: We hold, then, that William Shakspere, the son of a possessor and cultivator of land, a gentleman by descent, married to the heiress of a good family, comfortable in his worldly circumstances, married the daughter of one in a similar rank of life, and in all probability did not quit his native place when he so married. The marriage-bond, which was discovered a few years since, has set at rest all doubt as to the name and residence of his wife. She is there described as Anne Hathwey, of Stratford, in the diocese of Worcester, maiden. Rowe, in his Life,' says,-"Upon his leaving school he seems to have given entirely into that way of living which his father proposed to him and in order to settle in the world, after a family manner, he thought fit to marry while he was yet very young. His wife was the daughter of one Hathaway, said to have been a substantial yeoman in the neighbourhood of Stratford." At the hamlet of Shottery, which is in the parish of Stratford, the Hathaways had been settled forty years before the period of Shakspere's marriage; for in the Warwickshire Surveys, in the time of Philip and Mary, it is recited that John Hathaway held property at Shottery, by copy of court-roll, dated 20th of April, 34th of Henry VIII. (1543).* The Hathaway of Shakspere's time was named Richard; and the intimacy between him and John Shakspere is shown by a precept in an action against Richard Hathaway, dated 1576, in which John Shakspere is his bondman. Before the discovery of the marriage-bond Malone had found a confirmation of the traditional account that the maiden name of Sakspere's wife was Hathaway; for Lady Barnard, the grand-daughter of Shakspere, makes bequests in her will to the children of Thomas Hathaway, "her kinsman." But Malone doubts whether there were not other Hathaways than those of Shottery, residents in the town of Stratford, and not in the hamlet included in the parish. This is possible. But, on the other hand, the description in the marriage-bond of Anne Hathaway, as of Stratford, is no proof that she was not of Shottery; for such a document would necessarily have regard only to the parish of the person described. Tradition, always valuable when it is not opposed to evidence, has associated for many years the cottage of the Hathaways at Shottery with the wife of Shakspere. Garrick purchased relics out of it at the time of the Stratford Jubilee; Samuel Ireland afterwards carried off what was called Shakspere's courting-chair; and there is still in the house a very ancient carved bedstead, which has been handed down from descendant to descendant as an heirloom. The house was no doubt once adequate to form a comfortable residence for a substantial and even wealthy yeoman. It is still a pretty cottage, embosomed by trees, and surrounded by pleasant pastures; and The Shottery property, which was called Hewland, remained with the descendants of the Hathaways till 1838. 266 here the young poet might have surrendered his prudence to his affections: "As in the sweetest buds The eating canker dwells, so eating love Inhabits in the finest wits of all."* The very early marriage of the young man, with one more than seven years his elder, has been supposed to have been a rash and passionate proceeding. Upon the face of it, it appears an act that might at least be reproved in the words which follow those we have just quoted : "As the most forward bud Is eaten by the canker ere it blow, This is the common consequence of precocious marriages; but we are not therefore to conclude that "the young and tender wit" of our Shakspere was "turned to folly"-that his "forward bud" was "eaten by the canker "-that Two Gentlemen of Verona Act I., Scene 1. 'his verdure was lost "even in the prime," by his marriage with Anne Hathaway before he was nineteen. The influence which this marriage must have had upon his destinies was no doubt considerable; but it is too much to assume, as it has been assumed, that it was an unhappy influence. All that we really know of Shakspere's family life warrants the contrary supposition. We believe, to go no farther at present, that the marriage of Shakspere was one of affection; that there was no disparity in the worldly condition of himself and the object of his choice; that it was with the consent of friends; that there were no circumstances connected with it which indicate that it was either forced or clandestine, or urged on by an artful woman to cover her apprehended loss of character. Taking up, as little as possible, a controversial attitude in a matter of such a nature, we shall shape our course according to this belief. In the last week of November, in the year 1582, let us look upon a cheerful family scene in the pretty village of Clifford. The day is like a green old age, "frosty but kindly." The sun shines brightly upon the hills, over which a happy party have tripped from Stratford. It is a short walk of some mile and a half. The village stands very near the confluence of the Stour with the Avon. It is Sunday; and after the service there is to be a christening. The visitors assemble at a substantial house, and proceed reverently to church. The age is not yet arrived when the cold formalities of a listless congregation have usurped the place of real devotion. The responses are made with the earnest voice which indicates the full heart; and the young, especially, join in the choral parts of the service, so as to preserve one of the best characters of adoration, in offering a tribute of gladness to Him who has filled the world with beauty and joy. During the service the sacrament of baptism is administered with a reverential solemnity. William Shakspere had often been so present at its administration, and the ceremonial has appeared to him full of truth and holiness. But the opinions which were earnestly disseminated amongst the people, by teachers pretending to superior sanctity and wisdom, would be also familiar to him; and he would have learnt, from those who were opposed to most ancient ceremonial observances, that the signing with the Cross in baptism was a superstitious relic of Rome-a thing rejected by the understanding, and only preserved as a delusion of the imagination. A book with which he was familiar in after-life was not then written; but on such occasions of controversy it would occur to him that "the holy sign,' "imprinted on the gates of the palace of man's fancy," would suggest associations which to Christian men would be "a most effectual though a silent teacher to avoid whatsoever may deservedly procure shame." Through the imagination would this holy sign work; for "the mind, while we are in this present life, whether it contemplate, meditate, deliberate, or howsoever exercise itself, worketh nothing without continual recourse unto imagination, the only storehouse of wit, and peculiar chair of memory. On this anvil it ceaseth not day and night to strike, by means whereof, as the pulse declareth how the 268 heart doth work, so the very thoughts and cogitations of man's mind, be they good or bad, do nowhere sooner bewray themselves than through the crevices of that wall wherewith Nature hath compassed the cells and closets of fancy." Such was the way in which the young Shakspere would, we think, religiously and philosophically, regard this ceremony; it would be so impressed upon his "imagination." But the service is ended; the gossips are assembled in the churchyard. A merry peal rings out from the old tower. Cordial welcome is there within the yeoman's house, to whose family such an occasion as this is a joyful festival. The chief sponsors duly present the apostle-spoons to the child; but one old lady, who looks upon this practice as a luxurious innovation of modern times, is content to offer a christening shirt.† The refection of the guests aspires to daintiness as much as plenty; and the comely dames upon their departure do not hesitate to put the sweet biscuits and comfits into their + See Note to this Chapter. Hooker's 'Ecclesiastical Polity,' book v. pockets. There is cordial salutation, at this meeting, of William Shakspere and his fair companion. He and Anne Hathaway are bound together by the trothplight. There is no secret as to this union; there is no affectation in concea.ing their attachment. He speaks of her as his wife; she of him as her husband. He is tall and finely formed, with a face radiant with intellect, and capable of expressing the most cheerful and most tender emotions; she is in the full beauty of womanhood, glowing with health and conscious happiness. Some of the gossips whisper that she is too old for him; but his frank and manly bearing, and her beauty and buoyant spirits, would not suggest this, if some tattle about age was not connected with the whisper. No one of that company, except an envious rival, would hold that they were “ misgraffed in respect of years." The Church is in a few days to cement the union, which, some weeks ago, was fixed by the public trothplight. They are hand-fasted, and they are happy. There is every reason to believe that Shakspere was remarkable for manly beauty:-"He was a handsome, well-shaped man," says Aubrey. According to tradition, he played Adam in As You Like It, and the Ghost in Hamlet. Adam Upon his personation of the Ghost, Mr. Campbell has the following judicious remarks:-" It has been alleged, in proof of his mediocrity, that he enacted the part of his own Ghost, in Hamlet. But is the Ghost in Hamlet a very mean character? No: though its movements are few, they must be awfully graceful; and the spectral voice, though subdued and half-monotonous, must be solemn and full of feeling. It gives us an imposing idea of Shakspere's stature and mien to conceive him in this part. The English public, accustomed to see their lofty nobles, their Essexes, and their Raleighs, clad in complete armour, and moving under it with a majestic air, would not have tolerated the actor Shakspeare, unless he had presented an appearance worthy of the buried majesty of Denmark."* That he performed kingly parts is indicated by these lines, written, in 1611, by John Davies, in a poem inscribed To our English Terence, Mr. William Shakspeare :' "Some say, good Will, which I in sport do sing, And been a king among the meaner sort." The portrait by Martin Droeshout, prefixed to the edition of 1623, when Shakspere would be well remembered by his friends, gives a notion of a man of remarkably fine features, independent of the wonderful development of forehead. The lines accompanying it, which bear the signature B. I. (most likely Ben Jonson), attest the accuracy of the likeness. The bust at Stratford bears the same character. The sculptor was Gerard Johnson. It was probably erected soon after the poet's death; for it is mentioned by Leonard Digges, in his • Remarks prefixed to Moxon's edition of the Dramatic Works. |