HALLIWELL'S LIFE OF SHAKES PEARE.
NOTWITHSTANDING the numerous lives of Shakespeare, from Rowe with his traditional account, (to which substantially but little has been added,) to the skilful antiquarian contribution of Mr. Hunter, the biographical romance of Mr. Charles Knight, and the grave, gossipy, all-exploratory moiling of Mr. Collier, Mr. Halliwell presents the world with another "Life," possessing characteristics distinct from any of his predecessors, though not imparting quite so much useful information as the author as- sumes. The principle on which Mr. Halliwell proceeds is to exhibit every document directly relating to Shakespeare and his family, verbatim; and he pursues the same course with printed contemporary statements or allu- sions of a biographical character. Thus the reader sees the whole records relating to Shakespeare exactly as they stand in the originals, whether they are in manuscript or print, and whether they concern the private or poetical doings of the author. Besides a narrative necessary to connect these documents, Mr. Halliwell comments upon them; occasionally adding collateral facts, and inferences of his own. Upon the whole, however, he is tolerably sparing of dissertation—for a Shakesperian commentator. The value of the volume consists in this fact of collection. Its use is mainly for those who are curious in documents, or who wish to study for themselves the life of the great poet. The principal authorities had been frequently inspected already. Malone gave their substance, in his view of it, to the world. Mr. Collier, Mr. Knight, and others have reprinted or exhibited abstracts of the documents, besides adding new facts to those of Malone. What Mr. Halliwell has done is to give in every case the whole record, and with scrupulous and minute accuracy. In hunting among the municipal archives at Stratford and the collactions of private individuals, he has here and there turned up a new fact. To one class of records Mr. Halliwell has the merit of leading the way : by means of the Index Fininm he has fixed the dates of Shakespeare's purchases. He shows, for example, that Shakespeare bought New Place in "Easter Term, 39 Eliz. 1597"; and took the state of a gentleman in his native town when he was only thirty-three,--a fact conclusive as to his early success, and to the early date of many of his dramas, even putting other evidence aside.
This collection of the original documents more strongly impresses one trait, by no means of a romantic kind : the bard chiefly figures as a good economist and improver of his property.
" Shakespeare, whom you and every playhouse bill
Style the divine—the matchless—what you will, For gain, not glory, wing'd his roving flight."
In the year after he purchased New Place, (1598,) a scarcity occurred; an account was taken of all the corn and malt in Stratford, whether owned by a straingers" or townsmen; and there were not twenty persons in the place who had more than "Wm. Shackespere, x quarters.' In the same year, he sells a load of stone to the Corporation for tenpence. In 1604, he brings an action against one Phillip Rogers, for "1/. 15s. 10d. for malt sold and delivered to him at several times." In 1609, he pro- ceeds against John Addenbrooke, for a debt ; and the return being "Non eat invent. infra libertat. hujus burgi," the bard tackled the bail, one Thomas Horneby. No absolutely new fact is brought to bear upon the mooted question of the coat of arms • but we think Mr. Barnwell makes it probable that the application to ildrM's College was Shakespeare's own, and his father's name merely' a colour; while the character of Dethiek, Garter King of Arms, renders the recital of the family honours very apocryphal, Garter not having been so scrupulous as an official herald ought to be. "1 have seen," says Mr. Halliwell in a note, "a 16ng and curious statement of the complaints made against Dethiek for granting arms improperly; but Shake- speare's grant is not mentioned. 'He committed very many and grease abuses, as namely the giveing of armes, yea and of some of the nobilitie, to base and ignoble persons, as Yorcke HerauIde, bath at large sett downe in a books delivered to the King's majesty. He falsefyed pedeg-rees aLsoe, as that of Harbourne being of idj. descents, wherein he made vj. knights, which God nor man never knewe; nor the name himselfe, when heexas called before the deputy commissioners, could justify .no farther then his grandfather, who was reputed to be an honest man, but of meane fortune.'"—Asinnolean MSS.
The entire survey of the documents relating to pecuniary matters, coupled with the entail in the poet's will, rather supports Mr. Halliwell's notion that Shakespeare, having no son, wished to found a family through his daughter's line. But, alas for the posthumous plans of the most penetrating of men! within five-and-twenty years after his death, the entail was broken. In 1670, his granddaughter, Lady Barnard, died; with her the lineal descent of the poet passed away ; and in 1675, her trustees under a will or power conveyed the property to strangers, and the great owner figures in the recital as "William Shakespeare, gent."
Looking back upon the many documents he has brought together, Mr. Barnwell thinks there is proof enough that more is known about Shake- speare than it is the fashion to assume. The remark is true; but the in- formation is not about the poet, but the man of business. We see him as a householder storing up corn in a scarce year, and assessed to rates and subsidies ; we trace him as a purchaser of property—houses, lands, and tithes ; we obtain a glimpse of him as a patron of common enclo- sure projects—not merely, it is to be inferred, as a landlord, but a tithe- owner ; and Mr. Shakespeare possibly stood in Stratford estimation as a " hard " man, prosecuting poor debtors and their bail. Mr. Ilalliwell agrees with Mr. Charles Knight respecting the betrothment previous to the marriage. He bolds with the general opinion that old Mr. Shakespeare could not write; and that there was a prosecution for deer. stealing on the part of Sir Thomas Lucy. Upon the exact pursuit and status of the father he throws no new light, and attempts no explanation, except that he was a glover in and about 1556: the facts, however, rather con- firm Mr. Knight's view, that John Shakespeare was subsequently a general agricultural dealer. By quoting from the Stratford Court of Record a habeas corpus granted in 1587, Mr. Halliwell affirms that the old gentle- man was then in prison, and hence infers embarrassed circumstances in his old age. Over the literary part of Shakespeare's career, especially the early part, the biographer passes slightly and easily:. In act, he does not seem to be thoroughly at home there; and he might have given more completeness to his printed records by pursuing the subject beyond Shakespeare's burial.
The volume is fully illustrated by wood-cuts, as well as by fac-similes of autographs, handwritings, and seal-rings, done with greater accuracy, Mr. Halliwell affirms, than in any previous attempt.
Previous page
