Storieta
English
Sign up

About this book

C. C. Stopes’s work is a scholarly investigation into the Shakespeare family, beginning with a meticulous examination of John Shakespeare’s property dealings in mid‑sixteenth‑century Stratford‑upon‑Avon. The opening pages lay out competing theories about whether the poet’s birthplace was owned, rented, or later purchased by his father, and trace a succession of financial setbacks, legal disputes and municipal obligations that shaped the household’s fortunes. Stopes weaves together parish records, chamberlain accounts and court documents to sketch a picture of a “high‑spirited fellow” whose imprudence and debts reverberated through the lives of his children, including the future playwright. The narrative proceeds from these detailed local archives to a broader portrait of William Shakespeare’s upbringing, his schooling, early marriage and the social pressures that surrounded his family.

The book is written in the measured, documentary style of early‑twentieth‑century historical scholarship, with dense footnotes and a focus on primary sources rather than narrative flourish. Its tone is analytical and occasionally speculative, reflecting the author’s attempt to reconcile fragmentary evidence. Readers who enjoy genealogical research, Elizabethan social history, or a rigorous, source‑based look at the background of England’s most famous poet will find it rewarding, while those seeking a more popular biography may prefer a lighter account.

Who appears in Shakespeare's family

  • John ShakespeareMiddle‑aged Tudor merchant, brown beard, wool‑shop apron, doublet and hose, standing before timber‑framed house
  • William ShakespeareYoung Elizabethan gentleman, dark curls, ruff collar, black doublet, holding a quill, poised beside a thatched cottage

The opening · free to read

_To face p. 55._]

We must then face the question, either John Shakespeare owned the birthplace in 1552, and resided in it until he added the wool-shop in 1556; or he rented the wool-shop in 1552, which he purchased in 1556; or he rented the birthplace in 1552, which he purchased in 1575 from the Halls. Under whatever circumstances he secured these, both remained free to him during all his financial difficulties, and descended to his son. But these uncertainties create the doubt that remains in the mind of some, Was the poet really born in the birthplace which tradition has assigned to him, or not? To me it seems that the balance of all considerations remains in favour of the birthplace. It is hard to account for a purchase in 1575 (that evidently galled him) of any other premises save those in which he resided. Little is known of John Shakespeare or his family during 1576 and 1577, but in 1578 begin the records of his temporary poverty, which I have noted under the account of his relations to his wife's relatives. For the Town Council, doubtless in consideration of his past services, excused him paying 3s. 4d., as his share of "the furniture of the pikemen," etc.; and, along with Mr. Robert Bratt (the poorest member of the Corporation), he was excused the 4d. a week imposed on the aldermen for relief of the poor. Then came the mortgage of Asbies in 1578-79.[129] The following year he again left unpaid his share of the levy for armour--3s. 4d.; and he began, probably through shamefacedness, not to show himself at the Halls, though the State Papers still enter him among the gentlemen and freeholders of Warwickshire. But another influence began to affect his circumstances prejudicially about this time, and that is, the evil fortunes of his brother Henry of Snitterfield. How his biographer, in the "Dictionary of National Biography," could call this brother "_a prosperous farmer_," I know not.

In 1574 there had been a free fight, wherein blood was drawn, between him and Edward Cornwall, who afterwards became the second husband of his brother's sister-in-law, Margaret Webbe, nee Arden. In the year 1580 there was an extra long series of actions against him for debt; threats of excommunication for withholding tithes; fines for refusing to wear the statute caps on Sunday; fines for not doing suit of court. Altogether he seems to have been a high-spirited fellow, who brought on himself, through lack of prudence, much of his ill-luck, and who had the unfortunate knack of involving other people in his troubles.

In 1582 both brothers were summoned as witnesses in support of Robert Webbe against the Mayowe appeal.

In November of that year John's eldest son William, of whom no earlier direct mention had been preserved, added to his embarrassments by a premature marriage, and in the following year John was made a grandfather by the birth of Susanna Shakespeare. In 1584 the twins Hamnet and Judith were added to his anxieties. About this time the Stratford Records notice how a John Shakespeare was worried by suits brought against him by John Brown, in whose favour a writ of distraint was issued against Shakespeare in 1586. But the answer was returned that "he had nothing whereon to distrain."

There are several reasons for believing that this John was not the poet's father. The prefix Mr. is not used in the entries; it is certain that he retained his freeholds in Henley Street all his life, and if he had "no goods whereon to distrain," he could hardly have been received as sufficient bail at Coventry, on July 19 of that year, for Michael Price, tinker, of Stratford-on-Avon, or as security for his brother Henry's debts. In 1586 he was removed from his office of alderman.[130]

Just in the year of the death of Edmund Lambert, when the possession of money would have given him power to have renewed his efforts to regain Asbies, Henry Shakespeare became a defaulter, and Nicholas Lane, by Thomas Trussell, his attorney, sued John Shakespeare in his place, 1587. William Court was his attorney in a weary case, which must have led both sides into heavy costs, over the recovery of L22.[131]

On September 1, 1588, he paid a visit to John Lambert at Barton-on-the-Heath, in the vain hope of inducing him to surrender Asbies; instituted proceedings against those who owed him money in Stratford, and, in 1589, against Lambert in the Queen's Bench at London, probably acting in the latter case through William. From the inquisition post-mortem of the Earl of Warwick, in 1590, we know Mr. John Shakespeare still owned the two houses in Henley Street.

In 1592 Mr. John Shakespeare appraised the goods of two important neighbours--of Ralph Shawe, wool-driver, July 23, and Henry Field, tanner, August 21. Thomas Trussell, the attorney, drew up the inventory, and denominated his associate as Mr. John Shaksper, Senior, for no clear reason, but possibly to distinguish him from the shoemaker John. The attestation is witnessed only by a cross. During this year Sir Thomas Lucy and others were drawing up the lists of Warwickshire recusants[132] that had been "heretofore presented." Among these they included several members of the sorely-oppressed family of the Ardens of Park Hall, and in Stratford-on-Avon "Mr. John Shackspere" and eight others. Probably some friendly clerk, wishing to spare them fines, added: "it is sayd that these last nine coom not to Churche for feare of process for debte." But it is quite possible it might refer to John Shakespeare the shoemaker, who, having been Master of the Shoemakers' Company, might have been called "Mr."[133] In the earlier undated draught from which this was taken the Commissioners state: "wee suspect theese nyne persons next ensuinge absent themselves for feare of processes, Mr. John Wheeler, John his son, Mr. John Shackespeere," etc.

Away up in London in 1593 the tide was beginning to turn for the family through the efforts of the poet and the affection of the Earl of Southampton.

In this year Richard Tyler sued a John Shakespeare for a debt, but it is not at all certain it was not one of the others of the name. In a case brought by Adrian Quyney and Thomas Barker against Philip Green, chandler, Henry Rogers, butcher, and John Shaxspere, in 1595, for a debt of L5, the absence of a trade after Shakespeare's name has made Mr. Halliwell-Phillipps suppose that he had retired by this date. A John Shakespeare attested by a cross the marriage settlement of Robert Fulwood and Elizabeth Hill in 1596, which represents probably the name of the poet's father. In 1597 he sold, to oblige his neighbour, George Badger, a narrow strip of land at the western side of his Henley Street garden, 1-1/2 feet in breadth, but 86 feet in length. For this he received L2 10s., and his ground-rent was reduced from 13d. to 12d., the odd penny becoming Badger's responsibility. He also sold a plat, 17 feet square, in the garden, behind the wool-shop, to oblige his neighbour on the other side, Edward Willis.

The application made for coat-armour, initiated in 1596, ostensibly by John Shakespeare, but really by William Shakespeare, as well as the Lambert case, dragged on through the later years of the century.

That he had not lost credit with his fellow-townsmen may be seen by John's latest recorded piece of work.

Early in 1601 an action was brought by Sir Edward Greville[134] against the Corporation respecting the toll-corn; and John Shakespeare, with Adrian Quyney and others, assisted to draw up suggestions for the use of the counsel for the defendants. On September 8 of that year the funeral of the old burgess took place at Stratford-on-Avon, but there is no trace now left of any sepulchral monument or memorial of any kind. No will or inventory, or even inquisition post-mortem, has come down to us.

It is quite possible that the Henley Street houses were entailed upon his eldest son, or that he may have bought up all rights during his father's lifetime to such an extent that "inheritance" could hardly be talked of. He seems to have indeed supported all the family, as there is no trace[135] of any of them, except Edmund the player, engaging in any trade or profession. Whether his mother resided in Henley Street or at New Place is not clear. There is nothing further known of her save the register of her burial: "September 9th, 1608, Mayry Shaxspere Wydowe."

No sepulchre or memorial of her has come down to our time. We only know that somewhere in the consecrated ground by Stratford Church lies the dust of John Shakespeare and Mary Arden, the parents of the poet.

[122] All these references are from the Chamberlain's Accounts, and accounts of the Halls at Stratford-on-Avon. Those who have not had access to them may refer to Halliwell-Phillipps's "Outlines," i. 29; ii. 179 et seq.

[123] Worcester administration bonds, 1561. Notes and Queries, 8th Series, xii. 413.

[124] This statement is, however, evidently erroneous.

[125] Roll for Stratford, Longridge MS.

[126] Stratford Borough Records.

[127] The first notice of municipal employment of players appears during his year of office, the Queen's Company and that of the Earl of Worcester having performed before the council. A case was tried at the Warwick assizes, Easter, 11 Elizabeth, concerning the tithes of Rowington, and John Shakespeare, of Stratford-on-Avon, was on the jury.--Ryland's "Records of Rowington."

[128] See Chamberlain's accounts for "the expenses of Mr. Queeney in London," also for the expenses of the dinner given to Sir Thomas Lucy and others, at which Quiney and Shakespeare presided.

[129] In 1579 he buried his daughter Anne "with the pall and the great bell." On May 3, 1580, his youngest child Edmund was christened.

[130] "At this halle William Smythe and Richard Court are chosen Aldermen in the places of John Wheler and John Shaxspere, for that Mr. Wheler doth desire to be put out of the company, and Mr. Shaxspere doth not come to the Halles when they be warned, nor hath not done of long tyme."--Borough Reports. It is noteworthy that he was never fined for absenting himself as others were.

[131] Controlment Rolls, 29 Elizabeth, Stratford-on-Avon.

[132] State Papers, Domestic Series, Elizabeth. It may be noted that there was no Mrs. Shakespeare among the recusants. Other wives were noted, as Mrs. Wheeler.

[133] It remains a fact that John Shakespeare, shoemaker, is heard of no more in Stratford-on-Avon, and shortly afterwards his house was tenanted by another man.

[134] Stratford Corporation Records.

[135] Halliwell-Phillips is in error in stating that Gilbert was a London haberdasher.

William Shakespeare

William Shakespeare was thirty-seven when he became head of the family in 1601. His previous life must have been a stirring one, though we know only too little about it. Still, certain inferences may be soundly based on known facts. He must have been educated at the Stratford Grammar School, free to the sons of the burgesses, a high-class school for the time. Its head-master had a salary then double that of the Master of Eton. A taste for learning had certainly imbued William's spirit even in early years, but he doubtless warmly shared in the difficulties of his father's life, and knew the anxieties of debt, the oppression of the strong hand--the "cares of bread," as Mazzini calls it--and the sickening weariness of the law's uncertainty and delay. Most of his relatives were farmers, and his actions show that he would gladly have followed the same course of life, with the relaxation of field sports, of course, if he could have attained his desire. But the genius within him was to be welded by fiery trials, and he was driven on a course that seemed at discord with his nature, and yet led to its own fulfilment. In the enthusiasm of a first love, he married early, not, it must emphatically be noted, over-early for the custom of the period, when the means of support were assured, but over-early, as it would then have been considered, solely from a financial standpoint. He had no assured means of support. His hope of securing his inheritance of Asbies was fading. He did not marry an heiress. Many vials of wrath have been poured on the devoted head of Anne Hathaway by those who do not consider all sides of the question. Harrowing pictures of the relations of young Shakespeare and "his aged wife" are drawn, even by such writers as Dr. Furnivall. Now, it is a well-known fact that almost all very young men fancy girls older than themselves, and it is an artistic fact that a woman under thirty does look younger, and not older, than a man of the same age, if she has led a natural and simple life. It is much more than likely that the well-grown, responsible eldest son of anxious John Shakespeare looked quite as old as Anne Hathaway, seven years his senior, especially if she was slight and fair and delicate, as there is every reason to believe she was. And the masterful spirit marks its own age when it goes forth to woo, and determines to win the first real fancy of his life. It must not be forgotten, in association with the situation, that Richard Hathaway of Shottery (for whom John Shakespeare had stood surety in 1566) had made his will on September 1, 1581, and died between that time and July 9, 1582, when it was proved, leaving his daughter Agnes, or Anne, the small but very common marriage portion of L6 13s. 4d. A break had come into her home life; doubtless she went off to visit some friends, and the young lover felt he could not live without his betrothed, and determined to clinch the matter.

The book keeps going

Keep reading, and see it illustrated

Reading is free forever. Sign up and watch scenes appear while you read.

Illustrated scene from The Adventures of Sherlock HolmesIllustrated scene from FrankensteinIllustrated scene from The Great Gatsby

Scenes Storieta drew for other classics.

New illustrated classics

A new classic, drawn, in your inbox.

Once or twice a month: the latest books to get full character casts, scene art, and free comic editions. No account needed.