter in 1579, and the baptism or a son continued before the court for nearly five months; pro i mn 1580. His grandchildren, also are baptized in that parish in 1553 and 1595. But his assessments in with some knowledge of Greek, is to assume an ab se plat piace"---the burungh-are reduced in 1578, and surdity upon the face of the circumstances; and it wholly foregone in 1579. He has ceased to be amen- could never have been assumed at all, had not Rose, able to the borough assessments. The lands of Wel setting out upon a false theory, that, because in the combe and Bishopton, we may fairly assume, were his works of Shakspere “we scarce find any traces of any. home. He has not been dependent upon the trade of thing that looks like an imitation of the ancients," beld Stratford, whether in gloves or wool. He is a culti- that therefore “his not copying at least something from vator, and his profits are not very variable. His son them may be an argument of his vever having read purchases a large quantity of land in the same district them.” Opposed to this is the statement of Aubrey, a few years afterwards; and that son himself becomes much nearer to the times of Shakspere : “ he understood a cultivator, even whilst he is the most successful Latin pretty well.” Rowe had been led into his illon dramatist of his time. That som has also his actions in gical inference by the “small Latin and less Greek" the Bailiff's Court, as his father had, for corn sold and of Jonson; the “old mother-wit "of Denham; the "his delivered, of which more hereafter. That son cleaves learning was very little" of Fuller; the native wood. to his native place with a love which no fame won, no notes wild " of Milton,-phrases, every one of which is pleasure enjoyed, in the great capital,—the society of to be taken with considerable qualification, whether ve the great, the praises of the learned,

,-can extinguish. regard the peculiar characters of the utterers, or the cirNeither does that son take any part in the affairs of the cumstances connected with the words themselves. The borough. He purchases the best house in Stratford in question rests not upon the interpretation of the dictum 1597, but the records of Stratford show that he had no of this authority or that, but upon the indisputable fact desire for local honours. The father, instead of sinking that the very earliest writings of Shakspere are inbued into poverty, appears to us to have separated himself with a spirit of classical antiquity, and that the allusive from the concerns of the borough, and from the society nature of the learning that manifests itself in them, of the honest men who administered them. He pro-whilst it offers the best proof of his familiarity with the bably had not more happiness in his struggle to main ancient writers, is a circumstance which has misled tain the rank of gentleman; but that he did make that those who never attempted to dispute the existence of struggle is, we think, consistent with all the circum- the learning which was displayed in the direct pedantry stances upon record. That the children of William of his contemporaries. If," said Hales of Eton, “ be Shakspere should have been brought up at Stratford, had not read the classics, he had likewise not stolen that Stratford should have been his bome, although from them.” Marlowe, Greene, Peele, and all the early Loudon was his place of necessary sojourn, — is, we dramatists, overload their plays with quotation and think, quite incompatible with the belief that, at the mythological allusion. According to Hales, they steal. exact period when the poet was gaining rapid wealth as and therefore they have read. He who uses his knor. a sharer in the Blackfriars Theatre, the father was so ledge skilfully is assumed not to have read. reduced to the extremity of indigence that he had no- It is not our intention here to enter upon a general thing to distrain upon in his dwelling in the place examination of the various opinions that have been held where he had dwelt for years, in competence and as to the learning of Shakspere, and the tendency of

those opinions to show that he was without leaming. Seeing, then, that at any rate in the year 1574, when We only desire to point out, by a very few observations, John Shukspere purchased two freehold houses in Strat that the learning manisested in his early productions ford, it was scarcely necessary for him to withdraw his does not bear out the assertion of Rowe that his procon William from school, as Rowe has it, on account ficiency in the Latin language was interrupted by his of the narrowness of his circumstances (the education early removal from the free-school of Stratford. His at that school costing the father nothing), it is not diffi- youthful poem, ‘Venus and Adonis,' the first heir of uis cult to believe that the sen remained there till the invention, is upon a classical subject. The • Rape of perivd when boys were usually withdrawn from gram- Lucrece' is founded upon a legend of the beginnings mar-schools. In those days the education of the uni- of Roman history. Would he have ventured upca versity commenced much earlier than at present. Boys these subjects had he been unfamiliar with the ancient intended for the learned professions, and more especially writers, from the attentive study of which he could for the church, commonly went to Oxford and Cam-alone obtain the knowledge which would enable kim bridge at eleven or twelve years of age. If they were to treat them with propriety? His was an age of sound not intended for those professions, they probably re- scholarship. He dedicates both poems to a scholar, mained at the grammar-school till they were thirteen and a patron of scholars. Does any one of his con or fourteen; and then they were fitted for being ap- temporaries object that these classical subjects were prenticed to tradesmen, or articled to attorneys, a treated by a young man ignorant of the classics? Will nonnerous and thriving body in those days of cheap the most critical examination of these poems detect litigation. Many also went early to the Inns of Court, anything that betrays this ignorance? Is there not the ubich were the universities of the law, and where there most perfect keeping in both these poems,--an original was real stuly and discipline in direct connection with conception of the mode of treating these subjects, asla the several Societies. To assume that William Sliak- visedly adopted, with the full knowledge of what might spiere did not stay long eno“gh at the grammar-school be imitated, but preferring the vigorous painting of of Stratford to obtain a very fair“ proficiency in Latin,” nature to any imitation ? • Love's Labour 's Last

[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]
« PredošláPokračovať »