ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

MINOR CORRESPONDENCE.

MR. URBAN,-It seems to be generally agreed that the great survey of England by the commissioners of William the First is of inestimable value, and, therefore, anything which serves to explain the title of Domesday or Doomsday Book, by which it is familiarly known, may perhaps be interesting. The prevailing idea, I believe, now is, that the ludicrous appellation of Doomsday Book, derived, probably, from the Anglo-Saxon tenants, is a corruption of Domus-Dei, or God's house, MaisonDieu, its early place of custody. This is corroborated by the description of a very splendid copy of it preserved in the Church of Christ at Canterbury; for among the books recorded as being there early in the reign of Edward the Second is one entered thus: "Textus Magnus qui dicitur DOMUS DEI, argenteus, coopertus, et gemmis ornatus, cum crucifixo, et Maria et Johanne eburneo, et alba camáu sub pede crucifixi, cum quatuor Evangelistis in quatuor angulis." What value must all our old lawyers have attached to this great text book, bound in silver, and garnished with jewels, with a crucifix of ivory in the centre, accompanied with the usual figures of Mary and John in the same material, and a white cameo under the feet of the crucifix, with the symbols of the Four Evangelists at the four angles of the cover! I shall esteem it a favour if any of your learned Correspondents, Mr. Urban, will furnish me with any earlier notices of this volume. Oxford. Yours, &c. J. INGRAM.

In Camden's Britannia, under the head of" Romans in Britain," it is said, "We find in OLD RECORDS that in the days of Honorius and Arcadius, there were made in Britain certain highways from sea to sea." No intimation is given by Camden of his authority for this; but the roads alluded to may I think be ascertained. Perhaps some of your readers can point out the Records referred to by Camden; and if so, would be kind enough to say through

the medium of your Magazine where they may be seen, or point out some clue to ascertaining Camden's authority.-J. P.

QUESTOR has found that other readers besides himself have been puzzled as to the material of the beautiful monument to Bishop Ferrar in Halifax Church, of which we gave a plate and description in our March number. He asks, "Pray what is huddlestone? Hoping it may prove to be a real stone, and not a composition." We are happy to inform the querist that huddlestone is a fine magnesian limestone, so called from a township in the parish of Sherburn near York, in which the quarry lies. It is soft at first, but hardens by exposure, presenting as sharp an edge as marble, whilst it is far more durable. It is therefore admirably adapted to sepulchral monuments in our humid atmosphere. A magnificent monument to Dr. Beckwith in York Minster is in course of preparation from this material, by Mr. Leyland, the talented sculptor of the one to Bishop Ferrar.

We feel satisfied that B. N. A. D. are to be credited, and that the article they refer to requires animadversion and some castigation; but they will perceive that they ought (in confidence) to have favoured us with their real names and address, as the former communication was made to us on such authority.

Our Correspondent N. (p. 226), will find his inquiry about the import of Dominus, Dompnus, or Don, in the middle ages, satisfactorily answered by Fosbroke in Gent. Mag. Feb. 1817, vol. LXXXVII. i p. 114, where an abstract is given of the "Lettera de Francesco Cancellieri," upon the origin of the word "Dominus and Domnus," printed at Rome in 1808.

A STUDENT IN HERALDRY is anxious to know whether any antiquary has written at large on the title Esquire.-We believe he will find this as well as higher dignities discussed in Selden's "Titles of Honour."

THE

GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE.

Life of William Shakspere. By J. O. Halliwell, Esq. 8vo.

IT would be quite as well to have one established Life of Shakspere ; seeing that the former biographies, being written by various gentlemen of different persuasions and creeds, and all a little warm and positive in their notions, and no one bearing a very good will towards the other, have produced certain variations and contradictions that may somewhat embarrass an inexperienced reader. A young friend of ours brought us the result of his perusal of the Lives in one of the Variorum editions, as follows :—

"That Shakspere was a butcher's boy;

That he was an attorney's clerk;

That he was the father of a Doctor of Divinity;

That he was very indolent and careless;

That Thomas Poope and John Shanke were his associates and friends;
That the less that is said about him and Anne Hathaway the better;

That he sacrificed virtue to convenience;

That he made no progress at school;

That he was very ignorant ;

That he wrote in the Trochaic dimeter brachycatalectic;

That he makes Hamlet quote Aristotle ;

That he was paid for mending old plays;

That he was the most ungrammatical of all writers;

That he did not understand the Pes Proceleusmaticus ;

That he has not written one play which now would be heard out;

That what he wrote would require an Act of Parliament to make one read;

That he was a Papist;

That he never went to Church;

That he neglected his own lawful wife, and took up with a Mistress Davenant of
Oxford;

That he was hasty and inattentive;

That he did not understand dramatic laws;

That his rambling and undigested fancies excite the laughter of the critical;

That there is more meaning in the growling of a mastiff and neighing of a horse than in Shakspere;

That there were two Shaksperes ;

That there was never any such person as Shakspere at all."

Amidst the pleasing variety of these biographical traditions it is no wonder that an inexperienced person like ourselves should perchance lose our way, and be led by our "blind guides" into much doubt and discontent. We are therefore thankful for a new Life of our bard, which should remove anomalies and reconcile differences, restore something that is lost, and correct much that is amiss. Mr. Halliwell certainly is not wanting in zeal, industry, and extensive investigation of the subject. He has travelled many miles, turned over many manuscripts, consulted many volumes, detected many errors, rectified many mistakes, contradicted some of his contemporaries (to which we have no kind of objection) and agreed with others. He sometimes indeed strains an hypothesis, and sometimes overloads an argument; but his volume contains some new and interesting materials, and

has afforded us information in several particulars. We proceed in rather too rapid a notice of it, but it is all we have the time and power of doing. Mr. Halliwell observes that--

latent facts that had otherwise been lost with the perishing details of social life. These two writers, indeed, have unfolded so much valuable information, and their perseverance has been so great as almost to have become proverbial, that no astonishment may well be expressed when we find others declining to trace sources believed to have been so minutely investigated, and lamenting the inevitable conclusion, that nothing more of any importance respecting the poet was now to be discovered."

"A small portion only of the writers of the history of Shakspere's life lay claim to the merit of having instituted original inquiries, the majority being content with appropriating the information recorded by their predecessors, and giving us the results of their own reasonings upon them. Some, especially Malone, and, more recently, Mr. Collier, have exercised laudable diligence in examining records for notices likely to throw light on the poet's history-legal registers of property and suits, which arrest so many But, in spite of all the diligence of these gentlemen, Mr. Halliwell adds,

'That, however strange the assertion may appear, the repositories of documents most obvious to any inquirer as likely to contain information relating to Shakspere have never yet been properly examined for that purpose. Even the records of Stratford-on-Avon have not been used to any extent; and the few notices of the Shakespeares hitherto quoted from them have been generally most inaccurately transcribed. Mr. Collier, in this respect, has contented himself with Malone's researches, and Mr. Knight is, I believe,

the only one of late years who has referred to the originals; but the very slight notice he has taken of them, and the portentous mistakes he has committed in cases where printed copies were not to be found, would appear to shew that they were unintel ligible to that writer. Malone, with all his errors, possessed some knowledge of palæography (but not in a very profound degree), a science essentially necessary in the investigation of contracted records of the sixteenth century, especially of those written in Latin."

Mr. Halliwell then mentions that in the council chamber at Stratford are preserved vast quantities of MSS., commencing at an early period, and rich in historical materials connected with that town during the reign of Elizabeth. All these, in boxes, in cupboards, in drawers, in chests, in all cribs and corners and crannies, Mr. Halliwell has perused. They were lent to Mr. Malone, who was very angry that after several years he was asked to return them. The corporation know better now; a commentator must go to the documents-lending is no longer the order of the day-and think himself lucky if he finds Mr. Hunt more liberal than the Prerogative Office, which will not permit Shakspere's will even to be collated, though it would probably decide whether the word "and" is in a certain paragraph, whether he meant to say his "body ys made of the earth or was made," and whether the word "her" was erased or crossed through; and would decide whether Mr. Hunter was right in one assertion, and Mr. Collier wrong in two interpretations.

With the exception of Mr. Collier's "New Facts," 1835, Mr. Halliwell says the present volume contains more new information than any biographical work on Shakspere that has yet appeared. He has silently corrected many hundreds of mistakes, some of the greatest magnitude, others literal; "indeed (he says) the corrections have been in some instances so overwhelming, that it is scarcely possible all could be detected. In the course of one short Latin document there are in all copies hitherto printed no less than fifty-seven blunders, so that it is absolutely unreadable, and hence its exact purport has never been mentioned." Mr. Halliwell mentions one curious instance. "The recurrence of ad 20 cur,' for ad

proximam curiam, the MS. reading p.r, which has been taken for xx, is one out of many examples that might be produced of the singularly small knowledge of records that has been brought to bear in these inquiries." As for the errors of Mr. Hunter touching Agnes Arden, we are glad to find "that no serious inconvenience is likely to follow," especially as "the subject is susceptible of very delicate arguments." We now proceed to give a popular summary of the Biography, for the use of our country readers, who have no opportunity, like Mr. Halliwell, of inspecting the Record Office in London, or of taking lodgings, like Mr. Harness, at Stratford in the summer months, and who must therefore derive their information solely from this volume.

The Shaksperes were settled in Warwickshire so early as the fourteenth century, and shortly afterwards their name was spread through the county. In the century preceding the establishment of the poet's family at Stratford the notices are numerous. About 1460 we read of a Richard Shakspere and a Joanna, and a Rudulph, a Ralph, and a Richard with his wife Margery, and a John, and two Thomas's, and Isabel, and Alice, and many others who spelt their names in defiance of Sir Frederic Madden and all established orthography. We prefer Sharper or Shagsper, but we have no wish to intrude our opinion on our readers, as they may choose Shackspeere, or Saxspere, for all which there is ample authority, as well as for Shakaspere, in the books and registers. In July 1550 we come to the maternal grandfather of Shakspere, Robert Arden, who was owner of lands and tenements in Snitterfield parish. Richard Shakspere of Snitterfield was in all probability Shakspere's grandfather, and many of that name appear in the register of that village, and the reader will find the pedigree of the Arden family, as well as the Shakspere, very carefully traced at this time by Mr. Hunter and Mr. Collier, but we must refer for these minute details to Mr. Halliwell's pages. We next arrive at John Shakspere father of the poet, who was the son of a substantial farmer at Snitterfield. About 1551 he came to reside as a tradesman at Stratford; there he filled the successive offices of the corporation, and in 1560 was made high bailiff. He was a good man of business, and a careful accountant, but had one small defect, that he could not write his own name. He used instead to make marks and crosses of very anomalous shapes, sometimes with a pen and sometimes with a kind of stick or glove-stretcher, but why he varied his marks, though Mr. Malone has anxiously inquired the reason, no satisfactory answer has yet been given. Mr. Halliwell thinks that they allude to his different occupations; however, it is established on the best possible evidence, that John Shakspere the father of the poet was a glover in the year 1556. Our readers are requested not to pay any attention to the Reverend Mr. Harness, who asserts that there were innumerable John Shaksperes in 1556 at Stratford, for, if so, we must give up the biography in despair but that there was a shoemaker of that name is certain. Of him, however, we take no immediate notice. We go back to the glover, who we find was also a considerable dealer in wool. 66 Why," says Mr. Halliwell,"why should Mr. John Shakspere have dealt in wool?"-a question somewhat difficult to answer, seeing that some one must have dealt in wool or woll, and why not Mr. John Shakspere? Mr. Hunter, looking diligently through the Court Rolls to discover something in honour of the Shakspere family, was rewarded by finding that in April 1552 this same gentleman was fined a shilling by the corporation at Strat

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »