Citation
Shakespeare, the land law, and the individual

Material Information

Title:
Shakespeare, the land law, and the individual their emergence in Elizabethan England
Creator:
Senn, Mark A. ( author )
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 online resource (118 pages) : ;

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Economics in literature ( lcsh )
Land tenure -- Law and legislation ( lcsh )
Land tenure -- History -- England ( lcsh )
Individualism ( lcsh )
Economics in literature ( fast )
Individualism ( fast )
Influence (Literary, artistic, etc.) ( fast )
Land tenure ( fast )
Land tenure -- Law and legislation ( fast )
England ( fast )
Genre:
History. ( fast )
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )
History ( fast )

Notes

Review:
Through the prisms of William Shakespeare's life and work and Elizabethan land law, this thesis not only (a) suggests that the sixteenth century witnessed the simultaneous rise of the individual and the creation of the English state, but also (b) identifies the chance confluence of several forces that led to personal freedom on the one hand and a national unification on the other. Shakespeare benefited personally from the individuation and the nation-building and wrote professionally about them. In the fourteenth century, the Black Death decimated the English population. The shortage of agricultural labor gave serfs bargaining power and ultimately freedom. The social change flattened the historically hierarchical society whose foundation was no longer a lineage society but rather a civil society. The fundamental economic consequence was the conversion of land from a measure of prestige to a commodity whose value lay in its productivity. All these matters were exacerbated by the enclosures which led to further social dislocation and monetization of land. The process of individuation was abetted by the diminished role of the church in the religious lives of its adherents and the displacement of the earth from the center of the universe. Shakespeare's professional life and business dealings were facilitated by these changes in Elizabethan life. He enjoyed an unprecedented freedom of association in his acting companies and opportunities to acquire land. In these arenas, the land law played an important role. Shakespeare made frequent references to that law and the lawyers who practiced it. In fact, Shakespeare's family was embroiled in litigation that epitomized an aspect of individuation: the ability of one court to overrule the decision of another based on conscience or differing ideas of right and wrong. Although national unity and individuation seem contradictory, they are reconciled by Adam Smith's notion of the "invisible hand" by which individual pursuit of self-interest yield unintended benefit to the national economy.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.A.)--University of Colorado Denver.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
System Details:
System requirements: Adobe Reader.
General Note:
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences
Statement of Responsibility:
by Mark A. Senn.

Record Information

Source Institution:
Auraria Library
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
868166160 ( OCLC )
ocn868166160

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

SHAKESPEARE THE LAND LAW AND THE INDIVIDUAL: THEIR EMERGENCE IN ELIZABETHAN ENGLAND By Mark A. Senn B.A., Stanford University, 1969 J.D., University of California at Berkeley, Boalt Hall, 1972 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado Denver i n partial fulfillment o f the requirements for the degree of Master of Humanities Humanities and Social Sciences 201 3

PAGE 2

ii This thesis for the degree of Master of Humanities by Mark A. Senn has been approved for the Humanities and Social Sciences Program B y Omar Swartz, Chair Pompa Banerjee Judge Richard A. Posner December 13, 2012

PAGE 3

iii Senn, Mark A. J.D. (M.H., Humanities and Social Sciences) Shakespeare the Land Law, and the Individual: Their Emergen ce in Elizabethan England Thesis directed by Associate Professor Omar Swartz ABSTRACT Through the prism s law, t his thesis not only (a) suggest s that the sixteenth century witnessed the simultane ous rise of the individual and the creation of the English state, but also (b) identifies the chance confluence of several forces that led to personal freedom on the one hand and a national unification on the other. Shakespeare benefited personally from t he individuation and the nation building and wrote professionally about them. In the fourteenth century, t he Black Death decimated the English population. The shortage of agricultural labor gave serfs bargaining power and ultimately freedom The social c hange flattened the historically hierarchical society whose foundation was no longer a lineage society but rather a civil society The fundamental economic consequence was the conversion of land from a measure of prestige to a commodity whose value lay in its productivity. All these matters were exacerbated by the enclosures which led to further social dislocation and monetization of land The process of individuation was abetted by the diminished role of the church in the religious lives of its adherent s and the displacement of the earth from the center of the universe. changes in Elizabethan life. He enjoyed an unprecedented freedom of association in his acting companies a nd opportunities to acquire land. In these arenas, the land law played

PAGE 4

iv an important role. Shakespeare ma de frequent references to that law and the lawyers who practice d it. In fact, family was embroiled in litigation that epitomize d an aspe ct of individuation : t he ability of one court to overrule the decision of another based on conscience or differing ideas of right and wrong. Although national unity and individuation seem contradictory, they are reconciled interest yield unintended benefit to the national economy. The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Approved: Omar Swartz

PAGE 5

v ACKNOWLEDGMENT S I deeply appreci ate the patience and indulgence of my committee Pompa Banerjee, Richard A. Posner, and Omar Swartz and of my friends who se helpful comments improved this thesis : Shawn Alfrey, Portia Morrison, Jill Pace, Leigh Paddon, Barry Permut, Alan Richmond, Kate Weller and Margaret Woodh u ll M y indefatigable assistant Lenette Wallace tolerated dozens of drafts and made this thesis appear as nicely as it does. Finally, Kerry Arquette tolerated Willy far longer than anyone could expect.

PAGE 6

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTE R I. INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 1 II. ENTERING THE ELIZABETHAN ERA ................................ ............................... 2 A. The Black Death ................................ ................................ .......................... 2 1. Consequences ................................ ................................ ................... 2 2. ................................ ................................ ....... 3 3. rks ................................ ................................ ... 4 B. Social Change ................................ ................................ .............................. 5 1. The End of the Hierarchical Society ................................ ................ 5 2. ................................ ............................ 6 3. The Fate of the Sumptuary Laws ................................ ..................... 7 4. The End of a Lineage Society ................................ .......................... 8 5. The Changing Role of the Land ................................ ....................... 9 C. The Changing Role of the Church ................................ ............................... 9 1. The Advent of Protestantism ................................ ........................... 9 2. The Expropriation of Church Lands ................................ .............. 10 3. Individual Worship ................................ ................................ ........ 11 D. The Financial Needs of the Crown ................................ ............................ 11 1. Henry VII ................................ ................................ ....................... 12 2. Henry VIII ................................ ................................ ...................... 14 3. Edward VI ................................ ................................ ...................... 15 4. Mary ................................ ................................ ............................... 15

PAGE 7

vii 5. Elizabeth I ................................ ................................ ...................... 16 6. James I ................................ ................................ ........................... 17 E. The Enclosures ................................ ................................ ........................... 18 F. The Legal Structure ................................ ................................ .................... 20 1. The Settled Rules ................................ ................................ ........... 21 a. Statute Quia Emptores ................................ ....................... 23 b. Statute De Donis ................................ ................................ 24 2. ................................ 26 a. Uses and Trusts ................................ ................................ .. 26 b. ................................ ................ 27 3. The Graveyard Scene ................................ ................................ ..... 28 4. ................................ ........... 30 G. N ationalism ................................ ................................ ................................ 33 III. ................................ .................... 35 A. Lodgings ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 35 B. Companies ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 36 C. The Globe Theatre ................................ ................................ ..................... 37 D. The Blackfriars Theatre ................................ ................................ ............. 44 E. The Home on Henley Street ................................ ................................ ....... 45 F. New Place ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 47 G. The Blackfriars Gatehouse ................................ ................................ ......... 50 H. The Lease of Tithe Lands and The Enclosures ................................ .......... 52 I. Lesser Business Dealings ................................ ................................ ........... 53

PAGE 8

viii J. Death and Will ................................ ................................ ........................... 55 IV. SHAKESPEARE AND EQUITY ................................ ................................ .......... 61 A. ................................ ................................ ............. 61 B. T he Court System ................................ ................................ ...................... 62 C. The Legal Backdrop ................................ ................................ ................... 63 1. Statute of Praemunire ................................ ................................ .... 63 2. Common Law v. Chancery ................................ ............................ 64 D. ................................ ................................ .............. 67 V. LEAVING THE AGE OF SHAKESPEARE ................................ ........................ 70 FIRST POSTSCRIPT: WHO WROTE THE PLAYS? ................................ ................... 73 SECOND POSTSCRIPT: WAS SHAKESPEARE A LAWYER? ................................ .. 81 ENDNOTES ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 87 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 102

PAGE 9

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism : Hobbes to Locke 1 C.B. Macpherson observed that i a moral whole, nor as part of a larger social whole, but as an owner of himself ; he called Because his attention was given to the political theories of John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, Macpherson did not address the reasons for the rise of possessive individualism. Those reasons may be surmised from a confluence of several forces in the sixteenth century : the lingering effects of the Black Death in the f ourteenth century; the collapse of a social hierarchy; the diminished role of the church ; and the monetization of land At the same time, England was founding its nationhood. thesis can be co nsidered in the life and works of William Shakespeare and the workings of Elizabethan land law. Although i ndividuation and national unity seem contradictory t hey are reconciled by Adam Smith in An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Natio ns national wealth.

PAGE 10

2 CHAPTER II ENTERING THE ELIZABETHAN ERA A. T he Black Death 1. Consequences Since the Norman Conquest in 1066 the English feudal social and economic structure had been based upon the hierarchical relationship among men with the king at the top and vill e in s at the bottom A ll of them were bound by their shared interests in the land that the conquering K ing William had granted to his family and favorites T he land was not merely a measure of wealth but also the organizing force of governmental, social, and economic life: From the earliest settlements until the industrial revolution the economic basis of society was agrarian. Land was wealth, livelihood, family provision, and the principal subject matter of the law. [L] and was also government and str ucture of society. 2 The bonds were also intensely personal Upon his investiture, a lord swore a profession of faith (or fealty ) and homage to the king or his over lord openly and humbly kneeling, being ungirt, uncovered, and holding up his hands both toge ther between those of the lord, who sate before him; and man 3 In the aftermath of the Black Death (or bubonic plagu e) which took twenty to thirty percent of the population in the middle of the fourteenth century, 4 there was much less demand for land and much greater demand for labor T hose who were able to work negotiate d advantageous arrangements for their services and put an end to their lowly villein status G. R. Elton stated the matter succinctly: Feudalism, stable on its basis of the land and firm in its scheme of known rights and duties, gave way to the patronage system of bastard feu da lism

PAGE 11

3 ns and needs were satisfied by him who could pay for services and at whose order and discretion they were done. 5 The nobles w ere forced not only to pay more for labor but also to raise money by renting the land that they had previously used themselves. T h e price of goods they were compelled to purchase increased just as the lower demand of a smaller population depressed both rents and the price s of the crops they were able to sell Moreover, a t the same time, the cost s to run a manor increased ; t hose cost s included the hospitality that the nobles were expected to extend their legal adversit ies and in some cases their personal excesses. 6 These pressures led the nobles to treat land not as a measure of prestige but as a commodity that could be bought and sold to support their lives. In turn, the market for land and the land law grew as the Elizabethan era reversed the trends of the two preceding centuries 2. The plague was part of Shakespear life 7 as well as Elizabethan life T he upon Avon indicate that in July 1564 three months after his birth Hi c i ncepit pes tis plague claimed one sixth of Stra Although London theatre life in the early 1590s was fortuitous in that his likely competitors died soon after his arrival -Christopher Marlowe, the author of Tambur laine Doctor Faustus and The Jew of Malta died in 1593 and Thomas Kyd, the author of The Spanish Tragedy died in 1594 -it was unfortunate in that the plague struck London in June 1592. Its effects were exacerbated by crowding and poor sanitation. A ll public gatherings within seven miles of the city were banned and theatres were closed to prevent the spread of contagion. 8 An outbreak

PAGE 12

4 in 1593 claimed approximately 11,000 people. 9 The plague recurred in February 1594, again closing the theatres, alt hough Titus Andronicus was performed in January 1594 at the Rose Theatre. The relationship of the plague and theatre gave rise to plagues is sinne, if you look to it well, and the cause of sinne are playse: Therefore the 10 With theatres closed, the acting companies had no choice but to take their shows into the country. Shakespeare may have taken the opportunity of the closure o f the theatres to write The Rape of Lucrece and Venus and Adonis 11 The last significant outbreak of the plague occurred at the beginning of the reign of James I in 1603 A weekly death toll of eleven hundred eventually killed 38, closed the theatres, and coronation 3. The plague plays a minor rol e Romeo an d Juliet its part is a turning point. Fri a Montagues and Capulets involves giving Juliet a drug to make her seem dead for forty two hours and thus avoid a marriage that has been arranged for her. He prepares a letter to Romeo informing him of the plan. The letter could not be delivered by Friar John or a After Juliet is placed in her family poisons himself by the crypt. When Juliet awakens, she sees Romeo and stabs herself.

PAGE 13

5 B. Social Change 1. The End of the Hierarchical Society s ociety was intensely, pervasively, visibly hierarchical 12 Ulysses expressed a prevalent Elizabethan world view in Troilus and Cressida 1.3.85 88: The heavens themselves, the planets, and this centre Observe degree, priority, and place, Infixture, course, proportion season, form Office and custom, in all line of order. This order was soon to be upset by the discoveries of Copernicus and Galileo in astronomy which prompted John Donne (1561 1626) to observe : .[The] new philosophy calls all in doubt, The Element of fire is qui t e put out; Can well direct him where to looke for it. All just supply, and all Relation. 13 The l o st coherence was evident not just to stargazers but also to observers of English society. William Harrison beg a n his contemporary account of Elizabethan England: 14 We, in England, divide our people commonly into four sorts, as gentlemen, citizens or burgesses, yeomen, and artificers or labourers. The gentlemen (aft er the king) were themselves divided into four levels. Citizens and burgesses were free men in cities with sufficient means to hold office; Harrison included in this group the emerging class of merchants in international trade (although he was clearly dis dainful of their effect on rising prices for domestic products and the abundance of expensive imported goods). Yeomen were also free men who own ed their own land stay ed settled, prosper ed kept their houses well and maintain ed working servants. Day lab ourers and artificers were at the bottom but Harrison emphasized the quali ty of their

PAGE 14

6 work and products. By end of the Elizabethan era, this hierarchy too was vanishing; even artificers had the benefit of a statute that regulated their work. The instabili ty of the heavens freed mankind from its belief in the celestial star bound fate. In King Lear Gloucester promises to leave his land to his illegitimate son Edmund, but illegitimate children were not capable of inheriting. Edmund not only challenges the rules of inheritance but also the settled belief in predestination embodied ne often the surfeit of our own behaviour we make guilty of our disasters the sun, the moon, and the stars, as if we were villeins by necessity 108. In Julius Caesar 1.2.140 41, anticipating their assassination of Caesar, Cassius tells Brutu s The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves, that we are underlings. In each of these plays, the individual is empowered to determine his own actions. 2. The soci al mobility following the Black Death led to a new personal sensibility in the English serf. T that George M. Foster has proposed as the South American peasant world view applied with equal force to the English serf before the pl ague : broad areas of peasant behavior are patterned in such fashion as to suggest that peasants view their social, economic, and natural universes their total environment as one in which all of the desired things in life s u c h as land, wealth, hea lth, friendship and love, manliness and honor, respect and status, power and influence, security and safety, exist in finite quantity and are always in short supply, as far as the peasant is concerned. Not only do these and n finite and limited quantities, but in

PAGE 15

7 addition there is no way directly within peasant power to increase the available quantities in nature, there to be divided and redivided, if necessary, but not to be aug mented. 15 T he Elizabethan era witnessed and the beginning of unbounded opportunities and the end of a notion of limited good 3. The Fate of the Sumptuary Laws This individuation can be seen in the fate of the sumptuary laws. Although one would expect common labourers to dress differently in style and cost from the nobility, the sumptuary laws precisely dictated the color, quantity, quality, price and style of clothing by refere VIII saw to the enactment of An Act Agaynst Wearing of Costly Apparrell 16 Amplifying laws 17 Among the rules were prohibitions of wearing: purple cloth with stripes of gold thread or purple silk by anyone but the royal family; sable by anyone under the degr ee of baron; and imported wool by anyone under the degree of lord or Knight of the Garter. The act also sought to protect the English wool trade and to curb imports. Nevertheless, the overarching goal was the preservation of social order by a legal frame 18 The 1509 Act was enlarged by an Act for Reformacyon of Excesse in Apparayle 19 which gave particular attention to silk goods and provided stricter penalties. Despite a century of statutes and royal proclamation s, and despite rewards for monarch Queen Elizabeth the sumptuary laws were neither enforced nor effective. They

PAGE 16

8 were repealed in 1604 20 apparently when the House of Commons rej ected legislation proposed by James I that would have given him authority to govern dress by proclamation. 21 The rising middle class, the expansion of English trade, the New World (which brought the first cotton to England), and the spirit of individualis m overcame the sumptuary laws. Shakespeare makes many references to clothing and social status. The perceptive King Lear 4.6.159. In Twelfth Night 3.4, Malvolio in his cross gartered yellow stockings, appears ridiculous and offensive to Olivia in part because he affect s a courtly style. his very few contemporary images is the inappropria te costume. The portrait by Martin Droeshout in the First Folio, which his colleague Ben Jonson acknowledged was Chandos portrait in the National Gallery shows Shakes peare in a black doublet that indicated wealth because of the high cost of black dye. 4. The End of a Lineage Society The lineage society gave way to a civil society in which kinship was less important soci al responsibility was more important, and individual choice was possible In the first scene of Romeo and Juliet the Prince enjoins on penalty of death the ancient On the other hand, t hat play dramatized the right of personal choice in love and its possibly tragic consequences

PAGE 17

9 5. The Changing Role of the Land In the Elizabethan world l and lost its medieval attracti on as a measure of power and took on a new measure its revenue to the owner. The buyer of land sought a return on his investment and not the mere prestige of ownership. The enclosures discussed in Section II.E arose from th is new economic rationality. The emergence of a landholding middle class with its own political, social and economic agenda led to greater involvement of the land law in everyday life. C. The Changing Role of the Church 1. The Advent o f Protestantism At the beginning of the sixteenth century the Roman Catholic church was a state within a state having special franchises and its own ecclesiastical courts. There were, however, the begin nings of fundamental changes. J ust as the nobility was feeling economic and social pressure s so also the church was encountering the anti clerical sentiment s throughout Europe that had been ex pressed in England by Geoffrey Chaucer two hundred years earli er The Ninety Five Thes e s (1517 18) advanced by Martin Luther (1483 1546) criticized nd its policy that good works were the road to salvation; for Luther and his follower John Calvin, faith was the means of salvation. P rotestantism spread quickly through Germany, Geneva, France, the Netherlands, Scotland, and Scandinavia. In the epoch as a whole, Catholic zeal had the feebleness of age and Protestant zeal had the feebleness of immaturity. 22 In 1509, at the age of eightee n, Henry VIII ascended to the crown. After his break with Pope Clement VII over the divorce from Catherine, Henry declared himself the head of the Church of English in 1529, thus beginning the English Reformation. The Reformation Parliament convened in 1 529 and continued to 1536. At the prompting of

PAGE 18

10 acts that redirected to secular recipients and the crown The Mortuaries Act and Probate Act (1530) limited ecclesiastical income from estates and funerals. The Act of Annates (1532) abolished the obligation of a bishop to pay his first Act of Appeals decide on the jurisdiction of the 23 2. The Ex propriation of Church Lands Henry VIII monastic establishments and dissolution of the monasteries 24 a generation before Shakespeare was born played a large role in The forfeited church landholdings for which tenants paid rents o r tithes were sold by the crown or transferred to municipal authorities. When Stratford upon Avon was incorporated in 1553, the crown The Stratf ord Corporation made new leases with tenants who paid rents or made subleases for the land granted to them. 25 As a buyer of tithe leases, Shakespeare was a beneficiary of the dissolution of the monasteries as discussed in Section III.H. T he appropriation of church lands by Henry gave rise to a new gentry and middle class that, like Shakespeare, traded in land and began to erode the landowning monopoly of the old nobility. 26 These mercantile activities enhanced the role of the land law in the service and control of commerce. When Henry VIII dissolved the monasteries, the revenues due to Westminster

PAGE 19

11 Peter Select English Works (c. 1380), and appears in a twelfth century The dissolution o f the convents, by the way, increased the marriageable women and spurred the Elizabethan growth. 3. Individual Worship O ne of the doctrinal differences with the Roman church was the Protestant belief that the people s hould be able to read the Bible for themselves and that the Roman c hurch should not have a monopoly on religious education. Cromwell and Henry both favored an English Bible, Cromwell because he believed that scripture was the supreme authority, and Henry was head of the Church of England. Their goals coincided with the advent of the printing press and the availability of vernacular scriptures that undercut the clerical monopoly assured by the Latin Vulgate of St. Jerome Latin was no longer taught as the primary language when lay teachers displaced the clergy in schools Language became a matter of political importance and not a religious issue as grammar schools emerged for the education of boys. 27 Thomas Cranmer, whom Henry VIII chose as the Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote the Book of Common Prayer in 1549 (and revised in 1552), in English with the goal of it being comprehensible to all English speakers. The first English Bible had been published in 1539. The believe based church was at an end and the individual was free to pursue his or her faith. D. The Financial Needs of the Crown Throughout almost all of the Elizabethan era, the crown was in desperate financial circumstances. John of Gaunt bemoans this in Richard II 2.1.40 60 :

PAGE 20

12 This royal throne of kings, this sceptered isle, This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars, This other Eden, demi paradise, This fortress built by nature for he rself Against infection and the hand of war, This happy breed of men, this little world, This precious stone set in the silver sea, Which serves it in the office of a wall, Or as a moat defensive to a house Against the envy of less happier lands; This bles sed plot, this earth, this realm, this England, This nurse, this teeming womb of royal kings, Feared by their breed and famous by their birth, Renowned for their deeds as far from home For Christian service and true chivalry As is the sepulcher, in stubbor n Jewry, This land of such dear souls, this dear dear land, Dear for her reputation through the world, Is now leased out I die pronouncing it Like to a tenement or pelting farm. The response of the crown to it s budgetary problems was often to sell crown lands. Once again, land was used as a commodity in trade and the land law became a 1. Henry VII On August 22, 1485 at Bosworth Field in Leicestershire, R ichard III was killed, the House of York was vanquished, and the fifty year War of the Roses ended. 28 The House of Lancaster under twenty eight year old Henry Tudor now King Henry VII was victorious, and the 118 year reign of the Tudors began. Henry VII married Elizabeth of York, the oldest daughter of Edward IV in an effort to unify the Houses of Lancaster and York. In addition to the establishment of the monarchy, Henry ordinary income of the crown from its lands, the revenues from customs and exports, the

PAGE 21

13 profits and fines levied in courts of justice, and its feudal prerogatives. In addition, the crown had occasional benefit of extraordinary g rants and loans from Parliament. In his efforts to assure that the crown could live on its own, Henry enforced amounts due to the crown. His efforts are variously seen as rapacious or merely collecting what was due to him. 29 Instead of executing nobles f or capital crimes, he use d the Parliamentary judgments of attainder or forfeiture. Attainder was a determination of corrupt blood with a resultant forfeiture of lands to the crown, although the judgment was often commuted in exchange for a payment. Forfe iture resulted in a direct loss of the land to the crown. Some of Henry raising techniques are simply amusing: (a) When his daughter Margaret married the King of Scotland, he sought the customary payments from his nobles but he did so more than two years after the marriage had occurred. (b) He also sought those payments upon the knighting of his son Arthur, which, although again entirely appropriate was unusual since the knighting had occurred fifteen years earlier and Arthur had been dead two years when the request was made. (c) One of Henry Canterbury John Morton (c. 1420 1500) who used a taxing technique that came to be because he obviously had the money to do so, and a person who lived modestly could afford to pay taxes because he had obviously saved his money by the avoidance of lavish living.

PAGE 22

14 (d) Henry £ 10,000 fine on the occasion of a social v isit to his friend Earl of Oxford who honored the king with a parade of six hundred liveried retainers in violation of the Act of Livery and Maintenance 30 (1504) which prohibit ed no person, of whatever degree or condition he be shall prively or openly give any livery or sign or retain any person, other than such as he giveth household wages without fraud or colour ). 31 When Henry VII died on April 21, 1509, he had restored the monarchy, subdued the nobility, reigned for twenty five year s free of civil strife, commerce (especially the wool trade), t a k en steps toward a national economic system, raised an efficient mercantile fleet and passed on his throne peacefully. He had filled the alth estimated at £ wealth was estimated at £4,000 2. Henry VIII In 1509, at the age of eighteen, Henry VIII ascended to the crown. Henry and his chief minister Thomas Cromwell pursu ed the dissolution of the monasteries with zeal, Sonnet 73 ln. 4. Before the dissolution (see also Section II.C.2) two thirds of London was owned by religious g roups. 32 In 1536 he appropriated the estates of small religious houses and in 1538 those of the larger ones. The estates were sold to speculators and resold to lesser men. Although the new found wealth eliminated on ill fated foreign incursions and patronage and of no lasting benefit. What would have enabled Henry to become the wealthiest monarch in England 33 became merely a benef it to the nobility and gentry.

PAGE 23

15 The Royal Navy was an end uring contribution by Henry. As a result of England being a narrow island (as opposed to the square shape of partially landlocked France), no one lived far from the sea, and thus the possibility of staffing a Royal Navy was a real one. The newly designed ships had three beams as opposed to the two beams that characterized so called round ships and employed a new cannon for broadside battle as opposed to the battle by ramming, archery and boarding that characterized the other ships of the day. The Royal N later. 3. Edward VI As the son of Henry VIII by Jane Seymour, and sanctione d by Parliament and Henry and died six years later. Although inflation hurt landlords with fixed rents and income, the brief reign of Edward was generally a prosperous one. 4. Mary In 1553, Henry s ucceed ed Edward VI and Lady Jane Grey, who reigned for only nine days after Edward. five year reign was a social and religious catastrophe O n the economic front it was scarred by har vest failures in 1555 through 1557 and the loss of Calais in an unsuccessful war with France prompted commonwealth was her approval of the notion that taxes should pay for the n ormal operations of government and not just extraordinary ones. Although not practiced in her lifetime, this view of taxation eventually became a stabilizing force in the life of England.

PAGE 24

16 5. Elizabeth I The forty four year reign of Elizabeth, the daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn, began with her ascension on November 17, 1558, at the age of 25 Throughout her reign, the Catholic nation of Spain had been a looming threat to England. With its wealth from the New World a nd formidable seafaring experience, Spain plotted to close the English Channel, meet troops from the Duke of Parma in the Netherlands, and invade The Armada was compose d of 130 vessels, 20,000 soldiers, 8,000 sailors, and 1,000 gentlemen. However, when the Royal Navy established by Henry VIII met the Armada in the Channel, the outcome was a distinct victory for England. Its smaller and more agile ships (without fore an designed for the calmer Mediterranean waters than the choppy waters of the Channel. counterparts. Many o ships were sunk in the Channel and many more were lost trying to return to Spain. 34 Only half the Spanish fleet returned. No English ships were lost. The defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 was one of the finest gn and the emerging nation On the other hand, Elizabeth was beset by economic problems. Tax revenues declined; as the result of use tax evasions, only one sixth to one tenth of the English wealth was taxed. 35 In 1596, Shakespeare was cited for his failu re to pay a 5s tax on his goods valued at £5 ( even though he bought a substantial residence in Stratford at about the same time ) and similar small amounts in 1598, 1599 and 1600. 36 With the rising birthrate and increased longevity, the Poor Laws of 1601 we re enacted and put the burden of unemployment on local parishes. Local taxation increased, as did a vigorous trade in

PAGE 25

17 local offices from which the crown had no benefit. The licenses and monopolies granted by the crown were in some cases genuine but often they were ruses to corner a market. Nevertheless, when Elizabeth died sitting up in her sleep on March 24, 1603, she government. 37 6. James I The succession of James VI of Scotland to the English crown as James I had been also have indicated her preference as she neared death. The month long procession from Edinburgh to Lo ndon was greeted joyously by the English people pleased by the peaceful transition. H istory however, has not accorded James I of England such a warm reception. 38 indebtedness of the crown. He sold knighthoods, lordships, peerages, and baronetcies for as much as £10,000 each but still never managed to live within his means. He offered to give up his customary right of wardship 39 for a regular tax, but the House of Commons refused for political and economic power associated with it, was passing out of the hands of the 40 In a remark curiously reminiscent of feudal ism and reflective of possessive individualism Lord Treasurer Lionel Cranfield sovereignty for it was a greater type of obedience to be a tenant to the King than to be his 41

PAGE 26

18 E. The Enclosures In the medieval scheme of communal agriculture, the lords used a third of their estates to support themselves, leased a third and left the remainder to be shared as for gr azing. The tenants leased long narrow strips of unfenced ground not necessarily adjacent to one another The strips were allocated with the intention that the tenants have equally valuable lands. The tenants might informally enclose their strips with he dges to pen their cattle, pigs and sheep On a small scale, enclosures increased productivity with a possible surplus for sale at market and an opportunity of other employment for the excess labor. age of open fields was not conducted on scientific lines, and obviously no one would spend capital improving 42 A farmer had no reason to weed his fields if his neighbor did not, and had no way to drain his fields if his neighbor did not cooperate with the drainage system. Garret t Hardin observed that people who share a common grazing area will each have an incentive to increase their herds. This is a benefit to the individual but a shar ed burden on the commons, and the result, the people will increase their herds until the commons are exhausted and 43 When the population beg an to recover from the Black Death and the wool trade began to prosper the value of land rose; for example, Yorkshire land that brought 4p per acre in the fifteenth century, brought 9p per acre in 1548 and 2s 4p in 1621. 44 Landowners took to enclosing the common areas, and converting arable land, waste and meadow to pasture land for the sheep that came to outnumber humans three to one As a

PAGE 27

19 result of the enclosures, the rights of common grazing were restricted, and demand for and the price of grain increa sed. 45 Because sheep husbandry required one or two men and a dog for a flock, as in a farm, unemployment increased. Sir Thomas More wrote little att ention to maintain them, now begin (so they say) to be so voracious and fierce 46 The enclosures did not present a problem to land that the lord cultivated for itself or land subject to short term leases that co uld be renegotiated as their value increased. The enclosures posed a real threat to tenants whose rights were precarious ( L. pre x prayer or entreaty ) and at first, to copyhold tenants w hos e rights arose from the records kept according to the custom of t he manor The interests of copyhold tenants (see Section III.I ) came to be protected in the royal courts which gave them a defense to eviction and a right to remain at their stated rent s and other duties, although the lord could exact a payment called a h eriot or relief More than twenty years before he had any personal experience with enclosures (see Section III.H ), Shakespeare made his only clear reference of them in II Henry VI 1.3.22 23 when one of several petitions to the queen indicates the loss of the feudal bond among men, lords and land. In works, rights in common appear:

PAGE 28

20 (a) In Julius Caesa r 4.1.27, Anthony speaks to Octavius of (b) When 2 Henry VI 4.2.63 (c) When Antip The Comedy of Errors 2.2.28 29. (d) Whe n Catherine and Boyet flirt in and Despite the absence of clear records, the enclosures seem to have affected just three percent of the commons 47 Nev ertheless, vagrancy and poverty are commonly and rightly considered as phenomena with lasting social consequences of the enclosures. When Edgar disguise d himself as Poor Tom in King Lear and wander ed the land, the Elizabethan audience would have recognize d a vagabond victim of the enclosures. T he enclosures were also economic phenomena that yet again put land into commerce and further promoted the land law to its pre eminent role in the legal system. F. The Legal Structure In the Elizabethan era, 48 The early law and procedure were directed to the land and to people as owners of land (at first because the

PAGE 29

21 lawyers, and litigants needed to attend to the demands of agriculture at harvest and planting seasons. The evidence usually did not require witnesses since the titles could often be resolved by reference to deeds and other written instruments. As a result of the limited scope of these early actions, the inadequacy of the common law and common law courts led to the creation of other courts with specialized ju risdiction and more flexible rules as discussed in Section III.B. As to Shakespeare, his close connection to the land law arose through his roles as particularly that 49 Many of the legal principles that facilitated the Elizabethan treatment of land as a commodity had been settled for several centuries; however, the Black Death and its aftermath made their availability irrelevant. Those princi ples are discussed in Section I II .F.1. In the Elizabethan era statutes were enacted and cases were decided that abetted the commercial use of the land. Th o se statutes and one of those cases are addressed in Section I I .F.2. 1. The Settled Rules By 1290, there were two methods of alienation available to a tenant (or occupant of land) upon making a payment called a fine to his lord A tenant could transfer his entire interest by substitution ; a modern lawyer might consid er this an assignment. If B held as a tenant of A, and substituted C, then C held as a tenant of A. The overlord would have had an interest in the identity of the substituted tenant when the services (such as provision of knights) were important As the services became less valuable and the or incidents became

PAGE 30

22 concern about a substitution diminished; as long as the land No new tenure was created by substitution. When t he cost of maintaining a household of knights became burdensome the lords granted tenures within their tenures The process was subinfeudation; a modern lawyer might compare it to a sublease. The subin feudated tenant owed service s to his lord. The burden of those service s bound not only the tenant but also the land, so that it might be said to run as a burden to subinfeudation of part of it did not relieve the lord or the land of the burden. The overlord could compel to perform services that the lord failed to provide However, unlike substitution which came to be of little concern to the overlord when the provision of services became unim portant, subinfeudation was of profound concern to the overlord when the monetary incidents became more valuable. tenant. If the lord B held the Manor as the tenant o f the overlord A, and B conveyed the Manor to C by subinfeudation, then A could look to the Manor for the services that were due but was only entitled to the incidents due to B from C according to the terms of the grant from B to C. If the Manor was subst antial, A expected income from the incidents However, if B subinfeudated (in exchange for minimal services such as a rose at midsummer), B could get (1) an immediate payment for the value of the estate and (2) a seignory the rose of no value. The o verlord was entitled to the regular services, but the incidents were o f no value. B stripped the value of the Manor.

PAGE 31

23 a. Statute Quia Emptores To avoid this outcome, the Statute Quia Emptores 50 (which derives its na me from their tenements in fee simple by substitution without paying a fine to the overlord but that the purchaser became liable for the performance of the services a nd payment of the incidents due to the overlord. Quia Emptores eliminated new tenures and the rungs between the crown and the subinfeudated tenants. By the rule of escheat by which all all tenants were eve ntually tenants of the crown and upon their deaths the crown regained their tenements. Put another way, no lord (other than the crown ) created a new tenure after 1290 because there could be no tenants to hold of a lord The feudal pyramid disappeared as lands reverted to the crown. Quia Emptores also put an end to a means for the church to own land. Lords had long sought statutes of mortmain (F. dead hand) to keep land out of the hands of churches which the lords believed did not give anything tangible b ack to society. At the beginning of Henry V 1.1.7 11, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Ely discuss how they might defeat a proposed statute of mortmain. The Archbishop says: If it pass against us, We lose the better half of our possession, F or all the temporal lands which man devout By testament have given to the Church Would they strip from us. Quia Emptores illustrates that the lords considered the incidents more valuable than the services. 51 As prices grew and the need for knights diminish ed, services lost their value. The incidents, however, were inflation proof and adjustable in some cases. Because transferors could no longer receive services over time, Quia Emptores encouraged the sale of land for a profit; it was the end of feudalism and the beginning of

PAGE 32

24 a free market in land. 52 If the owner wanted to have services over time, a lease or term for years worked well. b. Statute De Donis With their new ability to buy and sell land after the enactmen t of Quia Emptores the lords next needed a way to keep it in their families. The Statute De Donis Conditionalibus of 1285 53 provided the means to do it. Well before De Donis (from the had endeavored to the intention that the lands remain with the bloodline. The courts had construed the grant to mean that upon the birth of an heir, the condition was satisfied and the grantee could freely convey the land. De Donis conditional gift be respected. De Donis had the salutary effect of allowing a grantor to entail his estate to the heirs of his body but it did not eradicate greed. The owner of an entailed estate might wait to sell it free of the entail. To do so, two similar collusive lawsuits could be used: a common recovery and a fine The both relied on the rule that an entail could be broken if the entailed estate was replaced with one of equal value. 54 In a common recovery the plaintiff/demandant sued the defendant/tenant in arose through a third party. The tenant defended with a claim The vouchee ad the court. In his absence, the court entered judgment by default against the vouchee and

PAGE 33

25 in favor of the demandant and required the vouchee to give the tenant replacement property of equal value (which, of course, the vouchee was unable to do). The results future generations to pursue a worthless judgment. A double voucher was necessary for some titles and involved two vouchees. A fine (or finalis concordia ) is like a common recovery except that the claim was compromised in a collusive settlement. This device was used by wives to join in sh claims of dower. The settlement was set forth in three identical recitations on a single sheet that was cut into three parts, one for each of the parties and one the foot of the fine for the court. fines and recoveries a re humorous ; see Section II.F.3 for another reference to recoveries In The Comedy of Errors 2.2.71 76 this exchange occurs: nature. Antipholus: May he not do it by fine and recover y? Dromio: Yes, to pay a fine for a periwig, and recover the lost hair of another man. In The Merry Wives of Windsor the devil have him not in fee simple, with fine and recovery, he will never, I think, in the and recovery a judicially sanctioned means of transfer, Shakespeare here uses the legal terms in a metaphorical way.

PAGE 34

26 2. The Elizabethan Statutes a nd Shelley s Case a. Uses and Trusts A use, which a modern lawyer would call a trust, was a conveyance by a feoffor to a feoffee for the use of the feoffee, or a third part y called the cestui que use accordi ng to the wishes of the feoffor The feoffee was (in theory) obligated to provide the lucrative incidents described in Section II.F.1 but there were ways to avoid them. The cestui que use escaped these burdens. Land h eld in use was not subject to escheat or creditors or to defeat inheritance. The use could also be used in lieu of a will before wills were lawful; a landowner could benefit until his death and then to transfer it according to his wishes. Because Chancery court described in Section IV.B protected the cestui que use the use became so popular 55 As a result of uses, t he king who was always a lord and rarely a tenant lost valuable rights such as escheat and forfeiture. Ever eager to augment his coffers despite opposition from lords and Cha ncery court lawyers, Henry VIII saw to the passage of the Statute of Uses 56 Sir William Holdsworth called the Statute of Uses 57 The statute made the cestui que use lia ble for the incidents. Since ways remained to evade the Statute of Uses by certain oral transfers, the Statute of Enrollments 58 which was passed shortly after the Statute of Uses required those transfers to be written. An incidental effect of the Statut e of Uses was the diversion of cases from Chancery court to the common law courts a fact that won over the common lawyers in the House of Commons. This occurred

PAGE 35

27 bec ame legal estates, they were subject to the common law courts. In The Merchant of Venice gentleman / That lately stole hi 79. Since this division is proposed in that Shylock is to live from half his former estate and that upon his death it is to go to his daughter Jessic a and Lorenzo. Despite the importance and prevalence of uses, The Merchant of Venice has the only mention of a use in a strictly legal sense. Otherwise the term is employed more generally; for example Anthony says to Cleopatra on parting : Hear me, Queen. The strong necessity of time commands Our services a while, but my full heart Remains in use with you. Anthony and Cleopatra 1.3.42 44 b. The Rule in S 59 has bedeviled l aw students for hundreds of years. Although the case was decided in 1581, it has been an established principle of English the rule is less so: if A grants an estate purchase. As a result, upon B since they were not purchasers, and A was entitled to a payment in accordance with the rules of descent.

PAGE 36

28 facilitated full alienability of land (because B owned a fee estate). Once again, as with consequences of the Black Death lingered, but the pronouncement in the case revived an important means o f monetiz i ng land and allowing individuals to accumulate it. 3. The Graveyard Scene As Hamlet wanders in a graveyard before the burial of Ophelia, he chats with the gravediggers who toss him the skulls that have been uncovered. Contemplating one of conveyancing terms and puns that seem inappropriate for the conclusion of a play concerning regicide, incest, and suicide. H e says: another. Why might not that be the skull of a lawyer? Where be his quiddits now, his quillets, his cases, his tenures, and his tricks? Why does he suffer this rude knave now to knock him about the sconce with a dirty shovel, and will not tell him of hi recognizances, his fines, his double vouchers, his recoveries. Is this the fine of his fines and the recovery of his recoveries, to have his fine pate full of fine dirt? Will his vouchers vouch him no more of his purchases, and double ones too, than the length and breadth of a pair of indentures? The very conveyances of his lands will hardly lie in this box; and must ha? Hamlet 5.1.90 102 Quillet refers both to a small piece of ground and to a quibble. Quiddits (more commonly appearing as quiddity ) is not a legal term; it is a word also meaning a quibble or fine distinction, but also meaning the essence of a thing. and alliterative appeal Q uillet may be a pun on qualities T he grave site is a small piece of ground or quillet

PAGE 37

29 Shakespeare puns on fine using it not only in its legal sense but also in the sense of final quality sense of very small dirt is unmistakable. Statutes were of two sorts statutes staple and statutes merchant and both wer e security for the payment of money. If a debtor failed to pay his debts, the creditor could interest technically was an estate defeasible on condition subsequent. 60 Recognizances have nothing to do with conveyances. The Elizabethan audience would have also appreciated as a pun on dentition in the skull also have been a reference to a kind of deed An indenture b or torn irregularly across a word to prevent forgery, and was given in pieces to the parties to the indenture. When Henry Percy (known as Hotspur), Mortimer, and Glendower plot to rebel against Henry IV and to divide England and Wales among them, Mortimer says: And our indentures tripartite are drawn, Which, being sealed interchangeably I Henry IV 3.1.77 78 An indirect reference to indentures occurs in Troilus and Cressida 3.2.55 56 when Pandarus, Billing meant kissing. Indenture is King John 2.1.19 20.

PAGE 38

30 only to his coffin but also the box in which lawyers kept records of land transfers. When t 2 Henry VI 4.2.70, he is proposing the destruction of the records of land ownership. 4. The Curious Case of The second way in which the land law is implicated in the gravedigger scene arises from the discussion of the way in which Ophelia died. 61 (The gravediggers are The issue is whether s he is to be given a Christian burial or whether she committed suicide; suicides were not entitled to Christian burials but rather were buried at a crossroad with a stake through their hearts. 62 First Clown: Is she to be buried in Christian burial that wi lfully seeks her own salvation? Second Clown: I tell thee she is, and therefore make her grave straight. The coroner hath sat on her, and finds it Christian burial. First Clown: How can that be unless she drowned herself in her own defence? Second Clown First Clown: It must be se offendendo it cannot be else; for here lies the point: if I drown myself wittingly, it argues an act; and an act hath three branches: it is to act, to do, and to perform. Argal she drowned herself wittin gly. Second Clown: Nay, but hear you, Goodman Delver. First Clown: Give me leave. Here lies the water good. Here stands the man good. If the man go to this water and drown himself, it is, will he nill he, he goes. Mark you that. But if the water come to him and drown him, he drowns not himself; argal he that is not guilty of his own death shortens not his own life. The self se defendendo (or as the gravedigger humorously se offendendo conclude that Ophelia is having a Christian burial because she was a gentlewoman and not because of her lawful entitlement.

PAGE 39

31 The suggestion that a suicide was composed of three parts recalled the case of Hales v. Petit in 1563. 63 In that case, Sir Charles Hales, a puisne judge of the Common Pleas, 64 or lower court, drowned in 1554 in a river near Canterbury. Judge Hales had been indicted (but released) for his opposition to putting Lady Jane Gray on the throne. Althoug h he was a Protestant, he could not take any action against the heir apparent Mary who was a Catholic. With similar conscientious attention to the rule of law, he instructed grand jurors that the religious settlements of prior reigns were in effect and th at celebrating the mass was a crime. For this he was not allowed to take the oath of office under Mary and sent to jail. There he had tried to open his veins with a penknife and after his release drowned. 65 His drowning was ruled a suicide ( felo de se ) an d he was buried at the crossroads. In 1559 his widow Lady Margaret Hales brought an action against Cyriack Petit, to whom the crown had leased land that Judge Hales had leased and had forfeited to the was a suicide. The lease had been made to Judge Hales and his father in 1535 for twenty one years and renewed by Judge Hales when his father died in 1540. Dame Margaret claimed that she was only seeking to recover that which she had during the life of he r husband because they held the lease as joint tenants. 66 Petit argued that the lease was forfeited to the crown before it could vest in Margaret by her right of survivorship. To prevail, Petit has to demonstrate that the crime that led to the forfeiture occurred during Judge Hale s Dame Margaret on his death. To support this argument, Petit argued that the felony of suicide had occurred before Hales died:

PAGE 40

32 the act consists of three parts. The first is the imagination, which is a reflection or meditation of the mind, whether or no t it is convenient for him to destroy himself, and what way it can be done. The second is the resolution, which is a determination of the mind to destroy himself, and to do it in this or that particular way. The third is the perfection, which is the execution of what the mind has resolved to do. resolution to commit it, and its executi and forfeited his lease by stepping into the water, even though he was not yet dead and the court agreed: Wherefore all the justices agreed, that the forfeiture of the goods and chatt e ls real and personal of Sir James Hales shall have relation to the act done in his life time which was the cause of his death, viz the throwing himself into the water. Margaret and Petit. In 199 4, the notebooks of the chief judge Sir James Dyer were particular. No priority 67 Sir James Hales was dead, and how came he to his death? It may be answered, by drowning; and who drowned him? Sir James Hales; and when did h e drown him? In his life time. case although he expresses three parts with synonyms and not separate acts His the question whether the death would have been ruled a suicide if the water had come to Judge Hales; he would have died se defendendo In the play, the Queen suggests that her garments, heavy with their drink were,

PAGE 41

33 into the river by accident. The conclusion in the play is ambiguous. Ophelia is buried in a churchyard, but the services ar was doubt Although Hales v. Petit was decided before Shakespeare was born, three consciousness. In 1569, when Shak espeare was five years old, two and a half year old Jane Sha x spere drowned while picking flowers in a river about twenty miles from Stratford; although there is no known familial relationship between Shakespeare and her, the haphazard Elizabethan spellings make it possible. 68 On July 6, 1579 a William Shakespear when he walked into the river to bathe and fell into a deeper part. On December 17, 1579, Katherine Hamlett drowned in the Avon while drawing a pail of water. 69 All three deaths were r uled accidental ( per infortunium ). G. Nationalism The excommunication of Elizabeth I in 1570, the separation from Rome establishment of the Anglican church and the victory over the Armada all fostered nationalism and p ride in England. The word nation gained its modern sense in the sixteenth century as it evolved from its compared unfavorably with Latin and other European languages, by 1582 Richard

PAGE 42

34 Mulcaster could state i n the first part of his Elementarie ( 1582

PAGE 43

35 CHAPTER III When Shakespeare arrived in London in the early 1590s 70 its population was approximately 200,000, 71 representing a four fold increase since 1500. Although deaths outnumbered births, the population grew with immigration from the country and the Continent. The City of London consisted of 448 acres with about 100 parishes. Shakespeare would have found a noisy, crowded city. The streets smelled from the because there was no drainage system and the contents of chamber pots were thrown indiscriminately into the streets. The poorest areas were the northern and 72 far from the City itself. jurisdiction of the Lord Mayor of London who disapproved of plays because of the crowds and occasional riots they attracted: the Theatre at Shoreditch (built by James Burbage as the first permanent theatre), the Curtain near the Theatre, the Rose and Swan on the south sid e of the Thames (known as Bankside), and the Red Lion at Mile End. James Burbage also owned the Curtain ; it was named for the wall of Curtain Street that offered relief from wind and bad weather and not for the theatre curtain that had not yet been invent ed. In Cripplegate outside the north wall of the City, the famous tragedian A. Lodgings known lodgings in London, beginning before October 1596, 73 The Theatre and Curtain were within walking distance. 74 I n 1597 or so Shakespeare moved

PAGE 44

36 to Southwark on Bankside in the Liberty of the Clink, Surrey. The Clink was a small un jail derived. The Southwark location was near the future home of the Globe. In 1604, Shakespeare was living in the Christopher Mountjoy residence at the intersection of Silver and Muggle (Monkswell ), between Cripplegate and Cheapside 75 the City walls. 76 structures of gold, silver and jewels that women wore in their hair. B. Companies and the sink of all sin .They are public enemies to virtue and religion; and bring both the gospel into slander; the Sabbath into contem 77 A cting compan ies sought the patronage of a lord i n order to avoid a violation of the Vagabond Act of 1604 78 which proscrib ed ( among others ) players of interludes, fencers, bear wards, minstrels, begging scholars and sailors, palmists and fortune tellers 79 and beggars to be greevouslie whipped and burnt through the gristle of the right eare, with a hot yron of the compass of an inch about 80 After likely associations with several companies including those under the auspices of the Earls of Leicester, Pembroke, Derby and Sussex, Lord Strange, and the outbreak of the plague in 1593 94. The economic duress took its toll on the companies. In 1594 which operated under the patronage of Henry Carey, the first Lord Hunsdon, and cousin of the Queen.

PAGE 45

37 The Lord of James Burbage (himself a famous player ) and an accomplished player in his own right. The new company included the comic actor Will Kempe. The significance of their association is, of co urse, an illustration of possessive individualism; each member was selected for his skill and contribution to the company Shakespeare, as a writer, Kempe as a comic actor, and Richard Burbage as a tragedi a n Shakespeare was among t he sharers (or fellows) known as the senior players The sharers contributed capital to the company took the most prominent roles and shared in the profits of the company. The sharers were contrasted with the housekeepers (sometimes householders), who built and maintained th e theatres and collected a fee from the companies. 81 On May 19, 1603, shortly after James I took the crown, he issued letters patent that made T he actors continued as he positions not on ly earned money but also allowed the members to wear royal livery. played at court thirty death in 1616, the K companies put together. 82 Acting companies were typically short lived ; t hree or four lasted twenty years. However, t all the companies we 83 C. The Globe Theatre In 1576 James Burbage had leased land in Shoreditch for twenty one years and built the Theatre B efore it plays had been presented i n courtyards or inns and attract ed

PAGE 46

38 rowdy crowds and occasional riots. 84 In April 1597 the lease of the land beneath the Theatre ended. Burbage tried unsuccessfully to negotiate an extension of the lease. He went so far as to agree to an increased ground rent from £14 to £24 per annum for a five year period 85 However, when the landlord Giles Allen (who was a Puritan and opposed to theatre in general) insisted that the company make improvements that revert ed to him son Richard as a guarantor, James decided to to the Bla ckfriars Theatre which he had acquired in 1596 Why so large cost, having so short a lease, Dost t hou upon thy fading mansion spend? Sonnet 146 lns. 4 5 The Blackfriars Theatre was Cathedral 86 and part of a former Dominican Priory which had been confiscated in 1538 as a consequence of the Reformati on power of the mayor of the City of London and b y 1596 it was 87 The offices of the London Times stand there today. James Burbage spent £800 remodeling the B lackfriars T heatre. However, when the influential neighbors complained about the public nuisance threatened by the proposed theatre, the Privy Council prohibited performances. With neither the Theatre nor the Blackfriars Theatre en performed occasionally at the Curtain Theatre near the Theatre The company could hardly risk its future on the Having put all his money into the empty Blackfriars Theatre and unable to finance another theatre J ames Burbage died in January 1597 leaving the Theatre and Blackfriars Theatre to his sons Cuthbert and Richard

PAGE 47

39 ( ) The company pursued t wo novel expedients : the Globe was founded and the sharers agree d to become owners of their own theatre. O 28) 1598, the Thames was nearly frozen at London Bridge. Members of the Lord their contractor Peter Stree te and others dismantled the Theatre, loaded its parts into carts, and took it to Street e warehouse for storage until the foundation of the new theatre was completed. Some authorities suggest that they used a ferry that snowy night, while others think the river was too dangerous for passage and that London Bridg e was used. 88 Allen, as the owner of the Theatre, promptly brought suit for trespass seeking s with divers and manye vn law full and offensive weapons, as namelye swords daggers billes favor of the tenants because their lease was of the land and not the improveme nts which the lease allowed them to remove. F or the first time in theatre history, the sharers financed the theatre. The agreement among them executed February 11, 1599 provided that Richard and Cuthbert Burbage together owned fifty percent of the leaseh old and the other five Shakespeare, John Hemings (also Hemmings and Heminges) Thomas Pope, Kempe, and Augustine Phillips each jointly owned ten percent. A ten percent interest would yield as much as £100 annually for an initial investment of £70. Th ese sharers in the Lord Men thus became housekeepers to the Lord

PAGE 48

40 the money they would have paid to a n unrelated housekeeper. The housekeepers, other than the Burbages, conveyed their interests to Wil liam Leveson and Thomas Savage, who reconveyed the interests to them as tenants in common so that they could make transfers of their interests. 89 Kempe quit the troupe in 1597 and transferred his interest to the other housekeepers. In 1600 Robert Armin re placed him as the comic player of the troupe. The ingenious adaptation of theatre ownership by the company may have been prompted by the freedom of ass ociation that individuals found after the collapse of the The players were free to own the theatre they had earned. Land ha d monetary value and the sharers ha d The construction of the open air Globe was undertaken by Streete, who agreed to complete the work within twenty eight w eeks. Because of the proximity to the Thames and the unstable soil, piles were needed to secure the foundation; their installation took sixteen weeks. The posts (some thirty feet long) taken from the Theatre were finished with wattle and daub that was covered with white plaster The stage was oriented on an axis forty eight degrees east of true north in direct alignment with the mid summer solstice. 90 91 bore the motto Totus mundus agit historionem Theatres were round or octagonal and about eighty feel in diameter. 92 At the back was the tiring house where the players put on their costumes. The theatre was surmounted by a flag showing Hercules bearing the world on his shoulders. There are no surviving contemporary images of the Globe O ne by Claes Visscher is sometimes offered;

PAGE 49

41 however, Visscher had never seen the Globe (or in fact been to London) and had based his work on an earlier engraving. Like other outdoor theatres of the time, its design followed the design of the inns from which they evolved. Unlike the modern stage that is set behind a proscenium and separated from the audience by the orchestra pit, the Elizabethan stage (a so set up at the back of the courtyards of the inns) and projected just less than fifty feet into the theatre The better seats were on a gallery level corresponding to the rooms at th e inns and the less expensive seating w a s standing room on the ground. 93 The stage could not fit more than a dozen actors at a time. A trap door served for burials and disappearances. At the back of the stage, two doors allowed for exits, entrances, and the appearance of processions. The thatched roof or shadow standing on two pillars provided shelter from the rain and direct sunlight. A second storey at the back of the stage offered a balcony for scenes such as the one in Romeo and Juliet In May 1599 openings the Globe opened with Juli us Caesar on the summer solstice June 12, 1599 Venus and Jupiter were in the sky and the high tide at Southwark expedited travel across the Thames. Julius Caesar was followed by Othello Macbeth and King Lear At first, t he Globe offered afternoon per formances throughout the year ; after the Blackfriars Theatre opened (see Section III.D) it offered performances only from May to September. The Globe had a capacity of twenty five hundred to three thousand, which was considerably more than the population of Stratford. A proportionately sized theatre

PAGE 50

42 in modern Manhattan would have a capacity of nearly one hundred sixty thousand. Real cannon were used to shock the audience ; the odor of gunpowder linger ed There was no painted scenery but there were decor ations. 94 During a performance of Henry VIII on June 29, 1613, the Globe burned to the ground when a blank volley ignited the thatched roof that had been used instead of tile to save construction costs Fortunately, no one died and the costumes and play b ooks were saved; otherwise the company would have been bankrupt. In fact, those play books may required each sharer to contribute between £50 and £60. Some speculate tha t Shakespeare sold his interest in the Globe in order to avoid that expense because h is interest in the Globe does not appear in his will three years later The reconstruction of the Globe was completed in almost exactly one year, and it reopened in June 1614. 95 The Globe had ingenious arrangement by which the sharers were also housekeepers. Theatre. Th e lease or term for years and its transience (or determination) lend themselves to comparisons to love or beauty in several sonnets: (a) So should that beauty which you hold in lease Find no determination; then you were ease, When your sweet issue your sweet form should bear. Sonnet 13 lns. 4 8 Shakespeare is urging a youth perhaps his early patron Henry Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton to marry and have children. (b) Rough winds do shake the darling birds of May, And s Sonnet 18 lns. 3 4

PAGE 51

43 (c) Speaking of devoted love, Shakespeare wrote: It fears not Policy, that heretic, Which works on liares of short Sonnet 124 lns. 9 10 There are appear (d) Not mine own fears, nor the prophetic soul Of the wide world, dreaming on things to come, Can yet the lease of my true love control, Suppressed as forfeit to a confined doom. Sonnet 107 ln s. 1 4 (e) Macbeth 4.1.115, and not be killed. (f) 2 Henry VI 4.9.4 5, as he searche s for food. (g) When told that Francis has a five year apprenticeship at an I Henry IV 2.5.40 41. (h) John of Gaunt s Richard II 2.1.59 (2 .1.109 110). 96 (i) Finally, in an imaginary address to his beloved Silvia, Valentine says: O thou that dost inhabit in my breast, Leave not the mansion so long tenantless

PAGE 52

44 Lest, growing ruinous, the building fall And leave no memory of what it was. The Two Gent lemen of Verona 5.4.7 10 principle of the land law. In The Merry Wives of Windsor that is, fidelity in modern terms. To test her, he assumes th e name Master Brooke and, acting like her suitor, enlists Falstaff to act as a go between. When Falstaff asks Brooke t my edifice by mistaking the place 194. The legal principle is that what is affixed to the ground is part of the ground ( quicquid plantatur solo solo cedit and aedificatum solo solo cedit ). This rule arose from the belief tha t land is more important than the chattels on it (and that D. The Blackfriars Theatre On August 9, 1608, Shakespeare and six others by then leased the Blackfriars T heatre for twenty one years at £40 per year, or £5, 14s, 4p. for each of them. 97 Five of the seven had been With the addition of the Blackfriars T from two theatres; the open air Globe was used in the summer months from May to September, and the enclosed hall style Blackfriars Theatre was used in the colder and darker winter months. With a capacity of six hundred (as opposed to the three thousand ), the Blackfriars T heatre was nevertheless more profitable because it charged about six times greater admission than the Globe with a fee of 6p for the cheapest seats

PAGE 53

45 in the distant galleries, a shilling for a bench in the pit, and half a crown for a box. The seating nearest the stage was the most costly, so that poor patrons were out of the sight of the wealthier ones. This pricing scheme has survi ved. 98 The Blackfriars T heatre offered 99 and w as the more prestigious venue. Because it was enclosed, the Blackfriars Theatre offered candle lit performances that an open theatre could not. Woodwind and string music (as opposed to the trumpet music found in the Globe) first appeared in the enclosed theatres to entertain theatregoers both before the plays began and between the acts after the introduction of the division of plays into acts. 100 The Blackfriars T heat re became a model for theatres and in that sense was more important than the Globe. The use of artificial lighting to create night and day at the Blackfriars Theatre made it unnecessary for the actors to identify the time of day as they had to do at the o pening scenes of Hamlet t is now struck twelve. Get thee to bed, or the time of the murder of Banquo in Macbeth 101 At the Globe, on the other hand, an evening scene might be conveyed by players carrying torche s even if the performance was in the middle of the day. Actors wearing swords were a clue that the action was out of doors because swords were not worn indoors. Still, the spoken words and not the effects brought the plays to life so that when Edgar desc ribes the cliff from which his blind father Gloucester proposes to jump, King Lear 4.5.11 12. E. The Home o n Henley Street Shake John had prospered as a glover in Stratford and bought two houses in 1556 one on Henley Street and one on Greenhill Street in one of which Shakespeare was to be born. 102

PAGE 54

46 oldest son, in herited the house, 103 subject to a life estate interest in favor of mother Mary. 104 The canons and order of descent were quite clear and analogous to the descent of the crown 105 Estates descended lineally to the male children, grandchildren, and so on. They did not ascend. At the beginning of 3 Henry VI the weak King Henry proposes to entail the crown to Richard, Duke of York (who became Richard III), if Henry can keep the crown for his lifetime; however, Henry has a son Prince Edward and canno 3 Henry VI 1.1.146 47. Under t he earliest rule, called gavelkind and common in Wales, Kent and East Anglia, estates passed equally to all the male issue. To avoid fractured estates and assure the provision of services, descent to the eldest male primogeniture became the rule. The theme of primogeniture occurs in several plays that uphold the rule, but not without criticism. In T i t u s Andronicus the older brother Saturninus and the younger Bassianus vie for the throne and the love interest Lavinia; despite confusion and bloodshed, the elder prevails in his claim for the throne and the younger wins L avinia. As You Like It concerns Oliver the malevolent older brother and his mistreatment of the younger Orlando, and raises the question whether the people or the rule is bad. In King John a choice must be made between the older (arguably ) bastard brothe r Philip Falcongridge and his younger legitimate brother Robert ; although the crown goes to Philip, whom John finds to be legitimate Robert emerges as a better choice and the policy of primogeniture is cast in doubt.

PAGE 55

47 life estate enabled her to live in the Henley house for the rest of her life Upon her death, the estate passed to Shakespeare Sonnet 92 lns. 1 4 plays on the life estate to say that love and life are coterminous: But do thy worst to steal thyself away, For term of life thou art a ssurd mine, And life no longer than thy love will stay, For it depends upon that love of thine. F. New Place At the age of 33, Shakespeare bought New Place in Stratford. Located at Chapel Street and Chapel Lane (also known a 106 New Place was 107 and consisting of ten rooms with fireplaces, five gables, and grounds sufficient for two barns, t wo gardens, and two orchards. B uilt at the end of the fifteenth century by Sir Hugh Clopton New Place had sixty feet of frontage, seventy feet of depth, and stood more than twenty eight feet high. Before Shakespeare bought it, New Place had been describ 108 New Place had scandalous history of which Shakespeare must h ave been aware. In 1563, a well known local scoundrel named William Bott had married his daughter Isabella to John Harper, who promised that died intestate without issue. Bott then assured h without issue by 109

PAGE 56

48 Bott conveyed New Place to an Inner Temple lawyer, William Underhill, who left it to his son also named William. 110 On May 4, 1597, t he son William conveyed New House to Shakespeare for £60; the price recited in Elizabethan documents is not always accurate. The sale was effected by a fine described in Section I I F.1(b) but the trans fer was not completed Two months after the attempted conveyance to Shakespeare, and was hanged. T he crown seized New Place for a felony but regranted it other son Hercules when he came of age in 1602 Hercules then completed the transfer to Shakespeare by another fine. Hercules also conveyed to Shakespeare two orchards that were not included in the first sale Shakespeare paid an additional £60 for the additional land. 111 Shakespeare lived in New House until his death. Shakespeare owned New House in f ee simple: a perpetual, alienable, and inheritable interest, th at is the largest estate in land. Shakespeare makes several references to fee simple estates 112 Only two are used in the sense of an estate in land: (a) When discussing a proposed military incursion, the Captain says of Poland: To pay five ducats, five, I would not farm it Nor will it yield to Norway or the Pole A ranker rate, should it be sold in fe e. Hamlet 4.4.9.10 9.13 (b) When Iden catches Cade on his property, Cade says 2 Henry VI 4.9.22 Perhaps representing the new land owning bourgeoi s ie, Iden kills Cade for his trespass. In this period, Sir Edward Coke (who

PAGE 57

49 Section IV.B.2 ) popularized an old English proverb in The Ins titutes of the Laws of England Other appearances of fee simple are merely suggestive of someone holding the entirety of an interest: (c) The character of the First Lord Dum aine is described by Paroles: Sir, for a he will sell the fee simple of from all remainders, and a perpetual succession of it perpetually. 4.3.262 264 An ecu was a French silver coin worth five francs. Its name was derived from the shield O.F. escu and L. scutum depicted on it. (d) When Mercutio and Benvolio argue about which of them is the more quarrelsome, they exchange: Benvolio: An were I so apt to quarrel a s thou art, any man should buy the fee simple of my life for an hour and a quarter. Mercutio: The fee simple? O, simple. Romeo and Juliet 3.1.27 30 Benvolio contradicts himself by giving perpetual estate the simple a definite term, and prompts Mercu (e) In A 143 147 the distraught lover says: My woeful self that did in freedom stand, And was my own fee simple (not in part), What with his art in youth, and youth in art, Threw my affections in his charmed power,

PAGE 58

50 Reserved the stalk, and gave him all my flower. The meaning is to having given all of herself. (f) When he is told there is bad news to be reported, Macduff Macbeth 5.1.197 98. The ensuing r eport is that his family has been slaughtered. G. The Blackfriars Gatehouse On March 10, 1613 Shakespeare bought the Blackfriars gatehouse from Henry Walker for £140, of which £80 were paid in cash and £60 wer e due one year later. 113 located next to the Blackfriars T heatre and near Puddle Wharf from which Shakespeare could cross to the Globe. The gatehouse was presumably purchased by Shakespeare as an investment back dores and bye 114 It had provided lodging to the Prior of Dominicans and was later the headquarters of Catho lic intrigue. 115 The form of the transaction was unusual. Although Shakespeare paid for the gatehouse, title was taken in joint tenancy by him and three trustees, John Hemming, William Johnson, and John Jackson, the first two being theatre associates of Sha kespeare and the last being the proprietor of the famous Mermaid Tavern. 116 Joint tenancy is a 117 The prevailing speculation for this arrangement is that barred from a claim on property of which her husband was not the sole proprietor. 118 s interest. 119 Another theory hold s that the joint tenancy expedited the mortgage that was

PAGE 59

51 given the next day to assure payment of the balance of the price. Taking title in joint tenancy was also a means of creating a use (or trust) as discussed in Section I I .F.2; in this disposition of the gatehouse. In fact, no one knows why Shakespeare employed joint tenants t played a very important role in his life. Sonnet 134 is an extended metaphorical use of the mortgage: So now I have confessed that he is thine, And I myself am mortgaged to thy will, Thou wilt restore to be my co mfort still: But thou wilt not, nor he will not be free, For thou art covetous, and he is kind; He learned but surety like to write for me Under that bond that him as fast doth bind. The statute of thy beauty thou wilt take, ll to use, And sue a friend came debtor for my sake, So him I lose through my unkind abuse. Him have I lost, thou hast both him and me; He pays the whole, and yet am I not free. Here, the writer acknowledges that his love interest has gone to his mistress. The love interest has stood surety for the writer and has forfeited himself to the mistress upon the take him instead of the love interest. The mistress has th em both, however. The mistress, The Shakespeare family was involved in a mortgage as discussed in Section IV.D

PAGE 60

52 H. The Lease of Tithe Lands and The Enclosures In 1554 the warden of the College of Stratford had leased tithe lands to William Barker for ninety two years. After the dissolution of the property of the College, those tithe lands passed to the crown and e was not affected. He later transferred it to Ralph Huband. 120 On June or July 24 of 1605, tithes of Stratford, Old Stratford, Welcombe, Bishopton, and the parish of Stratford upon Avon. 121 creditors and £17 each year to the Stratford Corporation. 122 corn, grain, blade t £60 annually to Shakespeare. On July 9, 1614 a fire swept through the thatched roof houses of Stratford, destroying fifty four of them, and causing more than £8,000 of damage in two hours. 123 The entire town was nearly consumed. 124 On the next day, the richest man in Stratford John Combe died, leaving much of his fortune to his nephew Thomas Combe. William Combe, the older brother of Thomas, decided to initiate the enclosure of the open fields at Old Str atford, Bishopton, and Welcombe. Two other wealthy landowners Arthur Mainwaring and William Replingham joined Combe. 125 The e nclosure would have affected Shakespeare. If his Welcombe tithe lands were converted from arable land to pasture, their productivit y and his income (which was based on corn, grain, grass, and hay) would have decreased. On the other hand, if agricultural use was more productive, he would have gained. The Stratford Corporation was concerned as well because it held the reversion of Sha 126 The enclosure raised the threat of dislocation discussed in Section II .E. Thus, the proposed

PAGE 61

53 enclosures created a conflict among rich and poor and the community and the wealthy landowners. Shakespeare made an advantageous agreement which assured that his interests were protected even if the interests of the Stratford community were not. He got an anie inclosure or decaye of tyllage there ment and intended by the said William His own feelings about enclosure are found in an ambiguous statement he made to John Greene, one of the local opponents of enclosure. Shake speare is reported to have said word bear Shakespeare left his sword to Thomas Combe so th ere were evidently no hard feelings. In any event, the enclosures were ultimately unsuccessful when Chief Justice of Warwickshire. By then Shakespeare was dead. 127 I. Lesser B usiness Dealings By 1598 Shakespeare had earned the reputation of a wealthy investor. Abraham Sturley of Stratford wrote to Richard Quiney (whose son Thomas later married 128 There is no record of Shakespeare making any investment at that time perhaps because wet summers of 1594, 1595, and 1596, a nd murrain in 1595 led to a poor corn harvest high prices, poverty, and discontent. 129 On October 25, 1598, the sa me Richard Quiney

PAGE 62

54 debts he had incurred in London, perh aps when he was there on business. There is no record of the letter being received or the loan being made. On May 1, 1602, John Combe and his uncle William Combe sold Shakespeare a freehold of one hund red seven acres of arable land with common pasture appurtenant to it and twenty acres of pasture and rights of common in Bishopstone and Welcomb e for £320. This land is often called four yardlands, which was a measure that varied by locale but was usually about thirty acres. Shakespeare was evidently not in Stratford then because his brother Gilbert received the deed. In September 1602, Shakespeare bought a copyhold interest to a quarter acre including garden and cottage on the south side of Chapel Lane, 130 across the street from New Place and perhaps used for servants quarters. 131 Copyhold grew out of unfree or villeinage tenure when the shortage of labor d emesne lands, the villeins or tenants were given ten to thirty acres for their own use and m anorial court roll, which was enforced according to the custom of the manor. Copyholds could be hereditary. ey the custom of the ther eroded the feudal system. Shakespeare may have referred to copyhold tenure in Macbeth 3.2.38 39:

PAGE 63

55 Lady Macbeth: But This exchange has led to a great deal of scholarly discussion. 132 Is it a reference to copyhold or merely a way of saying that Banquo and Fleance are mortal like other of terminable at will but was a protected interest. Shakespeare does not use copyhold at all and does not use copy in this ambiguous sense in other works. A few months after the purchase of New Place, Shakespeare was re ported to be hoarding ten quarters (or eighty bushels) of malt, which was probably more than was necessary for family consumption. 133 Engrossing (or hoarding supplies in bulk) and forestalling (or buying from farmers instead of the open market) were notewor thy offenses, although no action was taken against Shakespeare on account of them; the mention in Coriolanus 1.1.71 Romeo Romeo and Juliet 5.3.114 15 J. Death and Will Shakespea re died on April 23, 1516. The traditional date of his birth may have begun as an effort to have his (possible) day of birth and day of death the same. Shakespeare was buried in the chancel of the Holy Trinity Church where he had been christened. As an owner of church tithes, he was a lay rector and entitled to be buried in the church as opposed to the churchyard. 134 He was buried on April 25. The epitaph whose author is unknown reads:

PAGE 64

56 GOOD FREND FOR IESVS SAKE FORBEARE, TO DIGG THE DVST ENCLOASED HEARE AND CVRST BE HE YT MOVES MY BONES. The location of the grave near the charnel house may have prompted concern that his bones might be exhumed to make room for another burial 135 moved to a ccommodate Ophelia in Hamlet 5.1. January 1616 Shakespeare signed the will on March 25, known six signatures are in this will ; 136 w ills (after the Statute of Wills ) and testaments did not have to be signed, or sealed, or witnessed, but often were for convenience of proof. The handwriting of the three page will sho 137 hat affected prolific writers. Because oral testaments could be made only by the very ill, a superstition arose that written testaments, and by extension wills, wer e a portent of imminent death. In The Merry Wives of Windsor 3.4.53 such a sickly creature, I give Romeo and Juliet 1.1.195. Shakespeare lived only a month after he signed his will. Shakespeare may have made his will in anticipation of impendin g marriage of daughter Judith to Thomas Quiney. Without a special license and thus in violation of ecclesiastical law (which had accelerated the wedding plans of Shakespeare and Anne Hathaway), Judith and Thomas Quiney were married during Le nt in February

PAGE 65

57 1616. Five years younger than Judith, Thomas ran a tavern and was the son of Richard Quiney who had asked Shakespeare for a loan in 1598 (see Section I I I. I ). Shakespeare left Judith: £150 of which £100 was payable immediately; £50 on the condition that she renounce any claim to the copyhold of the cottage where her sister lived on Chapel Lane across from New Place; and an additional £150 if she or her heirs were living three years abeth Hall. However, unless her husband gave her equivalent value in land, she could receive only the interest on the when Quiney was charged in the ecclesiastical court s with fornication having impregnated Margaret Wheelan who died in childbirth along with their child. Quiney was ordered to do public penance but instead paid five shillings Some speculate that his marriage to Judith was intended to cover up the expecte d scandal. In fact, Shakespeare Shakespeare left his sister Joan £20 and his clothes. In addition, she was allowed to stay at the H enley Street residence at a nominal rent. He left three of her four sons £5 misce llaneous gifts such as money for rings to some of his colleagues (two of whom assembled the First Folio). This devise would have included New Place, the Henley Street residence, the Blackfriars gatehouse, and the

PAGE 66

58 lands around Stratford. 138 The evident goal of these bequests was to keep his holdings together. 139 The devise to Susanna was by fee tail : a grant o A, and the male heirs of his tailer was tailored to the grant. The tail was imposed to keep the grantee from selling the estate thus defeating the inheritance of descendan ts, and also to assure the grantor of a reversion if there were no heirs of his body. Shakespeare selected a fee tail male so that the property went to eldest surviving male son and then his son and so on. andchildren died childless and the plans for his estate were frustrated. Shakespeare employs the proper terminology when Lear transfers part of his King Lear 1.1.57 58. However, Shake speare misuses the tail in two ways in III Henry VI 1.1.195 201: I here entail The crown to thee and thine heirs for ever, Conditionally, that here thou takes thine oath Cease this civil war, and whilst I live To honor me as thy king and sovereign, And no r by treason nor hostility To seek to put me down and reign thyself. Contrary to proper practice, he bodies, and he does not create a present estate in possession. He does, however, convey the conflict ing preferences of King Henry and Queen Margaret for the governance of the it could be barred or destroyed, by proceedings known as common recoveries or fines, as

PAGE 67

59 discussed more fully in Section I. C He demonstrates his awareness that tails could be defeated in 4.3.263. The bequest to his wife of thirty four years Ann e has attracted the attention of historians for many years. By an interlineation on the third and last page of his will, he context, the furniture would have involved the sheets and covers. This small bequest wife. On the other hand, historians hav e suggested that the best bed was reserved for guests and that the second best bed would be the marital bed with its associations of love and fidelity. It may also have been an heirloom or the one in which he was lying when he died. Other historians poin t out that there is no need to make a specific provision for Anne since she had a one dower which dated to the thirteenth century. 140 Although the dow e r rights with respect to land were cons istent throughout England, research regarding dow e r has shown that rights as to personal property and dow e r varied by local custom among London and other parts of England. 141 in the Globe is not mentioned perhaps because it had been so ld, or perhaps because it was included within the residuary devise to Susanna. Since a husband that owned an estate in joint tenancy was not solely seized of it and his interes t

PAGE 68

60 was not subject to dower 142 Shakespeare had tenancy perhaps with the goal of defeating Ann Shakespeare mentions dower several times. When Petruccio talks to Baptista (whose daughter Petruccio hopes to marry), Baptista promises a dowry of £20,000 immediately and one half his lands after his death. Petruccio responds: Her widowhood, be it that she survives me, In all my lands and leases whatsoever. The Taming of the Shrew 2.1.121 23 That the promise is more generous than the law provides is meant to demonstrate his ardor. In 1.1.3 6, Theseus compares how slowly time withering child must wait to inherit while its mother lives. A wife could lose her dower if her husband was convicted of a felony or treason; however, Mariana inherits the possessions of her disgraced husband Angelo by the Measure for Measure 5.1.

PAGE 69

61 CHAPTER IV SHAKESPEARE AND EQUITY A. Shakespear only four times and differently each time When unsuccessfully defending against a charge of treason, Gloucester says: Foul subornation is predominant, 2 Henry VI 3.1.145 146 When King Lear conducts a trial of his daughters, he arrays a court consisting of King Lear 3.6.31 32. Here, the ref erence is to the Chancery court which was a court of equity as discussed in Section IV.B A moment before the cellor in the House of Lords sat. 143 King John 2.1.241. The reference seems to be to the disputed title to the English throne arising out of the Falconbridge ba star dy matter discussed in Section II.E and suggests a right that should be protected by the Chancery equitable powers. By far the most interesting use is in I Henry IV when Prince Hal and Poins have left Falstaff with Bardolph to rob the travelers Between that robbery and the re entry by Prince Hal and Poins to attack Falstaff and his cohorts (who surrender what they have This

PAGE 70

62 reference compels an exploration of an important part of the English judicial system and B. The Court System Before that exploration can begin, familiarity with the Elizabethan judicial syste m is necessary. The three common law courts that sat at Westminster Hall since the Magna Carta : t Exchequer Across from them were the Court of Chancery and Court of the Lord Chanc ellor. William the Conqueror established the C ourt of Exchequer to have jurisdiction that covered its table and served to mark sums and score counte rs. T he C ourt of Comm on Pleas involving matters such as property, debt and trespass. These proceedings were slow, expensive, and complicated. The requirement of quite specific pleading frequently led to trivial errors and inj ustice. As a result this court was not as popular as the others. Originally the court in which the king sat, th e had jurisdiction over civil matters, criminal matters (pl eas of the crown), and appeals from Common Pleas. When the court was not in session at Westminster Hall, two or three conveyed not only a centralized and increasingly uni form law, but also the policy and will of the crown. The Court of Chancery began as an administrative and political office because it

PAGE 71

63 presiding officer, was the holder of high political office (whose title derives from a cancellando referring to his right to cancel letters patent), 144 Until the Reformation, the Chancellor had been an ecclesiastic since on ly churchmen were conversant in writing when Chancery was established. The Court of Chancery heard cases involving uses and trusts (see Section II.F.2 ) and ones that the common law courts could not address adequately such as mortgages or fraud Chancery p conception that justice ought to be done even at the cost of non compliance with the strict 145 146 Instead of o rdering a party to pay damages, it would order a party to do (or not to do) something that should (or should not) Standing in contrast to the letter of the law, equity was certain to conflict with the common law 147 Moreover, with the common law would have political consequences. C. The Legal Backdrop 1. Statute of Praemunire A recurren t question in the early development of English law was reception or rejection of Roman law as reflected in the shifting boundary between ecclesiastical courts and royal courts. The pope, for example, had forbidden English bishops to recognize the decision s of royal courts regarding ecclesiastical patronage. The battle between these courts had been joined when King Stephen (1135 1154) prohibited the study of civil law at Oxford four centuries before Shakespeare was born. As a result of the ecclesiastical

PAGE 72

64 have been drawn out of the realme to answer of things, whereof the cognizance thereof d be 148 Although there had been similar statutes before it, the enduring Statute of Praemunire 149 was passed in 1353. Its Praemunire facias Institutes : 150 The effect of the statute of 16 R. 2. [Praemunire ] is, if any pursue or cause to be pursued in the court of Rome, or elsewhere, any thing which toucheth the king, against him, his crowne and regality, or his realme, their notaries, procurators, &c. fautors, &c. shall be out of the kings protection. The p protection. Praemunire had been written to limit the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts and papal authority in England. However, the oblique wording did not specify i ts goal. More directly on point was the Statute of Prohibition (1403) that provided in part: After judgment rendered in the courts of our lord the king the parties and their heirs shall be in peace until the judgment is reversed by attaint or writ of erro r. 151 In Henry VIII 2. Common Law v. Chancery During the Elizabethan period an analogous issue arose among the English courts themselves as opposed to the dispute among English courts and ecclesiastical courts:

PAGE 73

65 could Chancery ( w hich suffered from the taint of i ts origin as a Roman ecclesiastical court ) conflict would What was Chancery to do when a matter came to it that appeared to be a miscarriage of justice? Could it give relief from an unjust award of damages by enjoining the complainant from enforcement of the judgment? If so, Chancery stood above Parliament and above the jury system. If not, the crown as the fountain of justice was thwarted. Although the legal issue can be framed as the finality of judgments or res judicata how often can the same matter be litigated there are more subtle questions. Is redress to Chancery an impermissible method to appeal an adverse judgment? How can a properly award ed judgment according to substantive rules be said to be just if it can be set aside by another set of rules? If so, are the substantive rules wrong? The political issue, however, concerns the primacy of either the common law, or the crown (through its p rerogative courts). As it was stated then, does the decision of one supersede the the common law. In an effort to reconcile the arguments Francis Bacon 152 suggested that C the successful litigant. time The first was Throckmorton v. Finch in 1597 153 In that case, the cro wn had leased land to if the rent was not paid within forty days after it was due. After a default in payment, the

PAGE 74

66 Queen recovered the lands and leased them to a thir d party who leased them to Finch. Throckmorton sued in Chancery to set aside the lease to Finch; the basis for relief was the Queen, despite (or because of) having a di rect interest in the outcome, and despite a lapse of twenty one years between the forfeiture and its enforcement, referred the matter from judgment at law: they all after di vers hearings, and conferences, and consideration had of the laws and statutes of the realm, unanimously resolved, that the lord keeper could not after judgement given relieve the party in equity, although it appeared to them, that there was apparent matte r in equity. And amongst others, the judges gave this reason, that if the party against whom judgement was given, might after judgement given against him at the common law, draw the matter into the chancery, it would tend to the subversion of the common l aw, for that no man would sue at the common law, but originally begin in chancery, seeing at the last he might be brought thither, after i.e. had recovered by the common law. 154 In Falstaff and Equity: An Interpretation Judge Charles E. Phelps relates a mor e maids of honor and had scandalized the crown with her alleged imprudent conduct with Sir Walter Raleigh who was rumored to be romantically involved with the Queen. 155 In the 156 Lord Chancellor Ellesmere (who had unsuccessfully represented Throckmorton) enjoined enforcement of a judgment for fraud Bench (who had successfully represented Finch) indicted several of the parties for praemunire Consistent with his belief that the crown was the wellspring of justice, King James avert this standoff, reso lved the judicial crisis by supporting his prerogative court of

PAGE 75

67 Chancery. Adopting the solution proposed by Bacon, the rule sought to avoid the process and the role of the p revailing litigant: Where a judgment is obtained by oppression, wrong and a hard conscience, the chancellor will frustrate and set it aside, not for any error or defect in the judgment, but for the hard conscience of the party. Coke was dismissed a few mon ths later. Coincidentally, Ellesmere as Lord Chancellor had supported the Welcombe enclosures that Coke ha d prohibited (see Section II.H ) and this is the same Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, who is sugge sted as the author of the plays (see Appendix 1 ) D. Just at the time of the first performance of 2 Henry VI in 1597, expression would have been readily understood to the audience who knew of the ongoing matter. For Phelps it is at once a timeless reference to the legal issue, an immediate joke to the audience, and a personal revelation of the playwright. 157 In 1578 or 1579, John and Mary borrowed £40 from r Joan, and to secure repayment mortgaged a property which consisted of a house on sixty acres about three miles from Stratford. The property had been in the Arden family. The transaction may have been a scheme to protect o r to avoid the risk of the confiscation of lands held by recusant Catholics 158 of which John may have been one The loan was due by Michaelmas (September 20) 1580

PAGE 76

68 Shortly before the mortgage was made, the property had bee n leased to George Gibbs for twenty years at a nominal annual rent of eight bushels of wheat and barley beginning Michaelmas 1580. ( Leases were often used to defraud creditors. ) The lease y was lodged. The lease did not play a part in the subsequent events, although Lambert suggested that the Shakespeares were motivated by a desire to charge a higher rent on releasing. The Shakespeares claimed that they tendered timely repayment and that E dmund Lambert refused to accept it because the Shakespeares owed other amounts to him (and there is evidence of this). It is also possible that John may not have tried to repay the loan. In any event, Edmund died and his son John inherited his estate. I n 1587 the Shakespeares threatened suit to recover the property. On September 26, 1587, John Lambert agreed to pay an additional £20 to settle the matter, but reneged on his agreement. In 1589 the recover the promised £20. There is no record of the outcome of that action, which languished unresolved for eight years, until November 24, 1597 just nine days after the decision in Throckmorton v. Finch when the Shakespeares commenced an action in Ch ancery seeking reconveyance of the property; presumably, the property was worth more than £20. unless other money owed to him by the Shakespeares was also paid. John Lambert re sponded simply that payment had not been made and that the property was forfeited as

PAGE 77

69 appointment of commissioners to examine witnesses, there is no record of a conclusio n to the litigation. court would not bestir itself to reverse that judgment On the other ha nd, the 1597 case in Chancery sought a different judgment not one for money but rather one for reconveyance. Perhaps the Shakespeares believed that this distinction in the desired relief would be within Chancery and Falstaff simply meant that Chancery had not yet acted on the claim. 159 In a different sense, however, the issue may be framed as individual conscience versus the law of the land. Just as a court of equity can exercise its conscience by extending or restricting a statute of the r ealm, an individual can consider what is right or there is nothing either good or Hamlet 2 2.250 51.

PAGE 78

70 CHAPTER V LEAVING THE AGE OF SHAKESPEARE The most remarkable accomplishment in the age of Shakespeare may have been the ability of the English to feed themselves. Reversing stagnant growth since the Black Death, the population grew rapidly, wage s fell and prices doubled between 1500 and 1540 and doubled again between 1540 and 1560. The higher prices encouraged sales at market in preference to subsistence farming. The influx of gold and silver from the New World also led to inflation. In a cen tury, an abundance of land was replaced with a shortage a labor shortage was replaced with a surplus, and high wages were replaced with lower ones. Poverty and unemployment led to the Poor Laws of 1601 In the words of G.M. Trevelyan: 160 Elizabeth the industrial, commercial, and social system of the country was brought under national instead of Statute of Artificers (1563) legislated the seven year period of apprenticeship at the expense of the traditional local guild system. Perhaps circumnavigation of the world in 1577 80 and his success against the Armada in 1588 merchant ships brought luxury goods from the New World, West Africa, and the Mediterranean to the emerging middle class Tobacco from the 161 These sentiments are certainly exempli fied by the voyage to such exotic described in The Tempest 5.1.186 162 The economic history of the sixteenth century could almost be told by reference to the wool t rade. 163 The century began with the exportation of raw wool. When it

PAGE 79

71 became profitable to finish the wool domestically, sheep raising, carding, and spinning at the cottage gave way to weaving and dying in town for storage and export. These tasks were coor a shepherding, landowners enclosed their fields with resultant dislocation and unemployment. The seaports and London and the crown (as it struggled to support itself) prof ited from the duties on exports. The language sustained changes and, with the arrival of the printing press supported national unity. The age of Shakespeare saw the increased power of the individual individual consciousness and a concommitant eliminat ion of personal loyalties to anyone other than the state. Trevelyan notes the curious analogy to the Protestation elimination of everything between the individual and God and the Elizabethan elimination of everything between the individual and the state. 164 The class distinctions based on social origin faded with the rise of a middle class and a redistribution of wealth. The r ule of the n obility in the social, political and judicial affairs of the country was diminished The son of a glover from Stratford could pursue a successful career as a London Playwright, earn a coat of arms, and return to live in one of the la rgest homes of his birthplace. Geoffrey Elton wrote: The century and a half that followed upon the accession of Henry VIII in 1509 was to wit ness a series of developments which, though they drew upon the medieval experience of the English polity, amounted to a whole bundle of transformations the sum of which provided an unfailingly united and centralized kingdom with its own national civilizati on, so well centralized that it could afford to allow diversity and liberties, and in the end even real civil war, to endure without endangering the fundamental fact of national identity. 165

PAGE 80

72 be called from a measure of prestige to a measure of prosperity. The individual conscience was common law courts. Each Elizabethan could take a cue from the court of equity and ask Ha mlet 2.2.244 45.

PAGE 81

73 FIRST POSTSCRIPT WHO WROTE THE PLAYS? Although no one doubted during his lifetime that he wrote the plays attributed to questioned in the late eighteenth century by Herbert Laurence in The Life and Adventures of Common Sense (1769); he proposed that Sir Francis Bacon (1561 1626) wrote the Shakespeare canon. In 1780 James Wilmot, who lived near Stratford 166 searched unsuccessfully for Shakesp eareana and inexplicably concluded that Bacon was the author of the works attributed to Shakespeare. He passed his suspicions to James Cowell who published them but the issue was dormant for fifty years. In the 1850s, several articles and pamphlets revive d the question and the proposition that Bacon wrote the plays. Then Delia Bacon from rural Ohio became plays. Although there is no known genealogical connection between Ms Bacon and Sir Francis, she did claim him as an ancestor later in her life. Evidently an engaging and persuasive personality, Bacon managed to enlist (briefly) Ralph Waldo Emerson and Nathaniel Hawthorne in her cause. Her monomania resulted in the publi cation of The Philosophy of the Plays of Shakespeare Unfolded (1857). Apparently as a result of a mystical revelation, Ms. Bacon believed that Bacon had left hieroglyphic failed to find them spe nt her last years in an asylum. 167 Ignatius Donnelly, who had written Atlantis: The Antedeluvian World ( 1882 )

PAGE 82

74 code in The Great Cryptogram that Bacon wrote not only most of Montaigne Helen Keller also favored Bacon. Henry James favored Bacon at times, but finally merely dou The prob lems with attribution to Bacon are that: in contrast to Shakespeare, he was interested (at the same time) in arcane Neoplatonic symbolism and contemporary empiricism; he had a full time career in politics; his forays into creative writing were notoriously unsuccessful; his major creative work consisted of Biblical texts ; 168 and his metrical version of the Psalms of David As a trained lawyer, he would not have made the number of legal errors that appear in the plays and as an E ast Anglian, he would not have used the Warwickshire vocabulary of the plays. 169 Finally, b ecause although Bacon was alive when the First Folio was composed, he apparently did not offer assistance with some textual problems candidacy began to lose favor just before the twentieth century. As early 170 Shortly after Davis, Judge Charles E. the time these words w ere written, in 1892, the delusion [that Bacon wrote the plays attributed to Shakespeare] was still held by many respectable people who have since had 171 Edward de Vere, the 17 th Earl of Oxford was propose d as another candidate by the schoolmaster Thomas Looney in Seventeenth Earl of Oxford (1920). Looney postulated that Shakespeare was insufficiently educated and of the wrong social class to have written the plays. He

PAGE 83

75 decided upon the characteristics that the author of the plays should have and concluded that Oxford had them. Looney had noticed that poems written by Oxford in his youth seemed similar to Venus and Adonis (1593) ; in fact, the similarity arises from the common practice of using stock images in Elizabethan poetry. 172 Oxford also wrote plays but none survives. With no literary background but a strong distaste for the materialism and individualism of his time, Looney believed he had found in Shakes peare a soulmate who supported a feudal sort of authoritarian social order. The fullest explication of the Oxfordian thesis has been advanced by Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn in The Star of England (1952) and Mr. Ogburn in The Mysterious William Shakespeare (1984); their essential notions are that Shakespeare lacked the education and social standing to know what he wrote about (but that a lord did) and that Oxford concealed his identity because playwriting was beneath his station and he might have embarrasse d some of his peers by his revelations of courtly life. appeared for nearly ten more years, the Oxfordian thesis maintains that Shakespeare left his remaining plays partially compl eted to be finished by others. Others respond that modern attribution studies demonstrate that the plays were collaborative efforts and that Oxford would not have collaborated with commoners. The Oxfordians have garnered their share of odd notions. One Oxford was not only her lover but also her child by her stepfather Thomas Seymour; this

PAGE 84

76 In 1959 the Journal of the American Bar Association devoted an issue to the authorship question, and, on the basis of dubious scholarship, seemed to subscribe to someone other than Shakespeare having written the plays. Mi lward W. Martin wrote a thorough and frequently sarcastic response that collects the arguments for and against 173 The essential points of the anti Stratfordian position are 174 The principal subsidiary points are (following Martin): (a) he did not show early talent; (b) his name is misspelled; (c) his business dealings are unlike an artist; (d) (e) the legal terms show the author was a lawyer, but he was not; and (f) he did not travel outside England so he could not have written plays set in Venice or Rome. Justices William Brennan, Harry Blackman, and John Paul Stevens of the Supreme Court considered the authorship question in a moot court at American University on September 25, 1987. 175 At the outset, Brennan acting as chief justice surprised the other justices by announcing that the Oxfordians had the burden of proving their case, thus giving Shakespeare a distinct advantage. The ju stices unanimously determined that the case for Oxford had not been proven. Brennan rejected the notion that the breadth of knowledge was too great for anyone but an aristocrat who had been educated at a university although he pointed out numerous factua l errors in the plays. He

PAGE 85

77 exposed him to what he wrote. He was most influenced by the appearance of several not believe Shakespeare was uneducated; took at face value the assembly of the First a contempor ary Francis Meres had mentioned both Shakespeare and Oxford. However, Stevens acknowledged merits in the Oxfordian points about the absence of writings about Shakespeare in his lifetime and of eulogies on his death. He added that if Shakespeare was not t res judicata and recommended that the Oxfordians abandon their conspiracy theories and produce a reason that the Oxford wrote under a pseud onym. He later changed his allegiance to Oxford. 176 The Boston Bar Association held a mock trial on November 12, 1993 with a federal judge presiding over educated jurors from several disciplines. The jurors favored Shakespeare over Oxford ten to four. 177 Th e anti Stratfordians contend that the bust at Holy Trinity Church in Stratford plays said disrespectfully he called evidence, let alone persuasive. The absence of proof of irrelevant matters is taken as proof that Shakespeare did not write his plays. Of course, no other author is shown To prove their case, the anti Stratfordians will ha ve to answer these questions (among many) adequately:

PAGE 86

78 (1) whom was Robert Greene attacking in his Groats worth of Witte, Bought with a Million of Repentance (1592) if not Shakespeare? This pamphlet is the first published notice of Shakespeare in London It i s the bitter death bed autobiography of a minor playwright and player who felt that his companies had used his plays and he is well able to bombast out a blank verse as the best of you: and being an absolute Johannes factotum is in his own conceit the only Shake 3 Henry VI 1.4.138, whe an uneducated person as opposed to the so by 1592 Shakespeare was a player also attracting attention as a playwright. By that time Shakespeare has probably written three parts of Henry VI The Two Gentlemen of Verona Titus Andronicus and The Taming of t he Shrew (2) Venus and Adonis that was published by Richard Field who also came from Stratford and presumably knew Shakespeare, and why the self effacing dedication to the Earl of Wriothesly? (3) why did The Rape of Lucrece (1594) follow the same course as Venus and Adonis with respect to the publisher and its dedication? (4) Sonnet 136 ?

PAGE 87

79 (5) to whom was Francis Meres referring in Pallad is Tamia or Wits Treasury (1598) in which he compared the English poets to those of classical Rome and Greece, and contemporary Italy with Shakespeare emerging as his favorite ? As to theatre omedy and Tragedy among the Latines: so Shakespeare among [the] English is the most excellent in both 178 His mention of several plays by name helped scholars to date their first presentations. (6) who is meant by the contemporary referenc es by name to Shakespeare made by Francis Beaumont? (7) companies both of which performed plays written by that person? (8) why did a member of his company Augustine Phillips remember Shakespeare in his will, and why did Shakespeare remember members of his company in his own will? (9) why did John Hemings and Henry Condell, the sole survivors of Shakespeare is the author. Published in 1623 in an edition of 1,000 priced at £1 (when the average annual income was £4), the First Foli o contains thirty six plays omitting Pericles and Two Gentlemen of Verona which was a collaboration with John Fletcher (1579 1625) to which Shakespeare contributed very little. (Shakespeare and Fletcher

PAGE 88

80 also wrote Cardenio which is lost.) The dedicatory letter to the Earls of Pembroke and (10) why did the contemporaries Ben Jonson and the poet Leonard Digges write dedications in the First Folio that name Shakespeare? Jonson wrote (in part) across from Martin Droesho u in the First Folio (1623) : (11) documents related to areas in a nd around Stratford? (12) Shakespeare? Although Elizabethan playwriting was a collaborative effort, and individual attributions were usually not made before 1600, 179 the authority of title pages is genera lly accepted as determinative of the authorship of early literature. 180 The first attribution of a play to Shakespeare is on the title page of Richard II in 1598. 181 Bacon, Marlow e (who died in 1593 but, as the story goes, faked his death and went in been the most popular ones [N] 182

PAGE 89

81 SECOND POSTSCRIPT WAS SHAKESPEARE A LAWYER? first recorded suggestion that he was a lawyer. The coincidence of this issue with the authorship issu 183 Based on his belief that all fiction is autobiographi cal, Twain was a Baconian. (Twain also believed Queen Elizabeth was a man.) The industrious Irish barrister Edmond Malone, disappointed by the paucity of biographical material, made the first suggestion that Shakespeare was a lawyer. Malone used Shakespe argument presupposed that in writing his plays Shakespeare mined his own emotional life in transp 184 hint was a footnote to Hamlet in an essay on the chronology of the plays. Twelve years lat works: His knowledge and application of legal terms, seems ( sic ) to me not merely such as might have been acquired by the casual observation of his all comprehending mind; it has the appearance of technical skill; there is, I think, some ground for supposing that he was early initiated in at least the forms of law such circumstances seem to me to render it extremely probable. 185

PAGE 90

82 Seventy years after Malone, W.L. Rushton published Shakespeare a Lawyer (1858). 186 Rushton made many more references to the works than did Malone and profession, sufficient has probably been stated to prove that h e acquired a general 187 Rushton followed that book with Legal Maxims which re ordered the citations in his prior work, offered a chapter with a few allusions to the law of real property, 188 knowledge and correct application of legal maxims displayed in his work afford the strongest evidence I have yet produced that the great poet must have been, for some time, a student at Shakesp Acquirements Considered 189 190 was strongly inclined to believe Shakespeare ha d legal given Were an issue tried before me as Chief Justice at the W arwick assizes, up Avon, gentlemen, ever was clerk in up to go to the jury in support of the affirmative, but I should a dd that the evidence is very 191 1 Henry IV 3.1.77, Campbell concluded that Shakespeare must have seen one in a opied the expression from one

PAGE 91

83 Chronicles Rushton noted that Campbell 192 Campbell was like Malone and Rushton equivocal. However, Sir Dunbar Plunket Barton felt compelled to write in Links between Shakespeare and the Law 193 that pourri of legal 194 With respect to specific topics in the land law, the modern com mentators have m ortgages] do not reveal 195 ownership 196 the references to the commons are merely the sense of shared and have been called ; 197 a s to Elizabethan dramatists generally, t s to estates in fee simple ; 198 and t 199 After 500 pages of analysis and examples, Edward J. White concluded Comm entaries on the Law in Shakespeare 200 The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Paul S. Clarkson and Clyde T. Warren Elizabethan would accumulate in the course of association with educated people, and that basis of our comparative studies, we do state categorically that the internal

PAGE 92

84 201 Arthur Underhill opened his discussion of law in th e Life and Manners of His Age phrases and allusions, his knowledge of law was neither profound nor accurate, and it is unnecessary to explain such knowledge as he had by assuming that he enjoyed eve n a 202 Judge Charles E. Phelps concluded 203 To the contrary, B.J. Sokol and Mary Sokol introduced their Sha Language superficial, and that Shakespeare exploited legal ideas, circumstances, and language with cumulative evidence, that on the contrary Shakespeare shows quite precise and mainly serious interest in the capacity of legal language to convey matters o f social, moral and 204 More than a century earlier C.K. Davis had employed a 205 Writing of other Elizabethan dramatists, Cla rkson and Warren state: not only do half of the playwrights employ legalisms more frequently than Shakespeare, but most of them exceed him in the detail and complexity of their legal problems and allusions, and with few exceptions display a degree of accur 206 Sokol and Sokol agree with Clarkson and Warren that Shakespeare did not use Elizabethan terminology more frequently than other playwrights. Jonson, the son of a

PAGE 93

85 bricklayer, used twice as many legal allusions as Shakespear e in half the number of plays. 207 training, so also can one respond that his failure to use legal terms e specially those pertaining to the land law shows an absence of leg al training. Shakespeare does not use most of the terms related to tenures: socage, villeinage, knights service, serjeanty, frankalmoin, copyhold, primer seisin, aids, or escheat and forfeiture (in their legal senses). Although he uses many of the terms related to estates, he does not use curtesy Despite their prevalence and importance, Shakespeare rarely mentions uses The argument from use founders on the errors and non technical ways in which legal terms are used. The argument from non use does no t consider that the unused terms may have been inappropriate or poor choices for their possible contexts. Although there were professional attorneys educated at the Inns of Court, there were many other practitioners that offered legal services: 208 notaries, scriveners, solicitors (who supervised attorneys attached to particular courts but were themselves not regulated), court officials, and experienced tradesmen. Thus, the question whether are have acquired his legal knowledge from his own experiences and his exposure to other Elizabethan society was fascinated by the judicial process. O. Hood Phillips estimates that two thirds of Elizabethan plays have trial sce nes. 209 The modern reader may be impressed by the quaint and curious legal terminology even though it may have been part of common parlance among Elizabethans. 210 Shakespeare was creating

PAGE 94

86 entertainments for a wide range of social and economic strata, and not abstruse treatises for legal scholars. His expected goal would be to engage his audiences in matters that resonated with them and not to lose them in bewildering arcana. Still, one wonders how Shakespeare could write King John and not mention the endur ing legacy of his reign and the cornerstone of English jurisprudence the Magna Carta.

PAGE 95

87 ENDNOTES 1 Macpherson, C.B. The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962, p. 3. 2 Milsom, S .F.C. Historical Foundations of the Common Law London: Butterworth, 1969, p. 88. 3 2 Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1979, p. 53. Shakespeare makes humorous use of homage when Viola dressed as Cesario says to Olivia in Twelfth Night does not expect anything from her such as the monetary exactions due after an oath of homage. The joke is in t he reversal of genders as a result of Viola dressing as Cesario. Women rarely did homage and certainly never to another woman. 4 [I]t is hard to escape the conclusion that in the 15 th Century England displayed the characteristics of a stagnant and declin ing civilization. The fundamental trouble was a spiritual malaise induced by plague and general uncertainty; among the more important symptoms with the disintegration of society, the violence of public life, the decay of law and order, and the weakness of Elton, G.R. England Under the Tudors London: Methuen & Co., 1955 p. 9. 5 Elton, G.R. England Under the Tudors London: Methuen & Co., 1955 p. 3. 6 Ford, Boris, Ed. The Age of Shakespeare Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1955, p. 30, et seq 7 the reign of Queen Elizabeth began in 1558. The Tudor era began with the reign of the first Tudor in 1485 and ended with the death of the last Tudor, Elizabeth, in 1 603. 8 Bryson, Bill. Shakespeare: The World as Stage New York: HarperCollins, 2007, p. 45. 9 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977, p. 168. 10 Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life Oxfor d: Oxford University Press, 1998, p. 100. 11 Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998, p. 145. 12 Greenblatt, Stephen. Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004 p. 76 and Tillyard, E.M.W. The Elizabethan

PAGE 96

88 World Picture New York: Vintage Books, N.d. The Tudor sumptuary laws were the most visible evidence of a hierarchical society. See Appendix B. 13 Although De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium was published in 1543, his heliocentric theory was not confirmed until the beginning of the seventeenth century by Johannes Kepler in 1609 and Galileo in 1610. Consequently Elizabethans adhered to the geocentrism of Ptolemy with the earth at the center and the sun and seven planets revolving around it. The sublunar space was mutable but the superlunar space was not. Astrology was revered as a science. The foremost astronomers Tycho Brahe (1546 1601) and Johannes Kepler (1571 1630) were astrologers. Other occult s ciences alchemy, numerology and magic had wide followings. 14 Harrison, William. Elizabethan England. London: Walter Scott, n.d., is an invaluable tool for Elizabethan history contemporary history and inventory of England first published as part of during the reign of Elizabeth. 15 Anthropologist 293 (1965), at 296. 16 I Henry VIII, ch. 14. 17 (July 1915), pp 433 43, which reprints th e 1509 and 1533 acts in modernizing English. Cox and Hooper differ on the date of the 1509 act. 18 Taken for Wonders: Community, Identity and A History of Sumptuary Law 23 Law and So. Inquiry, Summer 1998, pp 707 Governance of the Consuming Passions: A History of Sumptuary Laws 19 24 Henry VIII, ch. 13. 20 1 James I, ch. 25. 21 The evidence is not clear but is related in Phillips, O. Hood. Shakes peare and the Lawyers London: Methuen & Co., 1972, pp. 448 49. 22 Trevelyan, G.M. A Shortened History of England London: Penguin Books, 1942, p. 204. 23 Smith, Lacey Baldwin. This Realm of England: 1399 to 1688 Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1966, p 108.

PAGE 97

89 24 When Henry VIII dissolved the monasteries, the revenues due to Westminster (which occurs Select English Works (c. 1380), and appears in a twelfth century 25 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven: Yale University P ress, 1961 p. 43. 26 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005, p. 114. 27 Millward, C.M. A Biography of the English Language (2 nd ed.). Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1996, p. 225; Greenblatt, Stephen. Will in the Wo rld: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004 p. 91. 28 roses derive from Henry VI in which the Yorkists choose white roses and the Lancastri ans red. 29 Elton, G.R. England Under the Tudors London: Methuen & Co., 1955, p. 52. 30 Smith, Goldwin. A History of England 193. 31 Smith, Goldwin. A History of England 957, p. 192. 32 Sheppard, Francis. London: A History Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998, p. 174. 33 Smith, Lacey Baldwin. This Realm of England: 1399 to 1688 Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1966, p. 111. 34 The story is fully told in Price, Mary R. a nd C.E.L. Mather. A Portrait of Brittan Under the Tudors and Stuarts 1485 1688 Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1954, pp. 75 90, and L.B. Smith, page 179, et seq. 35 Holland, Peter. William Shakespeare Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 116. 36 Harrison G.B. Introducing Shakespeare Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books Limited, N.d., p. 35. 37 Smith, Lacey Baldwin. This Realm of England: 1399 to 1688 Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1966, p. 156.

PAGE 98

90 38 Trevelyan, G.M. England Under the Stuarts New Yo rk: Barnes and Noble., 1904, 1949, 1965, ch. 3. 39 40 Smith, Lacey Baldwin. This Realm of England: 1399 to 1688 Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1966, p. 202. 41 Smith, Lacey Baldwin. This Realm of England: 1399 to 1688 Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1966, p. 203. 42 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 281. 43 Hardin, Garr Science Vol. 162, p. 1243 (December 13, 1968). 44 Trevelyan, G.M. English Social History London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1942. 45 Bridenbaugh, Carl. Vexed and Troubled Englishmen 1590 1642 London: Oxford University Press, 1967 at p. 98. 46 More, Thomas. Utopia trans. Clarence H. Miller. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001, p. 22. 47 Burt, Richard and John Michael Archer, eds. Enclosure Acts: Sexuality, Property and Culture in Early Modern England Ithaca, NY: Co rnell University Press, 1994, explores the notion of enclosure in the sense of confinement or circumscription in several contexts. 48 Plucknett, Theodore F.T. A Concise History of the Common Law ( 5 th ed.) Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1956, p. 177. 49 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005 p. 34. The land law is just one of the legal topics that Shakespeare addresses. See Appendix A. 50 18 Edw.I, ch. 1. 51 Simpson, A.W.B. An Introduction to the History of the Land Law Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961, p. 51. 52 Cantor, Norman F. Imagining the Law New York: HarperCollins, 1997, p. 204. 53 Stat. Westminster II, ch. 1.

PAGE 99

91 54 The common recovery and fine processes are described in detail in Underhill, Arthur. Law. In (pp. 381 412). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1916. 55 Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warren. The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Pre ss, 1942, p. 135. 56 27 Henry VIII, ch. 10. 57 Holdsworth, William. A Historical Introduction to the Land Law London: Oxford University Press, 1927, p. 151. 58 27 Henry VIII, c. 16. 59 1 Co. Rep. 93(b) 1581. 60 Davis, C.K. The Law in Shakespeare Washingt on, D.C.: Washington Law Book Co., 1883, pp. 267 268. 61 See Keeton, George W. London: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, 1967, ch. 12. 62 Keeton, George W. London: Sir Isaac P itman & Sons, 1967, p. 186. This rule was relaxed by 4 Geo. IV, ch. 52 which allowed suicides to be buried in a churchyard between 9 p.m. and midnight within twenty four hours after the end of the inquisition but without burial rites. 63 1 Plowden 253. 64 P uisne post (later) and natus 65 Davis, C.K. The Law in Shakespeare Washington, D.C.: Washington La w Book Co., 1883, p. 265. 66 For a feminist critique of Hales v. Petit Hales v. Petit Eyston v. Studd and Equitable Action in Hamlet and Karen Cunningham, eds. The Law in Shakespeare London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007. pp. 189 205. 67 Hales v. Petyt (1562), in 1 Reports From The Lost Notebooks Of Sir James Dyer 72, 75 (J.H. Baker ed.) (1994). http://www.shakespearefellowship.org/virtualclassroom/Law/regnier.htm#_ednref360 68 www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/jun/08/shakespeare re ophelia link

PAGE 100

92 69 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930, vol. II, p. 4. Phillips, O. Hood. Shakespeare and the Lawyers London: Methuen & Co., 1972, p. 36; Keeton, George W. Legal & Political Background London: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, 1967, pp. 190 191. 70 70 from the christening of his twins in 1585 to the first mention of him as a player in London in 1592. 71 Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998 p. 96. 72 Burgess, Anthony. Shakespeare N ew York: Barnes & Noble Publishing, 2006, p. 65. 73 Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998 p. 121. 74 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961 p. 71; Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930 p. 54. 75 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare: The Biography New York: Random House, 2005 p. 420. 76 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary L ife New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 260. 77 Hodges, C. Walter. Shakespeare and the Players New York: Coward McCann, 1958 p. 23. 78 XIV Eliz., ch. 5. 79 Greenblatt, Stephen. Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004 p. 88. 80 190 N. Am. Rev. 605 (Nov. 1909) 81 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Pres s, 1930 p. 57. 82 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 253. 83 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961, p. 88. 84 In 1594 the Curtain Theatre was erected near the Theatre, and the Rose was built on Bankside, a suburb on the south side of the London Bridge.

PAGE 101

93 85 The daily wage in Elizabethan times would have been about one shilling. 85 The vary from £200 to £700, 85 with the weight of authority leaning toward the lower end. 85 Several historians agree that a £1,000 in Elizabethan times would translate approximately to £500,000 in modern money 85 for a five hundred fold inflation in four hundred years. The Oxford Companion to Shakespeare endeavours is the attempted conversion of currency valuations from one time to another. The problem with such an endeavour is that standards of living, desires, practices, available goods in a word, life itself differ so greatly from one period to another that we are left acknowledging the essentially untranslatable nature of 85 There are several reasons for this difficulty: many commo dities such as bread or fruit were baked or grown at home; technological innovations have made the production of some goods much cheaper; a cash economy was more common in urban areas than rural ones where barter was quite common; and inflation has changed the relation of prices and wages. 86 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961 p. 115. 87 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005 p. 465. 88 Honan, Park. Shakesp eare: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998 p. 267. 89 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961 p. 102. 90 Gurr, Andrew with John Orrell. New York: Rou tledge, 1989, p. 22. 91 A great deal of research has been devoted to the shape circular or polygonal. The conclusion largely driven by the reality of timber construction is polygonal. See Gurr, Andrew with John Orrell. e New York: Routledge, 1989, ch. 3 for a thorough discussion. 92 Larouque, Francois. The Age of Shakespeare New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1993, p. 65. 93 Harrison, G.B. Introducing Shakespeare Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books Limited, N.d., p. 94. 94 Hodges, C. Walter. Shakespeare and the Players New York: Coward McCann, 1958 p. 57. 95 Greenblatt, Stephen. Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004 p. 380.

PAGE 102

94 96 ement: Landholding, Leasing, and Inheritance in Richard II 72. 97 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961 p. 115. 98 Gurr, Andrew with John Orrell. Rebuilding Shakespe New York: Routledge, 1989, p. 59. 99 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 265. 100 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005 p. 359. 101 Ker mode, Frank. The Age of Shakespeare New York: The Modern Library, 2005 p. 178. 102 century and is not certain. 103 Kermode, Frank. The Age of Shakespeare New York: The Moder n Library, 2005 p. 123. 104 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930, vol 2, p. 5.2 105 See 2 Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England Chicago: The University of Chicago Pr ess, 1979, ch. 14 for a full discussion. 106 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 232. 107 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendo n Press, 1930 p. 53. 108 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005 p. 324. 109 Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998 p. 237. 110 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Li fe New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 234. 111 Phillips, O. Hood. Shakespeare and the Lawyers London: Methuen & Co., 1972, pp. 6 7.

PAGE 103

95 112 A fee farm was fee simple estate at a perpetual fixed rent. 112 of it occurs when Pandaru now, a kiss in fee Troilus and Cressida 3.2.48), presumably to indicate its duration or their enduring love, or perhaps that neither lover owed any further services. 112 In Richard II John of G as does the Captain in Hamlet when speaking of Poland. 113 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005 p. 495. 114 Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Pre ss, 1998 p. 379. 115 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930 p. 63. There is a great deal of confusion in the original documents with respect to the names of the grantees in this transac tion not to mention the usual vagaries in Elizabethan spelling. 116 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961 p. 82. 117 Hamlet 1 .2.9, although the marriage to her former brother in law Claudius might have been considered adulterous. 118 Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998 p. 379. 119 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 273. 120 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 246. 121 Harrison, G.B. Introducing Shakespeare Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books Lim ited, N.d., p. 42. 122 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961 p. 43. 123 Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998 p. 385. 124 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 281. 125 An effort to enclose these lands undertaken by Sir Edward Greville, Lord of the Manor of Stratford in 1601 had been unsuccessful after six Stratford aldermen, including Richar d Quiney, had leveled the hedges that purported to enclose the lands.

PAGE 104

96 126 Honan, Park. Shakespeare: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998 p. 386. 127 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon P ress, 1930, vol. 2, pp. 141 52 explains the matter thoroughly. See also Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 285. 128 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problem s (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930 pp. 2.101 2; Greenblatt, Stephen. Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004 p. 364. 129 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 V ols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930 p. 154. 130 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 246. 131 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Cl arendon Press, 1930, vol. 2, pp. 111 13. 132 See Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warren. The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1942, p. 44 et seq. and Phillips, O. Hood. Shakespeare and the Lawyer s London: Methuen & Co., 1972, p. 128. 133 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930, vol. 2, pp. 99 101. 134 Holland, Peter. William Shakespeare Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007 p. 60. 135 Frye, Roland Mushat. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967 Section 112. 136 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930 p. 166 ; Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1961 p. 153. The others are on the Blackfriars deed, the Blackfriars mortgage, and the disposition in the Mountjoy Belott suit. 137 Schoenbaum, S. Willi am Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977 p. 297. 138 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005 p. 512.

PAGE 105

97 139 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961 p. 57. 140 Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Handbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961, p. 154. 141 Schoenbaum, S. William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 197 7 p. 301. 142 Simpson, A.W.B. An Introduction to the History of the Land Law Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961, p. 65. 143 Davis, C.K. The Law in Shakespeare Washington, D.C.: Washington Law Book Co., 1883, p. 246. 144 mere Disinterred: The Attack on the Chancery in 145 Holdsworth, William. A Historical Introduction to the Land Law London: Oxford University Press, 1927, p. 147. 146 Milsom, S.F.C. Historical Foundations of the Common Law London: Butterworth, 1969, p. 83. 147 Milsom, S.F.C. Historical Foundations of the Common Law London: Butterworth, 1969, p. 74 et seq. tells the story very well. 148 3 Inst. 54. 149 16 Richard 2, ch. 5. 150 3 Inst. 54. 151 4 Henry IV, ch. 23 i 152 Phelps, Charles E. Falstaff and Equity: An Interpretation Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1901, p. 46. 153 3 In st. 124, 4 Inst. 86. 154 3 Inst. 124. 155 Phelps, Charles E. Falstaff and Equity: An Interpretation Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1901, p. 42. 156 1 ch. Rep. 1; 2 Lead. Ca. in Eq. 601.

PAGE 106

98 157 This reference is discussed at length by Judge Phelps in Falsta ff and Equity: An Interpretation 158 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005 p. 70. 159 In William Shakespeare: The Anatomy of an Enigma London: Caliban Books, 1990, Peter Razzell argues that John Shakespeare was disingenu ous in this litigation. 160 Trevelyan, G.M. English Social History London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1942, p. 190. 161 Trevelyan, G.M. English Social History London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1942, p. 192. 162 Price, Mary R. and C.E.L. Mather. A Portrait of Brittan Under the Tudors and Stuarts 1485 1688 Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1954, p. 15 et seq. 163 Trevelyan, G.M. A Shortened History of England London: Penguin Books, 1942, p. 206. 164 Trevelyan, G.M. A Shortened History of England London: Penguin Book s, 1942, p. 232. 165 Elton, Geoffrey. The English Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992 p. 113. 166 The disputed authorship is told well in Shapiro, James. Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare? New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010 167 Nolen, Stephanie. Shakesp NewYork: Simon & Schuster, 2002 p. 104 168 Martin, Milward. A Biography of the English Language (2 nd ed.) Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1996, p. 115 169 McCrum, Robert, William Cran, and Robert MacNeil. The Story of English New York: Penguin Books, 1986 p. 101 170 Davis, C.K. The Law in Shakespeare Washington, D.C.: Washington Law Book Co., 1883, pp. 37 8. 171 Phelps, Charles E. Falstaff and Equity: An Interpretation Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1901, p. 91 172 Nolen, Steph anie. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002 p. 106

PAGE 107

99 173 Millward, C.M. Was Shakespeare Shakespeare? New York: Cooper Square Publishers, 1965, p. 6 174 Burgess, Anthony. Shakespeare New York: Barnes & Noble Publishing, 2006, p. 38 175 See La 106 for an account of the proceedings with particular attention to the Oxfordians. 176 Wall Street Journal April 18, 2009, reported that the Justices that have expressed an opinion are evenly divided between Shakespeare and Oxford. 177 www.pbs 178 Larouque, Francois. The Age of Shakespeare New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1993, p. 84. 179 Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005 p 331 180 Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems (2 Vols.). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930 p. 83 181 Bryson, Bill. Shakespeare: The World as Stage New York: HarperCollins, 2007 p. 193; Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Bio graphical Handbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961 p. 16 182 Larouque, Francois. The Age of Shakespeare New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1993, p. 87 183 Quoted in Shapiro, James. Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare? New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010, p. 132 184 Shapiro, James. Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare? New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010, p. 40 185 Cited in Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warren. The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1942, p. xviii 186 London: Longman Brown Green Longmans and Roberts 187 at 50 188 Rushton, William Lowes. Liverpoos: Henry Young & Sons, 1907, p. 61 189 New York, D. Appleton and Company, 1859

PAGE 108

100 190 Phillips, O. Hood. Shakespeare and th e Lawyers London: Methuen & Co., 1972 p. 178 191 at 9 192 Rushton, 193 London: Faber & Gwyer Limited 1929 194 at 144 195 196 Th references to co 197 198 Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warr en. The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1942, p. 55. 199 Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warren. The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press 1942, p. 231. 200 Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warren. The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1942 p. 286 201 White, Edward J. Commentaries on the Law in Shakespeare St. Louis: The F.H. Thoma s Law Book Co., 1911 p. 480 202 Manners of His Age Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1916, p. 381 203 Phelps, Charles E. Falstaff and Equity: An Interpretation Boston: Houghton, Miff lin and Company, 1901, p. 103 204 Sokol, B.J. and Mary Sokol. London: Continuum, 2004 p. 3 205 Davis, C.K. The Law in Shakespeare Washington, D.C.: Washington Law Book Co., 1883, p. 59 206 Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warren The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1942 p. 285 207 Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warren. The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1942, p. 285

PAGE 109

101 208 Keeton, George W. London: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, 1967, p. 9 209 Phillips, O. Hood. Shakespeare and the Lawyers London: Methuen & Co., 1972, p. 84 210 England: An Account of the Life and Manners of His Age Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1916, p. 382

PAGE 110

102 BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare The Biography New York: Random House, 2005. Age o f Elizabeth Ed. John I. McCollum. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1960. Alexander, Peter. Shakespeare London: Oxford University Press, 1964. Aubrey, John. The Scandals and Credulities of John Aubrey E d. John Collier. New York: D. Appleton and Co mpany, 1931. Barnett, Lincoln. The Treasure of Our Tongue New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1964. Baugh, Albert C. and Thomas Cable. A History of the English Language ( 4 th ed. ) London: Routledge, 1951. Bentley, Gerald Eades. Shakespeare, A Biographical Ha ndbook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961. Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1979. Blake, N.F. A History of the English Language New York: New York University Press, 1996. Bridenb augh, Carl. Vexed and Troubled Englishmen 1590 1642 London: Oxford University Press, 1967. Brooke, Tucker. Shakespeare of Stratford: A Handbook for Students. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1926. Brown, Ivor. How Shakespeare Spent the Day New Yor k: Hill and Wang, 1964. Brown, John Russell. Shakespeare and his Comedies London: Methuen & Co., 1970. Bryson, Bill. Made in America New York: William Morrow and Company, 1994. Bryson, Bill. Shakespeare: The World as Stage New York: HarperCollins, 2007. Burchfield, Robert. The English Language Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. Burgess, Anthony. A Mouth Full of Air: Language, Languages Especially English New York: William Morrow and Company, 1992. Burgess, Anthony. Shakespeare Ne w York: Barnes & Noble Publishing, 2006. Campbell, John Lord. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1859.

PAGE 111

103 Cantor, Norman F. Imagining the Law New York: HarperCollins, 1997. Chambers, E.K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems ( 2 V ols. ). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930. Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warren. The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1942. Conveyancing Statutes from the 13 th Century to t he Present Time Ed. John Craigie. Edenborough: William Green & Sons, 1895. Crystal, David and Ben Crystal. Companion London: Penguin Books, 2002. Crystal, David. uence of the King James Bible www.oed.com December 7, 2010. Crystal, David. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Crystal, David. Think on My Word Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Davis, C.K. The Law in Shakespeare Washington, D.C.: Washington Law Book Co., 1883. Davis, Joel. Mother Tongue: How Humans Create Language New York: Carol Publishing G roup, 1994. 36 Ill. L.R. of Northwestern U 127 (1941) Eades Bentley, Gerald. Shakespeare: A Biographical Notebook New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961. Eccles, C hristine. The Rose Theater New York: Routledge, 1990. Elton, G.R. England Under the Tudors London: Methuen & Co., 1955. Elton, Geoffrey. The English Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992. Evans, G. Blakemore. Elizabethan Jacobean Drama. New York: New Amsterdam Books, 1990. Fisher, John H. and Diane Bornstein. In Forme of Speche is Chaunge. Lanham: University Press of America, 1984. Foster, Don. Author Unknown: On the Trail of Anonymous New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2000.

PAGE 112

104 Foster, George M. Peasant Society and the Image of Limited Good Anthropologist 293 (1965). Frye, Roland Mushat. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967. Greenblatt, Stephen. The Norton Shakespeare ( 2 nd ed ) New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2008. Greenblatt, Stephen. Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004. Greer, Germaine. Shakespeare: A Very Short Introduction New York: Sterling Publishing, 1986. Gurr, Andrew with John Orrell. New York: Routledge, 1989. Gurr, Andrew. The Shakespearian Stage 1574 1642 ( 3 rd ed ) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Guy, John. The Tudors New York: Sterling Publishing Co ., 1984. Halliday, F.E. The Life of Shakespeare London: Gerald Duckworth & Co., 1964. Science Vol. 162, p. 1243 (December 13, 1968). Harrison, G.B. Introducing Shakespeare Harmondsworth, England: Pengui n Books Limited, N.d. Harrison, G.B. Shakespeare at Work: 1592 1603 Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1933. Harrison, William. Walter Scott, N.d. Hodges, C. Walter. Shakespeare and the Players New York: Coward McCann, 1958. Holdsworth, William. A Historical Introduction to the Land Law London: Oxford University Press, 1927. Holland, Peter. William Shakespeare Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Honan, Park. Shakespear e: A Life Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Hughes, Geoffrey. Words in Time: A Social History of the English Vocabulary Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988.

PAGE 113

105 Hume, David. The History of England ( 3 Vols ). Indianapolis: Liberty Classics, 1983. Jespers en, Otto. Growth and Structure of the English Language New York: The Free Press, 1968. Jones, Emma and Guy Rhiannon. The Shakespeare Companion London: Robson Books, 2005. Jordon, Constance and Karen Cunningham, eds. The Law in Shakespeare London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007. Kay, Dennis. Shakespeare: His Life, Work, and Era New York: William Morrow and Company, 1992. Keeton, George W. London: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, 1967. Kermode, Frank. The Age of Sh akespeare New York: The Modern Library, 2005. The New Yorker April 11, 1988 : 87 106. Larouque, Francois. The Age of Shakespeare New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1993. Lee, Christopher. 1603 New York: St. Mart Lee, Sidney. A Life of William Shakespeare. New York: MacMillan Company, 1931. The Great Courses on Audio Tapes cassette, 1998. Lerer, Seth. Inventing English: A Portable History of the Language New York: Columbia University Press, 2007. Levi, Peter. The Life and Times of William Shakespeare New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1988. MacArthur, Tom. A Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language New York: Oxford University Pre ss, 1996. Mack, Maynard. King Lear in Our Time Berkeley CA : University of California Press, 1972. Macpherson, C.B. The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962 Marche, Steven. How Shakespeare Changed Eve rything New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 2011.

PAGE 114

106 Martin, Milward. A Biography of the English Language ( 2 nd ed. ) Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1996. Martin, Milward. Was Shakespeare Shakespeare? New York: Cooper Square Publishers, 1965. McCru m, Robert, William Cran, and Robert MacNeil. The Story of English New York: Penguin Books, 1986. McDonald, Russ. The Bedford Companion to Shakespeare: An Introduction With Documents Mellinkoff, David The Language of the Law. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1963. Milsom, S.F.C. Historical Foundations of the Common Law London: Butterworth, 1969. More, Thomas. Utopia trans. Clarence H. Miller. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001. Moynihan, Cornelius J. Introduction to the Law of Real Property. St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1962. Mushat Frye, Roland. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967. Neill, Stephen. Anglicism ( 3 rd ed. ) Harmondsworth, Middlesex Penguin Books, 1965. Nicholl, Charles. The Lodger Shakespeare New York: Penguin Books, 2007. Nolen, Stephanie. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002. Phelps, Charles E. Falstaff and Equity: An Interpretation Boston: Houghton, Miffli n and Company, 1901. Phillips, O. Hood. Shakespeare and the Lawyers London: Methuen & Co., 1972. Plucknett, Theodore F.T. A Concise History of the Common Law ( 5 th ed. ) Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1956. Pollock, Frederick and Frederic William M aitland. The History of English Law ( 2 nd ed. ) ( 2 Vols. ). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968. Posner, Richard A. Law and Literature. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988. Powell, Richard. Real Property San Francisco: Matthew Bender & Co 1968.

PAGE 115

107 Prall, Stuart E. The Development of Equity in Tudor England 8 Am. J. of Leg. Hist. 1 (Jan. 1964). Price, Mary R. and C.E.L. Mather. A Portrait of Brittan Under the Tudors and Stuarts 1485 1688 Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1954. Pyles, Thomas. T he Origins and Development of the English Language ( 2 nd ed. ) New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1971. Quennell, Peter. Shakespeare: A Biography Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1963. Razzell, Peter. William Shakespeare: The Anatomy of an En igma London: Caliban Books, 1990. Rosenbaum, Ron. The Shakespeare Wars. New York: Random House, 2006. http://shakespeare. palomar.edu/rowe.htm January 25, 2011. Rowse, A.L. The Elizabethan Renaissance: The Life of the Society New York: Charles Rowse, A.L. William Shakespeare: A Biography London: MacMillan & Co., 1963. Rushton, William L. Shake speare a Lawyer. London: Longmon Brown Green, 1858. Rushton, William Lowes. Liverpoos: Henry Young & Sons, 1907. Russell, John. London: B.T. Batsford, 1942. Schoenbaum, S. Shakespeare, His Life, His Language, His Theater. New York: Penguin Books, 1990. Schoenbaum, S. Shakespeare: The Globe & the World New York: Oxford University Press, 1979. Schoenbaum, S. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. Schoenbaum, S. William Shakes peare: A Compact Documentary Life New York: Oxford University Press, 1977. Schofield, John. The Building of London: From the Conquest to the Great Fire ( 3 rd ed. ) Gloucester: Sutton Publishing, 1999. Ed. Ameri can Bar Association Journal. n.p. 1961. This is a compilation of articles first appearing in that journal.

PAGE 116

108 Shakespeare Cross Examination Ed. Tappan Gregory. Chicago: American Bar Association, 1961. Shakespeare, William The Poems Ed. John Roe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Ed. R.E. Pritchard Gloucestershire: Sutton Publishing, 1999. Ed. Susane L. Wofford. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1 996. Shapiro, James. A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare: 1599 New York: HarperCollins, 2005. Shapiro, James. Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare? New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010. Sheppard, Francis. London: A History Oxford: Oxford Univers ity Press, 1998. Simes, Lewis M. Handbook of the Law of Future Interest ( 2 nd ed. ) St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1966. Simpson, A.W.B. An Introduction to the History of the Land Law Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961. www.oed.com December 7, 2010. Singman, Jeffery L. Daily Life in Elizabethan England Westport: Greenwood Press, 1995. Smith, Goldwin. A History of England 1957. Smith, Jeremy. A Historical Study of English: Form, Function, and Change London: Routledge, 1996. Smith, Lacey Baldwin. The Elizabethan World Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1991. Smith, Lacey Baldwin. This Realm of England: 1399 to 1688 Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1966. Smith, Logan Pearsall. The English Language ( 15 th ed. ) London: Thornton Butterworth, 1934. Sokol, B.J. and Mary Sokol. London: Continuum, 2004.

PAGE 117

109 Speaight, Robert. Shakespeare: A Man and His Achievement. New York: Cooper Square Press, 1977. Stoker, Br a 190 N. Am. Rev. 605 ( Nov 1909 ) Stubbs, William. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1916. Stubbs, W illiam. The Constitutional History of England ( 4 th ed. ) ( 3 Vols. ). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1883. Tames, Richard. London: Thames & Hudson, 2009. The Age of Shakespeare Ed. Boris Ford. Baltimore: Penguin Boo ks, 1955. Ed. Helen Vendler. Cambridge: Harvard, 1997. The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies Ed. Stanley Wells. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. The Scandal and Credulities of John Aubrey Ed. Jo hn Collier. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1931. Tillyard, E.M.W. The Elizabethan World Picture New York: Vintage Books, N.d. Trevelyan, G.M. A Shortened History of England London: Penguin Books, 1942. Trevelyan, G.M. England Under the Stuarts New York: Barnes and Noble., 1904, 1949, 1965. Trevelyan, G.M. English Social History London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1942. Underhill, Arthur. Law. In of H is Age (pp. 381 412). Oxford: Clare ndon Press, 1916. Wagner, John A. Historical Dictionary of the Elizabethan World. Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1999. Watson, Peter. Ideas: A History of Thought and Invention, from Fire to Freud New York: Harper Perennial, 2006. www.oed.com December 7, 2010. www.oed.com December 7, 2010

PAGE 118

110 www.oed.com December 7, 2010 White, Edward J. Commentaries on the Law in Shakespeare St. Louis: The F.H. Thomas Law Book Co., 1911. Williams, Charles. A Short Life of Shakespeare with S ources Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933. Wilson, Ian. Shakespeare: The Evidence Wrenn, C.L. The English Language London: Methuen & Co., 1949. Wright, Louis B. and Virginia A. Lamar. Life and Letters in Tudor & Stua rt England Ithaca NY : Cornell University Press, 1962.