alleging that within two hours the fire had consumed | had been settled Shakespeare returned to Stratford, "fifty-four dwelling-houses, many of them being very fair houses, besides barns, stables, and other houses of office, together also with great store of corn, hay, straw, wood, and timber." The amount of loss is stated, on the same authority, to be eight thousand pounds and upwards." What was the issue of this charitable appeal to the whole kingdom, we know not.

64

how long he remained there, or whether he ever came to London again, we are without information. He was very possibly in the metropolis at the time when a narrative poem, founded in part upon his historical play of "Richard III.," was published, and which until now has escaped observation, although it contains the clearest allusion, not indeed by name, to our author and to his tragedy. It is culled "The Ghost of Richard the Third," and it bears date in 1614; but the writer, C. B., only gives his initials. We know of no poet of that day to whom they would apply, excepting Charles Best, who has several pieces in Davison's "Poetical Rhapsody," 1602, but he has left nothing behind him to indicate that he would be capable of a work of such power and variety. It is divided into three portions, the "Character," the "Legend," and the "Tragwith the following stanzas, which show the high estimate the writer had formed of the genius of Shakespeare: they are extremely interesting as a contemporaneous tribute. Richard, narrating his own history, thus speaks:

It is very certain that the dwelling of our great dramatist, called New Place, escaped the conflagration, and his property, as far as we can judge, seems to have been situated in a part of the town which fortunately did not suffer from the ravages of the fire. The name of Shakespeare is not found among those of the inhabitants whose certificate was stated to be the immediate ground for issuing the royal brief, but it is not at all unlikely that he was instrumental in obtaining it. We are sure that he was in Lon-edy" of Richard III.; and the second part opens don in November following the fire, and possibly was taking some steps in favor of his fellow-townsmen. However, his principal business seems to have related to the projected inclosure of certain common lands in the neighborhood of Stratford in which he had an interest. Some inquiries as to the rights of various parties were instituted in September, 1614, as we gather from a document yet preserved, and which is now before us. The individuals whose claims are set out are, "Mr. Shakespeare,' Thomas Parker, Mr. Lane, Sir Francis Smith, Mace, Arthur Cawdrey, and "Mr. Wright, vicar of Bishopton." All that it is necessary to quote is the following, which refers to Shakespeare, and which, like the rest, is placed under the head of "Auncient Freeholders in the fields of Old Stratford and Welcome."

"Mr. Shakspeare, 4 yard land: noe common, nor ground beyond Gospell bushe: noe ground in Sandfield, nor none in Slow Hill field beyond Bishopton, nor none in the enclosures beyond Bishopton."

"To him that impt my fame with Clio's quill,
Whose magick rais'd me from Oblivion's den,
That writ iny stories on the Muses hill,
And with my actions dignified his pen;
He that from Helicon sends many a rill.
Whose nectared veines are drunke by thirstie men;
Crown'd be his stile with fame, his head with bayes,
And none detract, but gratulate his praise.
"Yet if his scenes have not engrost all grace,
The much fam'd action could extend on stage;
If Time or Memory have left a place
For me to fill, t'enforme this ignorant age,
To that intent I shew my horrid face,
Imprest with feare and characters of rage:

Nor wits nor chronicles could ere containe The hell-decpe reaches of my soundlesse braine." The above is the last extant panegyric upon Shakespeare during his lifetime, and it exceeds, in point The date of this paper is 5th September, 1614, of fervor and zeal, if not in judicious criticism, any and, as we have said, we may presume that it was that had gone before it. That C. B. was an author chiefly upon this business that Shakespeare came to of distinction, and well known to some of the London on the 16th November. It should appear greatest poets of the day, we have upon their own thut Thomas Greene, of Stratford, was officially evidence, from the terms they use in their comopposing the inclosure on the part of the corpora-mendatory poems, subscribed by no less names than tion; and it is probable that Shakespeare's wishes were accordant with those of the majority of the inhabitants: however this might be, (and it is liable to dispute which party Shakespeare favored,) the members of the municipal body of the borough were nearly unanimous, and, as far as we can learn from the imperfect particulars remaining upon this subject, they wished our poet to use his influence to resist the project, which seems to have been supported by Mr. Arthur Mainwaring, then resident in the family of Lord Ellesmere as auditor of his domestic expenditure.

It is very likely that Shakespeare saw Mainwaring; and, as it was only five or six years since his name had been especially brought under the notice of the Lord Chancellor, in relation to the claim of the city authorities to jurisdiction in the Blackfriars, it is not impossible that Shakespeare may have had an interview with Lord Ellesmere, who seems at all times to have been of a very accessible and kindly disposition. A petition was also prepared and presented to the privy council, and we may gather that the opposition was effectual, because nothing was done in the business: the common fields of Welcombe, which it had been intended to inclose, remained open for pasture as before.

those of Ben Jonson, George Chapman, and others. As we have stated, his work is one of great excel lence, but it would be going too much out of our way to enter here into any farther examination of it.

CHAPTER XX.

Shakespeare's return to Stratford.-Marriage of his daughter Judith to Thomas Quiney in February, 1616.-Shake speare's will prepared in January, but dated March, 1616.

His last illness: attended by Dr. Hall, his son-in-law. Uncertainty as to the nature of Shakespeare's fatal malady. -His birth day and death-day the same.-Entry of his burial in the register at Stratford.-His will, and circum. stances to prove that it was prepared two months before it was executed-His bequest to his wife, and provision for her by dower.

THE autumn seems to have been a very usual time for publishing new books, and Shakespeare having been in London in the middle of November, 1614, as we have remarked, he was perhaps there when "The Ghost of Richard the Third" came out, and, like Ben Jonson, Chapman, and others, might he acquainted with the author. He probably returned home before the winter, and passed the rest of his days in tranquil retirement, and in the enjoyment of How soon after the matter relating to the inclosure | the society of his friends, whether residing in the

66

country, or occasionally visiting him from the metropolis. "The latter part of his life," says Rowe, was spent, as all men of good sense will wish theirs may be, in ease, retirement, and the society of his friends;" and he adds what cannot be doubted, that "his pleasurable wit and good-nature engaged him in the acquaintance, and entitled him to the friendship of the gentlemen of the neighborhood." He must have been of a lively and companionable disposition; and his long residence in London, amid the bustling and varied scenes connected with his public life, independently of his natural powers of conversation, could not fail to render his society most agreeable and desirable. We can readily believe that when any of his old associates of the stage, whether authors or actors, came to Stratford, they found a hearty welcome and free entertainment at his house and that he would be the last man, in his prosperity, to treat with slight or indifference those with whom, in the earlier part of his career, he had been on terms of familiar intercourse.

was probably not of long duration; and if when he subscribed his will he had really been in health, we are persuaded that at the age of only fifty-two he would have signed his name with greater steadiness and distinctness. All three signatures are more or less infirm and illegible, especially the first two, but he seems to have made an effort to write his best when he affixed both his names at length at the end, "By me William Shakspeare."

We hardly need entertain a doubt that he was attended in his last illness by his son-in-law, Dr. Hall, who had then been married to Susanna Shakespeare more than eight years: we have expressed our opinion that Dr. and Mrs. Hall lived in the same house with our poet, and it is to be recollected that in his will he leaves New Place to his daughter Susanna. Hall must have been a man of considerable science for the time at which he practised, and he has left behind him proofs of his knowledge and skill in a number of cases which had come under his own eye, and which he described in Latin: these

published in 1657 by Jonas Cooke, with the title of "Select Observations on English Bodies," but the case of Dr. Hall's father-in-law is not found there, because, unfortunately, the "observations" only begin in 1617. One of the earliest of them shows that an epidemic, called the "new fever," then prevailed in Stratford and "invaded many.' Possibly Shakespeare was one of these; though, had such been the fact, it is not unlikely that, when speaking of "the Lady Beaufou," who suffered under it on July 1st, 1617, Dr. Hall would have referred back to the earlier instance of his father-in-law.c

One of the very latest acts of his life was bestow-were afterwards translated from his manuscript, and ing the hand of his daughter Judith upon Thomas Quiney, a vintner and wine-merchant of Stratford, the son of Richard Quiney, who died May 31st, 1602, while he was bailiff of Stratford. She must have been four years older than her husband, having, as already stated, been born on 2d February, 1585, while he was not born until 26th February, 1589: he was consequently twenty-seven years old, and she thirty-one, at the time of their marriage in February, 1616. As there was a difference of four years in the ages of Judith Shakespeare and her husband, we ought perhaps to receive that fact as some testimony, that our great dramatist did not see sufficient evil in such disproportion to induce him to oppose the union.

We are left, therefore, in utter uncertainty as to the immediate cause of the death of Shakespeare at an age when he would be in full possession of his faculties, and when in the ordinary course of nature he might have lived many years in the enjoyment of the society of his family and friends, in that grateful and easy retirement, which had been earned by his genius and industry, and to obtain which had apparently been the main object of many years of toil, anxiety, and deprivation.

His will had been prepared as long before its actual date as 25th January, 1615-16, and this fact is apparent on the face of it: it originally began "Vicesimo quinto die Januarij," (not Februarij, as Malone erroneously read it,) but the word Januarij, was subsequently struck through with a pen, and Martij substituted by interlineation. Possibly it was not thought necessary to alter vicesimo quinto, Whatever doubt may prevail as to the day of the or the 25th March might be the very day the will birth of Shakespeare, none can well exist as to the was executed: if it were, the signatures of the tes-day of his death. The inscription on his monument tator, upon each of the three sheets of paper of in Stratford church tells us, which the will consists, bear evidence (from the want of firmness in the writing) that he was at that time suffering under sickness. It opens, it is true, by stating that he was "in perfect health and memory," and such was doubtless the case when the instrument was prepared in January, but the execution of it might be deferred until he was attacked by serious indisposition, and then the date of the month only might be altered, leaving the assertion as to health and memory as it had originally stood. What was the nature of Shakespeare's fatal illness we have no satisfactory means of knowing, but it

b

"Obiit Anno Domini 1616.
Etatis 53. die 23 Apr."

And it is remarkable that he was born and died on
the same day of the same month, supposing him, as

That Shakespeare was of sober, though of companionable habits, we are thoroughly convinced he could not have and additions now lost) in five-and-twenty years had he been written seven-and-thirty plays (not reckoning alterations otherwise; and we are sure also, that if Drayton and Ben Jonson visited him at Stratford, he would give them a free Drayton was at all given to intoxication, although it is cerand hearty welcome. We have no reason to think that tain that Ben Jonson was a bountiful liver.

"Mrs.

He several times speaks of sicknesses in his own family, and of the manner in which he had removed them. Hall, of Stratford, my wife," is more than once introduced in the course of the volume, as well as "Elizabeth Hall, my only daughter." Mrs. Susanna Hall died in 1649, aged 66, and was buried at Stratford. Elizabeth Hall, her daughter by Dr. Hall, (baptized on the 21st February, 1607-8.) and grand-daughter to our poet, was married on the 22d April, 1626, to Mr. Thomas Nash, (who died in 1647,) and on 5th June, 1649, to Mr. John Bernard, of Abingdon, who was knighted after the Restoration. Lady Bernard died child. less in 1679, and was buried, not at Stratford, with her own family, but at Abingdon with that of her second husband. She was the last of the lineal descendants of William Shake

What credit may be due to this statement, preceded as it is by the words "it seems," implying a doubt on the subject in the writer's mind, we must leave the reader to determine.speare.

we have every reason to believe, to have first seen the light on the 23d April, 1564. It was most usual about that period to mention the day of death in inscriptions upon tomb-stones, tablets, and monuments; and such was the case with other members of the Shakespeare family. We are thus informed that his wife, Anne Shakespeare, "departed this life the 6th day of Augu. 1623:" Dr. Hall "de-erate that he should give her that piece of furniture, ceased Nove. 25. Ao. 1635" Thomas Nash, who married Hall's daughter, "died April 4, A. 1647:" Susanna Hall" deceased the 11th of July, A°. 1649." Therefore, although the Latin inscription on the monument of our great dramatist may, from its form and punctuation, appear not so decisive as those we have quoted in English, there is in fact no ground for disputing that he died on 23d April, 1616. It is quite certain from the register at Stratford that he was interred on the 25th April, and the record of that event is placed among the burials in the following manner:

be answered, that the “second best bed" was prob ably that in which the husband and wife had slept, when he was in Stratford earlier in life, and every night since his retirement from the metropolis: the best bed was doubtless reserved for visiters: if, therefore, he were to leave his wife any express legacy of the kind, it was most natural and considwhich for many years they had jointly occupied. With regard to the second part of the charge, our great dramatist has of late years been relieved from the stigma, thus attempted to be thrown upon him, by the mere remark of Mr. Knight, in his "Pictorial Shakspere," that Shakespeare's property being principally freehold, the widow, by the ordinary operation of the law of England, would be entitled to, what is legally known by the term, dower. It is extraordinary that this explanation should never have occurred to Malone, who was educated to the legal profession; but that many others should have followed him in his unjust imputation is not remarkable, recollecting how prone most of ShakeWhether from the frequent prevalence of infec-speare's biographers have been to repeat errors, tious disorders, or from any other cause, the custom of keeping the bodies of relatives unburied, for a week or more after death, seems comparatively of modern origin; and we may illustrate this point also by reference to facts regarding some of the members of the Shakespeare family. Anne Shakespeare was buried two days after she died, viz., on the 8th August, 1623: Dr. Hall and Thomas Nash were buried on the day after they died; and although it is true that there was an interval of five days between the death and burial of Mrs. Hall, in 1649, it is very possible that her corpse was conveyed from some distance, to be interred among her relations at Stratford. In the case of our poet, concluding that he expired on the 23d April, there was, as in the instance of his wife, an interval of two days before his interment.

"1616, April 25, Will' Shakspere, Gent."

Into the particular provisions of his will we need not enter at all at large, because we have printed it at the end of the present memoir from the original, as it was filed in the Prerogative Court, probate having been granted on the 22d June following the date of it. His daughter Judith is there only called by her Christian name, although she had been married to Thomas Quiney considerably more than a month anterior to the actual date of the will, and although his eldest daughter Susanna is mentioned by her husband's patronymic. It seems evident, from the tenor of the whole instrument, that when it was prepared Judith was not married, although her speedy union with Thomas Quiney was contemplated: the attorney or scrivener, who drew it, had first written "son and daughter," (meaning Judith and her intended husband) but erased the words "son and" afterwards, as the parties were not yet married, and were not son and daughter" to the testator. It is true that Thomas Quiney would not have been Shakespeare's son, only his son-in-law; but the degrees of consanguinity were not at that time strictly marked and attended to, and in the same will Elizabeth Hall is called the testator's "niece," when she was, in fact, his granddaughter. The bequest which has attracted most attention is an interlineation in the following words, "Itm I gyve unto my wief my second best bed with the furniture." Upon this passage has been founded, by Malone and others, a charge against Shakespeare, that he only remembered his wife as an afterthought, and then merely gave her "an old bed." As to the last part of the accusation, it may

rather than take the trouble to inquire for themselves, to sift out truth, and to balance probabilities.

CHAPTER XXI.

Monument to Shakespeare at Stratford-upon-Avon erected before 1623; probably under the superintendence of Dr. Hall, and Shakespeare's daughter Susanna.-Difference between the bust on the monument and the portrait on the title-page of the folio of 1623.-Ben Jonson's testimony in favor of the likeness of the latter.-Shakespeare's per sonal appearance.-His social and convivial qualities."Wit-combats" mentioned by Fuller in his "Worthies." -Epitaph upon Sir Thomas Stanley.-Conclusion. -Hallam's character of Shakespeare.

A MONUMENT to Shakespeare was erected anterior

to the publication of the folio edition of his "Com-
it is thus distinctly mentioned by Leonard Digges,
edies, Histories, and Tragedies" in 1623, because
in the earliest copy of commendatory verses pre-
fixed to that volume, which he states shall outlive
the poet's tomb :-

"when that stone is rent,
And time dissolves thy Stratford Monument,
Here we alive shall view thee still."

This is the most ancient notice of it; but how long before 1623 it had been placed in the church of Stratford-upon-Avon, we have no means of deciding. It represents the poet sitting under an arch, with a cushion before him, a pen in his right hand, and his left resting upon a sheet of paper: it has been the opinion of the best judges that it was cut by an English sculptor, (perhaps Thomas Stanton) and we may conclude, without much hesitation, that the artist was employed by Dr. Hall and his wife, and that the resemblance was as faithful as a bust, not modelled from the life, but probably, under living instructions, from some picture or cast, could be expected to be. Shakespeare is there considerably fuller in the face, than in the engraving on the title-page of the folio of 1623, which must have been made from a different original. It seems not unlikely that after he separated himself from the business and anxiety of a professional life, and withdrew to the permanent inhaling of his native air, he became more robust, and the half-length upon his monument conveys the notion of a cheerful, good-tempered, and somewhat jovial man. expression, we apprehend, is less intellectual than

The

it must have been in reality, and the forehead,
though lofty and expansive, is not strongly marked
with thought: on the whole, it has rather a look
of gaiety and good humor than of thought and re-
flection, and the lips are full, and apparently in the
act of giving utterance to some amiable pleasantry.
The bust was originally, like many other monuments
of the time, colored after the life, and so it contin-
ued until Malone, forgetting the practice of the
period at which the work was produced, had it
painted one uniform stone-color. It was afterwards
found impossible to restore the original colors.
On a tablet below the bust are placed the
ing inscriptions, which we give literally :-

Aubrey is the only authority, beyond the inferences that may be drawn from the portraits, for the personal appearance of Shakespeare; and he sums up our great poet's physical and moral endowments in two lines;-" He was a handsome well-shaped man, very good company, and of a very ready, and pleasant, and smooth wit." We have every reason to suppose that this is a correct description of his personal appearance, but we are unable to add to it from any other source, unless indeed we were to rely upon a few equivocal passages in the " Sonnets." Upon this authority it has been supposed by some follow-that he was lame, and certainly the 37th and 89th Sonnets, without allowing for a figurative mode of expression, might be taken to import as much. If we were to consider the words literally, we should imagine that some accident had befallen him, which rendered it impossible that he should continue on the stage, and hence we could easily account for his early retirement from it. We know that such was the case with one of his most famous predecessors, Christopher Marlowe, but we have no sufficient reason for believing it was the fact as regards Shakespeare: he is evidently speaking metaphorically in both places, where "lame" and "lameness" occur.

"Ivdicio Pylivm, genio Socratem, arte Maronem,
Terra tegit, popvivs mæret, Olympvs habet.
Stay, Passenger, why goest thov by so fast?
Read, if thov canst, whom enviovs Death hath plast
Within this monvment: Shakspeare; with whome
Quick natvre dide: whose name doth deck ye Tombe
Far more then cost; sieth all yt he hath writt
Leaves living art bvt page to serve his witt

Obiit ano Do3, 1616.

Etatis. 53. die 23 Apr."

On a flat grave-stone in front of the monument, and not far from the wall against which it is fixed, we read these lines; and Southwell's correspondent (whose letter was printed in 1838, from the original manuscript dated 1693) informs us, speaking of course from tradition, that they were written by Shakespeare himself:

"Good frend, for Iesvs sake forbeare
To digg the dvst encloased heare:
Blest be ye man yt spares thes stones,
And cvrst be he yt moves my bones."

His social qualities, his good temper, hilarity, vivacity, and what Aubrey calls his " very ready, and pleasant, and smooth wit," (in our author's own words, "pleasant without scurrility, witty without affectation,") cannot be doubted, since, besides what may be gathered from his works, we have it from various quarters; and although nothing very good of this kind may have descended to us, we have sufficient to show that he must have been a most welcome visitor in all companies. The epithet "gentle" has been frequently applied to him, twice by Ben Jonson, (in his lines before the engraving, and in his laudatory verses prefixed to the plays in the folio of 1623,) and if it be not to be understood precisely in its modern acceptation, we may be sure that one distinguishing feature in his character was general kindliness: he may have been "sharp and sententious," but never needlessly bitter or illnatured: his wit had no malice for an ingredient. Fuller speaks of the "wit-combats" between Shakespeare and Ben Jonson at the convivial meetings at the Mermaid club, established by Sir Walter Raleigh; and he adds, "which two I behold like a Spanish There is one point in which both the engraving great galleon and an English man-of-war: Muster and the bust in a degree concur,-we mean in the Jonson, like the former, was built far higher in length of the upper lip, although the peculiarity learning; solid, but slow in his performances: seems exaggerated in the bust. Opposite the en- Shakespeare, with the English man-of-war, lesser graving are the following lines, subscribed with the in bulk, but lighter in sailing, could turn with all initials of Ben Johnson, and doubtless from his pen.tides, tack about, and take advantage of all winds We give them exactly as they stand in the folio of 1623:

The half-length on the title-page of the folio of 1623, engraved by Martin Droeshout, has certainly an expression of greater gravity than the bust on Shakespeare's monument; and, making some allowances, we can conceive the original of that resemblance more capable of producing the mighty works Shakespeare has left behind him, than the original of the bust: the one may be said to represent Shakespeare during his later years at Stratford, happy in the intercourse of his family and friends, and the cheerful companion of his neighbors and townsmen; and the other, Shakespeare in London, revolving the great works he had written or projected, and with his mind somewhat burdened by the cares of his professional life.

"TO THE READER.

"This Figure, that thou here seest put,
It was for gentle Shakespeare cut;
Wherein the Grauer had a strife
With Nature, to out-doo the life:
O, could he but haue drawne his wit
As well in brasse, as he hath hit
His face; the Print would then surpasse
All, that was euer writ in brassc,
But, since he cannot, Reader, looke
Not on his Picture, but his Booke.
B. I."

If only half the pictures said, within the last century, to represent Shakespeare, were in fact from the life, the poet must have possessed a vast stock of patience, if not a larger share of vanity, when he devoted so much time to sitting to the artists of the day.

by the quickness of his wit and invention." Fuller has another simile, on the same page, respecting Shakespeare and his acquirements, which is worth quoting. He was an eminent instance of the truth of that rule, Poeta non fit, sed nascitur; one is not made, but born a poet. Indeed his learning was very little, so that as Cornish diamonds are not polished by any lapidary, but are pointed and smooth even as they are taken out of the earth, so nature itself was all the art which was used upon him." Of course Fuller is here only referring to Shakespeare's classical acquirements: his " learning" of a different kind, perhaps, exceeded that of all the ancients put together.

Connected with Ben Jonson's solidity and slowness is the following witticism between him and Shakespeare, said to have passed at a tavern.

"Mr. Ben Jonson and Mr. Wm. Shakespeuro

he gives it to Mr. Shakespeare to make up, who presently writt

That, while he liv'd was a slow thing,

And now, being dead, is no-thing."

This stony register is for his bones:

His fame is more perpetual than these stones: And his own goodness, with himself being gone, Shall live when earthly monument is none. "Written on the west end thereof. "Not monumental stone preserves our fame, Nor sky-aspiring pyramids our name. The memory of him for whom this stands Shall out-live marble and defacers' hands. When all to time's consumption shall be given, Stanley, for whom this stands, shall stand in heaven." We have thus brought into a consecutive narrative the particulars respecting the life of the "Myriadminded Shakespeare," with which our predecessors were acquainted, or which, from various sources, we have been able, during a long series of years, to collect. Yet, after all, comparing what we really know of our great dramatist with what we might possibly have known, we cannot but be aware how little has been accomplished. "Of William Shakespeare," says one of our greatest living authors (Hal

It is certainly not of much value, but there is a great difference between the estimate of an extempore joke at the moment of delivery, and the opinion we may form of it long afterwards, when it has been put upon paper, and transmitted to posterity under such names as those of Shakespeare and Jonson. The same excuse may be made for two other pieces of unpretending pleasantry between the same parties, which have been handed down to us upon something like authority. "Shakespeare was godfather to one of Ben Jonson's children, and after the christening, being in a deepe study, Jonson came to cheere him up, and askt him why he was so mel-lam, in his Introduction to the Literature of Europe) ancholy? No, faith, Ben, (sayes he) not I; but I have been considering a great while what should be the fittest gift for me to bestow upon my god-child, and I have resolv'd at last.'-'I pr'ythee what?' says he. 'I'faith, Ben, I'll e'en give him a douzen of Latten spoones, and thou shalt translate them.' Of course the joke depends upon the pun between Latin, and the mixed metal called latten.

The next is from a MS. formerly in the Harleian Collection:

"Verses by Ben Jonson and Shakespeare, occasioned by the motto to the Globe theatre-Totus mundus agit histrionem.

"Jonson. If but stage-actors all the world displays, Where shall we find spectators of their plays? "Shakespeare. Little, or much of what we see, we do;

We are both actors and spectators too.'

Of a different character is a production preserved by Dugdale, at the end of his Visitation of Salop, in the Heralds' College: it is an epitaph, inscribed upon the tomb of Sir Thomas Stanley, in Tongue church; and Dugdale, whose testimony is unimpeachable,distinctly states that "the following verses were made by William Shakespeare, the late famous tragedian."

"Written upon the east end of the tomb.

"Ask who lies here, but do not weep;

He is not dead, he doth but sleep.

of our greatest dead one, "whom, through the mouths of those whom he has inspired to body forth the modifications of his immense mind, we seem to know better than any human writer, it may be truly said that we scarcely know anything. We see him, so far as we do see him, not in himself, but in a reflex image from the objectivity in which he is manifested: he is Falstaff, and Mercutio, and Malvolio, and Jaques, and Portia, and Imogen, and Lear, and Othello; but to us he is scarcely a determined person, a substantial reality of past time, the man Shakespeare." We cannot flatter ourselves that we have done much to bring the reader better acquainted with "the man Shakespeare," but if we have done anything we shall be content; and, instead of attempting any character of our own, we will subjoin one, in the words of the distinguished writer we have above quoted, as brief in its form as it is comprehensive in its matter:-"The name of Shakespeare is the greatest in our literature—it is the greatest in all literature. No man ever came near to him in the creative powers of the mind; no man had ever such strength at once, and such variety of imagination."

If the details of his life be imperfect, the history of his mind is complete; and we leave the reader to turn from the contemplation of "the man Shakespcare" to the study of THE POET SHAKESPEARE.