In the sixteenth century there were Shakespeares all over the country, in Ess.e.x, Staffordshire, Worcestershire, Nottingham,[36] but chiefly in Warwick.

There the family had spread rapidly. But it is only the first half of the century that concerns us at present. There have been Shakespeares noted in Warwick, Alcester, Berkswell, Snitterfield, Lapworth, Haseley, Ascote, Rowington, Packwood, Beausal, Temple Grafton, Salford, Tamworth, Barston, Tachbrook, Haselor, Rugby, Budbrook, Wroxall, Norton-Lindsey, Wolverton, Hampton-in-Arden, Hampton Lucy, and Knowle.[37]

Most students, recognising Warwickshire as the ancestral home of the poet's family, exclude the town of Warwick from the field of their consideration, and select the Shakespeares of Wroxall, partly because more is known about them, and partly because what is known of them suggests a higher social status than is granted the other branches. From the "Guild of Knowle Records" we learn that in 1504 the fraternity was asked to "pray for the soul of Isabella Shakespeare, formerly Prioress of Wroxall,"[38] that the name of Alice Shakespere was entered, and prayers requested for the soul of Thomas Shakespere, of Ballishalle, in 1511; and in the same year Christopher Shakespere and Isabella, his wife, of Packwood, Meriden, are mentioned. The name of "Domina Jane Shakspere" appears late in 1526. She is often spoken of as another Prioress. Now, it is important to notice that Dugdale mentions neither of these ladies. He records that D. Isabella Asteley was appointed July 30, 1431, and that D. Jocosa Brome, daughter of John Brome,[39]

succeeded her. She resigned in 1524, and died on June 21, 1528.

Agnes Little was confirmed Prioress November 20, 1525, and at the dissolution of the house a pension of 7 10s. was granted her for life.

The rest of her fellow nuns were exposed to the wide world to seek their fortunes. Now Dugdale, with all his perfections, occasionally makes mistakes. He either mistook Asteley for Shakespeare, or another Shakespeare prioress intervened between the two that he mentions. The "Guild of Knowle Records" give unimpeachable testimony as to the existence and date of the Prioress, Isabella Shakespeare. In the edition of Dugdale's "Warwickshire" by Dr. W. Thomas, 1730, and the edition of his "Monasticon," published 1823, there is mentioned in a note that a license for electing to the office was granted Johanna Shakespere, Sub-Prioress, September 5, 1525. So she might have had the empty t.i.tle of Domina, without the usual pension allowed to the Prioress on dissolution.[40]

After the name of Domina Johanna Shakspere in the Knowle Records occur those of Richard Shakspere and Alice, his wife; William Shakespere and Agnes his wife; Johannes Shakespere and Johanna his wife, 1526; Richard Woodham and Agnes his wife, who was the sister of Richard. This Richard Shakespere was probably the Bailiff[41] of the Priory, who shortly before the Dissolution collected the rents and held lands from the Priory. He, however, was replaced in his office by John Hall, who received a patent for it on January 4, 26 Henry VIII. Among the tenants of the dissolved Priory were mentioned[42] "Richard Shakespeare,"

"William Shakespeare," and "land in the tenure of John Shakespeare, demised to Alice Taylor, of Hanwell, in the county of Oxford."

Mr. Yeatman[43] transcribes a grant of land in Wroxall by the Prioress Isabella Shakespere to John Shakespere and Elene, his wife, in 23 Henry VII. (Richard Shakespere on the jury).[44] But there seems to be some error in the date, as the "Guild of Knowle Records" distinctly state that Isabella the Prioress was either dead in 19 Henry VII. or had retired from office.

Elena c.o.c.kes, widow, late wife of John Shakespere, and Antony, her son, appear about this land in a court held by Agnes Little, Prioress of Wroxhall, April 21, 25 Henry VIII. William Shakespeare and Agnes were concerned in it, Alice Lone, and many other connected names. A Richard Shakespere was on the jury, and a Richard Shakespere was appointed Ale-taster. The Subsidy Rolls do not give a John resident in Wroxall at any date, but in 14, 15, and 16 Henry VIII. John, senior, and John, junior, were resident in the adjoining village of Rowington, and in 34 and 37 Henry VIII. there was one John Shakespeare there. In 16 Henry VIII.[45] there was a Richard Shakespere in Hampton Corley. The name also occurs at Wroxall in that year and in Rowington in 34-5 Henry VIII.

There were also a Thomas and a Lawrence (mentioned as a cousin in a will of a John Shakespere, 1574), at Rowington at that time, and the name of William appears repeatedly in Wroxall. A Robert Shakespere was presented for non-suit. Rev. Joseph Hunter[46] gives a rental of Rowington 2 Edward VI. Among the free tenants of Lowston End was John Shakespere; at Mowsley End, Johanna Shakespere, a widow, who seems to have died 1557, as her will, though lost, is mentioned in the index at Worcester; a William Shakespere and a Richard Shakespere are also mentioned. In 3 Elizabeth Thomas Shakespere held a messuage in Lowston. In Rowington End John Shakespere held a cottage called "The Twycroft," and Richard Shakespere a messuage in Church End at the same time. In the reign of Edward VI. a Richard Shakespere was on the jury for Hatton, a Court in the Manor of Wroxall. The Wroxall Parish Registers begin too late to be of any use (1586). The Wroxall Court Rolls mention in 1523, Richard of Haseley; 1530-36, Richard and William; 1547, Ralph of Barston.

Ralph[47] Shakespere was on the jury for Berkswell November 11, 4 Edward VI. and 5 Edward VI. In 1560 Laurence was presented, because he overburdened the commons with his cattle. John is mentioned in a transfer of property. Mr. J. W. Ryland gives us invaluable help in his publication of "The Records of Rowington." John Shakespeer and Robert Fulwood, gent., are mentioned as feoffees in the will of John Hill of Rowington, September 23, 1502. John Shakespeare elder and younger are frequently mentioned in the Charters of Rowington as feoffees or as witnesses, and a John had a lease of the Harveys for twenty-one years in 1554. A Joan Shakespeare, widow, and her son Thomas, lived at Lyannce in Hatton in 1547. In the Rental of Rowington, 1560-1, there are mentioned Thomas, William, John and Richard. Mr. Hunter mentions a Richard Shakespeyre, at Mansfield, co. Notts, about 1509; a Peter, in 1545; and a John at Derby, 36 Henry VIII. A Richard Shakespere was a.s.sessed at Hampton Carlew 16 Henry VIII.; Richard Woodham and Richard Shakspere had a farm at Haseley. The Haseley Registers begin in 1538, and are interesting for the fact that they record on October 21, 1571, the death and burial of "Domina Jane," formerly a nun of Wroxall, who would seem to have been the last sub-prioress, probably connected with Richard Shakespere, the Bailiff. In 1558 a Roger Shakespere was buried--by some supposed to be the old monk of Bordesley[48]--who received 100s.

annuity.

The earliest Shakespeare will at Worcester, proved at _Stratford_, was that of Thomas Shakespere, of Alcester, 1539, who left 20s. each to his father and mother, Richard and Margaret. He had a wife Margaret and a son William.[49] Among other Worcester wills is that of Thomas Shakespere of Warwick, shoemaker, May 20, 1557, who left his wife Agnes lands in Balsall for life; his daughter Jone, wife to Francis Ley, 4; to his sons Thomas and John 4 n.o.bles each; and his son William was to be his heir. Richard Shakysspere of Rowington, weaver, June 15, 1560, left his property to his sons Richard and William. His brothers-in law John and William Reve were executors and Richard Shakespeare was a witness.

In 1561 this William Reve in his will left a sheep to Margaret Shakspere, and in 1565 Robert Shakespeere of Rowington made his will.

But among all these Shakesperes we cannot certainly fix upon any one that is directly connected with our Shakespeare. It seems _almost_ certain that John Shakespeare was son of Richard Shakespeare, of Snitterfield. And yet many doubt it on grounds worthy of consideration, which are treated later in the notice of John Shakespeare. Mr. Yeatman found that an Alice Griffin, daughter of Edward, and sister of Francis Griffin of Braybrook, married a Shakespeare. He takes it for granted that she married Richard of Wroxall, and that it was he who came to Snitterfield. We must beware of drawing definite conclusions, of making over-hasty generalizations. We only collect the bricks to help future investigators to build the edifice.

The Sir Thomas Schakespeir, Curate, of Ess.e.x, Bristol and London, who died 1559, is treated later among the Ess.e.x Shakespeares.

There is one curious mention of the name which no student seems to have worked out. A certain Hugh Saunders, _alias Shakespere_,[50] of Merton College, Oxford, became Princ.i.p.al of St. Albans Hall in 1501. He was Vicar of Meopham, in Kent, Rector of Mixbury, Canon of St. Paul's, and Prebendary of Ealdstreet, in 1508; and Rector of St. Mary's, Whitechapel, in 1512. He died 1537. Now, such an alias was common at the time, when a man's mother was of higher social station than his father.

We may therefore, seeing he was somehow connected with Shakespeare, imagine Hugh Saunders' mother to have been a Shakespeare. He is styled "vir literis et virtute percelebris."

FOOTNOTES:

[36] "George Shaksper complains against Agnes Marshall that she detains two rosaries," June 18, 1533.--"Common Trained Soldiers in Nottingham,"

Peter Shakespear, etc., 1596-97. Stevenson's "Nottingham Records."

[37] Halliwell-Phillipps' "Outlines," vol. ii., p. 252.

[38] Guild of Knowle Register.

[39] John Brome was Lord of the Manor of Baddesley Clinton, but was murdered in the porch of the Church of the White Friars, London, November 9, 1468, leaving a wife, Beatrice, three sons and two daughters, one of whom was Jocosa. His son Thomas succeeded, and died without heirs, and his second son Nicholas then inherited the property.

Eight of his children are registered in the guild of Knowle. His son-in-law was Sir Edward Ferrers, who married Constance, to whom the property afterwards came. Their son was Henry Ferrers, the great Warwickshire antiquary, who succeeded at sixteen, and was Lord of the Manor for sixty-nine years ("Baddesley Clinton," Rev. H. Norris, p.

234).

[40] Nam Licentia concessa fuit Johanne Shakespere Sub priorisse ad.

eligend., 5 Sept., 1525; et 20 Nov., 1525, Agnes Little confirmata fuit Priorissa de Wroxall. Vac. per resign. Joc. Brome. Dugdale's "Monasticon," ed. 1823, vol. iv., p. 89, and "Warwickshire," ed. 1730, p. 649.

[41] "Valor Ecclesiasticus," 26 Henry VIII. (1535).

[42] Ministers' Accounts, April 24, 28 Henry VIII., and Augmentation Books, Public Record Office.

[43] Yeatman's "Gentle Shakespeare," pp. 138-142.

[44] Court Rolls, General Series, Portfolio 207, No. 99.

[45] Addit. MSS., Brit. Mus. (24,500).

[46] Mr. Yeatman's "Gentle Shakespeare," p. 142.

[47] Court Roll, No. 10, p. 207.

[48] Nash's "Worcestershire," vol. ii., account of Tardebigg. See Augmentation Books, October 14, 1539, 233, f. 8.

[49] Hunter's "Prolusions," p. 9.

[50] Wood's Colleges. Fasti Oxoniensis, Bliss, 1815. Wood, Antiq. Oxon., L. 2, 341. Boase, Reg. Univ. Oxon. Newcourt's "Repertorium."

CHAPTER IV

THE SHAKESPEARE COAT OF ARMS

[Ill.u.s.tration: NON SANZ DROICT.]

None of the family seem to have risen above the heraldic horizon till John Shakespeare applied for his coat of arms. Into the contest over that application it is well to plunge at once, and thence work backwards and forwards. Four cla.s.ses of writers wage war over the facts: the Baconians, like the late Mr. Donnelly, who deny everything; the Romanticists, who accept what is pleasant, and occasionally believe manufactured tradition to suit their inclinations; the agnostic Shakespeareans, like Halliwell-Phillipps, who really work, but believe only what they can see and touch, if it accords with their opinions; and the ingenuous workers who seek saving truth like the agnostics, but bring human influences and natural inferences to bear on dusty records.

Now, Halliwell-Phillipps does not scruple to affirm that three heralds,[51] the worthy ex-bailiff of Stratford, and the n.o.blest poet the world has ever produced, were practically liars in this matter, because they make statements that do not harmonize with the limits of his knowledge and the colour of his opinions. From his grave the poet protests--

"Good name in man or woman, dear my lord, Is the immediate jewel of their souls.

Who steals my purse steals trash....

But he who filches from me my good name Robs me of that, which not enriches him, But leaves me poor indeed."

_Oth.e.l.lo_, Act III., Scene 3.

We must therefore at least start inquiry with the supposition that these men thought they spoke truth. There was no reason they should not have done so. Sir John Ferne[52] writes: "If any person be advanced into an office or dignity of publique administration, be it eyther Ecclesiasticall, Martiall or Civill ... the Herealde must not refuse to devise to such a publique person, upon his instant request, and willingness to bear the same without reproche, a Coate of Armes, and thenceforth to matriculate him with his intermarriages and issues descending in the Register of the gentle and n.o.ble.... In the Civil or Political State divers Offices of dignitie and worship doe merite Coates of Armes to the possessours of the same offices, as ... Bailiffs of Cities and ancient Boroughs or incorporated townes." John Shakespeare had certainly been Bailiff of Stratford-on-Avon in 1568-9; the draft states that he then applied for arms, and that the herald, Cooke, had sent him a "pattern." Probably he did not conclude the negotiations then, thinking the fees too heavy, or he might have delayed until he found his opportunity lost, or he might have asked them for his year of office alone. No doubt John Shakespeare was deeply impressed with the dignity of his wife's relatives, and wished, even then, to make himself and his family more worthy for her sake. The tradition of this draft, or the sight of it, may have stimulated the heart of the good son to honour his parents by having them enrolled among the _Armigeri_ of the county.

John had appeared among the "gentlemen" of Warwickshire in a government list of 1580.[53]

The Warwickshire Visitations occur in 1619, after the death of the poet, without male heirs, and are no help to us here. In the first 1596 draft the claims are based on John's public office, on a grant to his antecessors by Henry VII. for special services on marriage with the daughter and heir of a gentleman of worship (_i.e._, ent.i.tled to armorial bearings). Then a fuller draft was drawn out, also in 1596, correcting "antecessors" into "grandfather." Halliwell-Phillipps only mentions one at that date, but Mr. Stephen Tucker,[54] Somerset Herald, gives facsimiles of both. Halliwell-Phillipps calls these ridiculous a.s.sertions, and a.s.serts that both parties were descended from obscure country yeomen. The heralds state they were "solicited," and "on credible report" informed of the facts. We must not forget that all the friends intimately a.s.sociated either with the Ardens or the Shakespeares (with the exception of the Harts) were armigeri.

n.o.body now knows anything of that earlier pattern, nor of the patents of the gifts "to the antecessors." But seeing, as I have seen, that sacks full of old parchment deeds and bonds, reaching back to the fifteenth century, get cleared out of lawyers' offices, and sold for small sums to make drumheads or book-bindings, and seeing that this process has been going on for 400 years, it does not seem to me surprising that some deeds do get lost. Generally, it is those we most wish to have that disappear. Lawyers do not, as a rule, concern themselves with historical fragments, but with the soundness of the present t.i.tles of their clients and their own modern duties. (I do think that historical and antiquarian societies should bestir themselves to have old deeds included among the "ancient monuments of the country" and ent.i.tled to some degree of protection.)

We must also consider how illiterate the inhabitants of the country were in the reign of Henry VII., how the nation was bestrid by officials of the Empson and Dudley type, and we have reason to believe that various accidents, intentional or otherwise, caused many an old grant to disappear at that period.

It has struck me as possible that John Shakespeare may have intended ancestors through the female line. The names of his mother and grandmother are as yet unknown, and the supposition has never been discussed. But in support of John Shakespeare's claim, and in opposition to Halliwell-Phillipps's contradiction, we can prove there _were_ Shakespeares in direct service of the Crown, not merely as common soldiers, though in 28 Henry VIII. (1537), Thomas, Richard, William and another Richard were mentioned as among the King's forces.[55]

But one Roger Shakespeare was Yeoman of the Chamber to the King, and on June 9, 1552, shared with his fellows, Abraham Longwel and Thomas Best, a forfeit of 36 10s.[56] This post of Yeoman of the Chamber was one of great trust and dignity; it was the same as that held earlier by Robert Arden, of Yoxall, the younger brother of Sir John Arden, and the election to it suggested either inherited favour, Court interest, or signal personal services. His ancestors might have been also the missing ancestors of John Shakespeare. He himself may be the Roger who was buried in Haseley in 1558, supposed by some to have been the monk of Bordesley. He may also have been the father of Thomas Shakespeare, the Royal Messenger of 1575, noticed later.