Page images
PDF
EPUB

This close resemblance in so clumsy an autograph would be extraordinary, if not impossible; but how easy to forge it by first tracing it lightly with a pencil. and then completing it with a pen. Here is a hair-line tracing of the spurious over the genuine autograph :

[ocr errors]

Even the most illiterate man who is obliged often to sign his name, will do it uniformly, so that when you have seen his signature once you will know it again. For example, take the following autographs:

Jhen. W. Smith
John M. Imith
John. W. Smith

WASHINGTON, D. C., May 31, 1885.

The undersigned, aged 78 years, wrote the above autographs in presence of the two subscribing witnesses. And he never wrote and cannot write anything but his name, though he can read print with ease. And he further says that he learned to write his name in the course of one month in the administration of President Polk (1845-'9,) while serving as a Capitol policeman; otherwise he would have been obliged to sign the pay-roll with his cross.

Witness: A. WATSON,

WM. HENRY BURR.

JOHN W. SMITH.

Bacon required a mask, and he found it in the illiterate play-actor Shakspere.

NO TRUE LIKENESS OF SHAKSPERE.

The likeness of Shakspere in the Folio of 1623 has frequently been called "an abominable libel on humanity." And yet its fidelity is certified by Ben Jonson in laudatory lines. Jonson was Bacon's friend and enthusiastic admirer. If there was an original portrait of that wooden face it has never been found. If there was a better likeness of Shakspere in existence why was it not reproduced in that famous Folio? The same ugly engraving reappeared in all the later editions up to 1685.

66

The bust on the monument at Stratford was first noticed in 1623. It was not taken from life, and is unlike any picture of Shakspere. It presents him in the act of composition, and "the vis comica," says Boaden, so broadens his countenance, that it is hardly a stretch of fancy to suppose him in the actual creation of Falstaff himself." More likely, we should say, Falstaff was Shakspere-Fall-staff, Shake-spear.

The most familiar pictures of Shakspere are very different from either of these, and generally far more intellectual and refined. They are pretended copies of what is called the Chandos portrait, but are not much like it. The Chandos picture was painted by an unknown artist, and has been altered by a later hand. It is said to have been owned by Sir William Davenant, who died in 1668; and he is said to have obtained it from an actor named Joseph Taylor, who died about 1653 at the age of 70. This we gather from Boaden's "Portraits of Shakspere," 1824. But now comes a further statement purporting to be written in Mr. Gunther's Folio, by one Charles Lomax, in 1781, as follows:

"The only original picture now extant of Shakespeare was: painted by Joseph Taylor, one of the actors," &c.

The rest of the pretended information agrees with what we find in Boaden's book, which has a picture taken from the Chandos portrait quite different from those we generally see, and not much like the Droeshout engraving in the ShakspereFolio.

Shakspere probably never had a portrait taken.

THE SONNETS OF SHAKSPERE

WRITTEN BY

FRANCIS BACON TO THE EARL OF ESSEX AND HIS BRIDE, A. D. 1590.

"The mystery of the Sonnets will never be unfolded."

-Richard Grant White, 1865.

"All is supposition; the mystery is insoluble."

-Dr. Charles Mackay, 1884.

The mystery unfolded by W. H. BURR, July 31, 1883.

The first published poem of Shakspere, so far as known, was "Venus and Adonis," in 1593. It was dedicated to the Earl of Southampton, then about twenty years of age. Five or six editions were called for in nine years. 1609. The latter poem has 154 stanzas of 14 lines each; the first 126 are addressed to a beautiful and ardently beloved youth; the remainder to the young man's betrothed.

The "Sonnets" did not appear till

As to the merits of the composition, the American Cyclopedia says:

"These 'Sonnets,' though deformed with occasional conceits, far surpass all other poems of their kind in our own language, or perhaps any other."

The dedication is in these words:

"To the onlie begetter of these insuing Sonnets | Mr. W. H. all happinesse | and that eternitie | promised by | our everliving poet wisheth | the well-wishing | adventurer in setting forth | T. T."

Some have believed that "Mr. W. H." was William Herbert; and a German critic supposes the initials to signify "William Himself." But the American Cyclopedia says:

"To whom they were written, and in whose person is among the most difficult of unsolved literary problems. Who this 'onlie begetter' was no man has yet been able satisfactorily to show.'

In regard to the hypothesis that "W. H." was William Herbert, the same authority says there is almost as much ground for the notion that the person addressed was Queen Elizabeth in doublet and hose.

In 1872 we first read Nathaniel Holmes's "Authorship of Shakspere; " since then we have never entertained a reasonable doubt that Bacon was the author of the Plays. In 1882 we reread them all in the light of that discovery; but until July 31, 1883, we had never read a page of the "Sonnets," nor when we began to read them on that day did we remember to have heard who "W. H." was supposed to be. But coming to the twenty-fifth sonnet, we suspected that the poem was addressed to the Earl of Essex, and subsequent research confirmed that suspicion.

Herbert was sixteen years younger than Shakspere, and nineteen years younger than Bacon. If, therefore, the poem was written in 1590, which we purpose to show, it is impossible for Herbert to have been the

* Dr. Charles Mackay attempts to solve the problem in an elaborate article in the Nineteenth Century, August, 1884, entitled "A Tangled Skein Unravelled." He claims only to have found indications of mixed authorship. But this only makes the tangle worse, which began with Shakspere's ostensible authorship; and the last despairing words of the astute unraveller are: "All is supposition, the mystery is insoluble."

"onlie begetter of these Sonnets," for he was then only ten years old.

Of course no one will date their composition as late as 1609, when Shakspere was forty-five and Bacon forty-eight. At that time the former had retired from the stage, and Bacon had been for six years King's counsel and three years a married man. And certainly two sonnets (138 and 144) were composed as early as 1599, for they are repeated at the beginning of "The Passionate Pilgrim," which was first published in that year.

All the internal and external evidence points to the year 1590 as the date, Francis Bacon as the writer, and the Earl of Essex as the person addressed.

It is said that Bacon made the acquaintance of Essex about 1590, but it would be remarkable if he did not know him years before. In sonnet 104 the poet says:

"Three winters cold

Have from the forests shook three summers' pride,
Three beauteous springs to yellow autumn turned

In process of the seasons have I seen,

Three April perfumes in three hot Junes burned,

Since first I saw you fresh, which yet are green."

Let us suppose that Bacon began to cultivate the Earl's friendship in 1590. He was then twenty-two years old; three years earlier, when Bacon first saw him, the Earl was "fresh;" now he is "yet green.

[ocr errors]

Robert Devereux, the second Earl of Essex, was born Nov. 10, 1567, and was beheaded for treason

*A letter from Bacon to the Earl of Leicester, asking for his furtherance in some suit which the Earl of Essex had moved in his behalf, has recently been found, written in 1588. (Spedding's "Bacon," 1878, i, 50, note.)

« PreviousContinue »