tive knowledge, the second edition of the "Richard II.," which was printed in 1598, with the scene of deposing King Richard left out, was the first one that bore the name of William Shakespeare on the title-page; and there may have been some special reasons, as well for the publication of it at that time as for a close concealment of the real author's name (as we shall see below); especially when it is considered that, only one year later, Dr. Hayward was actually sent to the Tower for publishing the "First Yeare of King Henry the Fourth," which contained little else than the deposing of Richard II., which the Queen took to be a seditious and treasonable pamphlet; and that the Earl of Essex was charged with "undutiful carriage" toward her Majesty, in that he allowed it to be dedicated to him; though, on being warned of her anger, he had made all haste to have the book called in and suppressed.

On the other hand, some of the previous quartos approach so nearly to the more perfect copies of the Folio, and are so correctly printed, that it would seem to be highly probable that the author himself had had some hand in the supervision of the press. And when it is considered how many of those that had been printed in quarto were remodelled, rewritten, enlarged, elaborated, corrected, or amended, before they appeared again in the Folio, and how many of the plays were published therein for the first time, and of what kind they were, we may easily believe, not only that the editors had much benefit from the possession of the "true original copies," but that even the true original copies themselves had undergone much revision. and emendation, before they appeared for the last time in the finished and perfected form of the Folio of 1623; nor need we be surprised at the announcement of the Preface, that they had so published them "as where (before) you were abused with divers stolne and surreptitious copies, maimed and deformed by the frauds and stealthes of injurious imposters, that exposed them: even those are now offered to

your view cured and perfect of their Imbes; and all the rest, absolute in their numbers as be conceived them": Veris mis siseen.

And that such was the fact, the history of the Timon of Athens may furnish at least some sight confirmation. It has been observed that the old play of - Timon" was the work of some other author altogether; and the studies of the later critics, especially Mr. Knight, have shown that the materials and the story of this play must have been drawn from other sources than that old play, or North's translation of Plutarch; and, in fact, that they came chiefly from the untranslated Greek of Lucian. There appears to be no mention on record of any performance of this play on the stage in those times, nor does the existence of it appear to have been known, until it was published in this Folio; and (as it will be shown) there is so much in the matter and style of it that so aptly accords with the external history of Lord Bacon's life, and especially with his later years, and so many distinct traces of himself in it, that it is not difficult to believe it was the latest production of his dramatic muse.

§ 5. ASSOCIATES.

That Francis Bacon, during the earlier portion of the period in which these plays were produced, comprising also nearly the whole period of the sonnets and minor poems, was an intimate personal friend, acquaintance, and associate of the Earls of Essex, Southampton, Rutland, Pembroke, and Montgomery, and other young lords and courtiers, who were also, at the same time, the especial patrons and constant frequenters of Shakespeare's theatre, may be taken as an indubitable fact. Not only in the relations of these great personages, but in the manners of the court and time, there are many circumstances which tend strongly to confirm the view here taken of this authorship. A few of them may be particularly noticed, even at the risk of some

1

slight repetition. It was in 1609 that the first authentic edition of the sonnets was dedicated by the printer to "Mr. W. H.," the only begetter of them, (supposed by Mr. Collier and others, no doubt correctly, to mean William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke,) as "never before imprinted"; 1 the previous smaller edition having been in all probability surreptitiously published. Now it is worthy of mention, at least, that Pembroke, Rutland, and Montgomery, were witnesses to Bacon's patent of peerage in 1618, and were present at his investiture with the coronet of St. Alban in 1621; and to Pembroke and Montgomery was dedicated the Folio of 1623. It is historically known that Bacon wrote sonnets to the Queen, and masques and devices to be exhibited before her. Plays, masques, and triumphs were frequently gotten up, sometimes in great magnificence, by these young lords and courtiers, for her entertainment at Court, at the Universities, at the Inns of Court, or at their own private houses, in which her greatest favorites took the leading interest and the largest part. Companies of players were kept enrolled among the servants of the greater nobles, or were licensed under their patronage, Shakespeare's theatres received the royal countenance and protection. The Lord Chamberlain's Servants" of the Globe and Blackfriars, in the reign of Elizabeth, became "His Majesty's Servants," in the time of King James. Nor is there anything improbable in the supposition that the courtly Francis Bacon, who was so notoriously given to the writing of masques and sonnets for the edification of the virgin Queen, should exert his genius in this same direction far more extensively than was publicly known, or even suspected by the Queen herself. It is quite certain that some of the plays were performed, for the first time, before her Majesty at Whitehall and other palaces; and, according to certain traditions, she seems to have taken an

66

1 Shakes. Sonnets (Fac-simile of the ed. of 1609, from the Original in the Library of Bridgewater House), London, 1862.

especial delight in the fantastic wit and superb drolleries of the fat knight in the "Henry IV." and the "Merry Wives of Windsor." King James appears to have taken equal pleasure in these dramatic entertainments. As we have seen, many of the plays were first performed before the King at Court, in his time. And the "Essay on Masques and Triumphs," and the several masques themselves, which are certainly known to have been written by Bacon, afford proof enough that he had the ability, the Shakespearean wit, the same grace, brevity, and beauty of style, an imagination equally powerful, and a love for the sport.

King James, on his coming into England in 1603, was entertained with a play performed by Heming's company, at Wilton, the country-seat of the Earl of Pembroke. The "Macbeth" was evidently suggested by the change of dynasty and the Scottish superstitions concerning demonology and witchcraft, on which King James had himself written a book; and the new sovereign is said to have acknowledged the compliment in an autograph letter addressed to William Shakespeare, a document which seems never to have seen the light. "The system of Dæmonologie," says Dr. Johnson's Preface, "was immediately adopted by all who desired either to gain preferment, or not to lose it." And it is worthy of notice, also, in this connection, that this play was written about the time that Bacon was made Solicitor-General; and that the "Henry VIII." was produced in great splendor, with a studied compliment to King James, just when he had obtained the royal promise to succeed to the Attorney-General's place. Not that King James, or Queen Elizabeth, knew that Bacon was the author of these plays (though it might be difficult to name a reason why they should not have known), but that they may very well have understood, at least, that he, among other courtiers, was largely instrumental in getting up these magnificent entertainments for the royal amuse

ment. Both of them certainly knew that Bacon "had a great wit and much learning," and that he took a leading part in the actual composition of some of them.

No more is it to be doubted, that the intimate personal relations which subsisted between Bacon and Essex extended to Southampton as well. He was of Essex's party, and was his supporter in those wayward schemes which culminated in a treasonable attempt against the Queen's government; and he was a party accused in the prosecutions and trials which followed. Essex was beheaded; Southampton, only imprisoned in the Tower; but soon after the accession of James, he was set at liberty. While yet in the Tower, Bacon addressed him the following letter:

"It may please your Lordship,- I would have been very glad to have presented my humble service to your Lordship by my attendance, if I could have foreseen that it should not have been unpleasing to you. And therefore, because I would commit no error, I chose to write; assuring your Lordship how credible soever it may seem to you at first, yet it is as true as a thing that God knoweth; that this great change hath wrought in me no other change towards your Lordship than this; that I may safely be now that which I was truly before. And so craving no other pardon, than for troubling you with my letter, I do not now begin to be, but continue to be,

"Your Lordship's humble and much devoted."1

On the accession of King James, the friends and followers of Essex were taken into especial favor, while those who had been the favorites of Elizabeth were, for a time, held at a distance, Bacon among the rest, though very soon afterwards formally appointed to the place of King's Counsel, the first that had ever been, " under the degree of serjeant, made so honoris causâ,” says Blackstone. When the trials of Essex and Southampton for high treason came on, in the previous reign, Bacon, as one of the Queen's Coun

1 Works (Mont.), XII. 115.

2 3 Black. Comm., 27.