Knight's store of knowledge for all readers: being a collection of treatises, in various departments of knowledge / by several authors.

  • Knight, Charles, 1791-1873
Date:
[1841]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Knight's store of knowledge for all readers: being a collection of treatises, in various departments of knowledge / by several authors. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    22/406 (page 12)
    subscribe tlicir marks. Tlio licence, aflixcd to tlie bond, tlien lirocceds as follows :— “ The oomlitioii of this obligation is such, tliat if licreafter there shall not npiwar any lawful let or imjxidiinciit by reason of any precontnict or nflluity, or by any other lawful means whatsoever, but that William Shnkspere on the one Jiarty, and Anne Hnthway of Stratford, in the diocese of ^V'orcc8ter, maiden, may lawfully sulcnmise matrimony, and in the same aflenvarils remain and continuo like man and wife, according unto the laws in that case provided; and moreover, if there be not at this present time any action, suit, quarrel, or demand, moved or depending before any judge ecclesiastical, or tem- ])oral, for and concering any such lawful let or impediment; and moreover, if the said William .Shakspere do not proceed to solemnization of marriage with the said Anne Hatliway without tlie consent of her friends ; and also if the said William Shakspere do upon his own proper costs and ex- penses defend and save harmless the Right Reverend Father in God Lord John Bishop of Worcester and his officers for licensing them, the said AVilliam and Anne, to be married togetlier with once asking of the bans of matrimony between them, and for all other causes which may ensue by reason or occasion thereof, that then the 'said obligation to be void and of none eflect, or else to stand and abide in full force and virtue.” The remarkable part of this licence is that they were to be married “ with once asking of the bansthey were not to be married “ without the consent ” of Anne's friends. There is no record where they were married. In 1583 an entry, of which we give the fac-simile (No. 8), is found in the Stratford Register of Baptisms. The entry is the fourth of the month, tile word May being attached to the first entry of tlie month. A comparison of the dates of the marriage licence and the baptism of Shakspere's first child leads to the obvious conclusion that the same fault into which the courtly Raleigh and tlie high-boni Elizabeth Throgmorton had fallen liad disturbed the peace of the liumble family of tlie Hathaways, and had no doubt made the mother of the imprudent boy-poet weep bitter tears. But there was instant reparation—a reparation, too, that must have been the volun- tary act of him who had committed tiie error. The troth- plight had no doubt preceded the legal marriage. There was, however, no public shame. AVilliam Shakspere was an in- habitant of .Stratford, and his wife is denoted os such in the licence;—and there they dwelt when they(were married;— and there their children were bom;—and there they lived in tlieir later years in opulence ;—and there they died. AVe can see no useful purpose to be sen ed in drawing inferences unfavour- able to the general character of Sliakspere’s wife from the docu- ment which has been discovered, and especially in assuming that domestic unhappiness banished him from Stratford. There is a remarkable passage in tbe comedy of ‘ Twelfth Night’ which has been supposed to bear upon the private history of Sliakspere; and there is another in the ‘Tempest,’ in whicli Prospero pronounces a solemn charge to Ferdinand, which is suppolcd to bear upon tlie circumstances which led to his own hasty marriage. AVe believe that such conjectures are in gene- ral founded upon a misapprehension of the dramatic spirit in which he worked; and that such notions especially as tliat he was himself jealous, because he has so truly depicted the pas- sion of jealousy,—or that he had himself felt the bitter pang of filial irreverence, because he had written, ** Ingratitude I thou marble-hearted Itend, More hideous, when tliou show's! ttieoina chiid, Tlian the aca'inonttcr 1’'— arc altogether hllc and worthies*. The detail*, however, of .Shakspere s private life are so few, and the facts and tradition* which have come down to ns require such careful exninina- limi, that we need not he surprised that tlie Innguago wliich he ha* held to he characteristic of the persons and incident* of his drama* *houM have hceii deemed, with more or less inge- nuity, to be choructcrUtic of himself, hi* action*, and hi* cir- cumstance*. Amongst the least overstrained of tliesc applica- tioiis is tlie passage in ‘ Twelfth Night;' and the inferences to be drawn from it are recommended by the opinion of one of the most original of living prose-writers :— “ Shakspere himself, looking back on his youtliful history from his inaturest years, breathes forth ^lathctic counsels Against llie ciTor* into which his own incx]>cnence had been ensnared. The disjxu-ity of years between himself and his wife he notices in a beautiful scene of the ‘Twelfth Night*’ The Duke Or8ino,obscn lng the sensibility which the pretended Cesorio had betrayed on hearing some touching old snatches of a love-strain, swear* that hi* licardless page must have felt Uie |)ossiou of love, which tlie other admits. Upon this the dia- logue proceeds tlms:— ** * Duke- >Vlinl kind of tcomnn is't ? y*oia. or >*011? compleidon. Duke. .She is nol worth Ihoc then. What years, i’ tiiilh ? Vio!a. About your year*, my louj.