16-is shakespeare dead-第8章

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！



accurate　knowledge　of　the　law。　　Therefore；　Shakespeare　of

Stratford　must　have　been　an　attorney's　clerk！　　The　method　is

simplicity　itself。　　By　similar　reasoning　Shakespeare　has　been

made　a　country　schoolmaster；　a　soldier；　a　physician；　a　printer；

and　a　good　many　other　things　besides；　according　to　the

inclination　and　the　exigencies　of　the　commentator。　　It　would　not

be　in　the　least　surprising　to　find　that　he　was　studying　Latin　as

a　schoolmaster　and　law　in　an　attorney's　office　at　the　same　time。



However；　we　must　do　Mr。　Collins　the　justice　of　saying　that

he　has　fully　recognized；　what　is　indeed　tolerable　obvious；　that

Shakespeare　must　have　had　a　sound　legal　training。　　〃It　may；　of

course；　be　urged；〃　he　writes；　〃that　Shakespeare's　knowledge　of

medicine；　and　particularly　that　branch　of　it　which　related　to

morbid　psychology；　is　equally　remarkable；　and　that　no　one　has

ever　contended　that　he　was　a　physician。　　（Here　Mr。　Collins　is

wrong；　that　contention　also　has　been　put　forward。）　　It　may　be

urged　that　his　acquaintance　with　the　technicalities　of　other

crafts　and　callings；　notably　of　marine　and　military　affairs；　was

also　extraordinary；　and　yet　no　one　has　suspected　him　of　being　a

sailor　or　a　soldier。　　（Wrong　again。　　Why；　even　Messrs。　Garnett

and　Gosse　〃suspect〃　that　he　was　a　soldier！）　　This　may　be

conceded；　but　the　concession　hardly　furnishes　an　analogy。　　To

these　and　all　other　subjects　he　recurs　occasionally；　and　in

season；　but　with　reminiscences　of　the　law　his　memory；　as　is

abundantly　clear；　was　simply　saturated。　　In　season　and　out　of

season　now　in　manifest；　now　in　recondite　application；　he　presses

it　into　the　service　of　expression　and　illustration。　　At　least　a

third　of　his　myriad　metaphors　are　derived　from　it。　　It　would

indeed　be　difficult　to　find　a　single　act　in　any　of　his　dramas；

nay；　in　some　of　them；　a　single　scene；　the　diction　and　imagery　of

which　are　not　colored　by　it。　　Much　of　his　law　may　have　been

acquired　from　three　books　easily　accessible　to　himnamely；

Tottell's　PRECEDENTS　（1572）；　Pulton's　STATUTES　（1578）；　and

Fraunce's　LAWIER'S　LOGIKE　（1588）；　works　with　which　he　certainly

seems　to　have　been　familiar；　but　much　of　it　could　only　have　come

from　one　who　had　an　intimate　acquaintance　with　legal　proceedings。

We　quite　agree　with　Mr。　Castle　that　Shakespeare's　legal　knowledge

is　not　what　could　have　been　picked　up　in　an　attorney's　office；

but　could　only　have　been　learned　by　an　actual　attendance　at　the

Courts；　at　a　Pleader's　Chambers；　and　on　circuit；　or　by

associating　intimately　with　members　of　the　Bench　and　Bar。〃



This　is　excellent。　　But　what　is　Mr。　Collins's　explanation？

〃Perhaps　the　simplest　solution　of　the　problem　is　to　accept　the

hypothesis　that　in　early　life　he　was　in　an　attorney's　office　（！）；

that　he　there　contracted　a　love　for　the　law　which　never　left　him；

that　as　a　young　man　in　London　he　continued　to　study　or　dabble　in

it　for　his　amusement；　to　stroll　in　leisure　hours　into　the　Courts；

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