FRANCIS BACON
LAST OF THE TUDORS
BY
Translated by WILLARD PARKER
President Bacon Society of America
[1924]
________
Translator's Postscript.--The translator feels, constrained to call especial attention to an extremely remarkable feature of this book. Madame Deventer had never read any of the other numerous works on the subject, but plowed the field as absolutely new ground, beginning her investigations, many years before her book was published in 1921, without the least idea whither they would lead her. This gives to her conclusions a greatly added weight, and even if her admiring translator had failed to follow all her deductions, he, for one, would certainly not presume to criticise them. Let others do so if they feel competent. W. P.
The first
critic of modern times to attack the Shakspere myth was A.
W. von Schlegel in 1808. Coleridge
followed in 1811, Byron in 1821, and Disraeli
1837. Emerson
voiced his discontent at the incongruity of fact and verse
in 1842. Gfroerrer
of Stuttgart was frankly skeptical in 1843. But no
substitute author seems to have been seriously suggested
till Delia Bacon raised the standard of revolt in
1852. Since
that date, thinker after thinker has declared in favor of
the Bacon authorship, and discovery after discovery has been
brought forward, all tending, in the words of Lord
Palmerston, toward the "explosion of the Shakespearian
illusions", until now it is fair to say that half, or at
least a very strong and scholarly minority of real readers
and thinkers have adopted the Baconian
belief. But of
all the great literary critics and students whose efforts
have shed light upon this question of the Shakespeare
Authorship, scarce one had deeply penetrated the historical
mystery of Francis Bacon's lineage and birth, until the
research on these lines was taken up by Madame Deventer von
Kunow in the work which it has been my great privilege to
put into English and which is now offered to the American
reader. The
endless and indefatigable patience with which she has delved
in the musty archives of the past--those in England, in
Spain and in Italy--justly entitles her to a place in the
front rank of fearless historical
investigators. The fact
of Francis Bacon's parentage--the legitimate son of Queen
Elizabeth and therefore the legal heir to the throne--is
indubitable, supported as it is, not only by a mass of
circumstantial evidence, but by such direct testimony as
Leicester's letter to Philip of Spain, which Madame Deventer
discovered among the Spanish State Archives, begging Philip
to use his influence with Elizabeth to secure his public
acknowledgment as Prince Consort. And
Elizabeth's real reason for posing as the Virgin
Queen,--announcing at the very beginning of her reign that
no Tudor should follow her upon the throne,--may well have
been the union of England and Scotland under one sceptre;
and this grand concept, carried to fruition through the
sacrifice of her husband, her son, and who shall say how
much of her own heart, is perhaps in its unselfishness the
one bright spot in the whole ghastly tragedy. No one
with an open mind, or with the slightest cranny therein
through which "revealing day can peep", can
possibly
4
follow Madame Deventer's revelations and remain
unconvinced. Her study of the Plays in relation to their dates of
presentation and publication is exhaustive and replete with
valuable information. So important does the translator deem
this feature of her book that he here subjoins a tabulated
list of the Plays with the dates applying, in the belief
that to many students, as to him, it will prove a most
useful work of reference. Her analysis of the motif of each Play, studied with
such care from the standpoint of the personality of Francis
Bacon Tudor Shakespeare brings out new meanings, oft-times
of tremendous import which we are surprised to find buried
just out of sight, where we have rambled over them a score
of times. An interesting example of this is Macbeth's vision
of the eight Kings descending from Banquo--the eighth
bearing the two-fold balls and treble sceptres--and the
glass showing more to follow. All told and in all frankness, it is not too much to
say that this work is one of the most interesting and
important additions to Shakespearian literature since the
production of the matchless Plays themselves, and if it
serves but a tithe of its potential purpose in awakening new
and stimulating old interest in the greatest literary
production of the ages, both Author and Interpreter will be
well repaid for their labors. The opportunity to reproduce
the interesting picture on page 79 from a modern reprint in
his possession, is due to the courtesy of Dr. W. H.
Prescott, of Boston. The gifted author does not, of course, claim that
every fact and deduction is absolutely new and original.
Many noble investigators, to whom be all well-deserved
honor, have plowed the field, but Madame Deventer adds her
contribution to the sum total in the hope and belief that
the matter and the manner of her presentation will be
welcomed and appreciated. WILLARD
PARKER. Conshohocken,
Pa., U. S. A.
5
Short
though the Title of this book, the question therein
implied--"Who was Francis Bacon?"--is of vast
import. It
embraces the descent, life and works of this
man. To this
inquiry the author devoted many years of searching
investigation entirely unconnected with the
Bacon-Shakespeare controversy, which question did not become
known to her until a later day. In early
youth, under the tuition of English instructors, I was
taught English history and literature, read Shakespeare in
English and later even in the original text, and when in
after years I studied in England, I again turned my
attention to history as a special branch. In this work I
therefore treat the question regarding Francis Bacon in two
separate parts: I. His descent and his life and work as a
statesman. II. His work as a Philosopher, pseudonymous
author, and "concealed poet," as he called himself in
confidential and non-cryptic letters to his
associates. When the
commission was entrusted to me by friends to prepare for
private record a "Stuart-Chronicle" based upon MSS.
investigation, I required for this purpose access to
historical documents and MSS.; and my way to all manner of
sources of information was therefore gladly open to
me. I also
remember with gratitude the assistance of Dr. R. Garnett,
LL. D., then director of the Department of King's Library in
the British Museum in London, as also the MSS. offered me in
Oxford, under Professor Max Muller's especial
guidance. In my
searches among the old books on sale and through Theatre
lists and works regarding them, Shakespeare's great
interpreter, Sir Henry Irving, was always at hand with
friendly assistance, and as these dear, ever-remembered
friends have in the meantime passed from among us, I cherish
them the more faithfully in grateful
recollection. An
unpublished letter from Francis Bacon was the first cause
and occasion of my Bacon-investigation. This letter is in
itself of no general interest, as it refers only to a
private affair of the recipient, but from this letter it is
plainly evident that the correspondent must have been
entrusted with the secrets of Francis Bacon's private life.
Here occurred a lightly
6
mentioned and veiled observation concerning the
fateful burden resting upon Francis Bacon, of which the
recipient was obviously aware. What was that experience
which the young barrister, Francis Bacon, had passed
through? That was to me, henceforward, the all-absorbing
question. From the histories I had learned as his "Fate" only
his fall from the Chancellorship. This, however, had
occurred much later than the letter referred to, which had
been written in the ninth decade of the Sixteenth Century,
between 1580 and 1590. When I first devoted myself to the study of Francis
Bacon's Life and Works, his literary and philosophical
productions, and especially his letters, I did not suspect
the crushing life-tragedy which was to be finally unfolded
before me. But with all the greater clearness, from under the
rubbish of years of false historical tradition, there then
arose before me the true personality in the names: Francis Tudor Bacon, Baron Verulam, Viscount St. Alban,--Shakespeare. as one in its tremendous unity. It is therefore my purpose in this study through the
application of known and admitted proof, and the aid of new
evidence which I have discovered, to add what I may to the
painstaking labors of other investigators, who have preceded
me in this field. In this spirit I commend the work to the friendly
offices of my readers. A. DEVENTER
VON KUNOW. Weimar,
Thuringen, Germany, 1921.
7
FOREWORD--P.
6-7. --Historical
investigations: Documentary evidences,
e. g. old
genealogical proofs, positive and negative:
Old MSS.
and what they yield. 1. The
secret marriage of Queen Elizabeth and Robert Dudley,Lord
Leicester, and the two sons sprung from this marriage:
Francis, named Bacon, and Robert, named Devereux--P.
9-15. 2.
Francis, called Mr. Bacon under Elizabeth--P.
16-47. 3.
Francis, Baron Verulam and Viscount St. Albans, as
statesman under James I--P. 48- 54. --Literary--Historical
with MSS. evidence. 1.
Francis Bacon, the Philosopher, and pseudonymous
and anonymous
author--P. 54-57. 2.
Francis Tudor, "concealed poet" as he called himself in
confidential and non-cryptic letters--P.
58-62. 3.
What is positively known of the Actor
"Shakspere"--P.63-66. 4.
Contemporary Pamphlets--P. 66-68. 5.
Comments concerning certain selected dramas in
which Francis
presents himself, allegorically on the stage as
a Tudor--P.
69-85. 6.
Sequence of the publication of Dramas, written for
the Court,
for masks at Gray's Inn, or for the stage.
Quarto Editions:
Alterations of Titles and finally the great
Folio-- edition
of 1623--P. 86-110. 7. The
Work: De Sapientia Veterum and Comments upon individual
sonnets--P. 111-118. "It is
ever darkest before day." _____________ We
searchers desire to bring light, and in our investigations
have thought only of the fame of that "Great Inheritance"
which on the reviving of his memory and the knowledge of his
true name is, according to his Will and Testament, to be
awaited by:
8
QUEEN ELIZABETH AND ROBERT
DUDLEY WHO WAS
FRANCIS BACON? Many
believe this question to be fully answered in historical
works, all of which state that he was the son of Nicholas
Bacon, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal under Queen
Elizabeth. But even
during Francis' lifetime were rumors current that he was the
child of Elizabeth and Robert Dudley. All
historians represent Dudley as the favorite of the Queen. In
order to clearly understand her relations with him, it is
necessary to seek for data from the time of their first
acquaintance to the close of his life. With the
support of the most varied documentary evidence the life of
Robert Dudley is here chronologically set
forth: The
Sutton Family, Barons Dudley, was an old English Baronet
Family. John of
Sutton I., who died in 1321, married Margaret, daughter and
heiress of John Somery, Baron Dudley, upon the Estate and
Castle Dudley. Through Margaret came the castle and title of
Lord Dudley into the Sutton family. Passing
over the next generations, attention is drawn to John of
Sutton II., Baron Dudley, Duke of Northumberland. He married
his son, Guildford, to Jane Grey, oldest granddaughter of
Henry VII's by his daughter, Lady Suffolk, sister to Henry
VIII, as he hoped to bring this daughter-in-law to the
throne. It is well known that Northumberland succeeded in
persuading the young King Edward VI to pass over in his
Testament his sisters Mary and Elizabeth and name Jane Grey
as his successor. After the
death of Edward VI, July 6, 1553, Northumberland's
conspiracy in favor of Jane collapsed, and he, his son
Guildford, and Jane, were arrested. With him were his four
other sons, John, Ambrose, Henry and Robert Dudley,
suspected of participation in the conspiracy. After the
execution of the Duke, Lady Jane Grey and Guildford, the
four other sons were still held prisoners in the Tower until
1555, when they were pardoned and by Act of
Parliament William Salt, Archiolog Society, Coll. IX, pt. II, p. 9-11 State Papers 1553-54
9
Calendar of Hatfield MSS. New Rec. Office Dictionary of National Biography New Rec. Off. Dictionary of National Biography New Rec. Off. Dictionary of National Biography Harleian MSS. Brit. Museum New Rec. Off. State's Papers Foreign 1551-52 reinstated in their former rights,--"restored in blood
by Act of Parliament." From this time the life of Robert Dudley begins to
interest the Princess Elizabeth. She had met him at the
court of her brother, Edward VI, where she had taken great
delight in the society of the elegant Cavalier. Robert Dudley had received a comprehensive education
at the University of Oxford, giving special attention to
languages and mathematics, together with Alchemy and Physic.
In accordance with the custom of the times he kept
permanently in his castle an Italian physician, who was at
the same time an Alchemist and Astrologer and understood the
preparation of chemical compounds. His preference for Italian Physicians, who were
celebrated for their secret arts, even as far as mixing
poisons, caused it to be often suspected that the subsequent
Lord Leicester had removed from his path by the poison
route, persons who were disagreeable to him. Of his friendship with the young prince, afterward
King Edward VI, and of his sojourn in the court, information
is found in Edward's diary, wherein it is also mentioned
that Robert Dudley often met there the Princess Elizabeth,
who was about his own age. The King also describes Robert
Dudley's marriage with Amy Robsart, daughter of Sir John
Robsart, which took place June 4, 1550, in the presence of
the King in the royal palace of Sheen in County
Surrey. The Dictionary of National Biography adds that the two
fathers, the Duke of Northumberland and Sir John Robsart,
Lord of the Manor of Sidenstern, in May 1550 reached an
agreement regarding the reciprocal dowries of their
children. In February 1554 the Duke of Northumberland
presented to his son Robert certain landed properties and
Hemsby castle at Yarmouth. The letters of this couple, Robert and Amy Dudley,
show how harmoniously they at first lived together, first in
Norfolk, where Dudley administered local offices. In 1553 Robert Dudley was elected Member of Parliament
from the County of Norfolk. In the meantime, when he
sojourned at the court of the young King, Amy was not
present. He also attended the King during his last illness,
and Edward presented him with estates in the Counties of
Rockingham, Easton and Leicester. In 1551 Robert spent some months at the French Court,
where he took service under the Scottish Queen Dowager, Mary
Guise.
10
During his confinement in the Tower which was at the
same time as the short imprisonment of Princess Elizabeth,
Bishop Gardiner of Winchester, a fanatical Catholic and
adherent of Queen Mary as her Chancellor of State, reports
that a love affair had already sprung up there between
Robert and Elizabeth. A chronicle of the Tower offers the further statement
that the couple had been married there by a monk. The "Dictionary of National Biography" however states
that after the execution of the Duke of Northumberland,
Guildford Dudley and Lady Jane Grey, the imprisonment of the
other Dudley sons was less strict, and that Robert Dudley
was allowed to receive his wife Lady Amy. On Robert Dudley's liberation he attracted the
attention of Philip II of Spain, then in England for his
marriage to Queen Mary, and was chosen while Philip was in
the Netherlands, as private ambassador between him and the
queen. This intimacy explains Leicester's subsequent appeal
to Philip to secure his (Leicester's) acknowledgment as
Prince Consort. See page 17. After Robert Dudley and his brothers were pardoned,
Oct. 18, 1554, and all honors and estates were restored to
the four sons of Northumberland by Act of Parliament,
Robert, with his brother Henry, entered the Military
Service. Both fought at the battle of St. Quentin, where
Henry was killed. Thus far Robert Dudley had discharged the duties of
his rank and age without receiving special distinction, and
in so far as he remained in his castles, he lived in various
locations with Lady Amy. Upon Elizabeth's accession to the
throne he sent his wife to a separate dwelling in the deep
isolation of a cloister farmhouse at Cunmor Hall, which had
formerly belonged to the monastery of Abingdon. This house
in Cunmor Hall was in charge of Anthony Forster. Of the splendid furnishings of certain rooms in this
house, as well as the payments for Robert's travelling
costs, when he there visited his wife, all the particulars
are to be found of record in the English archives of
State. Meanwhile Dudley rose in the favor of the Queen, and
from this time on Lady Amy complains in her letters of her
husband's neglect. On Sept. 18, 1559, Lady Amy died suddenly; as was
said, in consequence of a fall from the stairs in Cunmor
Hall. As history also reports, Robert Dudley's conduct
regarding his wife's funeral was questionable, as he
absented himself therefrom. The "Dictionary of National
Biography" states that Lady Amy's death was reported to be
the result of a plan to murder her, and that this rumor soon
reached London. New Rec. Off. Wyatt's Rebellion 1554 by Gardiner Gardiner's Annals New Rec. Off. Notes and Queries 3d Ser., p. 20, etc. Harleian MSS. Brit. Museum
11
From this point forward, Robert's career can be
followed as constantly rising in favor with
Elizabeth. As early as Jan. 18, 1558, three months after her
proclamation as Queen, she had appointed Dudley, Master of
Horse. Here it should be remarked that according to the
reckoning of these times the year began March 25th. Three months later, April 23, she created Dudley,
Knight of the Garter. In November of the same year she conferred upon him
two extensive monastic estates in the County of Kew, and a
large landed estate, also tax-exemption in the sale of
woolen goods, and other favors. And in the same month she appointed Dudley
Commander-in-Chief over the Castle and Forests of Windsor.
As the investiture of the Order of Knight of the Garter took
place in St. George's Chapel in Windsor Castle, Dudley thus
became immediately the first Knight of this Order, causing
much envy among the older Knights. But the greatest distinction of all was conferred upon
Robert Dudley when, in 1564, he was with all pomp created
Earl of Leicester. Sir James Melville, at that time Scotch
Envoy to England, attended this ceremony in Westminster and
describes it minutely in his memoirs. The possession of the magnificent Castle of Kenilworth
had been previously conferred upon Robert Dudley by the
Queen. When we follow all the evidences of favor which the
Queen heaped upon Leicester in far greater abundance, than
had ever before fallen to the lot of a favorite, and then
place over against them the fact that she proposed him for
the husband of Mary Stuart, it appears to contradict the
statement that she was herself consumed with love for
him. Obviously the two queens encountered each other in
these transactions with reciprocal false representations and
intrigues. From Elizabeth's standpoint this marriage
proposal had only a political significance, to protect
herself from a union of the Scottish Queen with some foreign
Catholic prince, or with the Catholic Darnley Stuart Lennox,
as a growing Catholic opposition might endanger her. Eric Marks very correctly calls Leicester a "Figure
upon Elizabeth's Chessboard", whom she put forward as soon
as she desired to protect herself from a marriage-candidate
by wavering and hesitation. In the case of Mary Stuart, also
she employed Leicester as a go-between, in order to gain
time, to frustrate the marriage plans of the Scottish Queen
with Catholic princes.
12
Her statesman William Cecil betrays most accurately
Elizabeth's real feelings on this subject in a
letter: "I see that her Majesty is anxious to be able to
advance My Lord Leicester to the high post of Husband to the
Scot- tish Queen; but when it comes to the necessary
conditions, then I see that her earnestness wanes." History has erroneously depicted Robert Dudley only as
Elizabeth's favorite,--her foot-ball used at will. At her
court, however, there were watchful eyes, who perceived
clearly that Elizabeth's heart, outwardly cold and since
early youth repressed by fate, was glowing with the fires of
love for Leicester. The dispatches of the Spanish envoy de Fiera to Philip
II give authentic proof of this: "The prospect of a union of the Queen with the
Archduke Karl is entirely miscarried, as the Queen evidently
loves Dudley." In Jan. 1560 de Fiera's successor de Quadra, the
Spanish envoy, reports from London to Philip that Dudley's
arrogance was continually increasing, and he was looked upon
as the future King. In December 1561 a secret despatch of the Spanish
envoy advises that the queen is expecting a child by
Dudley. A book of which more notice will be taken later,
entitled "Leicester's Commonwealth", "conceived, spoken and
published with most earnest protestation of all dutiful
goodwill and affection toward this realm", which first
appeared in Antwerp in 1584, enters with still greater
completeness and accuracy into these statements. In the
"Dictionary of National Biography" the individual statements
also agree with those in "Leicester's Commonwealth." It is therein recorded that on Jan. 21, 1561, Queen
Elizabeth was secretly married to Robert Dudley in the house
of Lord Pembroke before a number of witnesses. On the next day the birth of Francis, called Bacon, is
registered "in London." Many years later the notice was
added: "In York House." In the family genealogy of the house of Nicholas
Bacon, Francis was, however, not entered. Only the afternote
"Born in York House" created the impression that Francis had
first seen the light at the official residence of the Lord
Keeper. William Rawley, Bacon's personal chaplain and
amanuensis, in his Life of Sir Francis Bacon, printed in
Resuscitatio 1657, "in York House, or York Place, in the
Strand." Rawley must have known that York House was the
residence of Sir Nicholas Bacon, while York Place, known
also as Whitehall, was the Ellis, Letters Ser. II, Vol. 2, p. 294 These Despatches appear in complete detail in the records of Simancas Archives Simancas Archives, Escurial Pap. Escurial Pap. Dict. Nat. Biog XVI, p. 114
13
State documents of Simancas' Archives Dict. Nat. Biog. XVI. p. 114 Despatch Giac. Surian, Paris, June 1, 1566 residence of the Queen. This ambiguity, therefore,
would appear intentional and is highly significant. In the same year,--June 24, 1561, is dated another
communication of the Spanish envoy de Quadra to Philip
II. I extract the following also from the "Dictionary of
National Biography," XVI 114 (same page) (italics
mine): "Sir Henry Sidney in January 1560-1 first asked
de Quadra whether he would help on the marriage if
Dudley undertook to restore the Roman Catholic religion in
Eng- land. In February Dudley and the Queen both talked
with the Spaniard openly on the subject; in April Dudley
ac- cepted the terms offered by de Quadra. He promises
that England should send representatives to the Council
of Trent, and talked of going himself. On 24
June de Quadra accompanied Elizabeth and her lover on a
water-party down the Thames, when they behaved with
discreditable freedom. In a long conversation de Quadra
undertook to press on their union on condition that they should
acknowl- edge the papal supremacy. The negotiation was kept
secret from the responsible ministers, but Cecil suspected
the grounds of de Quadra's intimacy with Dudley and
Eliza- beth, and powerful opposition soon declared
itself." In these despatches it is noteworthy that de Quadra,
in his conversation regarding the marriage of the Queen with
Dudley received no denial and that Elizabeth and Robert
Dudley jointly gave to him their promise of the
acknowledgment of Papal Sovereignty. Elizabeth, who seldom lost her presence of mind, as
she showed in all the difficult crises of her life, and who
in the future never recognized Leicester as her husband,
much less Prince Consort, may at this time have acted under
unexpected and embarrassing circumstances, for she betrayed
in this joint acquiescence her relations with Robert Dudley.
The Spanish Envoy so understood it, according to his reports
to Philip as the records in Simancas clearly show. The Venetian Envoy Surian, also speaks of the
relations between Elizabeth and Dudley in 1566. Here it is
apparent that he knew nothing of the secret marriage, but
only considered this union probable, as the marriage of
Elizabeth's choice. He writes: "Mi e' stato detto da
persona, la qual e' ben avisata della cose di la', che
l'amor che porta sua Maesta al soprascritto milord Roberto
e' tale, che ella o' li prendera finalmente per marito o'
non ne prendera mai niuno." (A certain personage who knows the situation there
very well has told me that the love which her Majesty bears
for the above mentioned Milord Robert is so great that she
will eventually take him as her husband or none at
all.)
14
From all the above reiterated observations and
communications is evidenced the enduring quality which
Elizabeth showed in her love for Leicester, as also the
carrying out of her original intentions never to concede to
him the right of a Prince Consort. With her peculiar
tenacity she knew full well how to guard the secret of her
marriage. These methods of procedure, like the repudiation of
her sons, seem so incomprehensible that they are not to be
credited without convincing proof, and all the less as the
evidence remained so carefully hidden. Even tho' we attempt to excuse this behavior of the
Queen by citing the somewhat loose customs of the time, it
still remains an incomprehensible enigma. The solution is, however, to be sought in the reasons
of state followed by her from her accession to the throne,
always remembering that she as ruler was able to carry them
out with the determination of character inherited from her
father. She indicated this purpose when in addressing her
first Parliament she said "She desired to appear in the
Annals of History as the Virgin Queen, and therefore wished
no Tudor as successor to the Throne." No one during her lifetime saw through Elizabeth's
reasons of State and judged her more accurately than her
eldest, dethroned son, Francis Tudor, called Bacon. His
writings, his letters, and at last his great statesmanship
under James I, offer the clearest evidence.
15
ELIZABETHAN
PERIOD 1561-1603 From the
union of Elizabeth with Leicester sprang a second son,
Robert, born in 1567. This child also was attributed to
another family, namely, to Walter Devereux, Lord
Hereford. The
evidences of this are to be found in the writings of his
full brother Francis, referred to in the following
pages. The
Devereux Family traces its descent from Robert D'Evereux,
who came over with William the Conqueror and settled in
Hereford. Passing
over the intermediate generations, we draw attention to
Walter Devereux, Lord Hereford, born 1541, and married in
1561 to Lettice, the eldest daughter of Sir Francis Knollys,
Knight of the Garter. The young pair lived at first quite
retired upon their estates and were much troubled with
financial difficulties. Lord
Hereford was gradually drawn by Elizabeth to the court, and
later became Governor of Ireland. In the
old genealogical records of the Devereux Hereford family are
registered three children of the marriage of Walter and
Lettice Devereux Hereford. The son,
Walter, born 1569, who fell at Rouen 1591; also two
daughters, Penelope and Dorothy. On March
4, 1572, the Queen elevated Walter Devereux Lord Hereford to
the Earldom of Essex,--five years after the birth of Robert
Tudor, called Essex. And in the Essex genealogical
register of the 16th Century this Robert is
not entered as the eldest son until after the
Earldom of Essex had been conferred upon his reputed father.
As heir of this title he was then put forward as the
legitimate sone of the Essex couple. Thus at
the outset, through the absence of two genealogical records
we have two items of negative evidence that not only
Francis so-called Bacon, but also Robert so-called Lord
Essex, did not belong to these respective
families. The
history of Robert of Leicester shows that year after year he
hoped in vain to be openly acknowledged by Elizabeth as
Prince Consort; also that she continually heaped
distinctions upon him. Even after occasional outbursts of
ill temper against Leicester the Queen was to the last ever
the same in reconciliation and forgiveness. In
Froude's History of England, VII, p. 308-26, we find
that,
16
according to the records of the Simancas Archives,
Elizabeth and Leicester considered the announcement of their
marriage through Spanish mediation, but that Elizabeth
always refused. This does not, however, indicate that the marriage was
not concluded without Spanish mediation, since Elizabeth
desired to keep it secret. Much more remarkable is a letter from Leicester in the
Simancas Archives, in which he asks the mediation of the
Spanish Court to secure his acknowledgment by Elizabeth as
Prince Consort. In the Leicester genealogy is recorded his first
marriage with Amy Robsart, and afterwards a secret marriage
with Lady Douglas Sheffield before only eight witnesses in
Esher, County of Surrey. This marriage took place two days before the birth of
a son to this couple who was named Robert. This Robert was
afterward Leicester's sole heir, insofar as Elizabeth had
not, after Leicester's death, appropriated a portion of his
estates and other properties. Leicester did not trouble himself about this child. He
was sent early to school and later to Oxford University
under the tutelage of a special instructor, but entered only
as the "Son of a Lord," nothing revealing his ancestry.
After Leicester's death he had great difficulty in
legitimating himself as Leicester's son, which was afterward
accomplished through the discovery of a contract between his
parents. Concerning his father, he stated that for reasons
unknown to him his father had kept secret his marriage with
his mother. After three years Leicester parted from Lady
Sheffield, and evidently turned his passion toward Lettice,
wife of Walter Lord Essex. After Lord Essex's death he
married the widow, and this marriage also was apparently
kept secret from Elizabeth. This secrecy was not, however,
generally well preserved, as the French Ambassador, M. de
Simier, in a conversation with the Queen, casually mentioned
the marriage of Leicester with Lady Essex as a known fact.
Elizabeth's anger blazed up most severely. Leicester was
banished from the Court, and was apparently most repentant.
He withdrew from the court as an exile and stated that he
would poison himself in despair. But even after this
grievous affront, which Elizabeth had suffered in his
marriage with Lettice, she again pardoned him and permitted
him to remain near her. Leicester appeared everywhere and to
the last as victor in his influence over the Queen, even
though his greatest wish, to be acknowledged Prince Consort,
was always denied him. Escurial Papers State papers, Foreign 1580-87 M. de Simier Wil. Salt, Archeolog. Society Coll., Family Dudley
17
New Rec. Off. docum. Leicester and Notes and Queries, Ser. 3d. p. 20, etc. His death occurred in 1588, while both he and Lettice
were ill. As recorded in "Leicester's Commonwealth,"
Leicester had mixed a poison with medicine. Lettice,
however, handed it to Leicester, believing it to be a
harmless medical drink. His death resulted. To summarize the historical facts: Leicester made
three secret marriages, after he had gotten Amy Robsart out
of the way. His secret marriages he contracted with Queen
Elizabeth, with Lady Howard Sheffield, and with Lady Essex.
Through the last named he became the so-called stepfather of
his legitimate son Robert, born to the Queen. When Leicester died in 1588 he bequeathed to Elizabeth
valuable jewels, yet she also appropriated as her own after
his death part of the landed estates presented to him,
together with the costly gold and silver vessels and other
valuable furnishings from Kenilworth. That Leicester's hopes of acknowledgment as Prince
Consort again revived,--after he had, before his expedition
to the Netherlands, given them up,--is shown by significant
letters written from the Netherlands at this period. And
none of his "side marriages" would have stood in his
way,--he was too cold-blooded a poison expert, as he is
represented in Leicester's Commonwealth. (Leicester's
Commonwealth facsimile, P. 161. The following authorities are cited in addition to the
above: "Camden Society Publications and Calendar of State
Papers," Correspondence of Robert Dudley; Lord Leicester's
"Documents," Camden Society; "Leicester during his
government in the Low Countries, 1585."
18
FRANCIS TUDOR, CALLED BACON HIS
LIFE FROM 1561 to 1603. Francis
Tudor grew up in the family of Nicholas Bacon, Lord Keeper
of the Great Seal, and so shared the love of these his
foster parents that he felt himself in their home as their
own child. In particular did he cherish to the last a
grateful loyalty to Ann Bacon. She
was the second wife of Nicholas Bacon, daughter of Sir
Anthony Cooke, and sister to the wife of William Cecil,
afterwards Lord Burghley, the first Lord Treasurer. Of
Nicholas' first marriage were born to him three sons:
Nicholas, Nathaniel and Edward, and three daughters. Lady
Anne presented him with but one son, Anthony, who was two
years older than Francis. With
Elizabeth's accession to the throne began the rising career
of Nicholas Bacon, the Advocate, through the influence of
his brother-in-law Cecil, as under the Catholic Queen Mary,
even his life had many times been threatened. In 1558
Elizabeth both had advanced him to the position of Lord
Keeper, and to Knighthood as Sir Nicholas
Bacon. As
he had proven himself learned in both civil and
ecclesiastical law, the queen for many years confided to him
the guidance of ecclesiastical affairs in Parliament, he
presiding at the opening of the first Parliament which she
summoned. For
his official residence as Lord Keeper he received the palace
of the Archbishop of York (York House) on the
Thames. Early
in the fifteen sixties, Nicholas Bacon purchased the country
seat of Gorhambury, and gradually acquired estates in the
County of Middlesex. His
country house at Gorhambury, in the County of Hereford, near
St. Albans, he built for himself in the years 1563 to
1568. The
great banquet hall of Gorhambury was decorated with carvings
(being partly Sir Nicholas Bacon's original verse) and
maxims regarding Grammar, Logic, Arithmetic, Astrology,
History, etc. These interests of the Lord Keeper show how
Francis' spirit, from youth up, was awakened to the same. In
lively remembrance, he recalled the visits of the Queen,
who, D'Ewes Journal, II. Hayward's Annals Camd. Society, p. 22 Lambeth Palace Camden Society, p. 29 Lambeth Palace MSS., 644 ff. 5 & 6
19
Trinity College, Cambridge, Brit. Magaz., p. 144 & p. 365 Gray's Inn Book of Orders, p. 56 when tarrying in Gorhambury, conversed with the boys
regarding their school work and progress in study. At these
times she seemed to the young Francis particularly
severe. At twelve years of age he went to Trinity College,
Cambridge, and for two years lived there with his brother
Anthony. In 1576 Anthony and Francis were received into the
"Societas Magistrorum" of Gray's Inn, as Sir Nicholas had
destined both youths for a legal career. Francis does not state the exact day when he became
aware of his mysterious birth, but there are reasons to
believe that it occurred during his studies at Gray's Inn,
for while the elder Anthony was able to complete the course,
Francis, barely sixteen years of age, was suddenly torn from
them at the desire of the Queen, and sent out of England. He
was attached to Sir Nicholas' nephew, Sir Amyas Paulet, the
English Ambassador in Paris. But this diplomatic career was
likewise rudely interrupted, because, after Nicholas Bacon's
death, being left without means, he was obliged to follow
his legal career for a livelihood. Anthony on the other hand
after his father's death could pursue his education for ten
years further on the Continent. Life at the French court broadened Francis' views and
he met there prominent men, with some of whom he maintained
friendship till mature years. Opportunity was also afforded
him not only to engage in the study of the Romance
languages, and of foreign literatures, but also to increase
his efficiency in the ancient tongues. Thus did his sojourn
in France bear for him lasting fruits. After the death of Sir Nicholas Bacon in 1579 Francis
was obliged to return to London. Here it is noteworthy that
the Lord Keeper left all his children well provided with
means and certain landed estates in the counties of Hereford
and Middlesex. Anthony inherited Gorhambury, which also
remained the dower seat of Lady Ann Bacon. To Francis the Lord Keeper had bequeathed nothing and,
almost without means, he became dependent upon the
assistance of his foster-mother and occasional aid from
Anthony. Although the Lord Keeper had apparently hoped for
Elizabeth's support of Francis after his death, yet the
enforced continuance of his legal career shows that he was
obliged to seek a livelihood, and forms a sharp contrast
with his life at the French Court, which had caused him to
find legal pursuits much against his inclination. Anthony, on the other hand, was able to maintain
himself
20
for ten years on the Continent, become familiar with
France, Germany and Italy, broadening his education in this
manner. From the time when Francis resumed his law studies in
Gray's Inn, until he became there an "Utter Barrister", he
had experienced the greatest hardships through Cecil, who
from the outset opposed his efforts to secure a government
office. With great tenacity, Cecil pursued his purpose to
keep Francis away from the Queen. In 1584 Francis was elected to the Lower House of
Parliament from Melcombe, County of Dorset. At this time the conspiracy of the Catholic powers,
especially with the help of the banished English Jesuits,
against Elizabeth and in the interests of Mary Stuart, was
agitating all the English Protestants, while those of
Scotland were attached to her son James. This synchronizes
with the motif and earliest date of the Shakespeare Hamlet.
See "Renascence Drama," by William Thompson, Melbourne,
1880. In England, however, the Protestant party was divided.
The Orthodox Wing desired to transfer the ecclesiastical
power, which had been wrested from the Pope to a Protestant
head of the Church, clothed with almost equal pastoral
authority. Learned theologians of more moderate political
opinions were thus hampered in the freedom of teaching and
persecuted almost as fanatically as the Catholics. The Non-Conformist party had thus formed itself in
opposition to the Orthodox Church party, the former being in
no way antagonistic to the Government, but standing only for
the liberty of public teaching. Francis, at this time but twenty-four years of age,
was thus subjected to the influence of all the floods which
surrounded him: Dangers to Elizabeth through conspiracies,
mistrust against the Catholic Countries Spain and France,
and against the still powerful Catholic Nobility of
Scotland, and conflicts within the English Protestant
Church. In addition was felt also the influence of Francis'
greatly esteemed foster-mother, Lady Ann Bacon, who espoused
the cause of the non-conformists, and even addressed to her
brother-in-law, Lord Burghley a letter in regard to the
same. During the session of Parliament Francis' name is
mentioned but twice as voting, and never as an extensive
speaker, as is brought out in the Journal of D'Ewes. During this epoch, however, proceeded from his
pen: "Letter of Advice to the Queen." This article appears as the first significant work of
a young politician and magistrate, who with candor and yet
with becom- D'Ewes Journal
21
Harl. MSS. 6867/42. Probably written 1584, certainly not before death of Pope Gregory XIII. Apl. 1585 ing respect offers to his monarch, during a period of
her reign, when she was obliged to employ her wits against
friends and foes alike, and when it was considered by him
dangerous to press the Catholics too severely lest they
might unite themselves in a great movement against her. He
gives her delicate diplomatic hints how to act in order to
prevent the Catholics' enmity from increasing, while at the
same time not bidding for their friendship. In the same
manner he expresses himself regarding the bishops of the
English Church, although, as he writes, he fears that his
views are contrary to those of the Queen. Yet he sees in the
assumption of power by the bishops an oppression of her
Protestant subjects equally dangerous to the Queen.
Penetrating more deeply into all these subjects, he finally
calls her attention to political alliances, stating how
Spain is governed by a monarch, who can become a menace to
her through the Catholic power, even as Scotland through
proximity and claims to the throne. On the other hand he
advises an alliance with France since that government
cherished also a fear of the Spanish power. This short extract from the Harleian MSS. 6867/42,
shows how Francis, on his first public appearance in
Parliament, was noticed for his political foresight and the
fearless courage which led him even into a contradiction of
the views of Elizabeth for the good of the country and
herself. How could such a young barrister have presumed to
advise the strong-willed Queen in these highly important
affairs of State, unless he possessed especial personal
claims to her attention? The absence of royal resentment is
most significant! But through this bold fearlessness he became still
more disliked by the Cecils, father and son, as they
recognized in him a Statesman, who was becoming dangerous to
them, and to whom no higher office must be opened, as his
ability was superior to their own. But slowly Francis won advancement for himself and
became in 1586 a "bencher", a Judge Lateral upon the bench
at Gray's Inn, which gave him the right to present addresses
for the defence in the courts at Westminster; and in
Parliament he became Chairman of the Committee on Subsidies
for the Netherland War. Thus he soon gained reputation as a
great orator, and in 1589 represented Liverpool in
Parliament. During the Parliament summoned in 1586, where the
"Great Cause", the extraordinary case of Queen Mary Stuart
was agitating all, Francis was, on November 4th, created a
member of the appointed committee. Nevertheless no record
has been preserved of any address by him on this memorable
day.
22
The conflicting emotions and inward struggles of
Francis over Elizabeth's duplicity and severity in the case
of Mary Stuart, are readily to be appreciated in view of his
own fate, of which he was at that time well aware. His
decision in this case would therefore be more influenced by
general views, which, however, is only supposition, as thus
far no evidence is at hand. The "Philosopher and Statesman Bacon" is depicted in
history as a savant and a specially capable jurist,
distinguished as a keen thinker, but in whom were lacking
the sensibilities of heart and soul, as also the impulses of
imagination. Superficial students of his philosophical
works, essays and letters do not know that his far-seeing
glance was projected a century in advance, that he had also
a lively imagination, a fine humor, and united in himself
such gifts as are only possessed in this degree by a poetic
genius. A clear, cold calculating nature, a prosy jurist,
would hardly have been capable, like Francis, entering with
full warmth into the inner religious struggles of the human
soul, then being enacted through the tremendous
controversies between the Non-conformists, later called
Puritans, and the High Church of England. True they were no
longer agitated in Parliament for fear of causing
disturbance, but they were persistently fomented and
continued through discussions at the University of Cambridge
between the representatives of the High Church and the best
orators of the Puritans. Since the appearance of invidious and anonymous
attacks by the Puritans upon the High Church and the
latter's retaliation in kind, Francis, in attendance upon
the Cambridge debates, followed these disputes with keen
interest. An essay which Francis at first withheld from general
circulation is preserved in the Bodleian Library at
Oxford. It is entitled: "Advertisement, touching the
Controversies of the Church of England", and from its
contents it is evident how deeply he was moved by the
questions of faith, which found entrance into his soul, and
how the words of Christ moved him to meditation. He invoked
the prophecy of Christ; how in the latter days men would
say: "Here is Christ,--there is Christ"; as we read the word
and now witness its fulfilment. Entering into the
controversy he writes that every man should be quick to
hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger. And as he offers
this advice to both parties he adds that he who mixes poison
in the disputes, the more embitters the wounds
inflicted. He then continues: "Vos estis fratres: ye are
brethren-- Oxford Bodleian Library, E. Mus. 55
23
why strive ye?" But he who takes umbrage at this
advice, shows most plainly that he is doing his brother
wrong. He will not enter more deeply into the controversies
themselves, for, in order to remove them, was required
rather tranquillity than further and deeper
discussion. At the same time he states, that all parties must
recognize the fact that these questions are not of the
highest significance, as they did not touch the real
mysteries of the Faith, the dissemination of which has from
the beginning been the first duty of the Church. Thus he advised the parties to give over their
pamphleteering animosity. He weighs the ecclesiastical controversies pro and con
and points forward to the time when unbelief will
contaminate the leaders of the Church and undermine the
foundations of the Faith. He goes still further regarding
the similarities between the English State Church and the
Churches on the Continent, and wishes that all may receive
God's blessing in peace and harmony. Then he condemns all
the authorities, which permit these discussions between the
churches, but he speaks neither with the legal acumen of the
advocate, nor yet alone with philosophical wisdom, (though
he quotes both Solomon and Plato), but he speaks
impressively of his knowledge of and respect for the
Articles of Faith. He will not permit the Mystery of Faith
to lose, through controversy, its value for the inmost human
soul. In 1590 we learn by letters for the first time of his
meeting with Essex, who had distinguished himself under
Leicester in the Netherlands. Leicester had died in 1588, as
also the old counsellor, Lord William Burghley, and thus
Elizabeth found herself isolated and deprived of her former
staff. She now turned her favor toward Essex, who accepted
it, though without especial gratitude. Elizabeth had already appointed him in 1587 Master of
Horse, and in 1588 General of Cavalry. She thus seemed
disposed to heap upon him the same rapid distinctions as
formerly upon Leicester, but in this latter case appear
radical differences from the former. We observe that Francis was in this matter thoroughly
in Essex's confidence, and in case of misunderstandings,
which were not lacking between Essex and the Queen, the
elder, more experienced and intellectually superior Francis
sought to bring his hot-spurred younger brother into
submission to the Queen, in order not to forfeit the royal
favor.
24
In comparing the personalities which influenced most
strongly Elizabeth's self-engrossed life, Leicester remains
paramount. Her love for him overcame even his most grievous
offence against her--his marriage with Lady Lettice, the
widow of the elder Essex. But with all the passion which she
felt for him in youth, and which to the last never entirely
cooled, she understood how to cause him to appear before the
court only as her favorite and counsellor, and, whatever
more might be thought of their relations, the preservation
of the secret was a life and death matter. Leicester and young Essex, Father and Son, and again
appearing before the world as Stepfather and Stepson, and
the younger serving also under the elder in the Netherland
Wars, presented, even for those times, an almost
unbelievable complication. In addition to the confirmation of these circumstances
through a significant, contemporaneous book, the similarity
of feature, according to the best portraits of Leicester and
Robert indicate a close blood-relationship. There is a
tell-tale resemblance in their figure, elegant carriage and
cast of countenance. In character, however, the son was
better than the father, even though his hot blood swept him
finally into high treason and to the block. All the
statements here made concerning Leicester, even in his
relations with Elizabeth, have been preserved through the
centuries in a book with a recital of all the facts,
condemnatory it is true, but as to Leicester, depicting
truthful public opinion. In 1584 this volume first appeared under the peculiar
title of "Father Parson's Green Coat," a title which in no
way suggested the contents. But as it was published
anonymously, or to speak more correctly, pseudonymously, it
was so-called because of its green cover and green edges,
and its authorship without any reason at all attributed to a
Reverend Parson. It was prohibited in England and especially at the
court, but the interdict came too late, for in 1585 the
second edition appeared in London and in Naples. It is
evident, that the author of this work, directed as it was
against Leicester, describing with accuracy his life and
character, and exhibiting him as debauchee and poisoner,
could only have been a courtier with exact knowledge of all
the facts. But the real author never betrayed
himself. In 1641 this book was again published, but under the
title: "Leicester's Commonwealth, conceived, spoken and
published with most earnest protestations of all dutiful
goodwill and affection toward this realm." It is cited in
the State Calendar State Calendar 1641-43, p. 136
25
Cole's MSS.--129 Northumberland MSS., Alnwick Castle, Durham Co. Plates of Northumberland MSS., facsimile and interpretation. The Letters and Life of Francis Bacon, by James Spedding, London, Green, Longmans and Roberts, Vol. VII. 1861-74. The Northumberland MSS. for the years 1641 to 1643, p. 136, where it is
stated: "This book forms the basis for every memoir written
of Robert Dudley, Lord Leicester, as drawn from original
writing and records." The underlying purpose was evidently that the author
desired to provide for the upholding of the truth beyond his
own life time. The author, however, did not become known to
the afterworld until 1867. As early as the 17th Century it was shown as proven by
letters--that the suspicions which were directed against the
clerical parson as the author, were entirely unfounded, as
the work must have proceeded from the pen of a statesman and
courtier who possessed accurate information regarding
Leicester's life and conduct at the court. Two hundred years later, 1867, brought to light a
hitherto unknown MSS. The "Northumberland MSS" is so called from the place
of its discovery, in Northumberland House, London, afterward
Northumberland Avenue Place. Since then the Northumberland
MSS. has been preserved in Alnwick Castle, the seat of the
Duke of Northumberland in Durham County. The so-called "Bacon Discoveries," in so far as they
concern MSS. and Letters of Francis Tudor, are being brought
more and more to light. But it must not be thought that all
the writings of Francis have yet been brought out from
private archives, even perhaps against the wishes of the
owners, nor that the sum total of these discoveries can be
regarded as complete. Still the number of documents already discovered is so
great that, in the middle of the last century, Spedding felt
called upon to revise and publish those at that time known,
in the second series of his 14 volume work on Francis
Bacon. The Northumberland MSS., the publication of which
Spedding undertook in 1870, consisted of an envelope or
portfolio cover, containing the list of writings which at an
earlier date had undoubtedly all been contained therein, but
of which only 90 pages remained. The list included: Mr. ffrauncis Bacon of tribute or giving what is
dew. The praise of the worthiest vertue. The praise of the worthiest affection. The praise of the worthiest power. The praise of the worthiest person. Various essays and speeches. Leycesters Commonwealth. Orations and essays. Then follows the line: "By Mr. ffrauncis William Shakespeare."
26
Under this combined name appear upside down the words
"your sovereign." Rychard the second. Rychard the third. Asmond and Cornelia. Isle of Dogs. Between, beside and over these titles are written many
times in various forms and abbreviations the names
"ffrauncis Bacon," "Fr. Bacon," "William Shakespeare," "Wm.
Shak.", &c. The latter, is, however, written, not in the
form applied to the actor, but invariably
"Shakespeare." The masque composed in 1592 and produced for the first
time in honor of Queen Elizabeth's birthday, Nov. 17 of that
year, is noted in the fragments first above cited. The first six lines, referring to the masque of 1592,
are in a large, clear, and comparatively modern-pattern
hand, closely resembling, if, indeed it is not, the
chirography of Bacon himself. The balance of the lists and
scribblings on the cover are in the usual hand of the court
scrivener of the period. The large S, shaped like the S on
the Shakspere Will, and a thousand other documents of the
time, and on account of which Mr. Sothern has tried to
identify the handwriting on the Thomas More MSS., occurs at
least a dozen times on this cover. The real authorship of
Leicester's Commonwealth, so long a mystery, is also here
indicated though not positively stated. Most of the cover
and the ninety pages of contents preserved to us are
supposed to be the handwriting of John Davies, who acted at
times as Bacon's secretary. Spedding in his reproduction of this list has
overlooked the notice marked on the back: "put into type",
which clearly indicates a definite or planned order of
printing. And the majority of the titles shown in this list
can be identified as having been printed. Concerning this Northumberland MSS. it should also be
noticed that is shows on the edges damage by fire, and
certain words on the margin have become illegible, but the
titles cited have not suffered. And now turning to the friendship between Essex and
Francis, let it be mentioned that in 1592 Anthony Bacon
returned from the continent, and that from this time on, the
friendship of these three men assumed an intimate
character. Meanwhile the political horizon had become more
clouded and Essex, who had gained a seat in the Council,
brought about negotiations between France and England
concerning the contemplated apostasy of the Protestant King
Henry IV to Catholicism, which caused his allegiance to
Elizabeth to totter.
27
Lambeth Palace, London. Rawley's Resuscitatio. and Addl. MSS. 5503, p. 1b The many despatches which were at this period
exchanged with France and came under Essex's charge, Francis
and Anthony assisted him in deciphering. Cipher
correspondence between these three friends is also in
evidence during this period, showing that the three men
exchanged secrets among themselves. Interesting political events then developed. The
Spanish conspiracy against Elizabeth, undertaken for Philip
by Dr. Roderigo Lopez for large compensation, was discovered
by Essex. Whether and how far Francis assisted him in the matter
of cipher letters is not known, only that at that time they
were closely associated. During this period Francis was repeatedly under
pressure of poverty. His literary tendencies, secretly
pursued, which will be more fully touched upon later,
required money, as he was soon obliged to pay,--now for
borrowed pseudonyms,--now for costs of printing, and again
for costly copper-plates. Essex, in favor with the Queen, exerted himself
actively to secure for Francis a better income through a
higher office, but Elizabeth remained deaf to his
recommendation. She had not forgotten that in 1593 he had failed to
vote for the war preparation subsidies in accord with the
upper house, in event of a Spanish attack, but had stood out
for an extension of time. In this matter he had voted
against the wishes of the Queen and was advised to address a
letter of apology to the Upper House. His letter, which Elizabeth had opportunity to read,
contained, however, no apology at all. He wrote in regard to the subsidies: And it is not unknown to your Lordship, that I
was first of the Ordinary Sort, of the Lower House
of Parliament, that spake for the Subsidy;
And that, which I after spake in difference, was but in circumstances of
Time and Manner, which methinks should be no greater
Matter, since there is Variety allowed in Counsel, as a
Discord in Musick, to make it more perfect." A second conspiracy was discovered in Scotland, which
gave occasion for sending Francis thither as secret agent.
He unfortunately fell ill upon the journey without being
able to fulfil his mission, and on his return he took up his
abode in Cambridge. This visit drew to him the attention of
the outside world, as his old university conferred upon him
the degree of Master of Arts. From this same year, in which he received such
distinction in the world of letters, but during which he
knew that shame-
28
ful intrigues were being carried on against him at the
court to prevent his advancement to higher office, a MSS.
packet, unpublished until 1883, affords a glance at the
nevertheless uninterrupted intellectual activity of this
great thinker. Spedding drew attention to this MSS. in 1859
and in 1883 Mrs. Henry M. Pott most exhaustively analyzed
the same in their relation to the plays. Among these papers is noticeable a memorandum book in
Francis' own hand, entitled: "The Promus of Formularies and
Elegancies," which contains single words, sentences,
collected quotations and also proverbs which he had selected
in order out of this collection to enrich his mother tongue
where it had been hitherto found wanting. The number of his
newly-created words together with those adapted from other
languages is reckoned by an Etymologist at nearly five
thousand. And they show themselves in brilliant utilization
in his writings in comparison with the English language of
his day in pregnant, extraordinary and delicately turned
sentences and modes of expression. "A prophet is not without honor save in his own
country"--a bitter truth which Francis experienced to the
full. In spite of his intellectual labors, in spite of his
brilliant oratory, the higher offices remained closed to
him. In spite of Essex's efforts to secure for Francis the
vacant office of Attorney General, they saw it bestowed upon
Francis' enemy Coke, and in like manner the vacant office of
Master of the Rolls was denied him. Essex was now doubly anxious over Francis' distress
for money and offered him a piece of profitable land as a
gift. This Francis would not at first accept, which so
wounded the passionate and impulsive Essex that he
positively forced it upon him, until Francis could no longer
decline. From this period the transaction was carried on by
word of mouth and when brought to a conclusion Francis
touched upon it by letter. This letter is worthy of remark, as it shows the
intimate relations between these friends and
brothers. Francis during Elizabeth's lifetime had received no
advancement in rank, having not even been Knighted as was
his foster-father, and he always observed rigidly these
difference of rank. In his letters he always addressed his
foster-mother, who had been to him as his own, "Madam" or
"Your Ladyship," and subscribed himself as "Your Ladyship's
most obedient son, F. B." The same difference of rank he observed in letters to
Essex. In many letters he expressly states that he regards
himself as belonging to the "Commons." The Promus of Formularies and Elegancies. James Spedding, Robert Leslie Ellis and Douglas Denen Heath, 1859, Vol. VII, London. Longmans, Green Co.
29
Letter to Essex, Rawley's Resuscitatio, 1657. Other Letters, p. 93 On one occasion, when during his years of waiting, he
saw himself continually the victim of false hopes, he wrote
to Essex to the effect that he would not pursue further the
profession of the law unless indeed the Queen should
especially call him on a case. He had determined to employ
his time to better advantage. In this letter he concludes
with these words: "For your Lordship, I do think myself more
beholding to you than any Man. And I say, I reckon myself as
a Common (not Popular but Common) and as much as
is lawful to be enclosed of a Common, so much
Your Lordship shall be sure to have." Here it should be noticed how Francis continually
admits his rank as below that of the Lord, as "Common",
twice repeated but with the addition "not popular", which
indicates that he knew that he did not, like Essex, stand
high in popular favor. His pun on the "enclosing of the commons" shows a
sense of humor unabated by his misfortunes. Could he
possibly have had in mind the Actor Shakspere's attempt to
enclose the commons at Stratford and the consequent
litigation? In another letter he emphasizes the fact that despite
all friendship and devotion he can no longer remain
politically attached to Essex, as it would be contrary to
the laws of the State and his duty to the Queen. And in still a third letter he states that he loves
Essex above all, but yet loves more the preservation of
peace and the untroubled reign of the Queen. After the
acceptance of the gift of land, Francis states that the
bestowal of property constitutes vassals, but that Essex,
despite the gift, must not so consider him. Francis had purchased the country place at Twickenham
Park, formerly the property of his deceased elder
foster-brother, Edward Bacon, and Elizabeth had granted him
the ownership license for a term of years. Adjoining this
park lay the land presented to him by Essex, which Francis
sold later for £1800. Twickenham Park made it possible
for him to periodically retire into seclusion, which in a
letter to Essex he regards as essential in order to
concentrate his thoughts upon his intellectual
labors. Upon the whole his correspondence with Essex shows how
he, though standing in friendly intimacy with him, often
expressed his opinion against him. Nor did he conceal from Essex his bitter feelings
concerning his own life destiny. Yet these thoughts are so
expressed that their full significance can only be grasped
by the initiated and like-minded.
30
He also remembers with bitterness his early youth at
the French Court, which to him had seemed the beginning of a
diplomatic career. On the other hand he emphasizes the fact
that he had left England at that time at the Queen's command
and had been sent to Paris as the companion of Sir Amyas
Paulet at an unusually early age. So much the more
discontented did he feel that he had been precipitately
misplaced in the legal career and adds that he had served
Elizabeth for twenty years without the slightest reward from
her. He writes to Essex (1594 or 95?) an undated letter
which contains the following sentence: "And you Lordship may easily think that having
now these twenty years (for so long it is and more, since
I went with Sir Amyas Paulett into France, from
her Majesties royal Hand) I make her Majesties service the scope of
my life." Even in the time of William Cecil, Lord Burghley, as
early as 1580 can be traced the manner in which he was
continually fed with false hopes. He was during that time
fully conscious that the Queen, who usually encouraged young
blood about her, left him unnoticed. He considered his
treatment most unjust, for although admitting himself to be
still young for a high office, he realized that as early as
his sixteenth year he had entered the Queen's
service. He gives expression to this thought also in a letter
to the First Secretary, Sir Francis Walsingham, dated August
25, 1585. The original of this letter is preserved. Many
years afterward he complained in like manner regarding
Essex. Francis' relations with Essex did not, however,
confine themselves to confidences regarding his own cares,
but as the older and more experienced man he ever followed
Essex in his forward-pressing nature, ever zealous for
accomplishment. Nor was he sparing in advice against the
imprudences into which Essex was easily drawn. A special opportunity for this arose when Essex had
successfully carried out his bold stroke against the
Spaniard in 1596. If Essex thereby advanced in public favor then would
his enemies endeavor to lessen his favor with the Queen and
in his conduct toward her Essex needed good advice and
guidance. As Spedding rightly judges, one can compare the
conduct of Essex toward the Queen with the capricious and
impulsive behavior of a "spoiled child" if one but considers
the various misunderstandings between Essex and the aging
Queen. Many historians have represented the relations between Rawley's Resuscitatio, 1657. Other Letters, p. 73 New Rec. Off. S. P. O. Domestic. 1585
31
Essex and the Queen as a love affair. When, however,
they are considered from an unprejudiced standpoint,
especially in view of the great difference in their ages,
such scenes as the example hereafter cited, cannot fail to
awaken the impression that the incidents thus portrayed in
history were enacted between mother and son. It is true that some historians are disposed to cast
doubt upon this scene which was enacted in Elizabeth's
sleeping apartment, when in 1599 Essex had returned from
Ireland, prematurely and against her wish, and, in traveling
garb, surprised her late in the evening in order to report
to her in person his military disaster. But it is plain that
the passionate young man desired to express on the one hand
his despair at the miscarriage of his all too obstinately
advanced plans for the Irish campaign, and on the other
hand, knowing his army to be destroyed, wished to present
his justification before her. Her vascillating,
diplomatically calculating nature, which was so often the
despair of her advisors and subordinates, Essex could never
endure but took immediate offence. Again and again Elizabeth meets him as the
condescending and forgiving Queen. But the same patience which she exercised toward
Leicester did not extend to the son. Francis scrutinized the
whole with quiet clearness and plainly saw the dangers to
which Essex's passionate nature would expose him. He also
realized that Essex possessed many traits of character
similar to Leicester which might easily work to his
disadvantage since his relations to the Queen were quite
different and required the greatest circumspection. How
accurately he perceived the entire situation is shown by a
detailed letter from him to Essex. He recognized that the
young man, popular with the people, thirsting for action and
fame, possessed at the court jealous enemies who threatened
to estrange him from the Queen. Leicester had also risked
much and wounded the Queen to the heart through his secret
marriage with Lettice, Widow Essex--but he felt that he was
to her indispensable and therefore secure. Elizabeth's love transferred to the son was not so
strong,--it was only the reflection of those feelings which
she had buried in Leicester's grave. When we weigh this fact
in view of the advice which Bacon gives Essex concerning his
behavior toward the Queen, we see at once that he lays
everything plainly before him, not as being his inferior in
rank, but with the wisest foresight with which he has
thought out the entire matter and gives in his letters to
Essex the most confidential advice in the plainest of
language, though sometimes between the lines.
32
[Picture 2]
This "Letter of Advice to Essex," is printed in Rawley's
"Resuscitatio," p. 88. It is dated Oct. 4, 1596. The purpose of this book
does not necessitate its reproduction in full detail, but
the quotation of a few sentences from it will
suffice. First of all Francis states that he had already
expressed similar views verbally, and that he here repeats
them as he values Essex's fortunes as his own. He then
reminds him of the arguments which Essex had heretofore
adduced against such advice regarding the Queen, namely,
that, if he had shown himself too submissive, he would have
suffered from her cold and spiteful moods: In reply Francis
writes: "But whether I counsell you the best, or for the
best, duty bindeth me, to offer you, my wishes.". . . . . .
. ."Win the Queen; if this be not the Beginning, of any
other course, I see no end." Here he begs Essex to win the Queen as this is the
only way to establish the right relations and to destroy in
Elizabeth all mistrust against him. Also in his conduct
toward friends who advise him rightly as against those who
would ensnare him with falsity, he must give such expression
to his choice as would be in agreement with the Queen: "for
I know the excellency of her (Majesty's) nature too
well!" In this last sentence he points out to Essex the
proper relations to be sustained toward the Queen whose
excellence he extols, although elsewhere not denying her
weaknesses. Further on in this letter he warns him against the
hypocrisy and flattery in vogue at the court. He also warns Essex to avoid and minimize his likeness
to Leicester and all imitations of his ways: "Next, whereas I have noted you, do fly and avoid
in some respect the resemblance and imitation of my
Lord of Leicester--yet I am persuaded (howsoever I wish
your favor, integrity, magnanimity and merit) that it will
do you good between the Queen and you, to allege him for
authors and patterns." In this and other advice and counsel comes clearly to
view in few words the openness between Francis and Essex,
how they respectively judge of Leicester and how the elder
brother admits to the younger the latter's resemblance to
Leicester, while also recognizing his far superior
character. Essex's transactions in Ireland appear at this time
full of duplicity. He had entered into negotiations with the
powerful Earl of Tyrone, who was upheld by Spain against
England, and, without having defeated him, had returned to
England in advance of the Queen's recall. He had disregarded
the re- Rawley's Resuscitatio. 1657. Other Letters, p. 88
33
Original MSS. by Bacon's own hand. Brit. Mus. Lansd. MSS. LXXXVII. fo. 210, quoted in Resuscitatio, Several Letters, p. 8 Rawley's Resuscitatio, 1657, Several Letters, p. 10 Lambeth MSS. 941, p. 139 peated advice of Francis, so that the latter's efforts
with Elizabeth for reconciliation proved all in vain. Essex
was denied access to the Queen and held in arrest in his own
house. Thus closed the year 1599. When finally released, the restless Essex planned new
undertakings. He regarded the government of the aging woman,
Elizabeth, who held him in too close restraint, as
out-lived, and intrigued secretly against her with James VI
of Scotland, he relying too strongly upon the popular favor
by which he believed himself supported. He thus drew down
more dark clouds, not only over his own head but over
Elizabeth's. And again did Francis' wisdom and discretion
penetrate the dangers which Essex prepared for himself. It
was a tremendous moment--an historical landmark in which two
letters grandly exhibit alike Francis' character and
statesmanlike loyalty to his monarch, and Essex's restless
and strongly antagonistic spirit. Politically the two
brothers here separate, though their personal friendship
remains unbroken. Francis' letter to Essex is here given
literally: "My Lord-- No man better expounds my doings which maketh
me need to say the less. Only I humbly pray you to
believe that I aspire to the conscience and commendation, first
"bonus civis" which with us is a good and true servant of the
Queen and next of "bonus vir" that is an honest man. I
desire your Lordship also to think that though I confess I love
some things much better than I love your Lordship, as
the Queen's service, her quiet and contentment, her honor,
her favour, the good of my country and the like, yet I
love few persons better than yourself both for gratitude's sake
and for your own virtues which cannot be hurt but by accident
or abuse." Thus runs the principal content of this letter to
which Essex replied in proper spirit. Although he was by no
means without literary ability as his reply shows. It is
worthy of note in Essex's answer that he touches upon the
difference in their respective literary endowments, saying:
"I am a stranger, to all Poetical Concerts, or else I
might say somewhat, of your Poetical Example." This
exchange of views concerning their literary abilities
is most interesting. Then follows an undated letter from Essex to the Queen
which is to be found in Lambeth MSS. 941, 139, with the note
by Francis: "A letter framed for my Lord of Essex to the Queen."
Its contents are, therefore, to be accepted as having been
written by Bacon. But the Queen probably guessed that this
letter
34
had been framed by Francis and sprung from his own
sentiments rather than from any real submissiveness on the
part of Essex. These letters failed in their purpose to bring about
Essex's full restoration to the court as hoped by Francis.
Then began secretly Essex's progress with a conspiracy of
which he gave Francis no further intimation. He gained other
friends, exchanged secret letters with James VI, till at
last he felt himself strong enough by means of an organized
faction to overthrow the Queen and place himself on the
throne. In this can be seen the increasing recklessness of
this man who, with Elizabeth overthrown, would thus desire
an entire revolution of government. He was completely
entangled in these complications by his unquenchable thirst
for action. Here again is made apparent the great difference
between Francis and Robert, for the former maintained
continually his tranquil superiority despite the many
struggles from which he privately suffered through neglect
and ill treatment. The conspiracy proceeded to the point of outbreak in
open rebellion and now Essex was taken prisoner; and upon
the command of the Queen, Francis was compelled to appear
against him as prosecutor. His address to the prisoner is most remarkable! Bacon
begins his condemnation with these words: "You, my lord, should know that though princes
give their subjects cause of discontent, though they
take away the honour they have heaped upon them, though they
bring them to a lower estate than they raised them
formerly--yet ought they not to be so forgetful of their allegiance
that they should enter into any undutiful act,--much less
upon rebellion, as you, my lord, have done." Francis, as Judge in the Crown Council, was compelled
to recognize the conspiracy as high treason and the death
sentence followed. But it is noteworthy that he begins his
speech with an indirect reproach to the Queen, admitting
that she had given Essex cause for discontent, though he
follows with the statement that no subject is on that
account justified in rebellion. Historians of later days regarded his conviction of
his friend Essex as almost treason, whereas the
blame, if any, should rest upon Elizabeth who demanded his
services in the case. When, a year before, the case of Essex came up in the
Star Chamber, Francis had absented himself, which had
displeased the Queen. In the subsequent trial he but acted
the part of an obedient subject. The conflicting emotions
which
35
Ellis Letters, Ser. 2, Brit. Museum, Vol. 3, p. 195 swept over him, will be fully described from his works
and letters in a later volume. His lifelong resignation to his own fate was clearly
displayed before the eyes of Essex when he unequivocally
represented her as the instigating cause of Essex's guilt.
But the ending upon the block of Essex's young life must
ever be regarded as tragic and unpardonable in its
severity. However historians may try to paint it in the colors
of justice, the fact remains that Elizabeth from that time
fell into melancholia. Though she fought against it with all
her energy, while those about her sought to divert her
mind--still the underlying melancholy remained. And what
unprejudiced mind, without transforming into a ridiculous
old woman the highly gifted monarch whose forceful brain had
laid the real foundation of England as a world power, can
insinuate that her feelings for the young man were merely an
unworthy and amorous passion? No! No! the natural yearnings
of the mother forever dominated her agonized heart after
that awful death scene. Elizabeth's last hour was approaching, no heir
apparent had as yet been named. And when the high dignitary
Cecil, Secretary of State, the Lord High Admiral Lord
Howard, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, gathered on March
24, 1603, about her deathbed and laid before her for
decision the question of a successor, she remained silent.
And to the direct question of whether James VI of Scotland
should inherit the crown only a silent gesture is said to
have given her none too definite reply. A letter dated November, 1603, which gives the account
of Elizabeth's last hours, states: "It is hard to say whether the report that the
Queen agreed by gesture to the succession of James, rests
upon truth or whether it was circulated by those who
desired that this be believed a fact." A backward glance over her forty-four year reign shows
the development of a reason of state which she consistently
followed and which she had apparently had in view from the
beginning: To ultimately unite England and Scotland under
one sceptre. The will of her grandfather, Henry VII, provided that
in event of the failure of the Tudor line, England should be
united with Scotland under the Stuarts. With this end in
view he married his daughter Margaret in 1503 to James IV of
Scotland.
36
The will of her father, Henry VIII, provided that in
case his children, Edward, Mary and Elizabeth, died without
issue the succession should pass to the descendants of his
sister Suffolk. On the assembly of Elizabeth's first Parliament in
1558 she replied to the address laid before her by the
Commons requesting that she choose for herself a husband,
that it was her wish that a monument might ultimately be
erected to her with the inscription that she had lived and
died as the "Virgin Queen." Shortly after her accession the treaty of Edinburgh
was negotiated (1560), when the young queen Mary Stuart,
returned to Scotland. There the Protestant party had
meanwhile gained the ascendancy and desired to assert itself
against the Catholic party of the Queen. Furthermore,
Scotland desired to free herself from French
influence. The principal points of this treaty were as
follows: 1. The French troops heretofore stationed in Scotland
must leave the country. 2. The French fortifications at Leith must be
destroyed. 3. The French Kings could no longer bear the Scotch
and English arms. 4. All Scotch peers who had been banished were to
return, and be restored to their former rights and
possessions. 5. The higher Court offices could no longer be
conferred upon Catholic dignitaries. 6. Scotland was to be governed by a Council of State
in- stead of the military power as heretofore. This treaty was laid before Mary Stuart in France by
her half-brother, James Stuart, afterwards Lord Murray. She,
however, on the advice of her uncle, the cardinal of
Lorraine, refused to sign it. That the hands of Cecil and
Elizabeth were active in this treaty is shown by many
letters from this period. In one we read that, as protector of the Protestant
Church, Elizabeth had also attached to herself the
Protestant nobility of Scotland: "That in providing for the security and liberty
of Scotland, the realm was more bound to her Majesty,
Queen Elizabeth, than to her own sovereign." July 17,
1560. Cecil's preparatory work for this treaty is still more
clearly mentioned in the following letter written by
him: "That the treaty would be no small augmentation
to her Majesty's honour in this beginning of her
Majesty's reign, that it would finally procure the conquest of
Scotland which none of her Majesty's progenitors with all their New Rec. Off. State Pap., Letter dated July 8, 1560, from Cecil
37
battles ever obtained--namely the whole hearts and
good wills of the nobility and people which surely was
better for England than the revenue of the crown." Here it is clearly brought to light, how Elizabeth,
with Cecil Lord Burghley, pursued together the same object,
namely, the bringing of England and Scotland ultimately
under one scepter. It is true that Elizabeth never expressed this wish
but it is plainly shown by her actions. When, before a later
Parliament, she was asked regarding the succession she
avoided the giving of a decisive answer. She kept secret her
marriage with Leicester, surrendered her two sons, Francis
and Robert, to other families, maintaining always a position
which gave no indication of blood-relationship. This
hard-heartedness is readily explainable by the inherited
Tudor character of her father, as also the power and the
masterfulness with which she carried through what to her
appeared the justifying reason of State--the bringing of
England and Scotland under one crown. That she was able,
despite her marriage to attain this purpose, must be
considered due to the great scope of the royal power in her
hands where the death penalty followed so easily any
resistance to her authority or wishes. On the other hand, her definite refusal even to the
hour of death, to name a successor may easily have had its
cause in a troubled conscience, for she well knew that she
was not departing this life without a legitimate heir of her
body. And Francis, her son, he whom this dethronement most
nearly affected, composed her worthiest memorial: "In
felicem memoriam Elisabethae", not out of gratitude, but in
recognition of her real greatness as Queen.
38
FRANCIS
BACON, BARON VERULAM OF VERULAM VISCOUNT ST.
ALBAN UNDER JAMES I. After the
death of Queen Elizabeth the resignation of Francis in the
face of his disinheritance as the legitimate Tudor successor
to the throne might seem to indicate weakness of
character. But it
should be remembered that he not only had powerful opponents
in the Government and Court party, but did not, like Essex,
possess the popular favor, so that it is more than probable
that such a revolution would have lacked the adherents
necessary to ensure success. But there was a second and
still more potent reason. He was a thorough going
monarchist, a foe to all revolutions, and to him the last
will of Elizabeth was sacred. He had correctly grasped her
object--the union of the two lands under one sceptre and he
therefore bowed before the last silent expression of her
will. Do not also the confidence, protection and rapid
advancement which he enjoyed under James I for eighteen
years, and even the very incidents of his "fall" point to a
private understanding between them? It now
became his duty to offer the new ruler his abilities and his
loyalty, hoping in higher office to be able to better serve
his country as counsellor to the King, and this he sought to
accomplish through various letters, one direct to the King
in Scotland and others to those whose mediating influence he
believed would assist in the attainment of his purpose. It
is true that, as his detractors sometimes sneeringly allege,
he persistently sought public office, but always, as his own
utterances abundantly show, for the good of his country and
mankind, and not for himself. If it be
asked whether no one in his time was aware of his
unfortunate position, we can reply that many letters, well
worthy of careful and searching consideration, lead
logically to the belief that devoted friends were not
lacking who were pledged to secrecy. From MSS.
in Francis' hand which was discovered by Mrs. Henry M. Pott
in the British Museum in 1888 to 1895, she compiled that
interesting book: "Bacon's Secret Society," which alleges
that he founded such an organization. "Bonds" or secret
societies were then quite the order of the day, and in the
strict silence of these circles alone could the
secrecy Remains, p. 55, Addl. MSS., fol. 19b
39
Lambeth MSS. 976, fol. 4. The letter is written by a secretary, but the signature and the docket by Bacon's hand of weighty political and other matters be maintained,
not only during, but beyond, the period of life. These
organizations brought into being the system of cipher
correspondence among their members, such as is now customary
in diplomatic and other important affairs. It is known that Essex, Anthony Bacon and other
contemporaries belonged to this society. Among these must be
counted the poet, John Davies, later appointed by James I as
Attorney General of Ireland. He belonged to the deputation
which went out to meet the King on his journey from
Scotland. To him Bacon wrote the following letter in March,
1603: "Mr. Davis: Though you went on the sudden, yet you could not
go before you had spoken with yourself to the purpose
which I will now write. And therefore I know it shall be
altogether needless, save that I meant to show you that I am
not asleep. Briefly I commend myself to your love and to
the well using of my name, as well in repressing and
answering for me, if there be any biting or nibbling at it in
that place, as in impressing a good conceit and opinion of me,
chiefly in the King (of whose favour I make my self
comfortable assurance) as otherwise at court. And not only so, but generally to perform to me all
the good offices which the vivacity of your wit can
suggest to your mind to be performed to one, in whose affection
you have great sympathy, and in whose fortune you have
so great an interest. So desiring you to be good to
concealed poets, I continue Your very assured Fr. Bacon." Gray's Inn this 28th of March 1603. This letter shows Francis' interest in the service of
the State, his hope for advancement in position and his
expectation of the favor of the King. The last words
addressed to his poet-friend Davies, requesting him to be
good to "concealed poets" reveal Bacon as such!! The events which followed are too well known to
necessitate going into details. James who was an adherent of
the Essex party, when the conspiracy was first developed to
place him on the throne, must, as Essex's friend, have
received assurance from Francis to the effect that only
under compulsion he had sentenced Essex to death, for, as
before stated, Essex's friends had found no excuse for Bacon
in the matter of this sentence as demanded by the
Queen. Francis therefore considered it necessary to submit a
written justification of his procedure in this case. His memorial entitled "Apology" and addressed to the
Earl of Devonshire, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, furnished
a
40
comprehensive statement of the entire Conspiracy case.
Here it is to be noted that he draws especial attention to
the Queen's visit to him at Twickenham Park. This visit had
taken place after the adherents of Essex had brought about
the stage presentation of Richard II. The writer Hayward was
the supposed author of this drama. The abdication of Richard II was first published in a
pamphlet entitled "Henry IV". The earliest edition of this
is preserved in the British Museum and is dated 1599. The
Northumberland MSS. discovered in 1867 gave the first
intimation that Bacon was the author. After the stage
presentation, the publisher, John Wolfe, was examined by Sir
Edward Coke and stated that Dr. Hayward was the author. When
this tragedy of Richard II was presented on the stage in
connection with the conspiracy, and Elizabeth was apprised
of the fact, her keen perceptions grasped immediately the
correct allusion to her own abdication. Dr. Hayward was
therefore, after the examination of the publisher, taken to
the Tower in order to compel him by torture to name the
actual author. The Queen was evidently possessed of definite
suspicions and as she had known Bacon as the writer of plays
for the Gray's Inn Christmas celebrations or at least as a
willing participant therein, she now sought to discover in
conversation with Bacon at Twickenham Park, the real author
of Richard II. In his "Apology" he writes on this subject: ...."About the same time I remember an answer of mine
in a matter which had some affinity with my Lord's
(Essex) cause, which, though it grew from me went after about
in others' name. For her Majesty, being mightily
incensed with that book, which was dedicated to my Lord
Essex, being the story of the first year of King Henry the
Fourth, thinking it a seditious prelude to put into the
people's heads boldness and faction, said she had good opinion that
there was treason in it, and asked me if I could not find
any places in it that might be drawn within the case of treason:
whereto I answered: for treason surely I found none but for
felony very many. "And when her Majesty asked me wherein, I told her
the author had committed every apparent theft, for he had
taken most of the sentences of Corneilius Tacitus and put
them into his text. "And another time when the Queen would not be persuaded that it was his writing whose name was to
it, but that it had some more mischievous author and said
with great indignation that she would have him racked
to produce his author, I replied, 'Nay, Madam, he is a
Doctor, never rack his person but rack his stile; let him have
pen, ink, and paper, and help of books, and be enjoined
to continue the story where it breaketh off, and I
will undertake by collecting the stiles to judge whether he
were the author or no.'" This apology con- cerning the late Earl of Essex was written to the Right Honorable, his very good Lord, the Earl of Devonshire, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. Printed, London, for Felix Norton, was to be sold in Paul's Churchyard at the Signe of the Parrott, 1604
41
Bacon's subtle irony in this reply, lulled every
suspicion of the Queen and at the same time achieved his
purpose of saving from the rack, the luckless Dr. Hayward
for whom he was later able to provide an excellent
position. From the "Apology" it would appear through the
expression, "the matter grew from me" and the following
sentence "went about in others' name" that both the pamphlet
and Richard II emanated from Francis. Francis soon had opportunity to render his first
service to England in the new office of "Learned Counsel"
and as member of the Crown Council after the King had first
raised him to Knighthood as Sir Francis Bacon. The Union between England and Scotland was not so
easily welded. The common as well as the individual
interests of the two countries must be well considered and
blended as a whole. The advisory commission consisted of 48 Englishmen and
31 Scotchmen, Bacon acting as chairman. He was the first to
propose the name of Great Britain for the United
Kingdoms of England, Scotland and Wales, which appellation
still exists. Under James I, Francis quickly rose to higher
rank. Meanwhile his financial position was also greatly
improved through his inheritance upon Anthony's death in
1601 of the estate of Gorhambury. Lady Ann Bacon lived until
1610 and he cared for his foster mother, stricken as she was
with religious insanity, with the greatest faithfulness and
devotion. In Parliament, 1605, after the Gunpowder Plot,
threatening the lives not only of the king but of the entire
Parliament, had wrought tremendous excitement throughout the
land, Bacon was again summoned to more strenuous labors. He
fully realized, however, how little the young King was
adapted to his great duties. He showed no energy, nor did he
possess the cleverness to win to himself the favor of the
people. Francis sought in vain to encourage him and his
ministers to wise procedure. His efforts were futile and
Parliament was again adjourned without having accomplished
any results for the good of the State. In this year, 1606, Francis being already in his 46th
year, he married Alice Barnham and was at last appointed to
the again vacant post of Solicitor General. In all court events he participated with the same
diligence with which he devoted himself to the duties of
State. The death of the heir apparent, Henry, Prince of
Wales, 1612, brought upon him new responsibilities and in
the Privy Council, 1613, he was fully occupied with the
negotiations for
42
the marriage of the Princess Elizabeth with Frederick
V, Elector of the Palatinate. On the assembling of Parliament the following year,
1614, the sentiment of the people was very emphatic against
the King and the Government. What with the wasteful
extravagance at the court; the reciprocal intrigues, James'
new favorites, Somerset and the rising star, George
Villiers, later Duke of Buckingham, and the severities of
the Lord Chief Justice, Sir Edward Coke, amidst all these
personalities surrounding the King, Bacon was obliged to
steer his course. He who had never in the slightest degree attempted to
make himself popular, became, as he now appeared more
prominent in his higher offices, more and more appreciated
by the people. As Parliament on this occasion was to be
chosen, he was proposed as candidate three times--in St.
Albans, in Ipswich and by Cambridge University. He was regarded as the greatest orator from whom great
influence was expected. But again Parliament passed by in
stormy controversies especially against the unpopular
ministers. The Crown showed itself absolutely without
comprehension of the means advised by Bacon for bringing
about a peaceful understanding, while the King showed but a
vacillating indecision. These internal dissensions were most unfortunately
contemporaneous with serious affairs in France where Marie
de Medici was arranging two Spanish marriages. The young
King, Louis XIII, was to marry the Infanta Anna and his
sister a Spanish Prince. In the meantime the Spanish King
had in secret urged the marriage of his daughter with
Charles, Prince of Wales. Bacon advised against this plan
very energetically, as it would still further incense
against the King the Puritans who on account of James' High
Church proclivities regarded him as but a masked
Catholic. Again the process against Lord Somerset, accused with
his wife of poisoning the imprisoned Sir Thomas Overbury,
and the favors which the King showered upon Sir George
Villiers--all added to the distrust of the people against
the King. It is true that James asked Bacon for advice but
failed to accept his wise counsel. Nevertheless, James showed him every mark of
confidence and in 1617 appointed him to the vacant position
of Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, whereby he received as his
official residence York House, in which he had spent a
portion of his childhood. The next year, 1618, the King elevated him to the
Lord
43
Chancellorship and, as a member of the Upper House, to
the rank, Baron Verulam of Verulam. Now ensued a lengthy period without the assembly of
Parliament, during which occurred the war in Bohemia,
whereby James' son-in-law, Frederick, lost his crown, and
the Spaniards occupied his country, while at last the Thirty
Years War on the Continent developed, during which James,
despite the disapproval of part of his subjects, remained
neutral. In the absence of Parliamentary sessions the ever more
urgently needed funds for Crown Government were secured
through monopolies and patents. Herein the Lord Chancellor
perceived great improprieties and urged a new summoning of
Parliament. The whole mismanagement had so embittered the people
against the Government that both Crown and Upper House saw
ever-increasing difficulties in the coming negotiations,
owing to the opposition of the Lower House. It was,
therefore, determined to unload upon the shoulders of the
Lord Chancellor, Francis, all blame for the troubles, in
order that the remaining party in the Upper House might make
a bid for popular favor. Meanwhile, Jan. 1, 1621, Francis Bacon Verulam was
created Viscount St. Alban by the King, in recognition of
his services while every distinction conferred upon him
created only violent envy on the part of his opponents in
the Court and the Upper House. Thus was the stage set for his fall, by the insidious
intrigues against him in the Parliament which assembled in
March, 1621, with no forewarning suspicion on his
part. Since Buckingham's acquisition of complete mastery
over the weak King, the conferring of monopolies became more
and more the vogue, in order to defray the continuous
expenses of the State. The custom had obtained in Elizabeth's time but was
now considered the greatest piece of mismanagement against
which the House of Commons set itself. In the second month
of the session was begun the investigation of the conditions
obtaining in the Courts of Law. Bacon had previously always
spoken in Parliament against all intruding improprieties but
such were necessarily caused by the conditions of the time
and the poorly paid officials. The purchase of appointments
had become common and ostensible on behalf of the lower
placeholders, the upper officials endeavored to secure
special emoluments in irregular manner, while every higher
position demanded its price. Thus fees became the fashion,
these intruding irregularities
44
finding example among the names of the high worthies
of Henry VIII's Time. Parliament, which in the Upper House had determined
upon Francis' fall, accused him of the dishonesty of
accepting fees in lawsuits, charging that they represented
corruption money. Upon these charges, Francis admitted to have received
the moneys, but declared that they never influenced him in
his decisions. In consequence of this confession he was sentenced by
the Upper House to pay a fine of £40,000 and was
imprisoned in the Tower. The payment of the fine was later remitted and after
two days the King demanded his liberation.* The Upper House even chose him again as a member, but
Francis preferred to withdraw from the theatre of public
life and betake himself to the solitudes of
Gorhambury. Considering the wrongful custom which had crept in
during the days of Henry VIII to accept fees or presents for
any service, we read in the State papers in Rome, 1558,
Sanuto-Dar. XXVI of De Leva I, p. 274: "The foreign diplomats who transacted business
with Cardinal Wolsey, Giustiniani and La Sauche, but also
their opponent, as Polydor Vergil reports that Wolsey
demanded presents and pensions, but with the consent of Henry
VIII. Writers of history have, after this termination of his
period of public service, and after his fall whereby he
acknowledged himself as guilty, persistently represented him
as a despicable and confessedly guilty character. Delineations of this kind concerning the various
personalities of this epoch, and remaining substantially
unchanged through the centuries are to be accounted for by
the fact that it was customary to write up the history of a
given ruler, his court and his reign during his lifetime.
Thus Camden was entrusted with the compilation of the
history of Queen Elizabeth. Such a selected historian,
however, had access only to such state papers as the
Secretary of State might desire to place at his disposal,
this giving an intentional color to the work, which
obviously served as a foundation for the works of future
historians. In the time of James I., opponents of Bacon were
again at the helm of State, so that it may be readily
understood how the presentation of his personality during
his own lifetime was _________ * Translator's Note--To what extent James himself may
have personally profited by Francis' alleged irregular
income is a question never yet answered.
45
Lamb. MSS. Gibson Papers. Vol. VIII. fol. 7 dictated by a spirit of hate. Not until the middle of
the last century did Spedding undertake to produce not only
the publication of Bacon's philosophical works in standard
form, but to penetrate still deeper into the great spirit
and noble character of this man, studying him in the light
of his letters, speeches, conversations and scattered
essays. And his second work, also of seven volumes: "The
Letters and Life of Francis Bacon," has at last brought
light into the darkness to dispel all the calumnious shadows
with which historians had endeavored to surround his
image. Only in his letters as in an autobiography appear the
inmost depths of feeling in intercourse with true friends.
Even while they give expression to the bitterness of great
disappointment, continual hindrance, setbacks and hateful
intrigue, there is shown great relief in the consciousness
of being really understood by a few chosen
intimates. Francis has been called false in that he placed
himself at the disposal of the new ruler so soon after
Elizabeth's death. But consider that though designed from
earliest youth for the public service, every high position
had been denied him, so that it is quite conceivable that he
explained this to the young King in order to make him more
inclined, after all the years of vain toil and struggle, to
appreciate his potential usefulness to the State. In 1612, when the King was already suffering from
great financial and other troubles, and the Lord Treasurer,
Salisbury, was dead, Bacon wrote an advisory letter to
James. He counseled him before all to convene Parliament.
And, offering his own services in so far as they might be
agreeable to the King, he reminded him again how under
Elizabeth he had been able to devote his powers all too
little to the service of the State. On this point he
writes: "Your Majesty may truly perceive that though I
cannot challenge to myself either invention, or judgment or
elocu- tion, or method, or any of those powers, yet my
offering is care and observance and as my good old mistress was
wont to call me her watch-candle, because it pleased her to
say I did continually burn (and yet she suffered me to
waste almost to nothing) so I must more owe the like duty to
your Majesty, by whom my fortunes have been settled
and raised." Such pieces of "inside information" in open expression
through the medium of letters mirror with accuracy both time
and character. When we consider the fearful life tragedy of Francis
Tudor, held in such strict concealment not only in his own
time but
46
centuries thereafter, and realize that he, though
fully aware of it, would not bring it to light, we can
discover three reasons for the same: 1. Francis lived in the days when the throne of
England was held by that powerful dynasty, the House of
Tudor, which although it had been confirmed and ratified
by Parliament, and although every succession must be
so ratified anew, and although it could not reign without
the consent of Parliament, had yet acquired in specific
and de- ciding cases a far-reaching absolute power. 2. Also,--although, in that epoch, humanity and
the Renaissance had begun to take root, still it was
deeply tainted with the relics of Middle Age brutality and
force. The torture of the rack as well as sentences to the
scaffold for subjects merely inconvenient to the rulers, and
secret trials for treason on account of single occurrences at
court, were the order of the day. From this it is evident that the Court surrounding
Elizabeth maintained strict silence regarding her secrets,
in so far as they were let into them. Francis therefore well
knew that it would cost him his life if he were to divulge
his parentage. 3. This maintenance of secrecy also obtained to like
extent in Spain and betrayal was equally threatened with
death, save that under Jesuit rule the scaffold found
less employment than the quicker poison. Men were silenced
by death in frivolous wantonness, such was the cheapness
of human life. Whoever desires to gain a deeper insight into these
horrors must read the old records, the Calendar of the
Hatfield MSS. (edited by the Historical MSS. Commission,
London, 1883-88). These give among others a view of the
Elizabethan Epoch and afford a deep insight into the, to us,
unbelievable occurrences at the Court, and the secrets and
intrigues of the two Cecils, William Lord Burghley and
Robert Earl of Salisbury. But even this tell-tale document has not as yet
brought to light all the records of that period. In the State Archives of Venetia, as in Spain in the
Simancas Archives, still rest important records and
diplomatic letters, relative also to the marriage of
Elizabeth and Leicester. But insight is only so far granted
as will not at the same time cause undesired revelations
regarding Spain at that period. Calendar of the MSS. at Hatfield House Edited by the Historical Com- mission, London, 1883-88. 2d Part
47
THE
PHILOSOPHER FRANCIS
TUDOR-BACON, BARON VERULAM OF VERU- LAM,
VISCOUNT ST. ALBAN. ___________ V. "Knowledge
is Power." Not until
late in life did Francis compile the philosophical works
published under the name of "Bacon", though the
philosophical trend of his thought is to be traced in early
youth. A thorough student of the old philosophers he came to
the conclusion that Philosophy has not as yet shown itself
as bearing sufficient fruit, but was atrophied in syllogisms
and the transcendental speculations of the Middle
Ages. He was
the founder of Empiricism, and his free spirit strove after
new goals for science. To him the mastery of nature through
unprejudiced knowledge of nature was
all-essential. His keen
perceptions sought ways and means of investigation, together
with the consciousness that our power was coextensive with
our wisdom. The road
to knowledge requires the union of Theory with Empiricism,
as the latter alone simply collects facts, and Metaphysics
reach their summit in the thought-web of the individual.
Therefore Philosophy could not confine itself solely to the
assembling of facts, nor yet to the flimsy web of
Metaphysical thought, but Natural Science, Empiricism and
Metaphysics must unite to bring forth the real fruits of
science. Philosophy
therefore should not, like the ant, gather only, nor yet
like the spider weave but flimsy strands, but like the bee
industriously collect in order that the hoard so accumulated
might be employed for useful constructive
purposes. At that
time Philosophy and Natural Science were not yet separate
territory, and Francis therefore turned his attention
specially to investigations in physical science. Only as
their mysteries are observed he believed, could their laws
be determined:
48
The great inventions of his age--gunpowder, printing,
and the compass, he recognized as challenging the mind to
deep consideration, which brought him to the conclusion that
even inventions must be developed by methodical planning and
not be left to the haphazard of accident. They but offered
scope for those investigations which were in close union
with the powers of Nature and with Nature's laws, into the
depths of which the spirit of man must ever busy itself to
penetrate. At that time Alchemy, as well as Magic, were in high
favor, but Francis, who had familiarized himself with these
as with Astronomy and Astrology, strove toward scientific
physical investigations and tried himself all manner of
chemico-physical experiments. Even in the last year of his
life he apparently fell a victim to such an experiment,
having for a time taken himself to Gray's Inn for scientific
work. Previously, during the summer of 1624, Francis had
lived in Gorhambury, the plague being prevalent in London.
Of delicate health and constitution, he suffered much and
was the more liable to illness on account of the strain
endured through the intrigues which brought about his
deposition from office. In August of this year he was seriously ill and
recovered slowly. Meanwhile he was continually worried
through the shrinking of his income on account of the loss
of his office. Nevertheless, he lived to pursue further his
scientific researches. As soon as his strength recovered he
returned to London, and in March, 1626, on the journey to
Highgate, being overtaken by a snowstorm he wished to make
the experiment whether snow, like salt, would preserve meat
from decay. He entered a house and filled a vessel with snow to
bring back to Gray's Inn. But he was suddenly attacked by
illness so he could not reach his destination, but entered
the house of the Earl of Arundel which he was then passing.
As the Earl was absent and he made use of his hospitality
without the host, he wrote a letter to Arundel from his sick
bed. This letter states that, on sudden illness he had
taken refuge in his house and been cared for by his servants
in the best possible manner. At the same time he mentioned
that his case was like that of Caius Plinius who lost his
life though burning while trying an experiment with Vesuvius
in erruption. His snow experiment had been a great success,
but his hands had been rendered useless by it and he himself
made very ill, so that he must dictate the letter. Letter to the Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Matthew Collection, p. 57, headed: This was the last letter published
49
The Lord St. Alban to the Earl Marshall with humble thanks for a favor. Miscellany Works, 1629, p. 79 Niceron tom III, p. 45 This letter to Arundel is apparently his last. History
states that he did not recover, but was thus the victim of a
scientific experiment, and being thus torn suddenly away
from vast undertakings he had planned, died April 9,
1626.* Francis intended to leave behind him a comprehensive
Encyclopaedia of Scientific Knowledge, accompanied by
methodical instruction, but this great work it seems never
reached completion. In 1597 he published a small collection of ten essays
upon various themes, Observations in Nature, Medicine, etc.,
and fragments, entitled: "Colours of Good and Evil and
Meditationes Sacrae," bound in Octavo. The self criticism of his philosophical works can best
be followed in his letters on the subject written to Bishop
Andrews, Bishop of Wincester, 1622, and to the Philosopher,
Father Redempt-Baranza in Italy. To Bishop Andrews he writes that he will continue the
work begun, "Instauration," and had already received letters
regarding it from the Continent. His "Advancement of
Learning" is to serve as a Key to the better understanding
of the "Instauration" and he will therefore translate it
into the "Universal Language" (Latin). He then goes into a more detailed enumeration of the
whole work as planned. The "Novum Organum" (Instauratio Magna) he had
published in October, 1620. This constitutes the first part
published of the complete work as he had planned it, (See
Preface of 1640 Advancement of Learning), as the following
enumeration shows: 1. De Dignitate et Augmentis Scientiarum, preceded by
Partitiones Scientiarum. 2. Novum Organum, sive indicia vera de interpretatione
Naturae: Interpretation of Nature. 3. Historia Naturalis et experimentalis ad condendam
Philosophiam: Sive Phaenomena Universi. Heher Francis shows himself
as the founder of Experimental Natural
Philosophy. 4. Scala Intellectus: Advancement of "Intellectual and
Spiritual Culture." 5. Prodromi, sive anticipationes philosophiae
secundae. A stepping- stone to the New Philosophy. ________ * Note that the year then began and ended the latter
part of March. Some recent discoveries seem to indicate that
his death was but simulated, that he secretly left England
and lived many active years on the Continent of
Europe.
50
6. Philosophia secunda, sive scientia activa. The New
Practical Philosophy. He divides Science according to memory, imagination
and reason into the following parts: "History, Poetry and
Philosophy. His philosophical work, however, apparently remained
incompleted, as his sudden death (?) is thought to have
prevented the full working out of the above plan. Parts 4, 5
and 6 have not so far, at least, been located with
certainty, and seem to be missing; though it is possible,
that they were published in other than a philosophical form,
under other names, or even in cipher. In 1623 appeared the De Dignitate et Augmentis
Scientiarum Libri IX. Here,--as in the later English 1640
Advancement of Learning,--Book I is merely introductory, the
main body of the work, being comprised by Books II-IX. Hence
the nine books are preceded by a Summary, entitled
"Partitiones Scientiarum," etc., containing chapter-contents
for Books II-IX only. The Novum Organum which he published in 1620 is also
not entirely completed as the subject is often presented by
aphorism, and single sentences must frequently stand for
completed work: The Winds, History of Life and Death,
etc. In July, 1607, he wrote a more comprehensive sketch of
his philosophical works, "Cogitata et visa de
interpretatione naturae, sive de inventione rerum et
operum." In Oct., 1623, he sent to the King, the Prince of
Wales, and Buckingham the enlarged Latin translation, "De
Augmentis Scientiarum" of his earlier work: "Of the
Proficience and Advancement of Learning," which had appeared
in English in 1605. In February, 1610, he sent an interesting
communication to his banished friend, Sir Toby Matthews,
then in Salamanca, and later sojourning in Italy and
Brussels. Toby Matthews was the son of the Bishop of Durham, and
having gone over to the Romish Church, was for a time,
banished, being first granted permission to travel upon the
Continent. But under all his changing circumstances Francis
remained his faithful friend, and corresponded with him
liberally regarding his literary works, while Toby also
remained loyal to Bacon through his fall. As a pledge of their friendship Francis sent him an
essay: "On Friendship." Matthews, who on his travels met
many eminent savants, ever supplied his friend with the
latest works,
51
"The Promus of Formularies and Elegancies." Being private notes of about 1594. Illustrated and elucidated by passages from Shakespeare by Mrs. Henry M. Pott, with preface by E. A. Abbott, London, 1883. Also "Bacon is Shakespeare," by Sir Edwin Durning- Lawrence. McBride Co., New York, 1910 and reported to him by letter conversations on
scientific subjects. To enter into the details of Bacon's scientific works
is not the purpose of this book, but simply to emphasize
their influence upon his own times as well as upon the
afterworld. He towered above his contemporaries by reason of his
wonderful spirit of investigation, his thoughts which
projected far into the future and his constantly flowing
springs of many-sided Knowledge. He became the Pioneer of the new idea with the motto:
"Hypotheses non fingo." "I do not frame
suppositions." The aforementioned essays, published in 1597, are
more, so to speak, the fore-runner of the philosophical
works brought out by Bacon in his more advanced years. But
this note-book, the "Promus of Formularies and Elegancies,"
shows that Francis, in the last years of the 16th century
busied himself with comparative linguistic science in order
to improve his mother-tongue, which seemed to him still
barbarous as compared with the Romance languages. Moreover, during the last years of the 16th Century,
from 1584 onward are to be placed to his credit
parliamentary addresses prepared by him , judicial
treatises, letters of advice and counsel to the Queen and
many more MSS. of similar nature. His extended correspondence with friends and savants
in England and on the continent and many smaller yet
noteworthy writings, as well as a confidential note-book
compiled in 1608, were not sufficient to fill the idle hours
of this active and versatile brain. That he had such hours
against his every wish, is shown by his repeated complaints
to the effect that his duties did not place and employ him
to his full ability. He found himself continually called to
and employed in petty offices and unimportant affairs which
one less gifted could easily have undertaken in his
place. As he complained to the King he was for Elizabeth "A
Watch Candle" which burned uselessly (p. 54). If we trace
his literary activity further, beginning with the year 1603,
the following works are prominent: 1. Memorial to Elizabeth: "In felicem Memoriam
Elizabethae." 2. Francis' detailed "Apology" concerning his sentence
of Essex. 3. The confidential notebook on Politics, Philosophy,
Temperament, Personal Health, and Personal Finances.
52
4. A memorandum: "On the Greatness of Britain," which,
however, remained only as a fragment, 1608. 5. An enlarged edition of his essays of 1612. 6. History of Henry VII, which he wrote after his fall
as Lord Chancellor and during his banishment to Gorhambury,
June 23 to October 8, 1621. 7. Imago Civilis Julii Caesari, 1607. 8. His last work published in 1624, "The
Apophthegms"-- Apothegms and Anecdotes, and the translation of
several Psalms which are particularly noteworthy for their
peculiar rhythm. 9. A year before his death (?) 1625, he published his
third edition of essays further enlarged. Among the above-mentioned works the History of the
Reign of Henry VII: "Historia Regni Henrici VII" is most
conspicuous. Spedding writes concerning it: "It is the most complete work unapproached by any
history of this period written either before or after Bacon,
for it gives an exact description of the character, actions,
governmental activities and their development under this King and
all other historians have drawn their knowledge from its
pages." Not less significant was the second historical work
begun by Francis later: "King James I, Accession and Times,"
which was to portray this epoch. Such were the most important of the scientific and
historical works of this phenomenal intellect, which England
can be proud to have possessed, embodied in this man--an
immortal genius. Attention may be particularly given to the last
chapter of the work: "De Dignitate et Augmentis
Scientiarum," as he here evidences deep Christian
principles. And his own melancholy experiences and dreadful
fate gave to Francis a resignation to the authority of the
revelations of Him who had sounded the heights and depths of
human life, and thereby laid the foundations of his
Christian Knowledge. Those who fail to grasp the thought that Francis was a
Tudor, but hold to his unproven Bacon parentage, who deny
with quibbling argument that he was the author of
pseudonymous works,--sometimes credit him with being a dry
savant. Spedding was the first to thoroughly investigate his
scientific works and he came to the conclusion that neither
before him nor yet since his day had any English writer
attained to such powerful, majestical language,--his
brilliant metaphors and turns of speech resembled but
one,--Shakespeare. The other objection, brought forward by the opponents
of Francis Bacon, is that on account of his occupations he
could
53
possibly have had time to produce so many pseudonymous
and anonymous works, and even poems. This supposition he
answers by observations in his letters. Now in this and now
in that letter to friends he complains how little employment
was found for his powers under Elizabeth, and in his letter
to James I. at the time of his accession he distinctly
states that under his sceptre he hopes for a more
comprehensive activity and a proper employment of his
many-sided knowledge. In fact, he was, under Elizabeth, as
he himself states, an ever-burning light which had wasted
away for her in vain, as many of his services could have
been performed equally well by men of lesser
attainment. He found abundant time in Gorhambury, later in
Twickenham Park, and at last still oftener as dismissed Lord
Chancellor for the profitable and delightful company of his
Muse and his Sciences. VI. FRANCIS
TUDOR AS WRITER. PARTLY
ANONYMOUS, AND PARTLY UNDER VARIOUS PSEUDONYMS,--A
"CONCEALED POET," AS HE SUBSCRIBED
HIMSELF. Before we
endeavor to follow Francis' various pseudonyms and the
writings which he composed under them, we must seek for a
practical reason why it was, in his time, impossible for a
man of rank and especially a State official who aspired to
higher office, to appear before the public as a poet or a
writer. In
addition to the customs of the time, under which a man of
rank could not publicly exhibit himself as a poet, there
appealed even more strongly to Francis the grounds for
discretion regarding his descent, which condemned him to
lifelong silence. In his
day all civilized states were filled with political and
ecclesiastical contentions. In England, since the days of
Henry VIII, the two confessions, Romish and Protestant, had
alternated, and France was in the throes of war with
Huguenots. Thus, as forerunner of the Thirty Years' War,
with the victory of the Reformation under Luther and the
reformed reformers, and emancipation from the papal power,
the popular spirit was shaken to the core. In
England raged also the contest between Parliament and the
Tudors which continued under the Stuarts, while in
Spain
54
the secret diplomatic and Jesuitic intrigues of Philip
II. formed the support for his despotic power. The contest
between England and France, both striving for the throne of
Scotland, together with the bloody termination of Mary
Stuart's pitiful tragedy through which Elizabeth had
precipitated herself into the world struggle of the
Calvinists and counter reformers and at the same time
assured England of the Scotch Crown,--all these far-reaching
events busied not only the rulers but the ecclesiastical and
secular dignitaries from the highest jurisdiction to the
lowest. Frequent and varying problems, whose nature could
hardly be rightly determined, as well as the diplomatic
chess-moves between rival embassies, demanded in any
official an extraordinary cleverness and foresight, while a
political victory could often be won by employing against
the opponent his own wiles. Under such circumstances, a freely spoken word was
often very dangerous and could be used by the opposing party
in counter intrigues. Cipher was employed much more than now
in letters of importance and served both the ecclesiastical
and secular statesmen. To announce in print, opinions or statements of fact
or comments upon political questions and occurrences was
also most dangerous, as not only the opposition party but
the general ignorance of the reading public had to be
reckoned with. Whosoever wished to entrust his opinions to print
could safely do so only anonymously or by the use of a
pseudonym. To what extent these pseudonyms constituted the order
of the day is shown in a work published in the year 1700
entitled: "Vicentii Placii Theatrum Anonymorum et
Pseudonymous (Vincent Platz Theatre of Anonymous and Pseudonymous
Works.) The title page engraving shows a great library into
which an author is entering, other writers being also
present, and where the librarian removes all the
masks--hangs them up on a cord suspended through the library
so that authors can see one another face to face. This book
reveals a great number of authors whose names have hitherto
been concealed behind closed visors as anonymous or
pseudonymous writers. It is also known that Sir Nicholas Bacon, Lord Keeper
of the Great Seal, was a writer and even claimed to be the
only one of his class. However, but one of his books is
preserved, which he published under the name of one of his
subordinates, John Hales, died 1571. Ben Jonson states that a writer who at the same time
held office could never venture to make himself
known. A part of Francis' pseudonymous work was first brought Sir Edwin Bormann --"Die Kunst des Pseudonyms," Leipzig, 1901, reduced facsimile on p. 5 Harleian MSS. 550
55
Northumberland MSS. reproduced in fac- simile by Mr. Fr. J. Burgoyne, 1905 to light in the Northumberland MSS. discovered in
1867. This must here be mentioned again as it reveals the
new title of the work concerning Leicester. In 1584
Leicester's Life appeared under the title of "Father
Parson's Green Coat"; the same work appeared under the
altered title "Leicester's Commonwealth", after Francis'
death (?), and under this name it appears in the list upon
the Northumberland MSS. In this portfolio all the works
enumerated were apparently originally contained. Some had
been removed either purposely or through destruction by
fire, but the remainder indicate that it originally
contained a portion of Francis' pseudonymous works. This partly burned packet of MSS. found in 1867 in
Northumberland House and reproduced in facsimile and
published by Fr. J. Burgoyne in 1905, furnished us with the
only known manuscript line of Shakespeare's "Lucrece"
slightly altered. "reuealing day through every crany peepes." Among other titles enumerated are: "Rychard the second." "Rychard the third." These two dramas were at that time (1596) as yet
unpublished. "Essaies by the same author." And as previously noted on page 27 the often repeated
names: Nine times "ffrauncis Bacon," and repeatedly beside
it: "Shakespeare," not Shakspere, as it was applied to the
actor. This leaves no room for doubt that all these notes
point to one Author, Francis Bacon--identical with
Shakespeare. The oldest anonymous work of Francis thus far
discovered is unquestionably the book concerning Leicester
under its first title: "Father Parson's Green Coat," which
since its republication in 1641 has been known as
"Leicester's Commonwealth." When Leicester died in 1588 the author obviously
desired to publish the truth to posterity through this
satire on his real father, to which he gave a new title. It
is therefore desirable to note what sources he
employed. The facts regarding Robert Dudley's first marriage
with Amy Robsart, with its tragic end, later chronicled in
the "Antiquities of Berkshire," are drawn from the city
notices of the time, which Francis presumably also employed.
They give with accuracy the circumstances of the murder of
Lady Amy in Cunmor Hall, with the names of Leicester's
servants, who ingeniously contrived the fall from the
stairs, preceded, however, by the administration of
poison.
56
Mention is also made of the physician, Dr. Bayly, whom
they requested to prescribe the medicine which they were to
obtain from Oxford. When they told him, however, that they
wished to mix his medicine with a good, quieting home
remedy, Bayly became suspicious and declared that Lady
Dudley needed no medicine. Thus the physician became the
first witness to their intentions. When sudden death followed by means of a carefully
planned fall from the stairs, the whole occurrence was
looked upon as murder. This is also indicated by a note
which states that the clergyman, Rev. Babington, D. D.,
several times in his funeral address characterized her death
as "murder." This entire affair also appeared later worked into a
play: "Yorkshire Tragedy," whose author remained unknown,
but who was rightly or wrongly supposed to be the "Concealed
Poet"--Shakespeare. In this tragedy occur the following lines: "The only way to charm a woman's tongue "Is, break her neck,--a politician did it." In Evan's Ancient Ballads, Vol. IV, p. 130, is found
an Elegy on Lady Dudley's death, entitled "Cunmor Hall," by
Mickle. It is without poetic value but its contents
harmonize with the above facts. After describing, in many verses and in the style of
the day, the heartache of the neglected wife, he portrays
the cause of Dudley's neglect of Amy in this verse: "Then, Leicester, why, again I plead (The injured surely may repine), Why didst thou wed a country maid When some fair princess might be thine?" On account of these widely circulated reports, which
could never be entirely suppressed and which spread even to
the Continent, it became obviously impossible for
Leicester's sons ever to feel any actual respect for their
real father. In this connection it is also easy to comprehend, as
is revealed by the letters between Francis and the so-called
Essex, that the latter recognized in himself some
resemblance to his father Leicester and that Francis having
called his attention thereto he endeavored to overcome
it. The work: "Leicester's Commonwealth," also gives the
cause of Leicester's death as poison, but this time it was a
draught which he had prepared for his sick wife, Lettice,
and which she, Ballad: "Cunmor Hall," by Mickle P. 38: Leicester's Commonwealth, by Pseudonym: Parson; Author: Francis Tudor
57
MSS. Sir Robert Sibbald's copy "Ben Jonson to Drumond of Hawthorndon" as he also was ill, poured out in error for him as his
supposed medicine. The same account of Leicester's death is repeated by
Ben Jonson to Drumond of Hawthorndon. To consider now the "Concealed Poet," as Francis
called himself in his letter to Mr. Davis (page 40), in the
light of his ever-increasing creations, let us turn
attention first to one of his allegorical works. This
furnishes one more answer to the charge of his
opponents--"No imagination." In "The New Atlantis" he portrays the "Island of
Bensalem," for a thousand years inhabited by a learned
society called the "House of Solomon," as the lawgivers of
this society have chosen the Proverbs of Solomon as the
basis of their statutes. Bacon (for he published the
allegory under this name) now describes the manner in which
the headquarters of the Society are constructed upon this
Isle. Under lofty mountains extend cellars three English
miles deep which are designed for chemical experiments. A
half mile distant rises towers upon the mountain peaks. The
island presents salt and fresh water lakes, waterfalls,
ravines and rocks projecting into the sea, all of which are
intended for the purpose of observing marine animals.
Artificial fountains are laid out, rooms with artificial
ventilation and imitation meteors. Sanitariums served for
experiment and instruction in dietetic and medicinal work.
Factories and sample establishments are provided for
practical production. One building is designed for the study
of light and perspective. Echo-galleries for acoustic
experiment are there; also complete collections of
minerals. J. G. Buhle has interpreted and elucidated this
allegory in the following manner in his work which appeared
in Goettingen in 1804, entitled: "Concerning the origin and
most eminent destiny of the Orders of Rosicrucians and Free
Masons." On this vexed question he comes to the conclusion that
Bacon, in case he had belonged to the then existing orders
on the Continent, probably designed through them a secret
combination of savants. He writes further concerning this imaginary building
of Francis: "In his poem regarding the 'House of Solomon' will
be encountered what lies therein:--the colossal plan of a
bold scientific genius who soared far above his literary
age, and in the heights to which he attained, indulged himself in
the dream of what a rich nation under a wise ruler
could accomplish toward the perfection of Art and Science.
In this respect this poem of Bacon's has not been barren of
actual results. It caused the founding of the Royal Society
of London, which for nearly two hundred years has
58
rendered immortal service to the cause of Natural
Science and will continue to do so." The allegorical form in which Francis clothed his
plans regarding Science and especially Natural Science,
shows how well he understood contemporary taste, which would
certainly pay more attention to them in that form than if
presented in the usual dry matter-of-fact manner. His Sonnet with which he greeted Elizabeth on her
visit to him at Twickenham Park, shows again how well he
could, by a poem in her honor, cater to her peculiarities.
During his life at Gray's Inn he also co-operated
prominently in the production of the masques and mummeries
for the customary Christmas celebrations. As Spedding states in his Life and Letters of Francis
Bacon, Vol. I, p. 326, under "Gesta Grayorum." Francis'
Christmas Play, "The Prince of Purpoole," was produced in
1594. Spedding expresses himself regarding the articles
which form the piece, as follows: "The articles present in a strain of playful satire
so elegant an illustration of the fashions and humors of
those days that I shall transcribe them at length; the
rather as forming part of an entertainment in the preparation
of which Bacon certainly had a hand, though not, I think,
in the execution of this part of it." Later, however, we find this comedy incorporated in
the Shakespeare Folio under the title "The Comedy of
Errors." Bacon, with Essex, also undertook the presentation of
a play in celebration of the birthday of the Queen, Nov. 17,
1595. In his Vol. I Spedding credits Bacon with the
composition of this play and we find the arrangement of the
same in the previously cited list in the Northumberland MSS.
in the following manner: of Tribute or giving what is dew." ___________ The praise of the worthiest vertue. The praise of the worthiest affection. The praise of the worthiest power. The praise of the worthiest person. All the foregoing has been cited for the purpose of
demonstrating that Francis, from youth to age, was gifted
with poetic ability and occasionally devoted himself to the
Muse. If in his youth he participated in the customary
Christmas presentations at Gray's Inn through his own
productions:--if he was the poet brought forward for the
special comedies de-
59
De Dignitate et Augmentis Scientiarum libri IX, Lugd. Batavorum, 1645 signed for the queen:--then in the product of his
advanced years: "New Atlantis," we find a deeply contrived
allegory inspired by the highest flights of imaginative
power and in his last versification of certain of the
psalms, a finely polished rhythm which still remains a
classic standard. If we add to these special examples of his talent his
expressed thoughts upon the Drama and the purposes of the
Stage, we realize his distinct predilection for the Drama
and his far-seeing judgment regarding its purposes which
made a transformation of the dramatic poetry of his time an
imperative necessity. In Book II, Chapter 13, of his "De Augmentis
Scientiarum," he writes in part regarding it: "Dramatica" (poesis) "est veluti Historia Spectabills;
nam constituit Imaginem Rerum tanquam praesentium,
Historia autem tanquam praeteritarum" (Paris, 1624). (Dramatic poetry may be described as the visible
pres- entation of history, it shows by its pictures, history
as in the present, whereas history in itself only sets forth the
past.) In another part of the same work: "Dramatica autem Poesis, quae Theatrum
habet pro Mundo, vsu eximia est, si sana foret. Non parua enim
esse posset Theatri, & Disciplina, & Corruptela:
Atque Cor- ruptelarum, in hoc genere, abunde est; Disciplina
plane nostris temporibus est neglecta. Attamen licet in
Rebusp. modernis, habeatur pro re ludicra Actio theatralis,
nisi forte nimium trahat e Satyra, & mordeat; tamen apud
Antiquos curae fuit, vt Animos Hominum ad Virtutem
institueret. Quinetiam Viris prudentibus, & magnis Philosophis,
veluti Animorum Plectrum quoddam censebatur. Atque
sane verissimum est, & tanquam Secretum Naturae,
Hominum animos, cum congregati sint, magis quam cum soli sint,
Af- fectibus & Impressionibus patere." (Paris, 1624,
p. 121). Here he alludes to the corruptions of the contemporary
theatre. He states in this passage that dramatic poetry, as
pertaining to the theatre, could be of great service if it
were healthful. He recognizes stage-plays for those who witness them
as either a moral source of uplift or a corruptor of public
morals. Immoral dramas were very numerous and little notice
was taken of their moral influence. In the contemporary
theatres the play was regarded merely as a show or as a
satirical attack, while with the ancients the drama played
an educational and ennobling part. Wise men and philosophers
had regarded the drama as a work of art to touch the souls
of the audience. As a mystery of human nature it was
observed that the passions of a multitude were more
accessible and could be more easily influenced and excited,
than those of the individual.
60
A dramatic poet who in his youth found opportunity for
his first attempts, and who, while recognizing his own
genius and at the same time the great defects in the Dramas
of his time, for the most part mere spectacles for gallery
applause, could not fail, if actuated by the wondrous
intellect of Francis, to turn his attention early in life
toward the elevation of this branch of poetic art. That he
would not be content with mere proposals for the betterment
of the drama, but would strive to carry his ideas into
effect and employ his creative genius and enriched
vocabulary in the most varied dramatic works, is
obvious. His whole obsession was to work for the good of
mankind and to forget in intellectual activity the
oppressing circumstances which all too often surrounded him.
Indeed he occasionally refers to the fact that his soul had
remained but a stranger to his earthly surroundings. In spite of the fact that Richard II had been the
subject of other dramatic poets besides Shakespeare,
Francis' reply to the Queen at Twickenham Park in which he
referred her to the felonious copies of Cornelius Tacitus,
betrays the fact that the matter had nevertheless proceeded
from his pen, while the Northumberland MSS. shows that
Richard II and Richard III are included among his
papers. "22. The book of Deposing King Richard
the second, and coming in of Henry the 4th, supposed to be
written by Dr. Hayward, who was committed to the Tower
for it, had much incensed Queen Elizabeth; and she asked
Mr. Bacon, being then of her Counsel learned, whether
there were any Treason contained in it? who intending to do
him a pleasure and to take off the Queen's bitterness with a
merry conceit, answered: No, Madam, for Treason, I cannot
deliver Opinion, that There is any, but very much
Felony: The Queen apprehending it gladly, asked, How?
And wherein? Mr. Bacon answered: Because he had
stollen many of his sentences and conceits out of Cornelius
Tacitus" (Apoph- thegms, 1671). There is also preserved in the British Museum an
ancient pamphlet entitled "Henry IV," which treats of the
abdication of Richard II and which is accredited to
him. From Francis Bacon's "Apology" regarding the
condemnation of Essex, we gather not only that the supposed
author of Richard II, Dr. Hayward, was actually imprisoned
because of its production, for the sole purpose of
compelling him by torture to reveal the real author; but
that the publisher, Mr. John Wolfe, had been previously
examined before Attorney General Coke on July 13,
1600. This furnishes an illustration of the responsibility
at that time assumed by the publisher of Books and Dramas.
In Eliza-
61
Phil. Stubbs: "Observations on the Elizabethan Drama 1583" 1616; "State of the Drama illustrated by contemporary publication" beth's time is was customary for the author to seek a
deputy or representative for his work. Thus was the
publisher, for a consideration, obliged, in event of
litigation, to assume the responsibility for all errors of
the author. Three individuals are thus to be
differentiated: 1. The author who, especially in the case of dramas,
kept himself concealed. 2. The publisher, who in the case of dramas, usually
named the actors, also for a remuneration. 3. The printer, whose name also appeared upon the
work. Thus plays put forth under the names of Marlowe,
Greene and other contemporary actors, which fact was not
unknown to Elizabeth, who, for this reason, felt it
necessary to put forth some effort to determine the real
author of Richard II. That Ben Jonson collaborated with
Francis is well enough known; and only such writers as were
known to be friendly to one another, were in position to
gain information regarding each other's works. The Drama, which until the appearance of the Francis
Tudor Shakespeare Plays, ranked only as a stage performance
emanating from the despised class of dissolute play-writers,
was to such an extent prohibited that the Oxford Bodleian
Library, founded by Sir Thomas Bodley, accepted at that time
no dramatic works. Many pieces were not written down at all, but were
learned from the stage copies, rehearsed, presented before
the public often with new humorous interpellations to amuse
the "groundlings." On the subject of the "playwright," who then ranked as
a person of low caste, it may be said of Marlowe, that after
he took his degree of A. M. at Cambridge, he gave up his
studies and became an actor. Such was his education that the
writing of good plays might well be credited to him, but the
debauchery of his life as an actor is well known, as is also
his melancholy end, stabbed to death in a brawl with a
servant over a tap-room wench. Ben Jonson on the other hand is known as a
collaborator in Latin translations and was personally so
close to Francis that he doubtless stood on a far higher
intellectual ground than the actors of his day. When Francis selected the name of an actor to father
the publication of his plays it is to be noted in that the
name of the Actor Shakspere was altered in the spelling to
"Shake-speare"--Shaker of the Spear--and as such we find
Francis identified in Emblem Books of his time, of which
more hereafter.
62
WHAT IS
POSITIVELY KNOWN OF SHAKSPERE THE
ACTOR? ___________ Of the
numerous Shakspere stock in County Warwick it is known that
a few families lived as small householders in various
villages. The actor's father lived in Stratford-on-Avon as a
cobbler,--another account says as a butcher. Among his many
children two sons became actors, and William ranked as the
better. He could at best have attended the grammar school of
Stratford only until his thirteenth year, as his father is
supposed to have needed him in his business;--all this
being, however, hypothetical. In
Halliwell-Phillips' "Outlines" there is published but one
letter addressed to Shakspere dated Oct. 25, 1598.* He had
come to London, probably 1585 or 7, deserting his wife and
daughter, having been obliged to leave the neighborhood on
account of poaching. It is further stated that he held
horses at the Globe Theatre for the country
equipages. At
Christmas time, 1598, his name appears with the actors
William Kemp and Richard Burbage on the pay list of the
"Lord Chamberlain's" players, issued by the Treasurer of the
Chamber, for two plays on "St. Stephen's" and "Innocents'
Daye," given before Elizabeth. When
Shakspere left the theatre is not definitely known, only
that in the meantime he made his living as hair dresser and
marriage broker. He was not numbered among the players who
were granted leave of absence for the Continent, to
accompany the Earl of Leicester. This troupe produced Hamlet
at Antwerp in 1586. But as
stated in Halliwell-Phillips' "Outlines of the Life of
Shakspere," London, 1883, he purchased "New Place" at
Stratford-on-Avon for sixty pounds, and later acquired
adjoining land. He was very litigious and prosecuted many
petty suits, the papers in some of which are still
extant. And here
come under consideration his five existing signatures, each
in a different and perfectly uneducated
hand-writing _________ *
Translator's Note:--Two or three other letters to
Shakspere are extant, but for obvious reasons none
from him. All letters to him were regarding petty
loans,--nothing to remotely suggest an interest in
literature, but quite the reverse. Halliwell-Phillips "Outlines" Note of Halliwell and Furnival: "Accounts of the Treasurer of the Chamber" Sign for bloted ./. oftener with only one dot
63
Malone: An inquiry into the authenticity, etc. London 1796, p. 177 with the side note: "bloted" by William Shakspere, the
name being, however, almost illegible. It should also be
noted that "bloted" signifies the same as is now meant, in
the case of an illiterate who makes a cross or "His mark"
instead of the signature, his name being added by the
scribe. In fact, a heavy point with a small diagonal stroke
is all there is to Shakspere's signature. We conclude from this that he was an illiterate who
had to substitute his mark for his name. In his last will and testament not a syllable is
mentioned concerning MSS. of plays, nor yet of any books. It
is an open question whether in addition to being unable to
write, he was not also unable to read! Halliwell-Phillips also notes that his name no longer
appeared in the theatre lists after his return to Stratford.
Not until 1604, after the accession of James I., is he named
among the "King's Players." He purchased a property in
Blackfriars, London, in 1613, but it is not stated whether
the business was not done from Stratford. This property was
the legacy for his daughter Judith.* Concerning his intellectual knowledge and interests,
nothing is known, which is at least an evidence that in his
own time he was recognized only as an actor with no poetic
talent. Concerning the etymology of the family name Shakspere,
it is stated that the family had sprung from a Norman,
"Jacques Pierre." These two names, spoken rapidly in English
and run together were easily changed into Shakspere, and the
name was so employed by the actor and his family. The exhaustive investigations which have been made
concerning the actor Shakspere have only yielded the above
meagre results and utterly fail to justify the credulity of
a later age in according to him a fame far, far above any
possible deserts. All else that has been said regarding the actor has
been made up of pure suppositions for which no shred of
evidence can be found, and which are only maintained and
believed by those who hold to false "historical"
traditions. So reads the heading of an article which follows the
preface in an English edition of the Plays in which the life
histories of the actor and of the poet are ascribed to one
person. It is worth while to follow the interest which is
shown in _________ * Translators' Note: Judith was also an illiterate. At
the age of 26 she signed, with her mark, legal papers still
extant.
64
these articles regarding Shakespeare, as efforts are
still being made to identify the unproven legends of the
actor with the personality of the poet, entirely
disregarding the fact that the names of the actor and the
poet are different, and the further fact that the records do
not furnish us a single authentic proof that the actor
William Shakspere was also a poet. We read the following sentences in the edition of the
Chandos Classics (London: Henry Frowde, Oxford University
Press, Warehouse Amen Corner EC): --"A life of peace and prosperity furnishes but little
matter for a chronicle." --"We have no authentic anecdotes of the
'Myriad-minded Man,' as Coleridge terms him, only imperfect
and apocryphal traditions." --"His paternal ancestor is believed to have
fought at Bosworth Field." --"The boyhood of Shakespeare till he was ten years
old was spent probably in a manner well adapted to
foster his genius." (!!!) --"From about the time Shakespeare completed
his eleventh year, the prosperity of the family waned--in
1578 John Shakespeare (the father) was unable to pay poor
rates and was left untaxed. During these eleven years his
gifted son was receiving his early education at the free
grammar school of Stratford--of the where or how that
education was completed we have no records. That his
days of youthful study ended early we may, however,
conjecture, as he married at the age of eighteen."* --"We may believe that he had by some wild boyish
freak given annoyance to the "Justice," and thus added
another motive to those which disposed him to leave
his Warwickshire home. Doubtless but little inducement
was, however, required to lure him into the world of
famous men,** whose renown then filled the length and
breadth of the land, and whose grand memories surrounded his
own, lightening the age of Elizabeth with a galaxy of
statesmen and heroes." With such statements as: "probably" or "we believe" or
"doubtless but little inducement was required," a biography
is constructed out of pure supposition without one
positive fact, as the very first sentence frankly admits
that there are no authentic records concerning his
life and his studies! In the continuation we read: "As it is supposed (he) became an actor and
adapter of plays for the Blackfriar's Theatre--in 1598 he was
able to purchase a share in it, and from that time his fame
and good fortune grew rapidly. His dramas became
known--" In Shakspere's Will this Blackfriar's property is not
mentioned at all as a "share," but as a messuage or
tenement,-- _________ * Translator's Note: Francis did not have time
to marry 'till his 46th year.--W.P. ** Translator's Note: (The relative dates of his
marriage, his departure from Stratford and the birth of his
eldest child suggest further
"inducements"!--W.P.) Albion Edition The Works of William Shakespeare, With Life and Glossary, prepared from the text of the folio and the quartos by the editor of the Chandos
65
Robert Greene a piece of real estate, therefore, which he bequeathed
to his daughter Judith. When we compare all these uncertain suppositions
regarding the actor with the old and reliable sources of
information which exist concerning other contemporary actors
and play-writers who have chronicled their works and
dramatic performances in book form, we find all these
imaginary embellishments of the actor Shakspere absolutely
meaningless and absurd. ATTENTION. We should say in advance that the entry of a work at
the Stationer's Office did not by any means fix the year of
its printing, which often took place much later. Among the pamphlets we find two names, which, like
their author, deserve attention. 1. Robert Greene, born in Norwich 1560, studied at
Cambridge, and took the degree of Master of Arts, was at
first a clergyman, who devoted himself to Philosophy,
especially Natural Science. He published the work:
"Planetomachia," but being, on account of his dissolute
life, removed from his clerical office, he became at last a
writer for the stage in London. As such there remain two of
his known works: "Orlando furioso," and "Alphonsus, King of
Arragon." At last he died in 1592 in great poverty in
London, shortly before his death publishing another book: "A
Quip for an upstart Courtier." It is claimed that three months after his death,
another book, "Groats-worth of Wit," already published, was
found among his few possessions. This claim, however, rests
only upon a work entered at the Stationers' Office in 1592
entitled "Kind Heart's Dream," by H. C. Even though this
book was really entered at the Stationers' in December,
1592, the year of its publication is still unknown. The preface of this "Kind Heart's Dream" by H. C. is
worthy of note, signed by Henry Chettle and reading as
follows: "About three months since died Mr. Robert Greene,
leav- ing many papers in sundry book-sellers' hands, among
other his Groats-worth of Wit, in which a letter written to
divers play makers, is offensively by one or two of them
taken; and because on the dead they cannot be avenged,
they wilfully forge in their conceits a living author; and
after tossing to and fro, no remedy but it must light
on
66
me. How I have all the time in my conversing in
printing hindered the bitter inveying against scholers it hath
been very well known; and how in that I dealt I can
sufficiently prove. With neither of them that take offense was
I acquainted, and with one of them at that time, I did
not so much spare as I since wish I had, for that I moderated
the heate of living writers and I might have used my
own discretion (especially in such case), the author being
dead; that I did not, I am sorry as if the original fault
had been my fault, because myself have seen his demeanor no
lesse civill, than he excelent in qualitie he professes:
Besides, divers of worship have reported his uprightness of
dealing, which argues his honesty, and his facetious grace in
writing, that approves his Art. For the first learning I
reverence, and at the perusing of Greene's book, stroke out what then
in conscience I though he in some displeasure writ: or
had it been true; yet to publish it were intolerable: him I
would wish to use no worse than I deserve. I had only in
copy this share; it was ill written, as sometimes Greene's hand
was none the best; licensed it might be, ere it could be
printed, which could never be it might not be read. To the
briefe, I writ it over; and as I could I followed the copy: only
in that letter I put something out, but in the whole book not
a word in; for I protest it was all Greene's, not mine, nor
Master Nash's, as some unjustly have affirmed." In this preface of Chettle's there is no evidence at
all that the work was printed in 1592. Chettle
describes only in general what Greene left and one badly
written MSS. to which he added nothing but omitted some
portions. He also assures us that the same was not composed
either by himself or Nash, but by Greene. But meanwhile
Greene was dead, and certain undesirable passages were
ascribed to him, Chettle, against which he protected
himself. Meanwhile this preface does not state either what
work is referred to nor yet the passages which gave
offense. When this preface of Chettle's was printed is nowhere
to be discovered as the title page of "Kind Heart's Dream"
shows neither date nor year. Also of Greene's "Groats-worth of Wit," there is no
copy extant of 1592, but only of 1596. It is therefore uncertain whether it has any
connection with this preface. One expression "shake-scene,"
printed in 1596, could easily have been changed to or from
Shake-speare!! Shakespeare was first made known in 1593 in the
dedication of "Venus and Adonis." Here first comes to public
notice Shake-Speare with the given name of the player
Shakspere--"William." If a pun was intended in the change of
name it could easily have been altered to
"Shake-scene." But Greene up to the time of his death was ignorant of
this ambiguous name, and could therefore hardly have made
use of the word-play "Shake-scene." New Shake-speare Society Shakespere Allusion Books, London 1874, Part 1, p. 1
67
Francis Meres "Palladis Tamia" London 1598 Perhaps the writing which appeared four years after
Greene's death was intended as an announcement to excite
curiosity, as the use of the deceased's name could not be
attacked. A second contemporary, Francis Meres (perhaps Mere
Francis), who is stated to have been a country pastor,
figures also as a literateur of that epoch. In his work:
Palladis Tamia; Wit's Treasury, the author calls himself
Master of Arts from Cambridge and Oxford on the title
page. He treats of the literary men of his day, and compares
the old classics with the historical works of his period. He
mentions twelve plays of Shake-speare, using the name as
here written. Whence had he in 1598 knowledge of twelve Shakespeare
plays? Up to that time, but two, Richard II and Richard III,
had flowed from the pen of the poet, "Shakespeare." Nor had the Sonnets of Shake-speare yet been printed
at that time; still he speaks of these as being the
creations of the author of Venus and Adonis. He takes for
granted that these also had flowed from the pen of the poet,
"Shake-speare." This again may be regarded as advertising praise for
the new poet. And many years later, in 1623, Ben Jonson repeats the
praise of Greene's "Groats-worth of Wit" and Meres'
"Palladis Tamia" with the word-play "Shake a Stage" in the
lines of his Eulogy: "--From thence to honour thee, I would not
seeke For names, but call forth thund'ring
Aeschyilus Paccuvius, Accius, him of Cordoua dead, To life againe to heare thy Buskin tread And shake a Stage; Or, when thy Socks were on, Leaue thee alone for the comparison Of all that insolent Greece, or haughtie Rome* Sent forth, or since did from their ashes
come. The merry Greeke, tart Aristophanes, Neat Terence, witty Plautus, now not please." Although we cite but few examples which show
criticisms of "Shake-speare" by his contemporaries, yet
these alone have the force of self-evident truth. For
following the chronological order of the publication of
Francis Tudor's plays under the pseudonym "Shake-speare,"
only the list in the Stationers' Office can be fully relied
upon. The documents of the Master of the Revels also
give some data regarding stage plays and new publications,
he having charge of the Court Entertainments in the time of
Elizabeth and James I. _________ * Jonson used exactly the same words in his eulogy of
Bacon printed in the "Discoveries" nine years after Bacon's
official death. See page 73. W. P.
68
To make a close examination of all the Shake-speare
Plays is not the purpose of this book, but only to bring
forward such as, in the selected plot, as well as in the
development of the same, reveal a tone--an echo from the
soul of the poet, and in harmony with his own life. As such we will first consider the Play of "Dr.
Faustus," published under the pseudonym of Marlowe. Here it must be noted that possibly neither Marlowe
nor Francis Tudor Bacon knew the German language, and could
perhaps hardly have become familiar with the tale of Faust,
until the first English translation of the "Faust-book" of
Frankfurt-am-Main in 1593. As Marlowe, however, reached the
end of his degraded life on June 6, 1593, he could scarcely
in this short time, after the appearance of the English
translation, have been able to master the problems of
philosophy as does Dr. Faustus. All branches of science with which Francis had from
youth made himself familiar, pass in review before the
intellect of the English dramatizer of Faust, under the
pseudonym of Marlowe, each judged according to its
value. The first struggle of Francis' youth is told in the
soliloquy in the first scene: "Settle thy studies, Faustus, and begin To sound the depths of that thou wilt profess, Having commenced by a divine in show, Yet level at the end of every art And live and die in Aristotle's works." Here the poet still stands in the first experience of
youth hemmed in by the scholastic doctrines of Aristotle,
which he later replaces with his own philosophy--that of the
far-seeing mature man of keenest perceptions. And note another passage! Irony, sharp and drastic, speaks in the following
lines: "Si una eademque res legatur duobus Alter rem, alter valorum rei, etc. A petty case of paltry legacies. Ex heriditari filium non protest pater nisi,
etc., Such is the subject of the Institute And universal Body of the Law. This study fits the mercenary drudge Who aims at nothing but external trash Too servile and illiteral for me."
69
Here lies the whole bitterness of his knowledge of
unjust fate--his disinheritance of the crown. And still more clearly sounds the self-instilled moral
teaching in the Epilogue of the Chorus, which appears for
the first time in the third rewriting and
publication: "Thus is the branch that might have grown full
straight And burned is Apollo's laurel bough That sometimes grew within this learned man. Faustus is gone: regard his hellish fall Whose fiendful fortune may exhort the wise Only to wonder at unlawful things Whose deepness doth entice such forward wits To practice more than heavenly power permits." Here we see one of the metaphors so often found in the
Shakespeare Plays. It is a warning: "Exhort the wise Only to wonder at unlawful things." As it refers apparently to the fate which overtook Dr.
Faustus as a consequence of his trials of magic, so the poet
here reminds himself of his own dangerous inquiries
regarding his birth, since the day when, after the death of
Sir Nicholas Bacon, his fate was first whispered to him. How
willingly would he have searched this out until fully
certain of the truth! "Then broke the branch that might have grown full
straight, And burned was Apollo's laurel bough." Such a bough was he himself, sprung from the first
glowing passion of Elizabeth and Leicester. In ripe manhood
he recognized the bounds which fate had set for him, and
knew that he must spend his life in the depths of
subjecthood. And to be fully conscious of the truth,--that
was the hardest fate of his
existence,--undone,--disinherited. This play which, owing to the lack of an English
translation of the Faust story, could hardly have come to
the knowledge of Marlowe, was published under this pseudonym
after his death, and was subjected at all events to a
peculiar, careful and repeated rewriting, such as Francis
was in the habit of giving to those of his early productions
which were written with an important purpose. Though the
Play was entered at "Stationers' Hall" Jan. 7, 1601, under
the pseudonym of the deceased Marlowe, the first published
edition appeared in 1604 perceptibly improved. In 1616,
however, appeared a third edition, materially
amplified. What friend would thus have undertaken such a
rewriting of the drama for Marlowe--dead these three and
twenty years?
70
And who would have stood for the then costly printing
for the benefit of the dead man? For Francis, the attraction in his age for the
mysteries of Magic, which had drawn him in his youth, lay in
his later years presumably in the ripened experiences of his
own life, which caused him to abandon magic and turn to the
more highly prized investigations of Nature. To master Nature, to surprise her mysteries, to
penetrate her secrets and hidden powers, to impress her into
the service of mankind,--this thought is finally reflected
in the wisdom of Faust, even as Francis portrayed it, in
allegorical form in the "New Atlantis." In Faust he coins
for it the words: "These metaphysics of magicians And necromantic books are heavenly: Lines, circles, scenes, letters and
characters; Aye, these are those that Faustus most
desires. Oh! what a world of profit and delight, Of power, of honor, of omnipotence Is promised to the studious artisan! All things that move between the quiet poles Shall be at my command . . . . . . . . . . A sound magician is a mighty god, Here, Faustus, tire thy brains to gain a
deity." Everywhere the reward of wisdom is brought forward.
Would a man submerged in debauchery like Marlowe, or a
play-actor without scientific education, like Shakspere, be
capable of such a longing for knowledge--such a high
appreciation of wisdom? In the Northumberland MSS. we have already encountered
the titles of two Plays which show the pseudonym
"Shake-speare" placed side by side with "ffrauncis
Bacon." Also the then forbidden piece: "The Isle of Dogs,"
which is attributed to Thomas Nash, Spedding has been able
to better explain when he writes that the adjoining words:
"Thomas Nashe, inferior places," having become practically
illegible through age and the smallness of the characters,
would more correctly give sense if read: "Thomas Nash,
inferior player." Writers of literary history have been led grievously
astray in attempting to discover notable differences in the
works of the dramatic writers of that day. A. H. Bullen, on the contrary, in his edition of the
works accredited to Marlowe, has emphasized the fact that it
would
71
Gesta Greyorum London 1688 "The tracts of the Prince of Purpoole" reprinted in Nichols' Progresses of Queen Elizabeth be very difficult to differentiate the fine lines of
demarcation in the works Henry VI, Edward II and others, in
order to ascertain positively whether or not they had
emanated from Marlowe's pen. Ben Jonson writes in his "Discoveries," "Cicero is said to bee the only wit, that the
people of Rome had equall'd to their Empire. Ingenium
par imperio. We have had many, and in their severall Ages, (to take
in but the former Seculum.) Sir Thomas
Moore, the elder Wiat; Henry, Earle of Surrey; Chaloner, Smith,
Cliot, B. Gardiner, were for their times admirable: and
the more, because they began Eloquence with us. Sir Nico:
Bacon, was singular, and almost alone in the beginning of
Queen Elizabeth's times. Sir Philip Sidney, and Mr.
Hooker (in different matter) grew great Masters of wit, and
language; and in whom all vigour of Invention, and strength
of judgement met. The Earle of Essex, noble and
high; and Sir Walter Raleigh, not to be contemn'd, either for
judgment or stile. Sir Henry Savile grave, and truly
letter'd; Sir Edwin Sandes, excellent in both: Lo. Egerton,
the Chancellor, a grave, and great Orator; and best, when hee was
provok'd. But his learned, and able (though unfortunate)
Successor* is he, who hath fill'd up all numbers**; and perform'd
that in our tongue, which may be compar'd or preferr'd, either
to insolent Greece and haughty Rome. In
short, within his view, and about his times, were all the wits borne,
that could honour a language, or helpe study. Now things
daily fall: wits grow downe-ward, and Eloquence grows
back- ward: So that hee may be nam'd, and stand as the
marke, and acme of our language." Ben Jonson knew the "Concealed Poet" "Shakespeare"
well, but though he was under obligation not to betray him,
he knew how, in these words, to raise an imperishable
monument to his genius. For purposes of analysis we propose to divide the
dramas, according to the lapse of time from their inception
to first publication, and their publication in the folio of
1623, into two groups: Such as were originally composed for
special occasions, either for the Court or for the Christmas
celebrations in Gray's Inn under the auspices of the
Barristers' Association, and those which were also composed
for the theatre. Mention has already been made (page 59) of the play
"The Prince of Purpoole" for the Gray's Inn Christmas Masque
1594-95. Further data regarding it can be found in the works
cited. Of greatest importance in this piece are the five
speeches by _________ * Translator's Note: That is Sir Francis Bacon, as the
marginal Catalogue of Writers states in the 1641 edition.
The word "acme" further down is in Greek letters in the
original text here quoted. Jonson's omission of Shakespeare
or Shakspere from this list seems to clinch the entire
argument. ** A clear reference (numbers) to poetic
production.
72
the five judges, which repeat the same philosophical
thoughts given in Solomon's House in the "New Atlantis," and
cover exactly the views expressed by Francis in Parliament,
and his proposals for State and Government Reform. In 1594 Francis inherited from his deceased
foster-brother a country palace, Twickenham Park, and on
November 17, 1595, he received from the Queen "the lease"
for this property for 21 years. Here he could at last live
in rural retirement, and meditate upon his "new inventions,"
this expression then signifying poetic work. The play: "The Prince of Purpoole" has experienced
many changes of title. On account of humorous complications
during its presentation at Gray's Inn it was called
thereafter: "The Prince of Error" and "Night of Errors,"
until for the folio edition it received its final name: "The
Comedy of Errors." in the edition of this play published
1922 by the University Press, Cambridge, the title page
gives no author's name, but the Frontispiece, opposite title
page is the portrait of--FRANCIS BACON!! Spedding refers especially to a festival poem for the
Coronation Anniversary of the Queen, November 17,
1595. This festival play was for a long time regarded as the
work of Robert, Earl of Essex, but we are indebted to
reliable sources for the assurance that it was the work of
Francis Bacon. "Sydney Papers I," 360 and 62. Also a letter from
"Rowland Whyte to Sir Robert Sidney, 1595." Also "Nichols'
Progresses of Queen Elizabeth: Entertainments given to the
Queen at York House 17 November 1595." All of these sources
furnish full evidence that even at that day the poetic work
of Francis Bacon was recognized. Spedding also takes the same position regarding the
"Bacon Devices for the Queen" and recognizes them by
contents as well as style, as his creation. There is worthy of notice in this festival play the
inwoven allegory, from a West Indian legend which is again
repeated in Midsummer Night's Dream: An Indian Princeling
comes to England in fulfillment of a prophecy representing
allegorically England's great colonial possessions there.
Here Francis has also introduced into the play Raleigh's
discoveries in the Amazon territory, and the frustrating
influence of Essex's ambition. On this account the Poet (Bacon) composed a sonnet,
which was probably not produced on this occasion. But as
Spedding found it among the MSS. examined, it is, therefore,
added hereto: Spedding: Life and Letters of Francis Bacon, Vol. 1, p. 325 Sydney Papers I, p. 360/62 Gibson's Papers VIII, No. 270 and 118 Spedding: Life and Letters of Francis Bacon, Vol. 1, pp. 387-91
73
Spedding: Life and Letters of Francis Bacon, Vol. 1, pp. 388-9. A Sonnet Midsummer Night's Dream "Resuscitatio" 1671, p. 55. "Certain Miscellany Works of the Right Honorable Francis Lord Verulam Viscount St. Alban "The Attendant or Conductor to the Indian Prince.
He repeats the oracle in this Sonnet before the
Queen: Seated between the Old World and the New A land there is no other land may touch, Where reigns a Queen in peace and honour true Stories or fables do describe no such. Never did Atlas such a burden bear As she, in holding up the World opprest: Supplying with her virtue everywhere Weakness of friends, errors of servants best, No nation breeds a warmer blood for war And yet she calms them by her policy: To her thy son must make his sacrifice If he will have the morning of his eyes." The Indian Prince is born blind. What a
metaphor for Bacon! Born blind to their parentage were both
of Elizabeth's sons--she only possessed the power to open
their eyes. In "Midsummer Night's Dream" we find scenery with
nymphs and similar allegorical presentations, such as
occurred plentifully in Kenilworth Park, and Moonlight
feasts such as were offered on its heaths and among its
shrubbery in honor of Elizabeth. And whoever looks deeper into the symbolism of the
Midsummer Night's Dream cannot fail to be reminded of poor
Amy Robsart's vain and pitiful lamentations, and Leicester's
duplicity between her and the Queen. The play of "Henry VIII" bears a certain relation to
the "Miscellanies," which are closely related to the
"Resuscitatio." These contain two folio pages concerning the
commencement of the reign of Henry VIII. I. An Advertisement touching an Holy Warre. II. An offer to our late Soveraigne King James of
England. (London: Printed by John Haviland for Humphrey Robinson, 1629.) III. The History of the Reigne of King Henry the
Eighth. (London: Printed by John Haviland for Humphrey Robinson, 1629.) In the Folio of 1623 the Play is entitled: "The Famous History of the Life of King Henry
the Eight." No earlier edition, not even a quarto copy, has ever
been found. Concerning this book there have been advanced
many hypotheses by the Shakespearians. A letter of Sir
Henry
74
Wotton of July 6, 1613, who became Rector of Eton in
1624, states that: "The King's Players had a new play called 'All is
True,' representing some principal pieces of the reign of
Henry the Eighth." This piece, writes Wotton, was produced with
extraordinary appointments including the firing of mortars,
on June 29, and set fire to the Globe Theatre, which was
built of wood and straw. There are no other mentions of this
Play. As Wotton, however, mentions the Prologue to "All is
True," and the same is identical with that in the Folio
edition of Henry VIII, the identity of the two works is
possible, only the title being changed. In Elizabeth's time it may have been necessary to make
many changes in the text, above all in the form and content
of Wolsey's words regarding his fall. At all events Wolsey
is idealized and his feelings regarding his sudden and
precipitous fall, sound like the echo of the thoughts which
were later to fill Francis' heart when overtaken by the same
fate.* . . . . . . "Nay then, farewell: I haue touch'd the highest point of all my
Greatnesse, And from that full Meridian of my Glory, I haste now to my setting. I shall fall Like a bright exhalation in the Euening, And no man see me more." This passage in Act II, Scene 2, appears also as a
soliloquy, composed perhaps by Francis, and in the rewriting
of the play for the Folio, clothed in these words which he
puts in Wolsey's mouth: "Farewell? A long farewell to all my
Greatnesse. This is the state of Man; today he puts forth The tender Leaves of hopes; to morrow
Blossomes, And beares his blushing Honours thicke vpon
him: The third day, comes a Frost; a killing Frost, And, when he thinks, good easie man, full
surely His Greatnesse is a-ripening, nippes his
roote, And then he fals as I do. I haue ventur'd Like little wanton Boyes that swim on
bladders: This many Summers in a Sea of Glory, At length broke vnder me, and now ha's left me Weary and old with Seruice, to the mercy Of a rude streame that must foreuer hide me. Vain pompe and glory of this World, I hate ye, I feele my heart new open'd. Oh how wretched _________ * It is not impossible, and in fact, seems quite
probable, that this play in the Folio form, the only one
known to us, was not written until 1621 or later, after
Bacon's similar experience.
75
Dr. Faustus under pseudonym Marlowe Is that poore man, that hangs on Princes'
fauours? There is betwixt that smile we would aspire
too, That sweet Aspect of Princes, and their ruine, More pangs, and fears than warres, or women
haue; Neuer to hope againe." And againe the self-accusation: By that sinne fell the Angels: how can man
then (The image of his Maker) hope to win by it? Loue thyself last: cherish those hearts that hate
thee; Corruption wins not more than Honesty." And is it not like a direct laudation of Francis, when
Griffith, servant of the fallen Wolsey, speaks in Act IV,
Scene 2, to Katharine of Arragon, the deposed queen: "He was a Scholler, and a ripe, and good one: Exceeding wise, faire spoken and perswading! Lofty, and sowre to them that lou'd him not; But, to those men that sought him, sweet as
Summer, And though he were vnsatisfied in getting, (Which was a sinne) yet in bestowing, Madam, He was most Princely: euer witnesse for him Those twinnes of Learning, that he rais'd in
you, Ipswich and Oxford: one of which, fell with
him, Vnwilling to out-liue the good that did it. The other (though vnfinished) yet so Famous, So excellent in Art, and still so rising, That Christendome shall euer speake his
Vertue. His Overthrow, heap'd Happinesse upon him: For then, and not till then, he felt himselfe, And found the Blessednesse of being little. And to adde greater Honors to his Age Then man could giue him, he dy'de fearing
God." These passages certainly prove that the play was not a
work of Francis' youth. But in addition to the resignation
with which he here speaks as a great statesman concerning
his fall, the attention is still more attracted to the
praise poured upon the infant Elizabeth at the time of her
christening in the speech of Cardinal Cranmer to the King,
Act V, Scene 4: "This Royal Infant, Heauen still moue about
her; Though in her Cradle: yet now promises . . . . .
." Here follow all the blessings which are to be
fulfilled upon her and upon England when she becomes queen
(italics by the writer): "God shall be truly knowne and those about
her, From her shall read the perfect ways of
Honour, And by those claime their greatnesse; not by
Blood. The Bird of Wonder dyes, the Mayden Phoenix, Her ashes new create another Heyre, As great in admiration as herselfe. So shall she leave her Blessedness to
One, (When Heauen shal call her from this clowd of
darkness)
76
Who, from the sacred Ashes of her
Honour Shall Star-like, rise, as great in fame as she
was, And so stand fix'd. Peace, Plenty, Loue, Truth,
Terror That were the Seruants to this chosen Infant, Shall then be his, and like a Vine grow to
him; Where euer the bright Sunne of Heauen shall
shine, His Honour and the greatness of his
Name Shall be, and make new Nations; he shall
flourish And like a Mountain Cedar, reach his branches, To all the Plaines about him: Our Childrens
Children Shall see this and blesse Heauen." The King, to whom the birth of a daughter instead of
the desired son was a great disappointment, recognizes in
these words of Cranmer's a comfort, and at the same time a
prophetic oracle. He answers the Archbishop: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. This Oracle of comfort ha's so pleas'd me." This prophecy was fulfilled. From the ashes of the
maiden-phoenix arose the heir of her spirit in the person of
Francis Bacon Tudor, Elizabeth's rejected and dethroned son,
still greater in wisdom, and leaving behind him those
imperishable evidences of genius, upon which Europe and the
whole civilized world gaze in wonder. When will England at last recognize this great heir of
the house of Tudor, this fixed star of prophecy in Francis
Tudor--called Bacon as the Philosopher, and Shakespeare as
the poet--as the greatest genius in her history? And at the
same time thrust from his usurped throne the uneducated
Actor--scarcely noticed in his own day--Shakspere of
Stratford. Some critics of the Play of Henry VIII believe it to
be the one in the construction of which the poet exercised
the least care, but on the contrary, all scholars at present
agree that the Tragedy of Hamlet as given in the Folio of
1623, called forth the Poet's finest and most painstaking
labor. To set forth here all the hypotheses of the adherents
of the player "Shakspere" as the Poet, would exceed the
purpose of this book. It will be much more to the point to
search for the arguments which, rightly judged from the
internal evidences of the dramas, point indubitably to
Francis Tudor as the author. To occupy ourselves first with the earliest notices of
this play, we find from contemporaries that it had already
been presented with great applause in 1585 and
1586--according to both Nash's and Henslow's accounts. They
also state that the father's Ghost appeared upon the
stage. The Danish historian, Saxo, with the nom-de-plume
Gram- The Tragedy of Hamlet Prince of Denmark
77
Halliwell-Phillips "Outlines," p. 175 maticus, who died as Provost of Roeskild in 1204,
tells nothing about a Ghost in his history: and other old
sources of the Hamlet story tell also of no appearance of
the Ghost. This must, therefore, be the direct invention of
the dramatist. "Hamlet" was registered at the Stationers' in 1602,
but was first published in 1603. It was then in quite
incomplete form of which two specimens only are now extant;
but it apparently satisfied the tastes of the theatre-goers
of the day to judge by the applause which it
received. Concerning this play, as originally presented with
comic by-plays, Halliwell-Phillips says: "It is worth notice that the incident of Hamlet
leaping into Ophelia's grave, now sometimes omitted,
was considered in Burbage's time to be one of the most
striking features of the acted tragedy, and there is a high
probability that a singular little incident of by-play, enacted by
the first grave-digger, was also introduced at the Globe performances. The once popular stage-trick of
that personage taking off a number of waistcoats one
after another previous to the serious commencement of his
work, is an artifice which has only been laid aside in
recent years. The Tragedy, which appeared in 1604, bore the
title: "The Tragicall Historie of Hamlet, Prince of
Denmarke, by William Shakespeare, newly imprinted and enlarged
to almost as much again as it was according to the true
and perfect Coppie." This was the second Quarto edition which is
still extant. Again greatly altered and improved the Tragedy
appeared in new edition in 1605 and 1611, in which
rewritings, however, certain characters bore new
names. For instance, in the edition of 1603 Polonius was
called Corambis; and his servant, instead of Reynaldo,
Montano. Also certain scenes were changed and reversed. The
final rendering of text and division into acts and scenes
are given us in the Folio of 1623. To scrutinize the drama more carefully it must be
emphasized that the original material offered in the Hamlet
story underwent important changes in the poet's
hands. In riper age and after all the vast experience of life
through which Francis Tudor had passed, the motif of the
drama might well appeal to him with double force, and the
play seem well worthy of a fundamental revision. He had as
Statesman learned the weakness of the government of his own
land, as well as the mismanagement of the two Cecils, and
already perceived in the rising indignation of the people,
especially the Puritans, the heralds of a future
revolution. In accord with his principle that the Theater should
be an educational institution, and because he felt himself
called to
78
put forth his best endeavors for the good of mankind,
he regarded the material of Hamlet as practical, furnishing
an example in the ruin of Denmark, which could be brought
forward as a warning to his own land. The last version of this play, in the folio 1623,
therefore, shows increased and carefully thought-out
allusions, partly in plainly expressed sentences, and partly
in metaphors, which clearly refer to the English
Court. The episode of adultery, which is the central point of
the play as given before the Danish Court, was in the
original story, and not invented by the poet,--in short, it
pictured the immorality of the Court. To transfer this in
detail to the Court of Elizabeth gives instant rise to a
variety of suppositions. Yet the portrayal was not of
violations on the part of Elizabeth, but of the twice
unfaithful Leicester, who contracted two secret marriages
after his marriage with the Queen. There is no evidence of any infidelity to him on the
part of Elizabeth, but only of her coquetry with her various
wooers, all of whom she finally rejected. But immorality was
very prevalent, and under her successor, James, all manners
of scandals permeated the Court so that Francis could well
hold up the mirror to his time in this play. But the principal character, Hamlet, interests us more
than the motif. He is easily identified with the Poet
himself, who knows so well how to portray his resemblance to
the character of the disinherited Prince. Whether all the circumstances in each case are
identical is unimportant; but the inner struggles, the
feelings in Francis' case, toward his mother, who alone had
the power to acknowledge his father as Prince Consort, and
thereby himself, her first born son, as heir apparent, would
naturally cause the woes of the disinherited Hamlet to
awaken in him a manifold echo of his own bitter years. He
had necessarily been obliged to simulate ignorance all his
life. How often would he appear to himself as
abnormal--stunned--hardly grasping the reality of his
situation in the strained meetings with his mother! These
are soul-throes into which the outsider can never enter, but
all the more could he portray himself in the role of the
insanity-simulating Hamlet. Unfortunately Francis had been no stranger to
insanity, as he watched its inroads for years upon his
dearly loved foster-mother, Lady Ann Bacon, and beheld to
his sorrow,
79
[Picture 3] 80
how, owing to the
strifes in the Protestant Church which at last gripped her too
passionately as an adherent of the Puritans, she sank into a
religious mania. We find Francis'
profound psychiatric knowledge shown in the cases of mental disease
which his plays present, as in Lady Macbeth, in Ophelia, in King
Lear. In every instance he shows the fundamental character of the
individual altered through the diseased mind,--deformed, filled with
illusions, or with moral obliquities developed to the highest
degree,--in short the most varied pathological
pictures. The fundamental
tones which speak at the outset in the Tragedy of Hamlet, are
Melancholy and Discontent, two sentiments in themselves readily
comprehensible in the disinherited, and present a thousand-fold in
Francis, and which he, delving ever more deeply into philosophy, at
last smothered in resignation. But here in Hamlet he shows us both,
in pathological coloring, in a riot of a thousand words, now in
sarcasm, now in a subtle irony, now in utter weariness of life. To
what extent he feigns insanity--to what extent the madness
finally masters him,--therein also the poet offers us a most
interesting example of a pathological problem, almost beyond the
limits of comprehension. He desires to feign insanity, but his
nerves already greatly overstrained give way before the terrible
illness. To probe the
individual personalities in the dramas which in part at least seem to
have been taken from life, and to endeavor to determine which
contemporaries served as models, so to speak, might seem to rob the
poet of his creative power. Nevertheless it must not be forgotten
that theatrical presentation often served as the scourge of the
great. And so one can not
go far astray if one finds in Richard III with the crippled form,
many points of resemblance to Robert Cecil, son of the great Lord
Burghley: Now that the recently published Hatfield MSS. have for the
first time revealed the criminal deeds and intrigues of the two
Cecils, we can understand that Francis in his Essay on Deformity,
draws his comparisons showing how the Envy of the cripple, who
measures himself with normal men, often warps his character and
indeed furnishes him in place of the lacking bodily power, with a
greater wit and cruelty, and with the cleverness and inventive
ability to exercise them. And how grievous
is his picture of this degeneracy in the blood-thirsty Tyrant Richard
III. Read the self accusation of this King when he
says: Callander
of MSS. of
the Marquis of
Salisbury. Preserved
at Hatfield
House Edited by
the Historical
MSS. Commission, London
1883-88
81
Third Part of King Henry VI. "I that haue neyther pity, loue, nor feare, Indeed, 'tis true that Henrie told me of: For I haue often heard my Mother say I came into the world with my Legges forward, Had I not reason (think ye) to make hast And seeke their Ruine that vsurp'd our Right? 'The midwife wonder'd, and the Women cri'de O! Isus bless us, he is borne with teeth!' And so I was, which plainly signified, That I should snarle and bite, and play the
dogge: Then, since the Heauens haue shap'd my Body
so, Let Hell make crook'd my Minde to answer it. I have no Brother, I am like no Brother: And this word (Loue) which Greybeards call
Diuine Be resident in men like one another, And not in me: I am my selfe alone." Indeed, we find a second likeness of the two Cecils,
father and son, in Hamlet, in the flatterer Polonius and in
the younger Guildenstern. Horatio, Hamlet's friend, could,
however, be compared with Francis' close friend and
foster-brother Anthony. Though these be, indeed, but my
individual thoughts which the reader of these plays may
regard as he pleases, one can perhaps recognize in the
characteristics of these three persons a justification for
the poet's selection of his models. Through the Cecils and
in consequence of their intrigues, Francis was certainly
cheated of his birth-right, as William Cecil from the
beginning of Elizabeth's reign continually encouraged her in
her refusal to permit the elevation of Leicester to the rank
of Prince Consort. Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, was
later influential in causing Francis' fall as Lord
Chancellor, and in all these intrigues Francis appreciated
with full penetration the despicable character of the
Cecils, father and son. That a secret existed between Anthony Bacon and
Francis Tudor is plainly shown by the subtle allusions in
their letters and in their occasionally recorded
conversations. Anthony's sympathy for Francis shows itself in
tenderest form in his tireless willingness to go to the
extreme of self-endangerment as surety for Francis' debts;
and in no case can be found the slightest reproach on
Anthony's part. It is true that Francis received nothing
from the Bacon family estate, and was, indeed, entitled to
nothing, but shared continually the bounty, now of his
foster-mother, and now of the brother Anthony. Brought up in
the great style of the house of the Lord Keeper, accustomed
early to the French court, and then suddenly thrown upon his
own resources, with all the inherited extravagant tendencies
of Leicester,--who could ever regard this man, the grandson
of Henry VIII. as aught but a
82
Grand Seigneur? Anthony at all events seems to have
firmly so regarded him. But, thanks to his powerful and
governing genius, Francis learned to feel himself at home in
the solitude of Twickenham Park, in order to meditate in
this Tusculum upon his "new inventions," meaning obviously
his intellectual creations, in part at least poetic.* We
obtain a deeper insight into the friendship of these two
men, Francis and Anthony, from the last will and testament
of the latter, who, dying before Francis, made him his sole
heir, bequeathing to him Gorhambury and estates in
Herefordshire. How deep is the friendship portrayed between Hamlet
and Horatio! Hamlet appears in the first scene as the
younger, perhaps in the thirties, passionately aroused, and
yet of melancholy temperament, which caused him many a
struggle. The whole tragedy of his life rests upon
him. Horatio, the elder and more discreet, faithful unto
death, accompanies him through the perplexities of his
troubled spirit. He is represented as the faithful participant in the
dark and fateful secrets of the impending tragedy and it may
readily be thought that Anthony served as the model. One metaphor in the drama should also be noticed, of
the double meaning of which only Horatio is cognizant. In
Act III, Scene 2, Hamlet has the players produce a play of
his own composition referring to the events at the court. So
keenly works its poignancy that the new Danish King is
unable to hear it to the end. The Hall of the Castle is
emptied, and only Hamlet and Horatio remain, whereupon
Hamlet now speaks of the result of his Play: "Why let the strucken Deere go weepe; The Hart vngalled play: For some must watch and some must sleepe; So runnes the world away. Would not this sir, and a Forrest of Feathers, if the
rest of my Fortunes turn Turke with me; with two
Provin- ciall Roses on my rac'd Shooes, get me a Fellowship
in a crie of Players, Sir?" Hor.--"Halfe a share." Ham.--"A whole one I, For thou dost know: Oh Damon deere This Realme dismantled was of Iove himselfe, And now reigns heere, A verie, verie,--Pajocke!" Hor.--"You might have Rimed." Ham.--"Oh good Horatio, Ile take the Ghost's word
for a thousand pounds." _________ * In Bacon's Promus, fol. 109, front, he used the
expression: --"Ye Law at Twicknam for mery tales." W. P.
83
Here is a reference to the "concealed poet"--to the
Dramatic Poet, who will save two badges of his dethronement
as compensation for his lost inheritance: 1. A forest of feathers. 2. Also two provincial roses. Here is a play upon two
emblems which we find portrayed in the Emblem-book of 1612,
entitled "Minerva Brittana" (sic). In this book, where the
titles of Francis are enumerated, and placed, veiled, in the
Quarto and Folio editions of the so-called Shake-speare
Plays, both before and after the death of Elizabeth, he
signs himself first: "The Prince, Prince of Wales," and
there is shown on the back side of the title-page the symbol
of the rank of the Prince of Wales, the Three Feathers with
the motto: "Ich dien," surrounded by a garland of white and
red roses with the thistles of Scotland. Also later his
veiled name may be read: "Francis I, King of Great Britain
and Ireland." Of the secrets of this Emblem-book the most intimate
friends were doubtless cognizant, those who recognized in
Francis both the dethroned heir-apparent, and the Poet
Shake-speare, and who, therefore, rightly understood the
metaphors in his plays. As, with these references to Hamlet, we close our
consideration of its innumerable double-meaning passages, we
must also, with reference to the above-cited emblems, touch
upon the peculiar and wonderfully inventive method of the
so-called Bacon Secret Writings. The literature regarding
them is so extensive that it would require a work by itself
and is beyond the scope of this book. Toby Matthews was also deep in Francis' secrets and
lived until 1655. Through him the afterworld has received a
number of Francis' letters, which, however, were not
published until 1660, after Matthews' death. This collection
entitled: "A Collection of Letters made by Sir Tobie
Matthews" bears the simple inscription: "To a Friend," which
implies that Matthews was the recipient. In these letters
the greatest caution is evidenced not to betray anything
which the writer would not desire to be known even after his
death, and no one knows to what extent Matthews was guided
by Francis' instructions. At all events, dates and names are
omitted from this publication--in short everything which
would tend to the revealing of any mysteries. In Birch's edition of Bacon's works we come upon
another letter also without date and addressed from Matthews
to Francis, which is very important to the Bacon
investigator. The
84
original of this letter from Matthews to Francis is
preserved in the British Museum. As this letter is addressed to Lord St. Alban it must
have been written after his elevation to that rank, Jan. 27,
1621. Whoever has followed Matthews' life after his
reinstatement at the English Court, and his continuous
friendship for Francis, in order to better estimate the
relations between the two men, knows that Matthews on April
18, 1923, accompanied Charles, Prince of Wales, upon his
fruitless bridal journey to Spain. In this letter Matthews
thanks Francis "for the great and noble token"--a
magnificent intellectual creation, not more closely
described,--so much at least these few words indicate. But
of still greater value is the postscript which follows the
letter in these words: "The most prodigious wit that ever I knew of my
nation, and of this side of the sea is of your Lordship's
name-- though he be known by another." Here is indicated past question, a pseudonym which
Francis had adopted, and the Great Folio, just published by
Francis St. Alban (under another name) was certainly a
"great and noble token." These partly veiled indications, as well as the
omission of all betraying information in Francis' letters to
Matthews speak volumes regarding a well considered caution
against the betrayal of an existing important mystery. But
if such a secret was to be guarded even beyond the time of
Francis' death, it must have been of such scope, that it
should not only hide the Poet Francis Bacon St. Alban under
a nom-de-plume, but also conceal a far more important
personage as the author, namely, the masked Prince, who, by
reason of his birth, belonged upon the throne. Had all been
forcibly exposed at that time, the Stuart would have lost
his right to the crown. But that was not Francis'
purpose. This motive must be grasped as the cardinal point in
his life and character, and only in so doing do we get a
true impression of his real greatness.
85
Quarto Editions of the Plays PUBLICATION
OF THE PLAYS 1. The
Historical Plays. It is
important in following the Plays to their completion,
relative to the enrichment of their contents and the
refinement of their style, to distinguish among their
various editions from the time of their first appearance
until their issuance from the press. Here it
is most important to compare how the Quarto editions differ
from the Folio of 1623 in lacking many words and sentences
which later appear. In Dec.,
1597, Francis began his dictionary entitled: "The Promus of
Formularies and Elegancies" (see p. 58). In some
of the Quarto editions of the plays many expressions from
this word-treasury,--some formed anew by Francis,--some of
them from other languages,--are not to be found, but appear
later in the Folio. The
Quartos also lack many of the metaphors with which the Folio
is enriched. In addition these are so plainly allusions to
occurrences which took place at the Court, or scenes in
Parliament are so distinctly indicated, that they could only
have been portrayed by a poet who had actually witnessed
them. In those days there were no newspapers, and still less
were they likely to be divulged in conversation, outside of
very narrow circles, within the hearing of the
people. The
reader's attention is also particularly drawn to the
numerous legal expressions, the correct representation of
the customs and proceedings in the courts of law, which only
one thoroughly initiated, himself a practitioner, could
possibly have introduced to such an extent and with such
accuracy and ease. These
constantly increasing allusions, always in accordance with
the facts, are brought out as coming direct from government
officials and dignitaries. In some of the later dramas the
mistakes of the Stuart government under James I are finely
mirrored. The
Quarto editions lack the division into Acts and Scenes which
first appears when the plays were worked over for the
Folio. When one
follows the Historical Plays one realizes that England can
boast to the full of such a dramatic presentation of her
history and her constantly increasing power, as is enjoyed
by no other land on earth.
86
From the ancient King of Scotland, Macbeth, onward,
past King John "Lackland;" through the life and death of
Richard II, the reigns of Henry IV, Henry V, three plays on
Henry VI, then Richard III, until at last it reaches Henry
VIII, showing also the great Queen Elizabeth as an infant at
baptism,--thus has Francis celebrated this great pageant in
matchless lines. In the Tragedy of King Lear, a ruler of Britain from
the realm of myth, Francis expresses his own views regarding
absolute monarchy. Here he alludes, as an opponent of Byzantine
glorification, to the absolution towards which James I
improperly strove; for he sees, looking far into the future,
in the yawning discontent of the people and the activity of
the Puritans, all the coming dangers, even to the fall and
destruction of the royal power. In place of the missing play of Henry VII, Francis has
left us a monument in his matchless historical work
concerning this reign. No monarch worthy of name in the
entire line is forgotten. The poetic representation extends,
even to the natural heir of Elizabeth, to the disinherited
son of this queen; in reference to this character,--himself,
the interwoven allegories are most delicate and ingenious.
To him, the son robbed of his earthly crown, fell the
compensation of genius in such measure that his name won
immortality not only in England, but throughout the entire
civilized world. We now follow the plays according to the dates of
their first appearance and their publication in which the
following authentic works serve us as guides. Besides the two editions of "Bacon's Works" by
Spedding and Birch the following are to be named: Sir Tobie
Matthews: Collection of Letters, London, 1660. Edmond
Malone: "An Inquiry into the papers and legal instruments
attributed to Shakespeare, Queen Elizabeth and Henry, Earl
of Southampton. Illustrated with facsimiles." etc. London,
1796. Halliwell-Phillips: "Outlines of the Life of
Shakespeare," London, 1883. By the same: "Shakespeariana. A
catalogue of the early editions of Shakespeare Plays and of
the Commentaries and other publications illustrative of his
works," London, 1881. "Marlowe's Works," edited by A. H.
Bullen, 3 Vol., London, 1885. "Unedited Tracts: Illustrating the manners, opinions
and occupations of Englishmen during the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries. Now first republished from the
original copies with a preface and notes," London, 1868.
"Accounts of the Revels
87
The two first publications of Shakespeare Also the numerous lists cited by Spedding of the
masques and Christmas presentations at Gray's Inn are named
as authorities. Philip Stubbs: "Observations on the
Elizabethan Drama, 1583." "State of the Drama in 1616,"
illustrated by a contemporary publication. In general it is demonstrated that there exist no
handwritten MSS. of the individual Plays except the speeches
in the Gray's Inn Christmas play of 1595, which were found
later in the Northumberland MSS. Furthermore, it is pointed out that the Folio of 1623
contains sixteen plays never printed before. In 1593 appeared "Venus and Adonis," the first
publication printed with the pseudonym "Shakespeare" not
spelled like the name of the actor. After this, the first
publication under this name, followed the second in 1594:
"The Rape of Lucrece." These were two sensual productions
such as Elizabeth preferred. Four years later the name Shakespeare next was seen
under the Tragedies "Rychard II and Rychard III." Meanwhile, however, several pieces had been played in
the theatre under the name of Shakespeare, which had not
been printed, and of the manuscript compositions of which
nothing is known. In 1596 and 1598 appeared the expressions of
appreciation already mentioned on page 67, under the
pseudonym of the deceased Greene in "Groatsworth of Wit,"
and in "Palladis Tamia," by a certain "Francis Meres," of
whose actual existence there is no real evidence. (Another
pseudonym for "merely Francis"?) In this last named work it is stated that during the
same year, 1598, twelve Shakespeare plays had already been
presented on the stage, but they are not named. As the chronological enumeration of the publication of
the plays according to their entry, and the citation to the
various original sources of information are here repeated,
the question at issue shall not, as is the custom with
certain critics and especially the partisans of Shakspere,
be repeatedly laid before the reader. With the enumeration
of the dates of publication all these points of controversy
are laboriously dragged forth in order to support the claims
of the Stratford Actor as Dramatic Author, for such is the
custom in England, from motives of purely personal and local
interest, despite the fact that they cannot carry weight in
the determination of the truth in the domain of
international literature. We consider first the historical plays in order of the
epochs depicted.
88
"The Life and Death of King John" appeared anonymously
in 1591 under the above title but with the added note: "As
it was (sundry times) publikely acted by the Queene's
Majesties Players in the honourable Cittie of
London." This notation is peculiar in that under Elizabeth
the players were not called the "Queen's" but the "Lord
Cham- berlain's Servants," or his players. In the second and third editions 1611 and again ten
years later, 1622, the title pages read: 1611 the initials
"W. Sh.," and 1622 the name W Shakespeare. It is known that
Francis had employed this pseudonym since 1593, and that he
did not affix it to his plays, till he had worked them over,
so that they might not be printed in the temporary and
partially incomplete form in which they had been presented
on the stage. Nor was the name affixed until after
Shakspere, the actor, had left London for Stratford--about
equivalent to an emigration to Australia today. The reason
of this emigration is obvious. "To the Gentlemen Readers: "You that with friendly grace of smoother brow Have entertained the Scythian Tamburlaine And given applause unto an infidel; Vouchsafe to welcome with like courtesie A warlike Christian and your countryman." Under whatever name this Play may first have figured,
its repeated reworking and its appearance in the Folio
edition are certainly Francis' work. "The Life and Death of Richard II." This Drama, as already told in the account of Essex's
treason, played a peculiar role for its composer, as it is
the only play which not only mirrored political events, but
was regarded by its promulgators as propaganda of Rebellion,
for the purpose of winning over the people. Here the views of the critics diverge, depending on
how they interpret the play, in view of the light thrown
upon it thro' Francis' secret writing. The piece, as may be supposed, was presented with the
Parliament Scene and the abdication of Richard II, which
were to add impetus to the uprising. After the earnest inquisition of Francis by Elizabeth
at Twickenham Park, the irritating passages were apparently
cut out, so that the court might have no cause of complaint,
and King John Richard II
89
Elizabeth herself be misled. That the play was acted,
however, in 1597 or perhaps earlier, with the Parliament
scene added, is shown by the papers in the Essex treason
case. How well Elizabeth guessed the object of all this,
namely, that she should be deposed thro' this rebellion, is
shown by her historically authenticated exclamation: "Know
ye not I am Rychard Second!" Whoever will cherish any doubt regarding this play,
and denies that the entire piece, from its first composition
and including alterations and omissions in the most
important scenes of this tragedy, came from one hand
and sprang from a most astute and deliberating brain, must
indeed be blinded to the truth. The improved and thoroughly worked-over edition
appeared finally in the Folio of 1623. The Trilogy from the Folio: Two parts of Henry IV and
Henry V is the successor of the older play entitled: "The Famous Victories of Henry the Fifth." Thus the play was entered at the Stationers' Guild in
1594, and again published in 1598. Later under James I, it
was published again without date, but unquestionably several
years before the Folio edition. Through the list of the "Lord Chamberlain's" players
it is shown that the play had been presented prior to 1588
and 9, as the actor Tarleton, who died in 1588, is given the
principal role. It is supposed that the first hasty edition
of the play bore the name of Marlowe as Author, but that
does not prove that the play was not one of Francis'
youthful productions in crude form; since for the theatre of
those days, quickly improvised plays sufficed, which
acquired literary value only later when worked over. For all these old historical plays the authors gleaned
their material from the old Chronicles which they
transformed as demanded by the stage, and which, according
to their composition, offered the poets rough or finished
material, often with additions at variance with the truth.
These facts must be reckoned with, and the finer the
ultimate version of the drama as produced for the Folio, the
more fully will be appreciated the poetic ability of the
Author. Henry IV first appeared, though in the first part
only, in 1598, and was entitled: "The History of Henry the Fourth; with the Battell
at Shrewsbury, between the King and Lord Henry
Percy surnamed Henrie Hotspur of the North. With the
humor-
90
ous conceits of Sir Falstaff. At London. Printed by P.
S. for Andrew Wise, dwelling in Paules Churchyard, at the
sign of the Angel." This same edition was four times reprinted--1599,
1604, 1608 and 1613. The Second Part appeared in print in 1600, and this
was the only edition of the Second Part of Henry the Fourth
during the lifetime of the Actor Shakspere. It was
entitled--"The Second Part of Henrie the Fourth, continuing
to his death and the coronation of Henry the Fifth, with the
humors of Sir John Falstaffe and swaggering Pistoll. As it
hath been sundry times publickly acted by the right
honorable, the Lord Chamberlain his servants. Written by
William Shakespeare. London, Printed by V. S. for Andrew
Wise and William Aspley." These plays were acted before Elizabeth at the court
at Whitehall, at the Christmas festival 1597-98, but are
said to have been previously acted at the theatre. The queen was specially amused at the comic character
of Falstaffe, as she possessed a great fancy for such
burlesques. Falstaff was the physical embodiment of the Actor
Shakspere, with his weaknesses drastically caricatured for
which Francis possessed especial ability. These intermediate Falstaff-scenes afforded the
amusement demanded by the theatre-going public, between the
tragic portions of the Play. The whole therefore possessed great attraction for the
people who loved its broad and drastic humor. Many apparent typographical errors are found in the
folio edition, which will only be mentioned now but will be
given consideration later in this work. In Henry V the reworking for the Folio is even more
noticeable. Under this title: "The Famous Victories of Henry the
Fifth," this piece was presented at the Globe Theatre in
1599. The play had previously appeared in print in 1594, and
appeared again in 1598, 1600 and 1602, with the title: "The
Chronicle History of Henry the Fifth with his battell fought
at Agin Court. Together with Ancient Pistol," and in all the
Quarto editions the author remained anonymous. The final publication in the Folio showed an entirely
new and amplified rewriting, for the contents were increased
by 3,500 lines. The Choruses were introduced in the Folio
and the play was first divided into acts and scenes. Henry V
91
Henry VI The tragedy of Henry VI furnishes a second trilogy of
historical value. This play was also completed step by step. In their original form the Plays sufficed for the
Theatre. In the Oxford Library are preserved two Quarto
copies of this original text, which constitute evidence of
how little of the pains taken with the Folio edition, was
bestowed on the Plays for stage purposes. The portion which corresponds to the first part of
this trilogy does not seem to have been published until the
Folio of 1623. The earliest edition of the second part dates from
1594 and is entitled: "The first part of the Contention betwixt the two
famous houses of York and Lancaster, with the death of the
good Duke Humphrey: And the banishment and Death of the Duke of Suffolke, and the Tragicall End of the
Proud Cardinal of Winchester, with the notable Rebellion of
Jack Cade. And the Duke of Yorkes first claim unto
the Crowne," London, 1594. In the next year, 1595, the third part was published,
entitled: "The true Tragedie of Richard Duke of York, and
the death of the good King Henry the Sixth, with the
whole contention between the two houses of Lancaster and
Yorke, as it was sundrie times acted by the Right Honorable
the Earl of Pembrooke his servants." London, 1595. The London Shakespeare Society had these two quartos
reprinted through Halliwell-Phillips. They are interesting
because of their comprehensive titles which show how the
contents were explained in detail in order to attract the
public. In the Folio of 1623 the three parts appear under the
titles: "The First Part of Henry the Sixt." "The Second Part of Henry the Sixt with the death
of the Good Duke Humphrey." "The Third Part of Henry the Sixt with the death
of the Duke of Yorke." As the old quartos bear the dates of 1594 and 1595,
though the play was presented in 1592, by the "Servants of
the Honourable Lord Strange," it is a question whether these
first presentations followed the text of the Quartos.
Perhaps they were much more shortened, written more hastily
as, for the theatre, gripping portrayals were most in
demand. At all events, in this tragedy are shown to the full
Francis' adaptive ability to interest the public and in the
last rewritings for the Folio that poetic genius which could
master all materials and recoin them in enduring
forms.
92
The tragedy of King Richard III is closely united with
Henry VI, and mention has already been made of its contents
(p. 82), but we will here note briefly the individual
editions of this Play. The first draft that was printed bore the
title: "The True Tragedie of Richard the Third: wherein
is shown the death of Edward the Fourth, with the
smother- ing of the two young Princes in the Tower, with
the lamentable end of Shore's wife, an example for all
wicked women. And lastly the conjunction and joining of
the noble Houses Lancaster and York." In 1844 Baron Field procured a copy of this first
edition of 1597 for the Shakespeare Society, and it has
therefore been possible for me to obtain a view of it. In
1598 the poet improved this first edition but both editions
appeared anonymously. In 1623 the play came out in the Folio with the text
of the Quarto edition of 1598 here and there altered, and
for the first time published under the pseudonym of
Shakespeare. The last dramatic picture from English history: King
Henry VIII, is discussed on pages 76-78, and we have there
stated that it ranks as the historical drama composed latest
in life, hence there are no early editions in question save
possibly the play of 1613 under the title: "All is True,"
and finally the folio edition entitled: "The Life of King
Henry VIII." PUBLICATION OF THE COMEDIES AND
TRAGEDIES. There is much interesting comment to be offered
regarding the other Plays, Comedies and Tragedies, which
appeared in the Folio of 1623 and, to consider them
carefully, especially the dramatic representation of various
forms of mental disease, opens a wide view of Francis'
knowledge of medicine,* as well as the depth of
philosophical thought, likewise set forth in his
Essays. In the historical plays, Francis was in great measure
confined to available material, as well as circumscribed in
many respects by his critical position in life, as a
legitimate Tudor by birth and a statesman by calling; but
when developing a neutral motif in the non-historical plays,
he could grant himself much more freedom to arrive at his
object as a dramatic writer, and at the same time exhibit as
in a mirror the ruling errors, passions and faults of his
contemporaries. _________ * Translator's Note: Madame Deventer followed for
years the profession of psychiatrist and alienist,
practicing in some of the leading institutions of Central
Europe. W. P. Richard III
93
The Tempest In these dramas we recognize the greater delicacy of
texture, intended for a higher class of readers and less for
the mere applause of the theater. Many of these plays were
first produced at Court, partly also as "masques" and
presented before audiences of Jurists and Advocates at
Gray's Inn before being turned over in part to the public
theater. Brief mention will here be made of the dates of origin
of the plays and of their various printed editions: "The Tempest" has been declared by Malone to be the
last composed of all the Plays, though it appears to us that
several of the plays were written much later. It shows a
knowledge of sea-faring matters which Francis might have
gained in part on his journeys to France, but more
thoroughly through his association with Sir Walter
Raleigh. His use of the sailors' tales regarding the devil
infested Bermuda Islands shows how his imagination loved to
dally with such enchanted isles, as repeated very similarly
in his New Atlantis. And indeed this similarity of the two
works betrays the identity of authorship, even as his
natural science essays on the Winds and the Sea call forth
the same thought. Malone declares that the play was not written before
1610 and the "Accounts of the Revels at Court" indicate that
it was produced for the first time in 1611; then again in
1613 at the wedding celebration of the Princess
Elizabeth. The storm which is described with technical accuracy
was, according to contemporary report, part of the
experience of the Expeditionary Ship Admiral, which brought
the first colonists to Virginia. The play was first published in the Folio
edition. The comparison made by critics that Prospero was the
Poet shows how the story of Prospero's loss of the Dukedom
of Milan through the machinations of jealous relatives
offers a remarkable counterpart to Francis cheated out of
his crown. And thus in fine allegory he typifies his muse by
Miranda, brought up amid all the dangers of the enchanted
isle. On the desert land the work of his poetic genius is
fulfilled. We know that later our poet no longer courted his
peerless Muse. He devoted himself rather entirely to Divine
Philosophy, demanding from her power and wisdom in order to
rise above his fate. When we add to the aforesaid, the further fact that
our poet, as we shall show in the last chapter, not only
bade farewell to his poetic muse, but finally devised a
cipher in which he
94
laid bare his fate to the afterworld, the words which
he puts into Prospero's Mouth (Act V, Scene 1) become all
the more pregnant with significance: ". . . . . . . . . . But this rough Magicke I heere abiure: and when I haue requir'd Some heauenly Musicke (which euen now I do) To worke mine end vpon their Sences, that This Airie-charme is for, I'le breake my
staffe Bury it certain fadomes in the earth, And, deeper than did euer Plummet sound, Ile drowne my booke." The comparison here brought forward, shows again how
much easier it was for Francis in the employment of
fictitious material to bring in poetic allusions regarding
his own fate, and the persons who were responsible for it,
as well as the various court intrigues and improprieties of
his time. "The Two Gentlemen of Verona" develops from an early
poem, at first in a somewhat fantastic form, the material
afforded by a Spanish pastoral romance, entitled "Diana."
The "Accounts of the Revels at Court" state that it was
presented as early as 1584* at Greenwich as a "Pastoral,"
entitled: "The History of Felix and Philomena." It's contents correspond with the later play: "The Two
Gentlemen of Verona," but as it is not possible to state the
exact extent of any later alterations, nothing can be
definitely said on this score. At all events, the facts gathered from the "Accounts
of the Revels at Court" and other authentic sources show
that while Shakspere the actor was still in Stratford,
Francis had already become the "concealed"
Court-Poet. "The Merry Wives of Windsor" was entered at
Stationers' Hall in 1602, entitled: "A most pleasant and excellent conceited Comedie
of Sir John Falstaffe and the Merrie Wives of Windsor.
En- termixed with sundrie variable humours of Sir Hugh,
the Welch Knight, Justice Shallow and his wise cousin
M. Slender. With the swaggering vaine of Ancient
Pistoll and Corporall Nym. By William Shakespeare. As it
has been divers times acted by the Honorable my
Lord Chamberlaine's servants. Both before her Majestie
and elsewhere." The printed is the same as of the Quarto editions of
the Shakespeare dramas already mentioned. As indication that this drama was not written by the
Actor, _________ * Two or three years before the Stratford boy came to
London. Did he telegraph the play on ahead of him? W. P. The Two Gentlemen of Verona The Merry Wives of Windsor
95
Measure for Measure The Comedy of Errors Much Ado About Nothing we may note therein the rehearsal of his youthful
escapades, where he appears as a poacher, which would hardly
have been to his taste. Concerning the rewriting of this
Play for the Folio we will speak later in our concluding
chapter. In the Folio edition we find the so-called
typographical errors, also the newly inserted scenes and
altered names,--all this necessitated by the ciphers
introduced therein by the writer and required the most
careful and accurate revision.* The comedy "Measure for Measure" appears only in the
Folio. According to the "Accounts of Revels at Court," it
was enacted on Dec. 26, 1604, before King James I. But the
material had been twice before made use of: once
dramatically in 1578, under the name: "The History of Promus
and Cassandra," by George Whetstone. And later as a novel in
1582, entitled: "The Rare Historie of Promus and Cassandra,
reported by Madame Isabella." This plot, which appears to have been employed in
three different works, and which brings up the law-question
of adultery, may well have interested Francis as a young
lawyer. At all events the drama, as it appears in the Folio,
is so replete with technical legal expressions, that it
could not possibly have been created save by one learned in
the law. The drama as produced at Court bore the pseudonym
of Shaxberd--a new spelling of the name, of which this is
the only specimen. As the King so interested himself in both the literary
and the philosophical works of Francis, it is quite possible
that he would be as well-known as a poet to James as he had
been to Elizabeth, under whatever pseudonym he might conceal
himself from the general public. Concerning the Comedy of Errors not much more need be
said, as it has already been mentioned on page 74. According to the "Gesta Grayorum" (Program of masques
at Gray's Inn) we know that it was written for the same and
was there produced in 1594 under the title: "The Prince of
Purpoole." It came into print under the new title in the
1623 Folio. The Comedy: "Much Ado About Nothing," is to be found
in a quarto edition of 1600 and the alterations for the
Folio are but slight. _________ * Translator's Note: Tradition says that Queen
Elizabeth on witnessing the performance of Henry IV was so
interested in Falstaff (See pp. 90-91), that she expressed a
desire to see how he would act if in love,--hence, the
creation of the "Merry Wives."
96
"Love's Labor's Lost" bears in the quarto edition the
title: "A Pleasant Conceited Comedie called Loves
Labours Lost. As it was presented before here Highness this
last Christmas 1598." It remained a favorite, sparkling comedy at Court and
was again given in 1605 in honor of Queen Anna of Denmark,
and was printed almost unchanged in the Folio.* "The Midsummer Nights Dream" is discussed as to its
contents on pages 105 and 106. This Comedy appeared in two Quarto editions in 1600,
and was an especial favorite at Court because of its
delicious legendary aroma. It is supposed to have been first
presented in 1595 on the Queen's Birthday at York House, and
regarded at first as a work by the Earl of Essex. Whether
the two brothers, Francis and Essex, worked on it together
is uncertain, but at all events, according to Spedding, who
believed Essex to have been falsely regarded as the
Author, he at least criticized, exerting his influence to
such an extent that certain passages inimical to his
ambitions and perhaps also Francis' Sonnet, were not
presented. Between 1595 and its first publication in 1600, it is
possible that Francis eliminated some of the passages more
directly flattering to the Queen, in order better to adapt
to the general public the form of the first printing which
in turn passed hardly altered into the Folio
Edition. "The Merchant of Venice" was entered and published in
1600, after having been previously mentioned by Meres in
1598. The quarto edition of 1600 bore the title: "The excellent History of the Merchant of Venice,
with the extreme cruelty of Shylock the Jew towards the
said Merchant, in cutting a just pound of his flesh. And
the obtaining of Portia by the Choyse of three caskets.
Pub- lished by I. Roberts." _________ * Translator's Note: In Act V of this play, supposed
to have been one of the earliest, if not the very first
dramatic "heir" of our poet's invention is found,--thrown
meaninglessly into the text--the Latin word
"Honorificabilitudinitatibus." This word occurs in
uncompleted form on the cover of the Northumberland MSS.
and, so far as known, no where else in literature in the
exact form permitting the following anagram: A rearrangement
of the letters of this word was discovered a few years ago
to make the remarkable sentence: "Hi ludi F. Baconis nati
tuiti orbi." These plays, F. Bacon's offspring, are
preserved for the world. Fully discussed in Sir Edwin
Durning-Lawrence's "Bacon is Shakespeare," New York, 1910,
McBride Co. Love's Labor's Lost The Midsummer Night's Dream Merchant of Venice
97
As You Like It Another quarto edition appeared in 1600 through the
bookseller Hayes, a trifle altered and entitled only "The Merchant of Venice." Here it should be remarked that in 1598 a Drama is
mentioned, by the untraceable Francis Meres,*
entitled: "A book of the Merchant of Venyse, otherwise
called the Jew of Venyse"--probably a first draft of the
afterward improved drama. As Francis' debts are known to have been heavy, and as
he was once sent for a visit to the Debtors' Prison, he
would certainly have had plenty of experience and
opportunity for psychological study of Usury and
Usurers.** His foster-brother Anthony may well have served as
model for the noble Merchant, Antonio, as his liberality
"many a time and oft" made him Francis' saviour from
financial embarrassments. The Comedy: "As You Like It," is to be found only in
the Folio edition. Malone has supposed it to have been entered at the
Stationers' in 1600 under the title of Love's Labour Won."
Perhaps Francis changed the name as being too similar to
"Love's Labour's Lost," but all remains in the realm of
uncertainty. Of much more significance is the similarity of sense
where Lord Jaques compares all the world to a stage, Act II,
Scene 7. And all the men and women meerely players;"
&c. Spedding has preserved for us in "Lord Bacon's Works,"
Vol. VII, p. 271, a poem by Francis which expresses
the same thought as Jacques' speech. Into both citations, the poem and Jacques' words the
same thought is woven, of the seven ages of man and the
general worthlessness of earthly life. This fundamental
thought is applicable to no one more than to Francis, the
renouncer of all earthly honors and of the rights that were
his due. Of the comedy, "The Taming of the Shrew," three early
editions are extant, 1594, 1596 and 1607. _________ * Translator's Note: As the identity of this Francis
Meres has never been discovered, may it not stand for
"Merely Francis," for Francis being neither Tudor nor Bacon
was "Merely Francis." W. P. ** Translator's Note: See Bacon's Essay on Usury. W.
P.
98
A sketch is known entitled: "A Pleasant Conceited Historie, called The Taming of
a Shrew. As it was sundrie times acted by the Right
Hon- orable the Earl of Pembrooke his servants
1594." In the first presentation the scene is laid in Athens,
but in the last reworking, it is transferred to Padua and
the names of the persons changed. There has been much controversy among the critics
regarding this play, principally on the ground of its
publication in 1594 and also later 1596 and 1607
anonymously. In the Folio edition we find it enumerated
among the Shakespeare plays. In the prologue, Scene 2, is a hint at "Venus and
Adonis," and a connection with the writer of this poem, when
the Tinker is asked: "Dost thou loue pictures? We wil fetch thee
strait Adonis painted by a running brooke And Citherea all in sedges hid Which seeme to moove and wanton with her
breath Euen as the waiuing sedges play with winde." There are many of these ever-recurring ideas of the
poet, to which he imparts new form, and which come forth now
from his prose--now from his essays, poems and the deep
thoughts of his philosophical works to live anew in the
dramas. The play, "All's Well That Ends Well" appears in print
only in the Folio, and regarding its date there is much
difference of critical opinion. Malone holds that it was first written in 1606, but
this is mere supposition. The original name, however, is
shown by the conclusion which harks back to the
title: "All yet seemes well, and if it end to meete The bitter past, more welcome is the sweet." And again the thought repeats itself in the
words: "The Kings a Beggar--now the play is done All is well ended. . . . . . . . ." Of the first presentation of this play we have no
record. At all events it would number among the finer
comedies which would win before the court its modicum of
applause. The title of the comedy "Twelfth Night," or "What You
Will," plays upon the twelve nights of Masque performances
in the judicial chambers, Gray's Inn and others, which were
celebrated at Christmas time. When it appeared is uncertain
but Halliwell-Phillips has learned from the diary of an advocate The Taming of the Shrew "All's Well that Ends Well" Twelfth Night, or What You Will
99
The Winter's Tale The Tragedy of Troilus and Cressida by the name of John Manning that this play was
presented on Feb. 2, the "Feast of Purification" in the
"Inner Temple," possibly, however, the previous Christmas,
before Elizabeth, 1602. This appears to have been the first
presentation of this comedy. Further data regarding its
history are lacking. "The Winter's Tale," the last comedy in the Folio, is
also published only in the complete edition. The "Master of the Revels" states that the play was
acted on Nov. 5, 1611, the anniversary of the Gunpowder
Plot, and repeated on the occasion of the marriage of
Princess Elizabeth to Frederick V, elector of the
Palatinate.* A report by the well-known Dr. Forman, Francis'
Contemporary, states that he saw the Comedy on May 15, 1611,
at the Globe Theatre. This play is another subject of critical controversy,
the opponents of Bacon claiming that a man of his learning
would never have chosen the "sea coast" of Bohemia as the
scene of the play. But Francis was better
informed.** The cause of his authorship is much more eloquently
argued by the description of the flowers and the laying out
of the garden in the story which again fully corresponds
with Francis' Essay of Gardens. This Essay was published with others in 1625, another
evidence, that the Actor could not have taken Francis' essay
as a model and followed it nearly word for word. Far more
easy is it to believe that it flowed from the pen of the
Essayist, transformed into poetry. THE TRAGEDIES. These Plays will also be briefly touched upon, in so
far as there is something definite to say regarding their
publication. Whether or not Francis inserted this Play in the Folio
after its completion and in a supplementary manner, opinions
and suppositions are divided. It is striking, however, that
this play received no consecutive page-numbers and the
regular Tragedies with page-numbers began with
Coriolanus. A still extant Quarto Edition of the Play entitled:
"The Tragedy of Troylus and Cressida" dates from the year
1609 _________ * Translator's Note: Her late Majesty Queen Victoria
was a descendent of this union. ** Ancient Bohemia had at one time two sea coasts,
Baltic and Adriatic.
100
and the preface of this edition is uniquely prophetic:
"And believe this, that when he (the poet) is gone, and his
comedies out of sale, you will scramble for them and set up
a new English Inquisition"! The poet, therefore, appears to have originally
numbered this play among the Comedies, but he sets it
as a transition piece between the Histories and the
Tragedies. It was entered at the Stationers' as early as 1603,
and the theater-owner Henslow states in his diary that the
piece was played Feb. 7, 1603, by the servants of the Lord
Admiral Nottingham. Whether this was the same as the Quarto
and Folio editions is not known, and, moreover, the piece
was attributed to "Dekker and Chettle," which, however,
signifies nothing, as Francis is known to have used a great
variety of pseudonyms. This is the play, which at that early
day hints at the Law of Gravitation, thus again pointing to
an author given to scientific investigation. Francis Tudor,
therefore, appears to have known of it through his
indefatigable and far-seeing researches. At all events such thoughts would have been utterly
beyond the mind of the Actor Shakspere. "The Tragedie of Coriolanus" was also published only
in the Folio and there are no indications when it was
written, where it was played, or when, if at all, it was
printed prior to 1623. Its depiction of the ingratitude of a nation leads us
to place the date of its writing after Francis' "fall" in
1621. The next Drama, "The Lamentable Tragedy of Titus
Andronicus," is ranked as a work of the Poet's youth. It was
mentioned by Meres* in 1598, appeared anonymously in Quarto
form, and the title page of 1600 shows how many different
troups of actors had played it. "As it has sundry times" stands after the name of the
Tragedy, "beene playde by the Right Honorable, the Earl of
Pembrooke, the Earl of Darbie, the Earl of Sussex and the
Lorde Chamberlaine their servants, London, 1600." It had been printed prior to 1600, for
Halliwell-Phillips writes that it was played Jan. 23, 1594,
for the first time, and entered the same year at the
Stationers.' The second Quarto Edition appeared in 1611, again
anonymous and following the title is the addition: "As it
has sundrie times been playde by the King's Majestie's
servants." _________ * See Translator's Note to p. 98. W. P. The Tragedy of Coriolanus The lamentable Tragedy of Titus Andronicus
101
Romeo and Juliet Ben Jonson, on the contrary, assumes that this play is
the earliest work of Francis' youth, when he returned from
France, as he locates its composition in this period.
Granted that it is thus to be attributed to the youthful
poet, it might account for the really horrid material
employed, as a young beginner might have eagerly chosen
it. Regarding the Tragedy which has perhaps best sustained
public interest up to the most recent times: "Romeo and
Juliet," the Shakespeare Society has furnished us with most
valuable data to enable us to follow it from its earliest
publication. The "New Shakespeare Society" has not only had printed
the two first quarto editions but placed the two texts side
by side in parallel, and also published the sources of the
plot. The first Quarto appeared in 1597 and bore upon its
title page the information that the drama had been played by
"the Right Honorable Lord Hunsdon's servants." But the royal players were so-called only from July,
1596, to April, 1597, hence the publication of the play must
have been early in 1597, but was anonymous. Halliwell-Phillips states in his "Outlines," p. 113,
that the first presentation of "Romeo and Juliet" may be
ascribed to the Curtain Theatre in 1596. Here it is worthy of note that prior to 1597 no
Shakespeare play appeared in print, but that in 1597, also
anonymously, appeared the two Tragedies, Richard II and
Richard III, in Quarto editions. From this we can judge that
the Author at this time began to publish in print,
anonymously, the plays which had been already acted. The second Quarto of "Romeo and Juliet" appeared in
1599, but had been already greatly improved, as noted on the
title page: "Newly corrected, augmented." And a close
comparison of the text of these two editions shows that from
Francis Tudor's Dictionary: "Promus of Formularies and
Elegancies," which was known only to him, were taken for the
second edition no less than 130 words and phrases then
entirely new to the English language. The subsequent Quarto, that of 1609 and the final
publication in the Folio of 1623 show little change from the
second, greatly improved Quarto of 1599. Concerning the contents of the play and the impulses
which prompted its writing, opinions differ widely. But they
all unite on one point,--namely, that the Montague-Capulet
feud found its strongest echoes in the Court of
Elizabeth.
102
The secret marriage of Juliet and Romeo reminds us of
the first legend of Elizabeth and Dudley to the effect that,
during their imprisonment they were married by a friar at
the Tower. The allusion to the letter R in Romeo also
reminds us of Robert Dudley, when the nurse (Act II, Scene
4) says to Romeo, as she assures him that Juliet is not in
love with the young Nobleman, Paris: ". . . . but Ile warrant you, when I say so, shee
lookes as pale as any clout in the versall world. Doth not
Rose- marie and Romeo both begin with a
letter?" When the love is said to have arisen between Elizabeth
and Robert Dudley in the Tower, Dudley belonged to the
hostile party at Court--that of his executed father,
Northumberland. There were Montagues and Capulets at Court
playing off their ever-varying intrigues. Francis knew at this time whose son he was. How did he
discover it? On this point there are thus far two
explanations. First, that the fact of Francis' birth and the
secret marriage of his parents was revealed by one of the
Court ladies who heard it from Cecil. Be this as it may, the
fact remains that Francis knew why he was suddenly and at
the Queen's command removed from the Court and sent to
Paris, as he states in all candor and as a reproach against
Elizabeth, in his letter to Robert Essex (page 31). Another explanation states that, Cecil in a fit of
anger against Francis, because he would not as a young
advocate and in Parliament, bow abjectly to his wishes, told
him in malice of his parentage and disinheritance. The exact details may never be known. They, however,
offered the young Poet in themselves abundant material to
make use of again and again even though he was constrained
to disguise his knowledge in the embellishment of the Drama.
Among Leicester's friends he might well have found a model
for Mercutio, who, dying cried out (Act III, Scene
I): ". . . . A plague a both your Houses, They haue made wormes meat of me, I haue it, and soundly to--your Houses." Until the Poet's own commentary upon this Tragedy
shall be discovered through his not yet wholly fathomed
cryptography, it is left to the imagination of the reader to
accredit to the Author this or that hidden meaning. It is specially interesting in this work to note the
development of the style between the first and the last
writings.
103
Tragedy: Timon of Athens Julius Caesar Tragedy: "Timon of Athens." If one were to enumerate all the hypotheses of which
the critics have delivered themselves regarding this play,
one might easily go far astray from the Poet's original
thought. Only the setting of the Folio edition 1623 is known
and this was not divided into Acts nor Scenes, but resembled
rather a loosely arranged series of pictures. In 1842 the
play was again printed by Dyce for the Shakespeare Society
in the old form without Act or Scene division. In the
preface the theory is advanced that it was intended
originally for an "Academic audience," reminding us of
Gray's Inn, emphasizing the Banquet Scene. It is regarded by
some as a youthful production, but there are many
indications that it was written after Bacon's "fall,"
illustrating as it does the ingratitude of friends. At all events it is not one of the plays carefully
rewritten for the Folio. The leading motif, namely, the
ingratitude of mankind on the one hand and the wasteful
generosity of the hero on the other, and at last the scorn
and bitterness of Timon, who, leaving Athens in disgust
finds a dwelling in his cave and cuts himself off entirely
from human-kind,--might in the last conclusion refer to
Francis' bitterness over his fall as Chancellor, but, for
those before whose eyes are the entire life and fate of
Francis Tudor the scathing words of Timon now complaining
and now cursing his native city and aimed so plainly at the
barbarous usages of court society; and the still more
gripping self-composed epitaph which the poet imparts
through Alcibiades after his death (Act V, Scene 4)--these
tell the story of our Francis to the life: "Heere lies a wretched Coarse, of wretched Soule
bereft: Seek not my name: a plague consume you, wicked
Caitifs left! Here lye I, Timon, who, aliue, all liuing men did
hate, Passe by, and curse thy fill, but passe, and stay not
here thy gait." We have seen Timon take leave of the world with only
scorn for all it had to offer--in solitude he ripened fully
into the Philosopher. The origin of The Tragedy of "Julius Caesar" is
difficult to follow, as only the Folio edition is
extant. That it was the product of the older poetic period is
evident from the entire intellectual composition of the
history and the brilliant oration of Antonius, reminding us
of the eloquence of Francis Tudor, when we think of his
enkindling and transporting parliamentary addresses, as
reported by Ben Jonson and Spedding.
104
In 1607 when he wrote the Memorial for Elizabeth: "In
felicem memoriam Elizabethae," Spedding tells us that he was
at the same time engrossed in Roman studies. (Lord Bacon's
Works, Vol. VI, page 335.) From the papers left by Francis, Dr. Rawley printed an
Essay in 1658, written in Latin and entitled: "Imago civilis
Julii Caesaris," which Spedding also notes in Vol. VI. Thus
Rome may well have been associated, and his letters show
such interchange of thought with Matthews. This Tragedy may, therefore, easily have originated
during this epoch as the Poet would first have familiarized
himself with the material before coining it into dramatic
poetry. Whether the drama was then acted or not is entirely
unknown.* "The Tragedy of Macbeth" is printed only in the Folio
Edition of 1623, no Quarto edition having been
discovered. This Drama is numbered with the most classically
finished of poetic works, richest in philosophic thought and
at the same time morally educational. We know how unselfishly Francis devoted himself to the
arduous labors connected with the amalgamation of the three
Kingdoms at the beginning of the Stuart reign (page 42), and
he might easily have selected this material out of Scottish
history in honor of James I. We know from the records of Dr. Forman, the
Astronomer, that he saw the play performed at the Globe
Theater on April 20, 1610, and yet this gives no indication
of the date of its origin. At all events there is no notice
of its having been produced at an earlier day as even the
"Revels at Court" fail to mention it. The contents are absorbingly interesting when one
notices here Francis' love for the commingling of myth and
fact, and the perpetual melancholy of the Scot, which he
felt closely allied to his own. The tragedy reminds one of the old Stuart proverb:
"Tha mi Dubhachas"--(darkness lies upon me), fate yielding
deeds with sorrow as the aftermath. "Ma tha sin an Dan," as
it is said in Celtic, "When it is so ordained." And how,
plunged in sorrow, suffering the qualms of a troubled
conscience, and _________ * Translator's Note: Apparent mention is made in Ben
Jonson's Discoveries, in his note on Shakspere the Actor, of
a stage presentation of this play, but no date for same can
be fixed. Macbeth
105
King Lear gripped by the deepest despair, Macbeth hears voices
through the castle (Act II, Scene 2): "Still it cry'd, Sleepe no more to all the
House, Glamis hath murther'd Sleepe, and therefore
Cawdor Shall sleepe no more. Macbeth shall sleepe no
more." Then later, Act IV, Scene I--a cave in the Highlands,
the Witches Cauldron boiling with their dread incantations.
Macbeth alone with the Weird Sisters craves answer to the
questions which rack his troubled conscience. He is told of his fall, and given a glance into the
far-off future, where he sees a line of Kings arising.
Indeed, he believes his own dynasty assured, as Banquo, the
traditional progenitor of the Stuarts, has been numbered
with his victims. But now the murdered man's descendants
rise before him. No material would have appeared to Francis better
adapted to flatter and win the young King than the prophecy
of his race,--the Stuarts, to the eighth of whom, James I,
fell the united crowns. 'Tis true that the Poet does not
pass over the tragic element in the inheritance of the
reigning house, and yet he brings forward conspicuously the
eighth King. From this point onward he sees the race bearing
two imperial globes and three sceptres. Reckoning from Robert, his second son, James I, II,
III, IV, V, Queen Mary and at last James VI, eighth in the
line and crowned James I of England,--the poet permits the
young King to see himself in the vision as the first heir of
the United Kingdoms. In Act IV, Scene 1, Macbeth recites the
vision: "Why do you shew me this?--A fourth? Start
eyes! What! Will the Line stretch out to th' crack of
Doome.. Another yet? A seauenth? Ile see no more: And yet the eight appears who beares a glasse Which shewes me many more; and some I see That two-fold Balles and trebble Sceptres
carry." When we consider, mingled with the hastily sketched
climaxes of this strenuous drama, the carefully thought-out
pathological representation of Lady Macbeth's ambition,
fanned even to madness, the entire work of such consummate
art fills us with the greatest admiration for the genius of
the Poet. "The Tragedy of King Lear" was also first brought out
anonymously. In 1594 it was entered without Author's name at
Stationers' Hall, then entitled: "The True Chronicle of King Lear and his three
Daugh- ters, Goneril, Regan and Cordelia."
106
Whether it was at that time printed remains in doubt
as the oldest edition extant bears date of 1605. In 1608 the
play appeared twice in quarto editions. These bore the
author's name as "Mr. William Shake-speare." In the separating of the name into two syllables, the
purpose of the author to draw attention to the pseudonym is
plain. How much the play was altered from the original
theater edition to fit it for presentation at court, cannot
be accurately determined, but according to the register it
was played at the Court at Whitehall, Nov. 26, 1607. At all
events, the "Concealed Poet" might well have sought a
justified disguise for his true person, for the drama
represented throughout, not the views of the King, but was
rather in agreement with the opinions expressed in Francis'
parliamentary addresses against absolute monarchy, without
parliamentary co-operation, and portrayed vividly all the
evils which an absolute monarch could bring upon his
land. We see again the wisdom of the astute statesman,
united in Francis with the far-seeing intellect which could
detect with prophetic vision the faults of the Stuart
monarch, as they constantly grew more dangerous through his
vanity, the extravagance of his court, and his vain-glorious
character,--all pointing to inevitable revolution. In vain Francis warned against it, and in delicate
manner, brought forward in the drama the consequences of
these royal weaknesses. Francis produced in this work a
masterpiece of intellectual power, when, with gripping force
he portrays the vagaries of madness, the phenomena of
Nature, in storm and tempest, and the virulence of
contesting monarchs. It belongs among the immortal works of this titanic
personality which rose sublime over fate, regarding
everything earthly as but dust. The Play: Othello. "The Master of the Revels" reports that on Nov. 1,
1604, a Tragedy entitled: "The Moor of Venice" was presented
at Whitehall by the King's servants." From this is to be
inferred, that it was written for the Court. This is also
confirmed by the first publisher of the Quarto edition of
1622, when he states on the title page that the drama has
been given to him for publication by Sir George Buck, the
Master of the Revels. From Halliwell-Phillips we know that it was also
produced in the theater. In 1613 it was again presented at
Court on the occasion of Princess Elizabeth's marriage
celebration. During the intervening years there was no new
edition until the Quarto The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice
107
Anthony and Cleopatra Cymbeline of 1622 and it then appeared much enlarged in the
Folio of 1623. But here the polishing revision of the Poet
is recognizable and the title is changed, now
reading: "The Tragedie of Othello, the Moore of
Venice." Anthony and Cleopatra. In 1608 there appeared, entered at Stationers' Hall,
"a book called Anthony and Cleopatra." It was, however, not
printed. Concerning the reason for its non-publication, the
opinions of commentators vary. Halliwell-Phillips follows
the supposition that there was nevertheless a hasty copy
prepared for the theater and that it was acted. And the form
of the play as it appears in the Folio, cannot be considered
as one which was carefully revised for the work, because it
was not even divided into Acts and Scenes. Although the play
shows Francis' powerful eloquence, it is on the other hand,
lacking in the careful revision, which would have brought
the loosely arranged scenes into closer harmony, more in
keeping with the grandeur of the basic material. How easy it must have been for Francis to sketch a
drama for the theatre, is shown by the words of Wm. Rawley,
when he casually remarks that versified writing flowed from
Francis in play! He evidently did not rewrite them all, but
in the main endeavored to give them proper revision for the
complete edition. On the other hand, time might have been
lacking, since some, as we have noted, missed the last
finishing touch. Who can gaze into the intellectual workshop of a poet,
let alone such a genius as Francis Tudor? Who can guess when
the first idea of a given creation occurred to him? When he
first put it on paper? When he completed it for the purpose,
be it Theatre or Printing press, for which it was originally
intended? When there appear no date of entry at the Stationers',
and no Quarto edition or evidence of the presentation of a
drama, there is nothing to say with any degree of
positiveness regarding its first inception. There remains now but the Tragedy of "Cymbeline," a
play most variously commented upon by the critics as to its
first formation and publication.
108
One certain piece of evidence as to when it was
played, is furnished again from the diary of the Astronomer
Forman who saw it acted at the Globe, though he does not
state the day when this occurred. His diary, however, in which he enumerates only
occurrences of the years 1610 and 11, mentions this
presentation of Cymbeline, hence he could have seen the play
only in one of these years. Whether it was given in the
original version, is not indicated, but Forman's description
of the drama corresponds in contents with the Folio edition
of 1623. It therefore only remains a question as to how far
Francis polished and improved this work for
publication. The charm of the fictitious, which renders it so
attractive, mingled with deep philosophical thought, tells
of the same fountain, namely Francis' genius, which in all
the dramas, knew how to mingle the delicious aroma of poetry
with the seriousness of philosophical wisdom, all leading
onward to the accomplishment of his high purpose, namely,
through the presentation of historical and poetic pictures
of the yet rough and backward usages of his time, to educate
mankind to higher aim and stronger endeavor. Dr. Samuel
Johnson in his edition of Shakespeare (1778) criticises this
play most severely and, as we feel, unjustly. In the Tragedy "Timon of Athens" the Poet unfolds with
compelling power the devastating consequences of the
forsaking of religious and moral law, when the embittered
Timon cried out as a curse upon his native city: ". . . . . . Piety, and Feare, Religion to the Gods, Peace, Iustice, Truth, Domestick awe, Night-rest, and Neighbour-hood, Instruction, Manners, Mysteries, and Trades, Degrees, Obseruances, Customes, and Lawes, Decline to your confounding contraries, And yet Confusion liue: . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nothing Ile beare from
thee But nakednesse, thou detestable Towne, Take thou that too, with multiplying Bannes: Timon will to the Woods; where he shall
finde Th' vnkindest Beast, more kinder than
Mankinde." We meet the same expressions of detestation toward the
wickedness, malice and falsehood of mankind which Francis
had so grievously experienced in his own person and in his
own immediate sphere, brought out in the text of many
dramas. As has been heretofore mentioned (page 98) Francis
in the
109
Comedy, "As You Like It," portrays himself in the
figure of the melancholy Jacques, who compares all the world
to a stage, upon which we are merely players and in Act II,
Scene 7, likens the life of man to seven steps or acts as
they are played. Here we are reminded of another poem of Bacon's,
quoted by Spedding in "Lord Bacon's Works," Vol. III, p.
271, and Francis' versified paraphrase of the 137th
Psalm. Everywhere, in the same comparison of the world with
transitoriness in this or that form, whether soap-bubble or
stage, speaks continually the realization that all is
vanity, all is but a deceptive mirage. The poem by "Bacon" will be a fitting conclusion to
our consideration of the dramas of the "Concealed Poet,"
Francis Tudor, named Viscount St. Alban. The world's a bubble and the life of man Less than a span; In his conception wretched from the woombe, So to the tombe, Curst from the cradel, and brought up to
years, With cares and fears. Who then to fraile, mortality shall trust But limnes in water, or but writes in dust. Yet since with sorrow here we live opprest: What life is best? Courts are but only superficiall schooles to dandle fools. The rurall parts are turn'd into a den of sauvage men And where's a city from all vice so free, But may be term'd the worst of all the three? Domesticke cares afflict the husbands bed, or paines his head. Those who live single take it as a curse, or do things worse. Some would have children, those that have them
none, or wish them gone. What is it then to have, or have no wife, But single thraldome, or a double strife? Our owne affections still at home to please, is a disease, To cross the seas to any foreigne soyle, perils and toyle, Wars with their noyes affright us; when they
cease, We are worse in peace. What then remains? but that we still should
cry, Not to be borne, or being borne to dye?
110
COMMENTS ON CERTAIN SONNETS -----------o----------- The discussion of the dramas by no means exhausts the
evidence regarding the "Concealed Poet," as Francis calls
himself. In order to fully understand his predilection for
poetry, for allegories, for grand dramas as well as for the
smaller humorous comedies, one must delve into his Essays,
and into the discussions wherein he gives his opinions in
detail regarding them. Thus he expresses himself regarding the fables and
parables of antiquity. His little work: "De Sapientia
Veterum" (The Wisdom of the Ancients) was most popular in
his time and was considered very delicately composed. It
assembles a continuation of similar ideas which he had
previously treated in the "Advancement of Learning" in the
section: "Poesie Parabolical." Old fables and myths which had survived the handing
down, must, he says, inspire the Poet to make use of them in
poetry allegorically, and at times united with moral
teaching, whether the old parable relate to Religion,
Politics or Philosophy. From this the vibration of Francis'
mind in unison with this class of poetry is easily to be
comprehended. As one follows his innermost emotions the thought
comes over the reader with irresistible force; that in his
comments upon allegorical poetry he revealed those profound
thoughts which he knew so well to inter-weave effectively in
the Plays with their Allegories and Metaphors, in the "New
Atlantis," or in the adaptation of the Indian legend in
Queen Elizabeth's birthday Sonnet (1595), (pages
75-76). A cold intellectual nature without depth of sentiment
would never have recognized the value of such mysteries, let
alone have been able to give them expression with poetic
beauty and power, as was the case with Francis in such
extraordinary measure. It would be proper here to treat somewhat of the
Sonnets. We know thus far of two Sonnets which are given to
us by Spedding, cited from the original works of
Bacon. The Sonnet which he wrote to Elizabeth when she
invited herself to dine with him at Twickenham Park, and
with which he welcomed her, was a Sonnet of opportunity,
which flowed from his pen lightly and rhythmically, but
which can hardly be called the free and untrammeled work of
his hand, owing to his constrained demonstrations of respect
under such abnormal cir-
111
cumstances (Authorship of Richard II). Nevertheless
the selection of the Indian legend, regarding the blind
child, whereby he referred to himself ambiguously, as the
son held in blindness, was a delicately chosen allegory
which apparently referred to the Indian Colonies, but
concealed a far deeper meaning. He left to the afterworld a great collection of
Sonnets celebrating his "Love"--his "Muse" in varied song.
Whoever probes deeply into these sonnets, studies them in
their absorbingly interesting allusions to his own fate, but
always upheld by the consolations of his Muse, cannot but
appreciate anew the greatness of the Poet, victor over all
misfortune, though he repeatedly calls himself but a
"stranger on the earthly pilgrimage." In the edition of the Sonnets as a collection in 1609,
their sequence may or may not have been arranged by the
Poet, and perhaps purposely not in the order of their dates
of writing. Sonnet 29 is most impressive. Here Francis speaks at
the outset of his disgrace as an outcast from life, but
closes with a hymn of praise to the Muse which stands in his
eyes higher than his lost Kingdom: "When in disgrace with Fortune and mens eyes, I all alone beweepe my out-cast state, And trouble deafe heauen with my bootlesse
cries, And looke vpon myself, and curse my fate. Wishing me like to one more rich in hope, Featur'd like him, like him with friends
possest, Desiring this mans art, and that mans skope, With what I most inioy contended least, Yet in these thoughts my selfe almost
despising, Haplye I thinke on thee, and then my state, (Like to the Larke at breake of daye arising) From sullen earth sings hymns at Heauen's
gate, For thy sweet loue remembred such welth
brings, That then I skorne to change my state with
Kings." And we cite one more of the number, in which he
remembers his hard calling, the undesired profession of the
law, which on all occasions, especially in the plays,
furnished him with a copious supply of technical
expressions, representation of Parliament scenes, and
Affairs of State. It is Sonnet 111: "O For my sake doe you with fortune chide, The guiltie goddesse of my harmful deeds, That did not better for my life prouide, Then publick meanes which publick manners
breeds. Thence comes it that my name receiues a brand, And almost thence my nature is subdu'd, To what it workes in, like the Dyers hand, Pity me then and wish I were renu'de, Whilst like a willing patient I will drinke
112
Potions of Eysell 'gainst my strong infection, No bitternesse, that I will bitter thinke, Nor double pennance to correct correction. Pittie me then deare friend, and I assure you, Euen that your pittie is enough to cure mee." Here is expressed in the bitter pain but also the
compensation for his sad fate in the friendship of his
Muse. And his fair fame with the afterworld is likewise in
his thoughts, when he prophesies that his works as a poet
shall better perpetuate his memory than monuments of marble
and gold. Sonnet 55: "Not marble, nor the gilded monument, Of Prince shall out-liue this powerfull rime, But you shall shine more bright in these
contents Then vnswept stone, besmeer'd with sluttish
time. When wasteful warre shall statues ouer-turne, And broiles roote out the worke of masonry, Nor Mars his sword, nor warres quick fire shall
burne: The liuing record of your memory. Gainst death, and all-obliuious enmity Shall you pace forth, your praise shall finde
roome, Euen in the eyes of all posterity That weare this world out to the ending doome. So til the judgment that your selfe arise, You liue in this, and dwell in louers eies." These sonnets can be regarded as a sort of spiritual
autobiography of the Poet, in which he gives expression to
the thoughts and feelings, which he otherwise holds hidden
from the world. And the manner of publication plainly shows
that even in these he will avoid all possibility of
self-betrayal. They appeared in 1609, without the name of the author
but only that of the publisher. Yet the previously mentioned
and mysterious "Francis Meres" speaks in 1598 of the
"honeyed" sonnets in connection with certain dramas, both
written by "Shake-speare." The "concealed poet" could thus
under the pseudonym of Francis Meres easily have handed down
a criticism on his own sonnets! At all events the fact thus
established beyond doubt that they were the work of the poet
"Shake-speare." The last quoted sonnet, No. 55, shows the desire of
the poet to leave a monument to his fame to the afterworld,
not according to the manner of Kings and Princes, in
perishable marble--subject to the ravages of time, but in
the enduring products of his Divine Muse. The inner struggles, which he passed through,
regarding the tragedy of his life, are again most vividly
portrayed in Sonnet 29, where he speaks of himself as an
"outcast" and refers to the wakeful vigils of his weary
nights. Melancholy
113
was a close relative to both the brothers, Francis and
Robert (Essex), but in Francis' case his greater
intellectual power, elevated him above his fate, and enabled
him, while delving deeply into the truths of natural and
philosophical science, to rise like the lark on the wings of
his poetic Muse, far above his earthly sorrows and the
bitterness of his lost royal power. Robert, as we know, was a veritable
"Hotspur,"--passionate, ambitious and thirsting for action.
He could not brook the reproach of the queen nor her
crossing of his wishes. He not only lacked resignation, but the real
thought-power of Francis was not within his scope, and the
elder brother was thus able to calm and forewarn the
younger, so long as his advice was followed. But when Robert
insisted on hewing his own path and kept his brother in
ignorance of his plans--he dug his own grave. Spedding recognizes Francis' calmness and
tranquillity, but associated it with a weakness of
will-power. He saw in him only the fallen Chancellor, only
the son of the House of Bacon. Spedding considered that a
more yielding policy toward the Queen would have been more
appropriate, when he gave powerful emphasis in Parliament to
his opinions in opposition to hers, and thereafter failed to
adopt the offered course to obtain her forgiveness. But we, who recognize in him the Tudor blood, well
know how sincerely he endeavored to point out the errors,
which he recognized in the piloting of the Ship of State.
And viewing him from this standpoint, we realize that his
purposes were unchanged, but that he, knowing that his
mother's recognition would never be his, resigned himself to
his fate, not weak of will but in full power, raising
himself above his personal grievances in firm endeavor to
work the good of his land in whatever position it pleased
God to place him. But he did not wish his real person to remain
forever unknown to the Afterworld. The honor of his
name was at stake, which is evident not only in the
allegorical allusions in his dramas and sonnets, but even
more clearly in his last Will and Testament. Notwithstanding, in the full consciousness of never
having accepted money as a bribe, he, for the moment, bowed
to the stroke, but while in the Tower wrote to Buckingham,
the favorite,* not asking, but demanding his instant
release. His devotion to his sovereign was such that he was
willing to enter ________ * This peremptory letter, May 31, 1621, opens with the
following blunt demand: "Good my Lord:--Procure the warrant
for my discharge this day."
114
the Tower under condemnation, with his head erect in
the consciousness of innocence, but there was a limit even
to his long-suffering and patience, so that when King and
favorite showed a disposition to break faith with him, he
was most firm and insistent in his demands for instant
liberation. The entire affair was obviously a sham planned
perhaps by himself to save the favorite and it may well be,
even the throne. It is not past belief that had he refused
to be the sacrifice, but insisted on defence and justice,
the Revolution which broke 20 years later, might have come
down upon the head of James the father instead of Charles
the son. His fine was promptly remitted--his imprisonment
lasted less than two days, and his letter to the King shows
that he submitted voluntarily to the sentence of
Parliament. Bacon wrote to the King on May 2, 1621, as
follows: IT MAY PLEASE YOUR MAJESTY, It hath pleased God for these three days past, to
visit me with such extremity of headach upon the hinder part
of my head, fixed in one place, that I thought verily it had
been some imposthumation; and then the little physic that I
have told me that either it must grow to a congelation, and
so to a lethargy, or to break, and so to a mortal fever or
sudden death; which apprehension, and chiefly the anguish of
the pain, made me unable to think of my business. But now
that pain itself is assuaged to be tolerable, I resume the
care of my business, and therein prostrate myself again, by
my letter, at your majesty's feet. Your majesty can hear me witness, that at my last so
comfortable access, I did not so much as move your
majesty by your absolute power of pardon, or otherwise, to
take my cause into your hands, and to interpose between
the sentence of the House. And according to my
desire, your majesty left it to the sentence of the
House by my lord treasurer's report. (Translator's
italics.) But now, if not per omnipotentiam, as the
divines say, but per potestatem suaviter disponentem,
your majesty will graciously save me from a sentence,
with the good liking of the House, and that cup may pass
from me, it is the utmost of my desires. This I move with
the more belief, because I assure myself, that if it be
reformation that is sought, the very taking away of the
seal, upon my general submission, will be as much in
example, for these four hundred years, as any further
severity. The means of this I most humbly leave unto your
majesty, but surely I should conceive, that your majesty
opening yourself in this kind to the lords, counsellors, and
a motion of the prince, after my submission, and my lord
marquis using his interest with his friends in the House,
may affect the sparing of the sentence; I making my humble
suit to the House for that purpose, joined with the delivery
up of the seal into your majesty's hands. This is my last
suit that I shall make to your majesty in this business,
prostrating myself at your mercy-seat,
115
Additional MSS. 4259 f. 111. Copy in the hand of John Locker. No reference to the MSS. from which it is copied after fifteen years' service, wherein I have served
your majesty in my poor endeavours, with an entire heart.
And, as I presume to say to your majesty, I am still a
virgin, for matters that concern your person or crown, and
now only craving that after eight steps of honour, I be not
precipitated altogether. But, because he that hath taken bribes is apt to give
bribes I will go further, and present your majesty with a
bribe; for if your majesty give me peace and leisure, and
God give me life, I will present you with a good history of
England, and a better digest of your laws. And so concluding
with my prayers, I rest Clay in your majesty's hands, FR. ST. ALBAN. May 2, 1621. Note especially the last paragraph of this letter in
which he treats the whole matter of alleged bribery as a
joke! Are these the words of a confessed criminal? Does the
confessed criminal demand his instant release as did
Bacon in his letter to Buckingham? And what reason of state
or prejudice could have been back of the fact that this
Buckingham letter, written 1621, was first published
by Montague 1842,--221 years later! Nevertheless he deemed it of the last importance that
he should be judged intelligently by the afterworld, and,
above all, that his real personality should be properly
recognized. While the proceedings against him were under way and
he awaiting the result at Gorhambury, he wrote a short
Will. This "Last Will and Testament" bearing date of April
10, 1621, was a short and obviously hastily composed
document, as Francis could not foresee the exact outcome of
the pending parliamentary proceedings. The preamble, however, is worthy of note, the first
three stipulations reading as follows: "I bequeath my soul to God above, by the oblation of
my Saviour. My body to be buried obscurely. My name to the next ages and to foreign
nations." On account of his fall as Chancellor he desired his
mortal remains to be buried quietly, obscurely and without
ceremony. But regarding his name and his undying
memory he expresses even at this time desires and
hopes. And this is made still plainer in his second and last,
Will and Testament. Here the second clause, regarding his memory after
commending his soul and body to God and Saviour until the
resurrection of his body in God's hand, reads:
116
"For my name and memory, I leave it to men's
charitable speeches, and to foreign nations, and to the next
ages." Here follow, as a part of his bequests, most detailed
instructions regarding his works and the MSS. and Fragments
which he left. This last Will which Francis drew on Dec. 19, 1625, in
presence of W. Rawley, Rob. Halpeny, Stephen Paise, Willm.
Atkins, Thomas Kent, and Edward Legg, was, in accord with
the custom of the time, deposited in "Doctor's Commons Will
Office," on St. Bennett Hill, in the "Perogative Court," the
proper office for the Registry and Filing of Wills. Francis
signed it with but the one name: "Fr. St. Alban." It was not
opened till several months after his death. As regards his true life-history and his concealed
parentage, it is important to note that this will repeats
verbatim the same wish concerning the memory of his name,
but with the addition that he left it to "men's charitable
speeches." Having as Chancellor experienced all the intrigues of
his enemies who had carefully prepared and staged his fall,
and knowing the partisan character of contemporaneously
written history, he could fully realize the efforts which
would be made and which, in fact, have been made, and even
believed since, to darken his record as Chancellor.
Spedding's Works on "Francis Bacon" were the first to throw
light into the darkness and upon the injustice of his
conviction, to which he deliberately submitted without
defense to safeguard his King. But does the word: "My Name" refer to his name as the
alleged son of the House of Bacon? or only to his reputation
as Chancellor? Both of the names conferred upon him later: "Baron
Verulam of Verulam" and "Viscount St. Alban" were new names
created for him, and in the selection of which he even had
some choice. He was, when he received from the King these
names, with advanced rank, already the possessor of
Gorhambury. This is not far from the City of St. Albans. In
the Roman days there was erected here the Fortress of
Verulamium, which later fell into ruins, so when Francis was
raised to the baronetcy he requested the name: "Baron
Verulam of Verulam," and on his second elevation in rank
James I conferred upon him the name of the new order:
"Viscount of St. Albans," but Francis dropped the S at the
end of this name. However, it must be emphasized that he, instead of
follow- E. Regr. Curiae Praerogat. Blackbourne's edition of Bacon's works. Vol. 11, p. 559
117
ing the English custom of continuing the original
names as the first--in this case "Bacon," dropped this name
entirely, as soon as he received the new titles created for
him. He knew that these new names came to him in truth as a
legitimate Tudor, but he showed in dropping the name "Bacon"
that he was fully aware of the entire absence of any
blood-relationship with that family. Nevertheless he showed constant loyalty to this
foster-family, both in his esteem and gratitude to his
foster-mother, and the confidence, friendship and inner
sympathy with his foster brother Anthony. But he desired that the afterworld should some day
learn the truth regarding his person, the royal rank to
which he was entitled, and of which he had been despoiled;
and if, as he correctly supposed, England, his motherland,
would be slow to recognize him, he directed the wish
expressed in his Last Will and Testament to "Foreign Nations
and the Next Ages." When, in the preparation of this study I drew upon the
comprehensive store of material gathered during a long
period of years, for the evidences which bear on the
question of Francis Bacon's real person and works, I was
only able to bring forward a small portion of the data which
touched upon the subject. All deserves to be set forth in
far greater detail than is possible within the limits of
this brief treatise. I regard this work as but one of the many stones in
the mosaic which has been in process of construction by many
investigators for nearly fifty years, and which will in the
end constitute together a likeness of
Francis-Tudor-Bacon-Shakespeare--drawn to the life. My work differs from the productions of my
predecessors only in the fact that, as stated in my
foreword, I had in mind at the outset simply a genealogical
historical investigation of Francis Bacon's personality and
lineage. In the course of these studies it became clear to me,
with what suggestive power all historians since Camden have
left the real personality of Francis as a Tudor, unrevealed,
and how it has been more and more deeply buried as
generations passed. My search centered around the cardinal question of his
parentage, and therefore all his works, published under the
name of Bacon, were closely scrutinized in order to discover
any ray of light, which they might be able to throw upon the
sombre fate so often hinted at.
118
Later I examined the Shakespeare Dramas and Sonnets
for passages which paralleled Bacon's works, and for
allegories and metaphors, which, in their double meaning,
could be applied as indicating the Tudor. For an example of the repetition of similar views by
"Shakespeare" and Bacon, let us note the position taken by
Francis in regard to the various religions, and how he
endeavored in the dramas to avoid espousing the party of any
one church. This corresponds exactly with his published views in
the "Advertisement, touching the controversies of the
Church of England." Having thus expressed himself in this article as
opposed to every church contention, he would certainly not
wish to see these questions placed upon the stage, that the
mysteries of the Faith might not be profaned, the inner
peace of the believers' soul destroyed, or the
clerical-political controversy fanned anew. In view of these, his known opinions, it will be
readily understood why he takes in his dramas a position
neither openly favoring Rome nor yet the Church of England,
nor any ecclesiastical party, in order that the religious
controversy might not, through the stage be presented and
discussed before the people.* As the controversy waxed through the rebellion of the
Catholics, he counseled the queen, in his "Letter of Advice"
for political expediency, neither to irritate the Catholics
by too strenuous opposition, nor yet to permit them to
attain to too great a development of power. We can trace Francis' clear convictions as a
Protestant, who, however, did not follow the inclinations of
his foster-mother Lady Anne Bacon as a non-conformist, but
endeavored to bring his Protestant faith ever more
completely into harmony with his philosophy. When we compare the religious, political and
philosophical views brought out in his speeches, essays,
letters and writings, the changing temperament from his
early years to the melancholy and often despair of his
maturity, with the allegories and metaphors whose double
meaning re-mirrors them in his dramas _________ * Translator's Note: In the original writing of Henry
IV the name of "Falstaff" was apparently "Oldcastle." In one
of the early quartos the prefix "Old" appears before one of
his speeches. In the epilogue to the Second Part of Henry IV
we are told "Oldcastle died a martyr and this is not the
man." The Poet obviously sought to avoid giving any possible
offence.
119
and sonnets, we are overpowered by the tremendous
struggle for Truth put forth by this universe-embracing
intellect. Thus in a careful comparison of the Bacon and
Shakespeare works in prose and poetry the guiding thread of
Ariadne is ever present to lead the searcher through the
unending depth and fullness of identical thought in all the
works, arriving inevitably at the ultimate conclusion:
Tudor-Bacon-Shakespeare--one Author--one Person. The plays and sonnets are not only replete with the
allusions to the dethroned Prince, of which I have selected
a few, but they mirror in other words and allegories his
clearly elaborated political views. As a Tudor--a scion of
the race which had been confirmed upon the throne by
Parliament,--he became the opponent of the inimical
pretensions of the Stuarts toward an absolute monarchy in
defiance of the will of Parliament. The work of the searcher would be crippled if an
attempt were made to separate the Statesman, the Philosopher
and the Poet. One great thinker only is to be recognized in
the unification of his views as expressed in all his
different characters. In order to suppress this Tudor by every power
of suggestion and through false representations of history,
his mighty intellect was purposely belittled and the
afterworld robbed of a great gain. But now there is opened to us a far-embracing Tudor
literature, from the pen of a Tudor himself. Early placed in possession of the facts of his
lineage, Francis was able to grasp, consider and judge all
that pertained to his blood and race with the spirit of a
legitimate Tudor, even though his friendship for his
foster-mother and for his foster-brother Anthony also
exerted great influence upon him from early youth. It goes without saying that he would certainly know
himself better than he could be known by his
contemporaries who believed him a scion of the House of
Bacon. When in letters and conversations with his legitimate
brother Robert, called Essex, he laid stress upon the fact
that he belonged to the "Common," it but expressed his
subtle irony. He knew himself, like Robert, to be the child of
Elizabeth's secret marriage and knew that their royal mother
favored Robert above him, even though she would acknowledge
neither. But she showed this preference in the elevation of
the foster-brother to the rank of Earl, which would
ultimately inure to Robert's advantage.
120
Francis she left as plain Mr. Bacon, and without
advancement in his career, while Robert (Essex) was loaded
with favors. That Francis often called his brother's attention to
these evidences of royal favor was never in the spirit of
petty jealously, but that he might urge and admonish him not
to trifle them away. And yet the innate sarcasm of Francis
also speaks out through these same letters. As Elizabeth was herself legitimated and the act
corroborated by the Testament of Henry VIII, so it stood
within her power, as Francis was well aware, at any time
during her life to confirm his own legitimacy.
Notwithstanding this, the outcast, shorn of all his rightful
honors, became and remains, through his own ability and
industry, the greatest historical representative of the
House of Tudor. Even though his recognition as such has not hitherto
been generally acknowledged, yet the Bacon-Shakespeare
question has long since been settled through Bacon's
ciphers, and other indubitable proofs. Such men as Nietzsche, Bismarck, Gladstone, Lord
Beaconsfield, Lord Palmerston, Lord Byron, Emerson, Benj. F.
Butler, William H. Furness, Coleridge, von Schlegel and
innumerable others among the World's great thinkers have
declared it to be either impossible or to the last degree
incongruous, that the actor Shakspere should have been the
poet of the Plays and Sonnets. We quote the words of Benjamin Disraeli, Lord
Beaconsfield: "And who is Shakespeare, said Carducci. We know
of him as much as we do of Homer. Did he write half
the play? I doubt it. He appears to me to have been an
in- spired adapter for the theaters, which were not then
as good as barns. I take him to have been a botcher up of
old plays. His popularity is of modern date and it may
not last,--it would surprise him marvellously." It would be piling Pelion on Ossa to cite here all the
partisans of the Bacon-Shakespeare identity. Some of these base their belief largely upon the
deciphering of Bacon's cryptic writings. To enlarge further
upon these is not the purpose of this study, which the
writer has based, above all, upon historical
researches. _________ * Translator's Note: At this date, 1837, no substitute
name had as yet been suggested to whom to accredit the
plays. This was first done by Delia Bacon in her "Philosophy
of the Shakespeare plays unfolded," nearly twenty years
later. W. P.
121
That the historical truth regarding Bacon could remain
so long undiscovered was foreseen by him, and can be
ascribed largely to the political upheavals which so quickly
followed his departure. The grave had apparently closed above Francis Tudor,
and the repeated false and erroneous "histories" placed even
more and more obstacles in the path of the searcher, who
would discover his real name and do justice to his
memory." A genius, who shines as a star apart in the
intellectual life of all civilized nations, becomes an
international possession to whose work and history the
searchers of all lands have an equal right. When Francis
Tudor-Bacon-Shakespeare is placed beside the immortal Homer,
the truth of the above becomes self-evident. No civilized
land can be deprived of Homer, for there is no nation whose
intellectual sword has not been whetted upon his genius.
What do we know of Homer? It cannot be ascertained whether
he was born in India or elsewhere. The long-forgotten
legends of antiquity have obscured his person in the mists
of tradition. The days of Francis Tudor, however, lie not so
far in the past, as to preclude the intelligent search for
his real person. A genius, who, as scion of the royal house of Tudor,
is justly entitled to the highest honors of his name, and
after whom are modeled not only the philosophies of life's
wisdom but the art and poetical development of other heroes
of poetry, and who above all, in his last Will and Testament
desired to be rightly known for what he was, must be
brought out of the darkness of error and misrepresentation
into the clear light of perfect knowledge and truth. Of the labors of other searchers into the life and
works of Bacon I will not speak, as I myself sought only the
sources of historical information, in which quest the
requisite aids had been tendered me. In addition, I was
guided in my study of the plays by Sir Henry Irving, who
referred me to the Theatre-list quoted. One work only on Bacon-Shakespeare had I been
privileged to examine, when after I had given my lectures on
Francis Tudor-Bacon during the winter of 1920, and was
preparing my Study, Count Vitztum of Silesia honored me with
the book, hitherto unknown to me, of his distinguished
relative, the late Ambassador Count Vitztum
Eckstaedt. "Shake-speare-Shakspere. The Genesis of the
Shake-speare Plays," Stuttgart Cotta-sche Buchandlung,
1888. Gripping and highly interesting as Count Vitztum's
book is, it still falls short of my own researches which
have reached
122
beyond the Shakespeare question to the still greater
truth of Bacon-Tudor. Although I am a hand-writing psychologist, I have
never yet occupied myself with the deciphering of the Bacon
ciphers. To engage in this in order to verify the exhaustive
work of other searchers were a belated and a useless labor.
The discovery and demonstration of Bacon's cipher methods
and keys will verify all the ciphers thus far
decoded. In special works yet forthcoming I intend as
hand-writing psychologist to enter further into several of
Francis' Cryptographic methods with which I am
familiar. For me as a historian, the Tudor research is the
all-essential, as this name stands as the foundation stone
of the edifice: Tudor-Bacon-Shakespeare. The individual
personality can always be best understood and appreciated,
when its blood and lineage, and the race from which it
sprung are thoroughly known. Books and letters are the voices of men, which speak
to us after the lapse of centuries. In the passionate and
poetical language of the dramas and in the delicate rhythm
of the Psalms and Sonnets, the words of Francis come down to
us and awaken in us the echoes of spiritual music. They
animate the ideal world in his legendary tales; in the
sonnet of the blind child from India's fairy-land; they
resound again from the mythological forms of the Midsummer
Night's Dream, and in the magic domain of Prospero's
sea-girt isle. We walk with him in his lonely wanderings through the
rocky and wooded ledges on the banks of the Wye, through the
park of Kenilworth with its grottoes, nymphs and sparkling
fountains, in his extravagant and luxurious splendor; we
follow him to the shore in contemplation of the storm-tossed
sea; we find him in the quiet solitude of Twickenham or
Gorhambury, where the creative genius of the naturalist
transformed and broadened his domain. Everywhere his "new inventions" surrounded and
absorbed him. Nature was ever living and weaving, budding
and blossoming about him, all,--all to be immortalized in
the delicate elfin tales and legends, or to grow and develop
into those figures of titanic power worthy the invention of
a son of the mighty race of Tudor. What a wide chasm yawns between the young man
embittered at his fate, filled with contempt for all things
transitory, and the sublime conqueror who rises triumphant
over all that is earthly and declares:
"There are more things in heaven and earth,
Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." In deepest sympathy with the great Universal Harmony,
emerging victorious from every struggle, filled with the
fullness of passionate courage, his gigantic Promethean
figure rises in immortal grandeur above the calumnies with
which lying history has for centuries vainly endeavored to
tarnish his fair fame. ________ Translator's
Postscript.--The translator feels, constrained to call
especial attention to an extremely remarkable feature of
this book. Madame Deventer had never read any of the other
numerous works on the subject, but plowed the field as
absolutely new ground, beginning her investigations
without the least idea whither they would lead her. This
gives to her conclusions a greatly added weight, and even if
her admiring translator had failed to follow all her
deductions, he, for one, would certainly not presume to
criticise them. Let others do so if they feel competent. W.
P.
124
SirBacon.org - Sir Francis Bacon's New Advancement of Learning
