Chapter Two THE EARLY AUTHORSHIP OF SHAKE-SPEARE RITICS are generally agreed that Shake-speare, or the author we call Shake-speare, began his dramatic career in or about the year 1592; that whatever he may have written previously to that date he wrote in collaboration with others; that he ceased to write in 1610 or 1612; and that he thus produced all the marvellous works that are ascribed to him in the comparatively short period of eighteen or twenty years. This statement we believe to be in all its parts erroneous; we believe that in 1592 Shake-speare had already acquired a marked pre-eminence among the dramatists of his time; that he collaborated with no one; that, beginning to write in 1580 or thereabouts, he continued to do so (with some interruptions toward the latter part of his life) until the publication of the first folio in 1623; and that he was thus almost constantly producing either new plays, or revised and improved versions of some of his older ones, during a period of more than forty years. The subject naturally divides itself under two heads, the early and the late authorship. The early authorship will be treated first. We shall now undertake to show that the followingnamed Shakespearean plays were written before 1592, and substantially in the order given: KING LEAR (King Leir and his Three Daughters). HENRY V. (Famous Victories of Henry V.). KING JOHN (Troublesome Reign of King John). TITUS ANDRONICUS. THE TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA. HAMLET. THE TAMING OF THE SHREW (Taming of a Shrew). LOVE'S LABOR 'S LOST. THE COMEDY OF ERRORS. KING HENRY VI., Part I. KING HENRY VI., Part III. (Contention.) (True Tragedy.) We shall consider the plays in the reversed order of this list. KING HENRY VI., Part III. This play was first printed, anonymously, in octavo under the title of 'The True Tragedy of Richard, Duke of York,' in 1595. It is alluded to, however, in Greene's 'Groatsworth of Wit,' a book entered on the Stationers' Register September 20, 1592. Greene's statement is as follows: "There is an upstart crow, beautified with our feathers, that with his tiger's heart wrapped 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." The phrase, "tiger's heart wrapped in a player's hide,” is a parody on a line in 'Henry VI.,' Part III. : "O tiger's heart, wrapped in a woman's hide!" This allusion is proof that the play was in existence, and that it had become known to the public, in the summer of 1592. KING HENRY VI., Part II. Part II. of this triple drama was first published under the title, The First Part of the Contention betwixt the Two Famous Houses of York and Lancaster,' in 1594. No evidence, external or internal, exists regarding the date of its composition. We may fairly presume, however, that it was written in its historical order; that is, in or about 1591. KING HENRY VI., Part I. Philip Henslowe, manager of the Rose Theatre in London, made a record in his diary, under date of March 3, 1591-92, of the performance of a play entitled 'Henry VI.' In the same year Thomas Nash, in his 'Pierce Penniless,' identifies this play as the Shakespearean 'King Henry VI.,' Part I., in the following unmistakable manner: "How would it have joyed brave Talbot (the terror of the French) to think that after he had lain two hundred years in his tomb he should triumph again on the stage; and have his bones new embalmed with the tears of ten thousand spectators at least (at several times), who in the tragedian that represents his person behold him bleeding." Talbot figures as a prominent character, and particularly as a "terror to the French," in the play of King Henry VI.,' Part I. He is not mentioned in any other, known to us, of that period. We cannot therefore assign to this play of 'King Henry VI.,' Part I., a date of composition later than 1590-91. THE COMEDY OF ERRORS. The evidences of the early origin of 'The Comedy of Errors' are wholly internal; the earliest record which we can find of it is that of its performance at Gray's Inn (on which occasion Francis Bacon was master of ceremonies) in 1594. That it was written previously to August, 1589, we can assume with a good degree of confidence. Dromio's reply to Antipholus that he had found France in the forehead of the dame who insisted on exercising uxorial rights over him, "making war," as he said, "against her heir" (a pun on the word hair) fixes the period to which its composition may be assigned. "Ant. S. Where France ? "Dro. S. In her forehead, arm'd and reverted, making war against her heir."-iii. 2. Henry of Navarre became heir to the throne of France upon the death of the Duke of Anjou in 1584, but it was not till five years later that he was proclaimed king. The war against him, as "heir," began in April, 1585, and terminated at the death of Henry III. in August, 1589. The 'Comedy of Errors,' then, was probably written between these two dates, a further reference to the Spanish Armada, as an event then fresh in the minds of the people, indicating more definitely the year 1588. LOVE'S LABOR 'S LOST. The scene of this comedy is laid at the court of Navarre in Southern France. Navarre himself is the hero. The most prominent characters associated with the king in the play, Biron, Longaville, Dumain (Duc du Maine), bear names of persons who were also associated with the historic Navarre in the great events of 1585-89. It is hence inferred that the play was written during the stormy period of the French civil war, when interest in French politics attracted attention in England. The date was probably somewhat later than 1586, for an interview held in that year between the King of Navarre and Catherine de Médicis of France, in which the beauty of the ladies accompanying Catherine was conspicuous, seems to have furnished the prototype for one of the principal scenes of the play. Robert Tofte, in a poem which he published in 1598, referred to it as an old production. In literary style, on the other hand, the play clearly antedates the Comedy of Errors.'1 1 The allusion to Banks's dancing horse (i. 2) is in no sense an obstacle to this view. The famous horse was on exhibition in London as early as 1588, and probably earlier, for Richard Tarlton, the comedian, who died September 2, 1588, made it the subject of a public jest. Banks seems to have trained several horses successively, his exhibitions of them covering a period of more than twenty years. He is said to have finally been burned at the stake, as a wizard, in company with one of his beasts, in Rome. "At the beginning of Tofte's 'Alba' it is said: 'Love's Labour's Lost I once did see,' which proves that the play must have been for years on the stage before it was printed." - ELZE's William Shakespeare, p. 333. THE TAMING OF THE SHREW. The first draft of this play bore the title of 'The Taming of a Shrew.' It was so published anonymously in 1594. That it was in existence several years earlier, however, appears from a reference to it in Greene's 'Menaphon' under date of 1589. Greene is slurring the reputed author of Shakespeare, and says: "We had an ewe among our rams whose fleece was white as the hairs that grow on father Boreas' cheek." Evidently a thrust at the Taming of a Shrew,' which contained the following: "Fernando. Tush, Kate, these words add greater love in me, And make me think thee fairer than before; Sweet Kate, the lovelier than Diana's purple robe, Whiter than are the snowy Apenis, Or icy hair that grows on Boreas' chin." Thomas Nash also referred to this play in his letter prefixed to the Menaphon.' Criticising the same person as Greene did in the body of the work,- that is, one who was simply masquerading as a dramatist, he called this reputed author the translator of "two penny pamphlets from the Italian," though possessing, as he said, not the slightest knowledge of that language. The only plays answering this description, then recently produced, were the 'Comedy of Errors' and the Taming of a Shrew.' No good ground exists for a denial of Shakespearean authorship in the case of the Taming of a Shrew.' A comparison of the play as printed in 1594 with the folio version ought to make this clear to any one. The two coincide, not only in plot throughout their entire length, but verbally in not less than two hundred and fifty-six lines, scattered here and there, from beginning to end. No other author's name was ever suggested by contemporaries for either of them. |