CHAPTER XIII

LAST YEARS IN LONDON

Although the seventeenth century dated the beginning of the more serious frame of mind in the dramatist, the records of his life for the year 1600 present him first as recovering £7 in a lawsuit from one John. Clayton, not otherwise known to fame. Clayton's immortality seems not expensive, such as it is, and Shakespeare's action shows an interest in practical matters which is further confirmed by the fact that he about this time busied himself in planting an orchard in Stratford.

Some trifling indications point to increasing general prosperity in England. The Earl of Arundel is credited with introducing the use of bricks in building, and it was

found necessary to forbid by law gentlemen from riding in those effeminate inventions, coaches, instead of going a-horseback as their fathers were wont. The more general use of vegetables is shown by the arrival of asparagus, artichokes, and cauliflowers upon English tables.

But to the student of Shakespeare the most important event of the year is the Essex rebellion, which involved Southampton in the foolish attempt to raise the people of London against Elizabeth. While the Queen made enemies by her autocratic ways and her court favoritism, the best sense of the nation knew from their experience under Mary Tudor that to bring the burning questions of religion into politics was to enter upon a time of disasters.

Naturally Essex's rebellion was an utter failure, and its authors went to the Tower. Essex lost his head and Southampton escaped only by the coming of King James to the throne. But in order to foment re

bellion, there had been an attempt to use the theatre and its hold upon the people. Testimony taken in regard to the uprising showed that forty shillings had been paid to the actor Augustine Phillips to play 66 Richard II." at the Globe Theatre, as a sort of object-lesson in the deposing of a monarch. The play was given early in February, 1601, and apparently not only at the Globe, since Queen Elizabeth complained, as Sidney Lee shows, that this tragedy was played “forty times in open streets and houses," with the intention of making trouble. If, as it seems, this was Shakespeare's play, it is at least a proof of the power of his work and its hold upon the public.

And yet there was rivalry for the actors, and a rivalry they keenly felt. The boys who formed the choirs in the Royal Chapel and in the Cathedral had been accustomed to present plays now and then, and after they had hired the Blackfriars Theatre,

their representations became so popular as to draw people from the regular performances. This gave rise to quarrels and recriminations into which we cannot enter, but they have given occasion for much writing regarding the relation of Ben Jonson and Shakespeare to the strife. Jonson championed the youthful players, and while Shakespeare is not known to have entered actively into the squabble we find in “ Hamlet" an unmistakable reference to the questions, and Shakespeare's opinion on the

matter.

Hamlet asks after the fortunes of the actors, and Rosencrantz in explaining why they are not "so followed," says:

"Their endeavor keeps in the wonted pace; but there is, sir, an aëry of children, little eyases that cry out on the top of question, and are most tyrannically clapped for it. These are now the fashion, and so berattle the common stages so they call them that many wearing rapiers are

afraid of goose-quills, and dare scarce come thither."

Then Hamlet points out the absurdity of the rivalry between young and old players whose interests should be the same, and thus dismisses the subject without ill-humor, and with eminent good-sense. If Shakespeare spoke his own mind, it does not seem likely he had allowed himself to take any bitterness from the controversy. Exactly what part he took is not settled, but in Jonson's "Poetaster," which is based upon the fracas, he seems willing that Shakespeare should play the role of arbiter and peacemaker; while in the "Return from Parnassus" a play given at Cambridge, Shakespeare is spoken of as if he had thrown his influence against Jonson and the boy-players. Those interested must look elsewhere for the detailed arguments.

In this year Shakespeare's father died, being buried on September 8, 1601, and thus the dramatist inherited the Henley