16-is shakespeare dead-第9部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



and　to　frequent　the　society　of　lawyers。　　On　no　other　supposition

is　it　possible　to　explain　the　attraction　which　the　law　evidently

had　for　him；　and　his　minute　and　undeviating　accuracy　in　a　subject

where　no　layman　who　has　indulged　in　such　copious　and　ostentatious

display　of　legal　technicalities　has　ever　yet　succeeded　in　keeping

himself　from　tripping。〃



A　lame　conclusion。　　〃No　other　supposition〃　indeed！　Yes；

there　is　another；　and　a　very　obvious　suppositionnamely；　that

Shakespeare　was　himself　a　lawyer；　well　versed　in　his　trade；

versed　in　all　the　ways　of　the　courts；　and　living　in　close

intimacy　with　judges　and　members　of　the　Inns　of　Court。



One　is；　of　course；　thankful　that　Mr。　Collins　has　appreciated

the　fact　that　Shakespeare　must　have　had　a　sound　legal　training；

but　I　may　be　forgiven　if　I　do　not　attach　quite　so　much　importance

to　his　pronouncements　on　this　branch　of　the　subject　as　to　those

of　Malone；　Lord　Campbell；　Judge　Holmes；　Mr。　Castle；　K。C。；　Lord

Penzance；　Mr。　Grant　White；　and　other　lawyers；　who　have　expressed

their　opinion　on　the　matter　of　Shakespeare's　legal　acquirements。

。　。　。



Here　it　may；　perhaps；　be　worth　while　to　quote　again　from

Lord　Penzance's　book　as　to　the　suggestion　that　Shakespeare　had

somehow　or　other　managed　〃to　acquire　a　perfect　familiarity　with

legal　principles；　and　an　accurate　and　ready　use　of　the　technical

terms　and　phrases；　not　only　of　the　conveyancer's　office；　but　of

the　pleader's　chambers　and　the　Courts　at　Westminster。〃　　This；　as

Lord　Penzance　points　out；　〃would　require　nothing　short　of

employment　in　some　career　involving　CONSTANT　CONTACT　with　legal

questions　and　general　legal　work。〃　　But　〃in　what　portion　of

Shakespeare's　career　would　it　be　possible　to　point　out　that　time

could　be　found　for　the　interposition　of　a　legal　employment　in　the

chambers　or　offices　of　practicing　lawyers？　。　。　。　　It　is　beyond

doubt　that　at　an　early　period　he　was　called　upon　to　abandon　his

attendance　at　school　and　assist　his　father；　and　was　soon　after；

at　the　age　of　sixteen；　bound　apprentice　to　a　trade。　　While　under

the　obligation　of　this　bond　he　could　not　have　pursued　any　other

employment。　　Then　he　leaves　Stratford　and　comes　to　London。　　He

has　to　provide　himself　with　the　means　of　a　livelihood；　and　this

he　did　in　some　capacity　at　the　theater。　　No　one　doubt　that。　　The

holding　of　horses　is　scouted　by　many；　and　perhaps　with　justice；

as　being　unlikely　and　certainly　unproved；　but　whatever　the　nature

of　his　employment　was　at　the　theater；　there　is　hardly　room　for

the　belief　that　it　could　have　been　other　than　continuous；　for　his

progress　there　was　so　rapid。　　Ere　long　he　had　been　taken　into　the

company　as　an　actor；　and　was　soon　spoken　of　as　a　〃Johannes

Factotum。'　　His　rapid　accumulation　of　wealth　speaks　volumes　for

the　constancy　and　activity　of　his　services。　　One　fails　to　see

when　there　could　be　a　break　in　the　current　of　his　life　at　this

period　of　it；　giving　room　or　opportunity　for　legal　or　indeed　any

other　employment。　　'In　1589；'　says　Knight；　'we　have　undeniable

evidence　that　he　had　not　only　a　casual　engagement；　was　not　only　a

salaried　servant；　as　may　players　were；　but　was　a　shareholder　in

the　company　of　the　Queen's　players　with　other　shareholders　below

him　on　the　list。'　　This　（1589）　would　be　within　two　years　after

his　arrival　in　London；　which　is　placed　by　White　and　Halliwell…

Phillipps　about　the　year　1587。　　The　difficulty　in　supposing　that；

starting　with　a　state　of　ignorance　in　1587；　when　he　is　supposed

to　have　come　to　London；　he　was　induced　to　enter　upon　a　course　of

most　extended　study　and　mental　culture；　is　almost　insuperable。

Still　it　was　physically　possible；　provided　always　that　he　could

have　had　access　to　the　needful　books。　　But　this　legal　training

seems　to　me　to　stand　on　a　different　footing。　　It　is　not　only

unaccountable　and　incredible；　but　it　is　actually　negatived　by　the

known　facts　of　his　career。〃　　Lord　Penzance　then　refers　to　the

fact　that　〃by　1592　（according　to　the　best　authority；　Mr。　Grant

White）　several　of　the　plays　had　been　written。　　'The　Comedy　of

Errors'　in　1589；　'Love's　Labour's　Lost'　in　1589；　'Two　Gentlemen

of　Verona'　in　1589　or　1590；〃　and　so　forth；　and　then　asks；　〃with

this　catalogue　of　dramatic　work　on　hand　。　。　。　was　it　possible

that　he　could　have　taken　a　leading　part　in　the　management　and

conduct　of　two　theaters；　and　if　Mr。　Phillipps　is　to　be　relied

upon；　taken　his　share　in　the　performances　of　the　provincial　tours

of　his　companyand　at　the　same　time　devoted　himself　to　the　study

of　the　law　in　all　its　branches　so　efficiently　as　to　make　himself

complete　master　of　its　principles　and　practice；　and　saturate　his

mind　with　all　its　most　technical　terms？〃



I　have　cited　this　passage　from　Lord　Penzance's　book；　because

it　lay　before　me；　and　I　had　already　quoted　from　it　on　the　matter

of　Shakespeare's　legal　knowledge；　but　other　writers　have　still

better　set　forth　the　insuperable　difficulties；　as　they　seem　to

me；　which　beset　the　idea　that　Shakespeare　might　have　found　them

in　some　unknown　period　of　early　life；　amid　multifarious　other

occupations；　for　the　study　of　classics；　literature；　and　law；　to

say　nothing　of　languages　and　a　few　other　matters。　　Lord　Penzance

further　asks　his　readers：　　〃Did　you　ever　meet　with　or　hear　of　an

instance　in　which　a　young　man　in　this　country　gave　himself　up　to

legal　studies　and　engaged　in　legal　employments；　which　is　the　only

way　of　becoming　familiar　with　the　technicalities　of　practice；　unless

with　the　view　of　practicing　in　that　profession？　　I　do　not　believe

that　it　would　be　easy；　or　indeed　possible；　to　produce　an　instance

in　which　the　law　has　been　seriously　studied　in　all　its　branches；

except　as　a　qualification　for　practice　in　the　legal　profession。〃





This　testimony　is　so　strong；　so　direct；　so　authoritative；

and　so　uncheapened；　unwatered　by　guesses；　and　surmises；　and

maybe…so's；　and　might…have…beens；　and　could…have…beens；　and　must…

have…beens；　and　the　rest　of　that　ton　of　plaster　of　Paris　out　of

which　the　biographers　have　built　the　colossal　brontosaur　which

goes　by　the　Stratford　actor's　name；　that　it　quite　convinces　me

that　the　man　who　wrote　Shakespeare's　Works　knew　all　about　law　and

lawyers。　　Also；　that　that　man　could　not　have　been　the　Stratford

Shakespeareand　WASN'T。



Who　did　write　these　Works；　then？



I　wish　I　knew。



…

1。　　From　Chapter　XIII　of　THE　SHAKESPEARE　PROBLEM　RESTATED。

By　George　G。　Greenwood；　M。P。　　John　Lane　Company；　publishers。





IX



Did　Francis　Bacon　write　Shakespeare's　Works？　　Nobody　knows。



We　cannot　say　we　KNOW　a　thing　when　that　thing　has　not　been

proved。　　KNOW　is　too　strong　a　word　to　use　when　the　evidence　is

not　final　and　absolutely　conclusive。　　We　can　infer；　if　we　want

to；　like　those　slaves。　。　。　。　　No；　I　will　not　write　that　word；

it　is　not　kind；　it　is　not　courteous。　　The　upholders　of　the

Stratford…Shakespeare　superstition　call　US　the　hardest　names　they

can　think　of；　and　they　keep　doing　it　all　the　time；　very　well；

if　they　like　to　descend　to　that　level；　let　them　do　it；　but　I

will　not　so　undignify　myself　as　to　follow　them。　　I　cannot　call

them　harsh　names；　the　most　I　can　do　is　to　indicate　them　by　terms

reflecting　my　disapproval；　and　this　without　malice；　without　venom。



To　resume。　　What　I　was　about　to　say　was；　those　thugs　have　built

their　entire　superstition　upon　INFERENCES；　not　upon　known　and

established　facts。　　It　is　a　weak　method；　and　poor；　and　I　am

glad　to　be　able　to　say　our　side　never　resorts　to　it　while　there

is　anything　else　to　resort　to。



But　when　we　must；　we　must；　and　we　have　now　arrived　at　a

place　of　that　sort。　。　。　。　　Since　the　Stratford　Shakespeare

couldn't　have　written　the　Works；　we　infer　that　somebody　did。

Who　was　it；　then？　　This　requires　some　more　inferring。



Ordinarily　when　an　unsigned　poem　sweeps　across　the　continent

like　a　tidal　wave　whose　roar　and　boom　and　thunder　are　made　up　of

admiration；　delight；　and　applause；　a　dozen　obscure　people　rise　up

and　claim　the　authorship。　　Why　a　dozen；　instead　of　only　one　or

two？　　One　reason　is；　because　there　are　a　dozen　that　are

recognizably　competent　to　do　that　poem。　　Do　you　remember

〃Beautiful　Snow〃？　　Do　you　remember　〃Rock　Me　to　Sleep；　Mother；

Rock　Me　to　Sleep〃？　　Do　you　remember　〃Backward；　turn；　backward；　O

Time；　in　thy　flight！　　Make　me　a　child　again　just　for　tonight〃？　　I

remember　them　very　well。　　Their　authorship　was　claimed　by　most　of

the　grown…up　people　who　were　alive　at　the　time；　and　every

claimant　had　one　plausible　argument　in　his　favor；　at　leastto

wit；　he　could　have　done　the　authoring；　he　was　competent。



Have　the　Works　been　claimed　by　a　dozen？　　They　haven't。

There　was　good　reason。　　The　world　knows　there　was　but　one　man　on

the　planet　at　the　time　who　was　competentnot　a　dozen；　and　not

two。　　A　long　time　ago　the　dwellers　in　a　far　country　used　now　and

then　to　find　a　procession　of　prodigious　footprints　stretching

across　the　plainfootprints　that　were　three　miles　apart；　each

footprint　a　third　of　a　mile　long　and　a　furlong　deep；　and　with

forests　and　villages　mashed　to　mush　in　it。　　Was　there　any　doubt

as　to　who　made　that　mighty　trail？　　Were　there　a　dozen　claimants？

Where　there　two？　　Nothe　people　knew　who　it　was　that　had　been

along　there：　　there　was　only　one　Hercules。



There　has　been　only　one　Shakespeare。　　There　couldn't　be　two；

certainly　there　couldn't　be　two　at　the　same　time。　　It　takes　ages

to　bring　forth　a　Shakespeare；　and　some　more　ages　to　match　him。

This　one　was　not　matched　before　his　time；　nor　during　his　time；

and　hasn't　been　matched　since。　　The　prospect　of　matching　him　in

our　time　is　not　bright。



The　Baconians　claim　that　the　Stratford　Shakespeare　was　not

qualified　to　write　the　Works；　and　that　Francis　Bacon　was。

They　claim　that　Bacon　possessed　the　stupendous　equipmentboth

natural　and　acquiredfor　the　miracle；　and　that　no　other

Englishman　of　his　day　possessed　the　like；　or；　indeed；

anything　closely　approaching　it。



Macaulay；　in