Shakespeare of Stratford

Front matter

THE YALE SHAKESPEARE

Edited by

Wilbur L. Cross Tucker Brooke

The Biographical Facts

THE BIOGRAPHICAL FACTS

[English documents are given in modern spelling, except as regards proper names, which remain as in the originals. Latin documents are usually not normalized, but are translated in footnotes.]

Fact 1

Baptismal Register, Stratford-on-Avon.

1564 April 26 Gulielmus filius Johannes Shakspere.

Note One. The Date of Shakespeare’s Birth is not precisely known, but it probably preceded his baptism on April 26 by only a few days. The tradition is that he was born on St. George’s Day, April 23, which was the day also on which he died. The inscription on his monument stating that he was ‘Ætatis 53’ at his decease would indicate that he had at least completed his fifty-second year on April 23, 1616.

Note Two. Shakespeare’s Parents and Ancestry.

The poet’s paternal grandfather was probably Richard Shakespeare (d. 1561), a farmer of Snitterfield, four miles northeast of Stratford. The poet’s father, John Shakespeare, was living in Henley Street, Stratford, in 1552. In 1561 he was elected one of the two chamberlains of the borough; in 1565 he became an alderman; and in 1568 high bailiff, or mayor, of the town. He was buried, September 8, 1601.

John Shakespeare married (presumably in 1557) Mary Arden, youngest daughter of Robert Arden, a wealthy landowner of Wilmecote, a couple of miles north of Stratford. Robert Arden, who had died in 1556, was the son of Thomas Arden (the poet’s maternal great-grandfather), who was living at Wilmecote in 1501 and who probably belonged to the aristocratic family of the Ardens of Park Hall. Mary Shakespeare, the poet’s mother, was buried at Stratford, September 9, 1608.

Note Three. Shakespeare’s Brothers and Sisters.

The poet was the third child and first son of John and Mary Shakespeare. The other children, with their dates of baptism were:

Joan (Sept. 15, 1558), Margaret (Dec. 2, 1562), Gilbert (Oct. 13, 1566), Joan (Apr. 15, 1569), Anne (Sept. 28, 1571), Richard (Mar, 11, 1574), Edmund (May 8, 1580).

The first two daughters died in infancy, and Anne (buried Apr. 4, 1579) at the age of seven. The poet’s three brothers all died before him, probably without children, though Gilbert may possibly have had a son. Edmund became an actor and was buried in St. Saviour’s Church, Southwark, Dec. 31, 1607. Joan—the second sister so named—married William Hart and has descendants still alive.

Fact 2

(A) Record of issue of marriage license, Episcopal Register, Diocese of Worcester, November 27, 1582:

Anno Domini 1582 Novembris 27 die eiusdem mensis. Item eodem die supradicto emanavit Licentia inter Wm Shaxpere et Annam Whateley de Temple Grafton.

(B) Marriage Bond from Worcester Episcopal Registry, November 28, 1582:

Noverint universi per praesentes nos Fulconem Sandells de Stratford in comitatu Warwici agricolam et Johannem Rychardson ibidem agricolam, teneri et firmiter obligari Ricardo Cosin generoso et Roberto Warmstry notario publico in quadraginta libris bonae et legalis monetae Angliae solvend. eisdem Ricardo et Roberto haered. execut. et assignat. suis ad quam quidem solucionem bene et fideliter faciend. obligamus nos et utrumque nostrum per se pro toto et in solid. haered. executor. et administrator, nostros firmiter per praesentes sigillis nostris sigillat. Dat. 28 die Novem. Anno regni dominae nostrae Eliz. Dei gratia Angliae Franc. et Hiberniae Reginae fidei defensor &c. 25°.

The condition of this obligation is such that if hereafter there shall not appear any lawful let or impediment by reason of any precontract, consanguinity, affinity or by any other lawful means whatsoever, but that Willm Shagspere on the one party and Anne Hathwey of Stratford in the diocese of Worcester, maiden, may lawfully solemnize matrimony together, and in the same afterwards remain and continue like man and wife according unto the laws in that behalf provided; and moreover if there be not at this present time any action, suit, quarrel, or demand moved or depending before any judge ecclesiastical or temporal for and concerning any such lawful let or impediment; and moreover if the said Willm do not proceed to solemnization of marriage with the said Anne Hathwey without the consent of her friends; and also if the said Willm do upon his own proper costs and expenses defend and save harmless the right reverend Father in God, Lord John Bishop of Worcester and his officers for licensing them the said Willm and Anne to be married together with once asking of the bans of matrimony between them and for all other causes which may ensue by reason or occasion thereof: that then the said obligation to be void and of none effect or else to stand and abide in full force and virtue.

Note One. Anne Whateley of Temple Grafton.

It is probable, but not certain, that the Anne Whateley mentioned in document A as the intended wife of Wm. Shaxpere is the same as the Anne Hathwey of document B, and that both records therefore refer to the poet. Sir Sidney Lee (Life of Shakespeare, 1922, pp. 30 f.) argues against the identity of the two; Mrs. Stopes (Shakespeare’s Family, p. 63), J. W. Gray (Shakespeare’s Marriage, p. 28), and Professor J. Q. Adams (Life of Shakespeare, p. 76), cite good reasons for accepting it. Whateley was a name of not infrequent occurrence in the Worcester neighborhood and might be misread or otherwise inadvertently substituted by the clerk for Hathwey. Temple Grafton is a village five miles from Stratford and may have been the place selected for the wedding—presumably because the Stratford rector declined to perform it or because the couple desired to avoid publicity. The Temple Grafton marriage register for the period is lost, and no record of the actual marriage of Shakespeare and Anne Hathway has been found elsewhere.

Note Two. Anne Hathway.

Anne Hathway, or Hathaway, was probably the eldest daughter, and one of the seven children, of Richard Hathway of Shottery in the parish of Old Stratford, whose will was dated Sept. 1, 1581, and proved July 9, 1582. She was buried as ‘Mrs. Shakspeare’ at Stratford, August 8, 1628, having died at New Place two days before, and was interred beside her husband in the chancel of the church with the following inscription: ‘Here lieth interred the body of Anne, wife of Mr. William Shakespeare, who departed this life the 6th day of August, 1628, being of the age of 67 years.’ The note of her age indicates that she was seven or eight years older than the poet. There exists no other evidence for the date of her birth.

Note Three. The Marriage Bond (Document B).

The two signers of the bond were friends of the Hathway family, evidently acting in the interests of Anne. Richard Hathway’s will names Fulke Sandells as one of his two ‘trusty friends and neighbors’ whom he appoints as supervisors of the testament; and John Richardson appears as one of the witnesses to it. The absence of any reference to Shakespeare’s family has been cited as a striking irregularity in the document, particularly as the poet was a minor. On the other hand it is argued that John Shakespeare’s embarrassed financial condition in 1582 would have rendered him unacceptable as surety for so large a bond as forty pounds, and that the license would not have been issued at all unless the Bishop’s representatives had received satisfactory assurance that he would not make serious complaint about the marriage.

The purpose of the bond and Bishop’s license was to save time. Normal procedure in the case of marriages was by thrice reading the bans on successive weeks; but December 1, 1582, began a prohibited period in the church year, the effect of which would have been to postpone for about two months the performance of the ceremony by the ordinary method.

Fact 3

Baptismal Register, Stratford-on-Avon.

1583 May 26 Susanna, daughter to William Shakspere.

Note. Susanna Shakespeare married John Hall of Stratford, an eminent physician, June 5, 1607, and died July 11, 1649. She had one daughter, Elizabeth Hall (baptized February 21, 1608), who married successively Thomas Nash of Welcombe near Stratford (April 22, 1626) and John Bernard, later Sir John Bernard, of Northamptonshire (June 5, 1649). She died without issue, February 17, 1670, being the poet’s last living descendant.

Fact 4

Baptismal Register, Stratford.

1584 [i.e. 1585] February 2 Hamnet and Judeth, son and daughter to William Shakspere.

Note. The twin children were presumably named after Hamnet Sadler, a baker of Stratford, and his wife Judith. Fripp (Richard Quyny, p. 108) notes that Hamnet and Hamlet are interchangeable spellings in the Stratford town records.

Hamnet Shakespeare was buried August 11, 1596, having lived eleven and a half years. (See no. XII.) Judith married Thomas Quyny of Stratford (Feb. 10, 1616) and was buried there February 9, 1662, aged seventy-seven. She had three sons, all of whom died long before her and unmarried. The eldest, Shakespeare Quyny (baptized November 28, 1616), lived less than six months.

Fact 5

From Coram Rege Roll, Public Record Office, London.

In 1579 John and Mary Shakespeare alienated to Edmund Lambert, brother-in-law of Mary, for forty pounds, the estate of Asbies, three miles from Stratford, an inheritance from Mary’s father, Robert Arden. There appears to have been an informal agreement for recovery of the estate on repayment of the sum; but Edmund and after him his son, John Lambert, refused to acknowledge this. In Michaelmas term (autumn), 1589, John Shakespeare brought suit against John Lambert, asserting that on Edmund Lambert’s death in 1587, John Lambert contracted to pay twenty pounds on condition that the Shakespeares should not bring suit against him and should confirm him in the possession of the estate. The por- tion of the document mentioning William Shakespeare is as follows:

Et quod dictus Johannes Shackespere et Maria uxor ejus, simul cum Willielmo Shackespere filio suo, cum inde requisiti essent, assurarent mesuagium predictum et cetera premissa, cum pertinentiis, prefato Johanni Lamberte, et deliberarent omnia scripta et evidencias premissa predicta concernentia; predictus Johannes Lamberte vicesimo sexto die Septembris anno regni dicte domine regine vicesimo nono, apud Stratford-super-Avon in comitatu predicto, in consideracione inde super se assumpsit et prefato Johanni Shackespere, adtunc et ibidem fideliter promisit quod ipse, idem Johannes Lambert, viginti libras legalis monete Anglie prefato Johanni Shackespere bene et fideliter solvere et contentare vellet; et predictus Johannes Shackespere in facto dicit quod ipse hucusque non implacitavit dictum Johannem Lambert pro premissis, nec aliqua inde parcella, et insuper quod ipse, idem Johannes Shackespere et Maria uxor ejus, simul cum Willielmo Shackespere filio suo semper hactenus parati fuerunt tam ad assurandum premissa predicta quam ad deliberandum eidem Johanni Lamberte omnia scripta et evidencias eadem premissa concernentia; predictus tamen Johannes Lamberte, promissionem et assumpcionem suas predictas minime curans, sed machinans et fraudulenter intendens ipsum Johannem Shackespere de predictis viginti libris callide et subdole decipere et defraudare, easdem viginti libras prefato Johanni Shackespere juxta promissionem et assumpcionem suas hucusque non solvit.

Note. Nothing seems to have been effected by this suit, in which the poet was only indirectly concerned. Eight years later (Nov. 24, 1597) a chancery suit against Lambert was instituted in the name of John and Mary Shakespeare, but doubtless at the expense of the poet, who however is not mentioned. The case dragged on for several years without profit to the Shakespeares. The documents are given by Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines, 7th ed., ii. 14 ff.

Fact 6

Epilogue to Robert Greene’s Groatsworth of Wit, bought with a Million of Repentance (August–September, 1592).

To those gentlemen, his quondam acquaintance, that spend their wits in making plays, R. G. wisheth a better exercise, and wisdom to prevent his extremities.

Base minded men all three of you, if by my misery you be not warned: for unto none of you (like me) sought those burs to cleave, those puppets (I mean) that spake from our mouths, those antics garnished in our colors. Is it not strange that I, to whom they all have been beholding: is it not like that you, to whom they all have been beholding, shall (were ye in that case as I am now) be both at once of them forsaken? Yes, trust them not: for there is an upstart crow, beautified with our feathers, that with his Tiger’s heart wrapt in a player’s hide supposes he is as well able to bombast out a blank verse as the best of you; and being an absolute Johannes fac totum, is in his own conceit the only Shake-scene in a country. O that I might intreat your rare wits to be employed in more profitable courses, and let those apes imitate your past excellence, and never more acquaint them with your admired inventions.

Note. Greene’s Groatsworth of Wit was written during the last illness of the author, who died September 3, 1592. The title-page of the edition of that year states that the book was ‘written before his death and published at his dying request.’ The actor-playwright attacked as ‘an upstart crow,’ ‘an absolute Johannes fac totum,’ and ‘the only Shake-scene’ is undoubtedly Shakespeare. The three acquaintances of Greene whom he exhorts to give up play-writing are pretty evidently Marlowe, Peele, and Nashe. The last two are addressed in friendly and flattering terms, but the address to Marlowe (who is called ‘famous gracer of tragedians,’ atheist, and student of ‘pestilent Machiavellian policy’) has a bitter tone.

Fact 7

Preface to Henry Chettle’s Kind-Heart’s Dream, December, 1592.

About three months since died M. Robert Greene, leaving many papers in sundry booksellers’ hands, among other his Groatsworth of Wit, in which a letter written to divers play-makers is offensively by one or two of them taken, and because on the dead they cannot be avenged, they wilfully forge in their conceits a living author With neither of them that take offence was I acquainted, and with one of them I care not if I never be. The other, whom at that time I did not so much spare as since I wish I had, for that, as I have moderated the heat of living writers and might have used my own discretion (especially in such a case, the author being dead), that I did not I am as sorry as if the original fault had been my fault, because myself have seen his demeanor no less civil than he excellent in the quality he professes. Besides, divers of worship have reported his uprightness of dealing, which argues his honesty, and his facetious grace in writing that approves his art.

Note. It appears that Marlowe and Shakespeare, personally or through their friends, had resented the allusions in Greene’s Groatsworth, posthumously published under the editorship of Chettle. The playmaker with whom Chettle does not wish to be acquainted is almost certainly Marlowe; and the other, whose ‘uprightness of dealing’ and ‘facetious grace in writing’ Chettle praises, is undoubtedly Shakespeare.

Fact 8

Dedication of Venus and Adonis to the Earl of Southampton.

To the Right Honorable Henry Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton, and Baron of Titchfield.

Right Honorable: I know not how I shall offend in dedicating my unpolished lines to your Lordship, nor how the world will censure me for choosing so strong a prop to support so weak a burthen; only if your Honor seem but pleased, I account myself highly praised, and vow to take advantage of all idle hours till I have honored you with some graver labor. But if the first heir of my invention prove deformed, I shall be sorry it had so noble a godfather, and never after ear [plough] so barren a land for fear it yield me still so bad a harvest. I leave it to your honorable survey, and your Honor to your heart’s content, which I wish may always answer your own wish and the world’s hopeful expectation.

Your Honor’s in all duty,

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.

Note. Venus and Adonis was entered for publication, April 18, 1593, by Richard Field, son of a tanner of Stratford. Field, who was three years older than Shakespeare, had left Stratford in 1579 and become a member of the Stationers’ Company in London.

Fact 9

Dedication of Lucrece.

To the Right Honorable Henry Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton, and Baron of Titchfield.

The love I dedicate to your Lordship is without end; whereof this pamphlet without beginning is but a superfluous moiety. The warrant I have of your honorable disposition, not the worth of my untutored lines, makes it assured of acceptance. What I have done is yours, what I have to do is yours, being part in all I have, devoted yours. Were my worth greater, my duty would show greater; meantime, as it is, it is bound to your Lordship, to whom I wish long life still lengthened with all happiness.

Your Lordship’s in all duty,

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.

Note. Lucrece was licensed for printing, May 9, 1594. Southampton’s generous patronage of the poet is the subject of an anecdote in Rowe’s Life of Shakespeare (1709) to the effect that the Earl on one occasion presented Shakespeare with a thousand pounds to enable him to carry through a purchase he had in mind.

Fact 10

Anonymous verses prefixed to Willobie His Avisa (1594).

Though Collatine have dearly bought To high renown a lasting life, And found that [what] most in vain have sought, To have a fair and constant wife; Yet Tarquin plucked his glistering grape, And Shake-speare paints poor Lucrece’ rape.

Note. This illustrates the immediate popularity of Shakespeare’s Lucrece. The curious topical work in mingled prose and verse which this commendatory poem introduces comprises a dialogue between H. W. (Henry Willobie) and one W. S. It has been dubiously supposed to allude to Shakespeare as an authority on love. The book was entered for publication, September 8, 1594.

Fact 11

Manuscript Accounts of the Treasurer of the Royal Chamber in Public Record Office.

1594 [i.e. 1595] March 15 To William Kempe, William Shakespeare, and Richard Burbage, servants to the Lord Chamberlain, upon the Council’s warrant dated at Whitehall xv die Marcij 1594 for two several comedies or interludes showed by them before her Majesty in Christmas time last past, viz.; upon St. Stephen’s day and Innocents’ day, xiij li. vj s. viij d., and by way of her Majesty’s reward vj li. xiij s. iiij d.: in all, xx li.

Note. This shows that Shakespeare had performed in plays before Queen Elizabeth on Dec. 26 and Dec. 28, 1594, the court being then at Greenwich Palace. For each play the company, for which Shakespeare was one of the three payees, received ten pounds, two-thirds of that amount being reckoned the proper price of the performance and one-third the Queen’s additional gratuity. (See Mrs. Stopes, ‘The Earliest Offcial Record of Shakespeare’s Name,’ in Shakespeare’s Industry, pp. 218 ff., where it is conjectured that one of the comedies presented was The Comedy of Errors.)

There is no earlier documentary evidence regarding the particular company with which Shakespeare was connected. It has been commonly assumed that he joined the predecessors of the Chamberlain’s company as soon as he reached London or even earlier. Recent investigators, however, have argued from cir- cumstantial evidence that his first connection was rather with Lord Pembroke’s players. (See J. Q. Adams, Life of Shakespeare, 1923, pp. 180 ff., and R. Crompton Rhodes, Shakespeare’s First Folio, 1923, pp. 84 ff.)

Fact 12

Stratford Burial Register.

1596 August 11 Hamnet filius William Shakspere.

Fact 13

Rough draft, preserved in Heralds’ College, London, of arms devised for John Shakespeare by William Dethick, Oct. 20, 1596.

NON SANZ DROICT

Shakespere, 1596.

To all and singular, noble and gentlemen, of what estate or degree bearing arms, to whom these presents shall come, William Dethick, alias Garter, principal king of arms, sendeth greetings. Know ye that whereas by the authority and ancient privilege and custom pertaining to my said office of principal king of arms from the Queen’s most excellent majesty and her highness’ most noble and victorious progenitors I am to take general notice and record, and to make public demonstration and testimony, for all causes of arms and matters of gentry throughout all her Majesty’s kingdoms and dominions, principalities, isles, and provinces to the end that as some by their ancient names, families, kindreds, and descents have and enjoy sundry ensigns and [coats] of arms, so other for their valiant facts, magnanimity, virtue, dignities, and deserts may have such marks and tokens of honor and worthiness whereby their name and good fame shall be [the better known] and divulged and their children and posterity in all virtue to the service of their prince and country [encouraged]. Being therefore solicited and [by] credible report informed that John Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon in the county of Warwick, whose parents and late antecessors were for their valiant and faithful service advanced and rewarded by the most prudent prince King Henry the Seventh of famous memory, sithence which time they have continued in those parts in good reputation and credit, and that the said John having married Mary, daughter and one of the heirs of Robert Arden of Wilmcote in the said county, Esq. In consideration whereof and for encouragement of his posterity, to whom these achievements may [?] descend by the ancient custom and laws of arms, I have therefore assigned, granted, and by these presents confirmed this shield or coat of arms; viz., Gold on a bend sable a spear of the first, the point steeled, proper; and for his crest or cognizance a falcon, his wings displayed, argent, standing on a wreath of his colors, supporting a spear—gold—steeled as aforesaid, set upon a helmet with mantels and tassels as hath been accustomed and more plainly appeareth depicted on this margent. Signifying hereby that it shall be lawful for the said John Shakespeare, Gent., and for his children, issue, and posterity at all times convenient to make show of and to bear blazoned the same achievement on their shield or coat of arms, escutcheons, crest, cognizance or seals, rings, signets, pennons, guidons, edifices [?], utensils, liveries, tombs, or monuments, or otherwise, at all times in all lawful warlike facts or civil use and exercises, according to the laws of arms without let or interruption of any other person or persons. In witness whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and fastened the seal of my office endorsed with the signet of my arms, At the Office of Arms, London, the xx. day of October, the xxxix. [ie. 38th] year of the reign of our Sovereign Lady Elizabeth, by the grace of God Queen of England, France and Ireland, defender of the faith, etc. 1596.

Note. The document quoted above is a very rough draft, with many interlineations. Dethick made a copy of it, introducing some unimportant verbal changes, which is also in the Heralds’ Office, but the fairer copy is badly torn in two places. Bracketed words in the transcript above are supplied from the second copy. Both documents give on the margin a pen and ink sketch of the arms assigned to Shakespeare. The second draft has the following notes added at the bottom:

This John hath a pattern thereof under Clarenc. Cooke’s hand in paper xx. years past. A justice of peace, and was bailiff, officer, and chief of the town of Stratford-upon-Avon xv or xvi years past. That he hath lands and tenements of good wealth and substance, 500 li. That he mar—(remainder missing).

Good facsimiles of both papers are provided in Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica, edited by J. J. Howard, Second Series, vol. i, p. 109 (1886).

It is reasonably conjectured that the motive for John Shakespeare’s effort thus to establish his social position came from the poet, and that it reflects the latter’s ambition and worldly prosperity. Other wealthy actors—e.g. Augustine Phillips and Thomas Pope of Shakespeare’s company—assumed arms to which they appear to have had no hereditary right. A contemporary herald, Ralph Brooke, mentions Shakespeare as one of twenty-three persons charged with obtaining coats of arms to which they were not entitled. (For an answer to this accusation see Mrs. Stopes, Shakespeare’s Family, pp. 22 f.) The arms here granted are displayed on the monument above Shakespeare’s grave and on the tombstone of his daughter Susanna. For a later document granting heraldic honors to Shakespeare see no. XXVI.

Fact 14

The following documents are in the Public Record Office, London.

(A) Report of collectors of the subsidy, November 15, 1597.

The petty collectors of the said second payment of the said last subsidy within the ward of Bishopsgate, London did say and affirm that the persons hereunder named are all either dead, departed, and gone out of the said ward, or their goods so eloigned or conveyed out of the same or in such a private or covert manner kept, whereby the several sums of money on them severally taxed and assessed towards the said second payment of the said last subsidy neither might nor could by any means by them the said petty collectors, or either of them, be levied of them, or any of them, to her Majesty’s use.

Among the defaulters in St. Ellen’s parish is listed William Shackspere V li.—v s.

(B) Assessment paper, October 1, 1598.

This indenture, made the first day of October, in the fortieth year of the reign of our Sovereign Lady, Elizabeth Witnesseth that the said Ferdinando Clutterbooke and Thomas Symons so named, deputed, appointed, and chosen to be petty collectors in the said ward [i.e. Bishopsgate], and authorized thereunto by these presents, shall receive, levy, collect, and gather of all and every the several persons hereafter named to the Queen’s Majesty’s use all such several sums of money as in this present extract been taxed and assessed upon them and every of them, for their several values and substances, rated, specified, and contained as hereafter followeth; that is to say, of

St. Helen’s Parish.

Affid. William Shakespeare, V li.—xiiis ivd.

(C) Residuum, or back-tax, account for London, 1598.

William Shakspeare in the parish of St. Helen’s in Bishopsgate Ward owes 13s. 4d. of the subsidy; and he answers in the following roll in Residuum Sussex.

(D) Residuum account for Sussex (which included also the Bankside district in Surrey), 1599.

William Shakspeare in the parish of St. Helen, 13s. 4d. of the whole subsidy aforesaid granted in the said 39th year. Which is required upon the same roll there.

This is annotated in the margin, ‘Episcopo Wintonensi,’ meaning that the person referred to was under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Winchester, who controlled the Bankside district.

Note. The second of these documents was first pointed out by Joseph Hunter, Illustrations of Shakespeare, 1845, 76–79; the others by J. W. Hales, Athenaeum, March 26, 1904. They indicate that Shakespeare had resided, probably for a number of years, in St. Helen’s parish, which was near the Shoreditch theatres (‘Theatre’ and ‘Curtain’), but that he had removed before 1597 and by 1599 had been traced by the inefficient tax collectors to the Bishop of Winchester’s liberty (i.e. the Bankside in Southwark). He seems then to have discharged the debt, as his name does not appear in the list of delinquents for the next year.

Confirmation of Shakespeare’s removal to Southwark is found in an uncorroborated note by Malone: ‘From a paper now before me, which formerly belonged to Edward Alleyn, the player, our poet appears to have lived in Southwark, near the Bear Garden, in 1596.’

Fact 15

‘Foot of fine’ (essential part) of deed transferring New Place from William Underhill to William Shakespeare, Easter Term (May 4), 1597. In Public Record Office.

Inter Willm Shakespeare, querentem, et Willm Underhill, generosum, deforciantem, de uno mesuagio, duobus horreis, et duobus gardinis cum pertinenciis in Stratford super Avon, unde placitum convencionis summonitum fuit inter eos in eadem curia, Scilicet quod predictus Wills. Underhill recognovit predicta tenementa cum pertinenciis esse jus ipsius Willi. Shakespeare ut illa que idem Wills. habet de dono predicti Willi. Underhill, et illa remisit et quietumclamavit de se et heredibus suis predicto Willo. Shakespeare et heredibus suis imperpetuum; et preterea idem Wills. Underhill concessit pro se et heredibus suis quod ipsi warantizabunt predicto Willo. Shakespeare et heredibus suis predicta tenementa cum pertinenciis imperpetuum; et pro hac recognicione, remissione, quieta clamancia, warancia, fine, et concordia idem Wills Shakespeare dedit predicto Willo. Underhill sexaginta libras sterlingorum. In cuius rei testimonium

iiij° die Maii anno regni supradicto.

Note. New Place, the second largest house in Stratford, was built over a century before Shakespeare acquired it by a member of the important Clopton family. It stood at the corner of Chapel Street and Chapel Lane, north of the Guild Chapel. In 1563 the house passed from the possession of William Clopton to that of a wealthy, though apparently unscrupulous, capitalist, William Bott, who sold it in 1567 to William Underhill, father of the William who appears as vendor in the sale to Shakespeare. Shakespeare’s family entered into occupation of the house very shortly after he had purchased it, but a further transaction with a member of the Underhill family became necessary in 1602 to assure the poet’s title (see document XXXV). New Place remained Shakespeare’s home till his death, and his will makes elaborate provision for its transfer to his heirs, who continued to own it till the death in 1670 of Lady Bernard, his granddaughter and last lineal descendant. In accordance with Lady Bernard’s will the house was sold, and ultimately passed back to the Clopton family, one of whom in 1702 erected a new house on the site of the Shakespearean mansion. (See Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines of the Life of Shakespeare, seventh ed., 1887, ii. 101–135, for a full account of the history of New Place.)

Fact 16

Letter of Abraham Sturley of Stratford to Richard Quyny, temporarily in London, January 24, 1598. (Stratford Corporation Records.)

Most loving and beloved in the Lord, in plain English we remember you in the Lord and ourselves unto you. I would write nothing unto you now but ‘Come home!’ I pray God send you comfortably home. This is one special remembrance from your father’s motion: It seemeth by him that our countryman, Mr. Shaksper,

is willing to disburse some money upon some odd yardland or other at Shottery or near about us. He thinketh it a very fit pattern to move him to deal in the matter of our tithes. By the instructions you can give him thereof, and by the friends he can make therefor, we think it a fair mark for him to shoot at, and not unpossible to hit. It obtained would advance him indeed, and would do us much good. Hoc movere et, quantum in te est, permovere ne negligas: hoc enim et sibi et nobis maximi erit momenti. Hic labor, hic opus esset eximie et gloriae et laudis sibi.