Bacon is Shake-Speare

CHAPTER XI

On the revealing page 136 in "Loves Labour's lost."

In the previous chapter it was pointed out that using letters for numbers, Bacon's name is represented by 33.

B A C O N .

2 2 1 3 14 13 = 33

and that the long word possesses the numerical value of 287.

H O N O R I F I C A B I L I T U

8 8 14 13 14 17 9 6 9 3 1 2 9 11 9 19 20

D I N I T A T I B U S

4 4 9 13 9 19 1 19 9 2 20 18 = 287

In the Shakespeare folio, Page 136, shewn in Plate 20 and Plate 21, on Pages 86-7, ON LINE 33, we read "What is Ab speld backward with the horn on his head?"

The answer which is given is evidently an incorrect answer, it is "Ba, puericia with a horne added," and the Boy mocks him with "Ba most seely sheepe, with a horne: you heare his learning."

The reply should of course have been in Latin. The Latin for a horn is cornu. The real answer therefore is "Ba corn-u fool."

This is the exact answer you might expect to find on the line 33, since the number 33 indicates Bacon's name. And now, and now only, can be explained the very frequent use of the ornament representing a Horned Sheep, inside and outside "Baconian" books, under whatever name they may be known. An example will be found at the head of the present chapter on page 103. The uninitiated are still "informed" or rather "misinformed" that this ornament alludes to the celebrated Golden Fleece of the Argonauts and they little suspect that they have been purposely fooled, and that the real reference is to Bacon.

It should be noted here that in the Quarto of "Loues Labor's lost," see Plate 22, Page 105, if the heading "Loues Labor's lost" be counted as a line, we read on the 33rd line: "Ba most seely sheepe with a horne: you heare his learning." This would direct you to a reference to Bacon, although not so perfectly as the final arrangement in the folio of 1623.

Proceeding with the other lines in the page, we read: —

"Quis quis, thou consonant?"

This means "Who, who"? [which Bacon] because in order to make the revelation complete we must be told that it is "Francis" Bacon, so as to leave no ambiguity or possibility of mistake. How then is it possible that we can be told that it is Francis Bacon? We read in answer to the question:

[Illustration: Plate XXII. Facsimile from "Loues Labor Lost," First edition 1598]

 
     "Quis quis, thou consonant?
      The last of five vowels if you repeat them, the
        fifth if I.
      I will repeat them a, e, I.
      The Sheepe, the other two concludes it o, u."
 

Now here we are told that a, e, I, o, u is the answer to Quis quis, and we must note that the I is a capital letter. Therefore a is followed by e, but I being a capital letter does not follow e but starts afresh, and we must read I followed by o, and o followed by u.

[Illustration: Plate XXIII. Facsimile of a Contemporary Copy of a Letter of Francis Bacon.]

Is it possible that these vowels will give us the Christian name of Bacon? Can it be that we are told on what page to look? The answer to both these questions is the affirmative "Yes."

The great Folio of Shakespeare was published in 1623, and in the following year, 1624, there was brought out a great Cryptographic book by the "Man in the Moon." We shall speak about this work presently; suffice for the moment to say that this book was issued as the key to the Shakespeare Folio of 1623. If we turn to page 254 in the Cryptographic book we shall find Chapter XIV. "De Transpositione Obliqua, per dispositionem Alphabeti."

[Illustration: Plate XXIV. FACSIMILES FROM PAGE 255 OF "GU TAVI SELENI

CRYPTOMENYTICES," PUBLISHED 1624. [The Square Table is much enlarged].]

This chapter describes how, by means of square tables, one letter followed by another letter will give the cypher letter. On the present page appears the square, which is shown in Plate 24, which enables us to answer the question "Quis quis."

By means of this square we perceive that "a" followed by "e" gives us the letter F, that "I" followed by "o" gives us the letter R, and that "o" followed by "u" gives us the letter A. The answer therefore to Quis quis (which Bacon do you mean) is Fra [Bacon]. See Plate 23, Page 107.

[Illustration: Plate XXV. FACSIMILE FROM PAGE 2O2b OF "TRAICTE DES

CHIFFRES OU SECRETES MANIERES D'ESCRIRE," PAR VlGENÈRE.]

But what should induce us to look at this particular chapter on page 254 of the Cryptographic book for the solution? The answer is clearly given in the wonderful page 136 of the 1623 Folio of Shakespeare.

As has been pointed out the numerical value of the long word Honorificabilitudinitatibus is 287, and the numerical value of Bacon is 33. We have found Bacon from Ba with a horn, and we require the remainder of his name, accordingly deduct 33 from 287, and we get the answer 254 which is the number of the required page in the Cryptographic book of 1624. But the wise Author knew that someone would say "How does this apply to the 1598 Quarto published twenty-six years before the great Cryptographic book appeared?" On Plate 24, Page 108, taken from page 255 of the Cryptographic book of 1624, it is shewn that the following lines are attached to the square

"Quarta Tabula, ex Vigenerio, pag. 202.b, etc."

=Square table taken from Vigenerio, page 202.b.

This reference is to the work entitled, "Traicte des chiffres ou secretes manieres d'escrire": par Blaise de Vigenere, which was published in Paris in 1586. Spedding states (Vol. I. of "Bacon's Letters and Life," p. 6-8) that Francis Bacon went in 1576 to France, with Sir Amias Paulet, the English Ambassador. Bacon remained in France until 1578-9, and when in 1623 he published his "De Augmentis Scientiarum" – (the Advancement of Learning) he tells us that while in Paris he invented his own method of secret writing. See Spedding's "Works of Bacon," Vol. 4, p. 445.

The system which Bacon then invented is now known as the Biliteral Cypher, and it is in fact practically the same as that which is universally employed in Telegraphy under the name of the Morse Code.

A copy of Vigenere's book will be found in the present writer's Baconian library, for he knew by the ornaments and by the other marks that Bacon must have had a hand in its production.

Anyone, therefore, reading the Quarto edition of "Loues Labor's lost," 1598, and putting two and two together will find on p. 202.b of Vigenere's book, the Table, of which a facsimile is here given, Plate 25, Page 109. This square is even more clear than the square table in the great Cryptographic book.

Thus, upon the same page 136 in the Folio, or on F. 4 in the Quarto, in addition to Honorificabilitudinitatibus containing the revealing sentence "Hi ludi F Baconis nati tuiti orbi" – "These plays F Bacon's offspring are entrusted to the world," we see that we are able to discover on line 33 the name of Bacon, and by means of the lines which follow that it is Fra. Bacon who is referred to.

Before parting with this subject we will give one or two examples to indicate how often the number 33 is employed to indicate Bacon.

We have just shewn that on page 136 of the Folio we obtain Bacon's name on line 33. On page 41 we refer to Ben Jonson's "Every man out of his Humour." In an extremely rare early Quarto [circa 1600] of that play some unknown hand has numbered the pages referring to Sogliardo (Shakespeare) and Puntarvolo (Bacon) 32 and 32 repeated. Incorrect pagination is a common method used in "revealing" books to call attention to some statements, and anyone can perceive that the second 32 is really 33 and as usual reveals something about Bacon.

On page 61 we point out that on page 33 of the little book called "The Great Assizes holden in Parnassus" Apollo speaks. As the King speaks in a Law Court only through the mouth of his High Chancellor so Apollo speaks in the supposititious law action through the mouth of his Chancellor of Parnassus, who is Lord Verulam, i.e. Bacon. Thus again Bacon is found on Page 33. The writer could give very numerous examples, but these three which occur incidentally will give some idea how frequently the number 33 is used to indicate Bacon.⁸

The whole page 136 of the Folio is cryptographic, but we will not now proceed to consider any other matters contained upon it, but pass on to discuss the great Cryptographic book which was issued under Bacon's instructions in the year following the publication of the great Folio of Shakespeare. Before, however, speaking of the book, we must refer to the enormous pains always taken to provide traps for the uninitiated.

If you go to Lunaeburg, where the Cryptographic book was published, you will be referred to the Library at Wolfenbuttel and to a series of letters to be found there which contain instructions to the engraver which seem to prove that this book has no possible reference to Shakespeare. We say, seem to prove, for the writer possesses accurate photographs of all these letters and they really prove exactly the reverse, for they are, to those capable of understanding them, cunningly devised false clues, quite clear and plain. That these letters are snares for the uninitiated, the writer, who possesses a "Baconian" library, could easily prove to any competent scholar.

[Illustration: 106 Surnames. Plate XXVI.]

Before referring to the wonderful title page of the Cryptographic book which reveals the Bacon-Shakespeare story, it is necessary to direct the reader's attention to Camden's "Remains," published 1616. We may conclude that Bacon had a hand in the production of this book, since Spedding's "Bacon's Works," Vol. 6, p. 351, and Letters, Vol. 4, p. 211, informs us that Bacon assisted Camden with his "Annales."

In Camden's "Remains," 1616, the Chapter on Surnames, p. 106, commences with an ornamental headline like the head of Chapter 10, p. 84, but printed "upside down." A facsimile of the heading in Camden's book is shewn in Plate 26, page 113.

This trick of the upside down printing of ornaments and even of engravings is continually resorted to when some revelation concerning Bacon's works is given. Therefore in Camden's "Remains" of 1616 in the Chapter on Surnames, because the head ornament is printed upside down, we may be perfectly certain that we shall find some revelation concerning Bacon and Shakespeare.

Accordingly on p. 121 we find as the name of a village "Bacon Creping." There never was a village called "Bacon Creping." And on page 128 we read "such names as Shakespeare, Shotbolt, Wagstaffe." In referring to the great Cryptographic book, we shall realise the importance of this conjunction of names.

On Plate 27, Page 115, we give a reduced facsimile of the title page, which as the reader will see, states in Latin that the work is by Gustavus Selenus, and contains systems of Cryptographic writing, also methods of the shorthand of Trithemius. The Imprint at the end, under a very handsome example of the double A ornament which in various forms is used generally in books of Baconian learning, states that it was published and printed at Lunaeburg in 1624. Gustavus Selenus we are told in the dedicatory poems prefixed to the work is "Homo lunae" [the man in the Moon].

[Illustration: Plate XXVII. Facsimile Title Page.]

[Illustration: Plate XXVIII. Left-Handed Portion, much enlarged, of

Plate XXVIII.]

[Illustration: 202. – Royal Eagle. Facsimile from p. 93 of Boutell's

English Heraldry, 1899. If this is compared with the bird in

Plate XXVIII. it will at once be seen that the later is an Eagle in full flight.]

[Illustration: Plate XXIX. Right-Hand Portion, much enlarged, of

Plate XXVII.]

[Illustration: Plate XXX. Top Portion of Plate XXVII., much enlarged.]

[Illustration: Plate XXXI. Bottom Portion of Plate XXVII., much enlarged.]

Look first at the whole title page; on the top is a tempest with flaming beacons, on the left (of the reader) is a gentleman giving something to a spearman, and there are also other figures; on the right is a man on horseback, and at the bottom in a square is a much dressed up man taking the "Cap of Maintenance" from a man writing a book.

Examine first the left-hand picture shewn enlarged, Plate 28, Page 118. You see a man, evidently Bacon, giving his writing to a Spearman who is dressed in actor's boots (see Stothard's painting of Falstaff in the "Merry Wives of Windsor" wearing similar actor's boots, Plate 32, Page 127). Note that the Spearman has a sprig of bay in the hat which he holds in his hand. This man is a Shake-Spear, nay he really is a correct portrait of the Stratford householder, which you will readily perceive if you turn to Dugdale's engraving of the Shakespeare bust, Plate 5, Page 14. In the middle distance the man still holding a spear, still being a Shake-Speare, walks with a staff, he is therefore a Wagstaffe. On his back are books – the books of the plays. In the sky is seen an arrow, no, it is not sufficiently long for an arrow, it is a Shotbolt (Shakespeare, Wagstaffe, Shotbolt, of Camden's "Remains"). This Shotbolt is near to a bird which seems about to give to it the scroll it carries in its beak. But is it a real bird? No, it has no real claws, its feet are Jove's lightnings, verily, "it is the Eagle of great verse."

Next, look on Plate 29, Page 119, which is the picture on the right of the title page. Here you see that the same Shake-spear whom we saw in the left-hand picture is now riding on a courser. That he is the same man is shewn by the sprig of bay in his hat, but he is no longer a Shake-spear, he is a Shake-spur. Note how much the artist has emphasised the drawing of the spur. It is made the one prominent thing in the whole picture. We refer our reader to "The Returne from Pernassus" (see pp. 47-48) where he will read,

 
     "England affordes those glorious vagabonds
      That carried earst their fardels on their backes
      Coursers to ride on through the gazing streetes."
 

Now glance at the top picture on the title page (see Plate 27, Page 115,) which is enlarged in Plate 30, Page 122. Note that the picture is enclosed in the magic circle of the imagination, surrounded by the masks of Tragedy, Comedy, and Farce (in the same way as Stothard's picture of the "Merry Wives of Windsor," Plate 32, Page 127).

[Illustration: Plate XXXII. Scene from "The Merry Wives of Windsor," painted by Thomas Stothard.]

The engraving represents a tempest with beacon lights; No; it represents

"The Tempest" of Shakespeare and tells you that the play is filled with

Bacon lights. (In the sixteenth century Beacon was pronounced Bacon.

"Bacon great Beacon of the State.")

We have already pointed out that "The Tempest," as Emile Montegut shewed in the Revue des Deux Mondes in 1865, is a mass of Bacon's revelations concerning himself.

At the bottom (see Plate 27, Page 115, and Plate 31, Page 123), within the "four square corners of fact," surrounded with disguised masks of Tragedy, Comedy, and Farce, is shewn the same man who gave the scroll to the Spearman, see Plate 29, Page 118 (note the pattern of his sleeves). He is now engaged in writing his book, while an Actor, very much overdressed and wearing a mask something like the accepted mask of Shakespeare, is lifting from the real writer's head a cap known in Heraldry as the "Cap of Maintenance." Again we refer to our quotation on page 48.

 
      "Those glorious vagabonds…
       Sooping it in their glaring Satten sutes."
 

Is not this masquerading fellow an actor "Sooping it in his glaring Satten sute"? The figure which we say represents Bacon, see Plate 28, wears his clothes as a gentleman. Nobody could for a moment imagine that the masked creature in Plate 31 was properly wearing his own clothes. No, he is "sooping it in his glaring Satten sute."

The whole title page clearly shows that it is drawn to give a revelation about Shakespeare, who might just as well have borne the name of Shotbolt or of Wagstaffe or of Shakespur, see "The Tempest," Act v., Scene I.

 
     "The strong bass'd promontorie
      Have I made shake, and by the spurs pluckt up."
 

There are also revealing title pages in other books, shewing a spear and an actor wearing a single spur only (see Plate 35, Page 153).

It will be of interest to shew another specially revealing title page, which for upwards of a hundred years remained unaltered as the title page to Vol. I. of Bacon's collected works, printed abroad in Latin. A different engraving, representing the same scene was also published in France. These engravings, however, were never reproduced or used in England, because the time for revelation had not yet come. Bacon is shewn seated (see Plate 33, Page 131). Compare his portrait with the engraving of the gentleman giving his scroll to the Spearman in the Gustavus Silenus frontispiece, Plate 27, Page 115, and Plate 28, Page 118. Bacon is pointing with his right hand in full light to his open book, while his left hand in deepest shadow is putting forward a figure holding in both its hands a closed and clasped book, which by the cross lines on its side (the accepted symbol of a mirror) shows that it represents the mirror up to Nature, i.e., Shakespeare's plays. Specially note that Bacon puts forward with his LEFT hand the figure holding the book which is the mirror up to Nature. In the former part of this treatise the writer has proved that the figure that forms the frontispiece of the great folio of Shakespeare's plays, which is known as the Droeshout portrait of Wm. Shakespeare, is really composed of two LEFT arms and a mask. The reader will now be able to fully realise the revelation contained in Droeshout's masked figure with its two left arms when he examines it with the title page shown, Plate 33, Page 131.

[Illustration: Plate XXXIII. Facsimile Title Page.]

Bacon is putting forward what we described as a "figure"; it is a "man" with false breasts to represent a woman (women were not permitted to act in Bacon's time), and the man is clothed in a goat skin. Tragedos was the Greek word for a goat skin, and Tragedies were so called because the actors were dressed in goat skins. This figure therefore represents the Tragic Muse. Here in the book called De Augmentis Scientiarum, which formed one part of the Great Instauration, is placed an engraving to show that another part of the Great Instauration known as Shakespeare's Plays was issued LEFT-HANDEDLY, that is, was issued under the name of a mean actor, the actor Shakespeare. This title page is very revealing, and should be taken in conjunction with the title page of the Cryptographic book which under the name of Gustavus Silenus, "Homo lunae," the "Man in the Moon," was published in 1624 in order to form a key to certain cyphers in the 1623 Folio of Shakespeare's Plays.

These two title pages were prepared with consummate skill in order to reveal to the world, when the time was ripe, that

BACON IS SHAKESPEARE

CHAPTER XII

The "Householder of Stratford."

We have in Chapter II. printed Mr. George Hookham's list of the very few incidents recorded concerning Shakespeare's life, but, as we have already shewn, a great deal of the "authentic history" of the Stratford clown has in fact been revealed to us. Ben Jonson calls the Stratford man who had purchased a coat of arms "Sogliardo" (scum of the earth), says he was brother to Sordido, the miser (Shakspeare was a miser), describes him as an essential clown (that means that he was a rustic totally unable to read and write), shews that he speaks "i' th' straungest language," and calls Heralds "Harrots," and finally sums him up definitely as a "Swine without a head, without braine, wit, anything indeed, Ramping to Gentilitie." In order that there should be no mistake as to the man who is referred to, "Sogliardo's" motto is stated to be "Not without Mustard," Shakespeare's motto being "Not without right" (Non sanz droict). Ben Jonson's account of the real Stratford man is confirmed by Shakespeare's play of "As You Like it," where Touchstone, the courtier playing clown, says, "It is meat and drinke to me to see a clowne" (meaning an essential clown, an uneducated rustic); yet he salutes him as "gentle," shewing that the mean fellow possesses a coat of arms.

The Clown is born in the Forest of Ardennes (Shakespeare's mother's name was Arden). He is rich, but only so-so rich, that is rich for a clowne (New Place cost only £60). He says he is wise, and Touchstone mocks him with Bacon's words, "The Foole doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a Fool." He says he has "a prettie wit" (pretty wit is the regular orthodox phrase as applied to Shakespeare). But when asked whether he is learned, he distinctly replies "No," which means that he says that he cannot read one line of print. A man who could read one line of print was at that period in the eye of the law "learned," and could not be hanged when convicted for the first time except for murder. If any persons be found to dispute the fact that the reply "No" to the question "Art thou learned?" meant in Queen Elizabeth's day "I cannot read one line of print" such persons must be totally unacquainted with Law literature.⁹

The play "As You Like it" confirms Ben Jonson's characterisation of Shakespeare being "an essential clowne." Next let us turn to Ratsei's Ghost (see p. 49), which, as Mr. Sidney Lee, in his "Life of William Shakespeare," p. 159, 1898 ed., confesses, refers to Shakespeare. Ratsei advises the young actor to copy Shakespeare, "and to feed upon all men, to let none feede upon thee" (meaning Shakespeare was a cruel usurer). As we shew, page 53, Grant White says: "The pursuit of an impoverished man for the sake of imprisoning him and depriving him both of the power of paying his debts and supporting himself and his family, is an incident in Shakespeare's life which it requires the utmost allowance and consideration for the practice of the time and country to enable us to contemplate with equanimity – satisfaction is impossible."

Ratsei continues, "Let thy hand be a stranger to thy pocket" [like the miser, Shakespeare], "thy hart slow to perform thy tongues promise" [like the lying rascal Shakespeare], "and when thou feelest thy purse well lined, buy thee a place of lordship in the country" [as Shakespeare had bought New Place, Stratford] "that, growing weary of playing, thy mony may there bring thee to dignitie and reputation" [as Shakespeare obtained a coat of arms], "then thou needest care for no man, nor not for them that before made thee prowd with speaking their words upon the stage." This manifestly refers to two things, one that Shakespeare when he bought New Place, quitted London and ceased to act; the other that he continually tried to exact more and more "blackmail" from those to whom he had sold his name.

Now we begin at last to understand what we are told by Rowe, in his "Life of Shakespeare," published in 1709, that is, 93 years after Shakespeare's death in 1616, when all traces of the actual man had been of set purpose obliterated, because the time for revealing the real authorship of the plays had not yet come. Rowe, page x., tells us: "There is one Instance so singular in the Magnificence of this Patron of Shakespeare's, that if I had not been assur'd that the Story was handed down by Sir William D'Avenant, who was probably very well acquainted with his Affairs, I should not have ventured to have inserted, that my Lord Southampton, at one time, gave him a thousand Pounds, to enable him to go through with a Purchase which he heard he had a mind to."

This story has been hopelessly misunderstood, because people did not know that a large sum had to be paid to Shakespeare to obtain his consent to allow his name to be put to the plays, and that New Place had to be purchased for him, 1597 (the title deeds were not given to him for five or six years later), and that he had also to be sent away from London before "W Shakespeare's" name was attached to any play, the first play bearing that name being, as we have already pointed out, page 89, "Loues Labor's lost," with its very numerous revelations of authorship. Then, almost immediately, the world is informed that eleven other plays had been written by the same author, the list including the play of "Richard II."

The story of the production of the play of "Richard II." is very curious and extremely instructive. It was originally acted with the Parliament scene, where Richard II. is made to surrender, commencing in the Folio of 1623 with the words —

"Fetch hither Richard, that in common view he may surrender,"

continuing with a description of his deposition extending over 167 lines to the words —

"That rise thus nimbly by a true king's fall."

This account of the deposition of a king reached Queen Elizabeth's ears; she was furiously angry and she exclaimed: "Seest thou not that I am Richard II."

A copy of the play without any author's name was printed in 1597, omitting the story of the deposition of Richard II.; this was followed by a second and probably a third reprint in 1597, with no important alterations, but still without any author's name. Then, after the actor had been sent away to Stratford, Shakespeare's name was put upon a fourth reprint, dated 1598.

The story of Richard II.'s deposition was not printed in the play till 1608, five years after the death of Queen Elizabeth.¹⁰

This history of the trouble arising out of the production of the play of "Richard II." explains why a name had to be found to be attached to the plays. Who would take the risk? An actor was never "hanged," he was often whipped, occasionally one lost his ears, but an actor of repute would probably have refused even a large bribe. There was, however, a grasping money-lending man, of little or no repute, that bore a name called Shaxpur, which might be twisted into Bacon's pen-name Shake-Speare, and that man was secured, but as long as he lived he was continually asking for more and more money. The grant of a coat of arms was probably part of the original bargain. At one time it seems to have been thought easier to grant arms to his father. This, however, was found impossible. But when in 1597 Bacon's friend Essex was Earl Marshal and chief of the Heralds' College, and Bacon's servant Camden (whom Bacon had assisted to prepare the "Annales" – see Spedding's "Bacon's Works," Vol. 6, p. 351, and Letters, Vol. 4, p. 211), was installed as Clarenceux, King-of-Arms, the grant of arms to Shakespeare was recognised, 1599. Shakespeare must have been provisionally secured soon after 1593, when the "Venus and Adonis" was signed with his name, because in the next year, 1594, "The Taming of a Shrew" was printed, in which the opening scene shews a drunken "Warwickshire" rustic [Shakspeare was a drunken Warwickshire rustic], who is dressed up as "My lord," for whom the play had been prepared. (In the writer's possession there is a very curious and absolutely unique masonic painting revealing "on the square" that the drunken tinker is Shakspeare and the Hostess, Bacon.)

The early date at which Shakspeare had been secured explains how in 1596 an application for a grant of arms seems to have been made (we say seems) for the date may possibly be a fraud like the rest of the lying document.

We have referred to Shakspeare as a drunken Warwickshire rustic who lived in the mean and dirty town of Stratford-on-Avon. There is a tradition that Shakespeare as a very young man was one of the Stratfordians selected to drink against "the Bidford topers," and with his defeated friends lay all night senseless under a crab tree, that was long known as Shakespeare's crab tree.

Shakespeare's description of the Stratford man as the drunken tinker in "The Taming of a Shrew" shews that the actor maintained his "drunken" character. This habit seems to have remained with him till the close of his life, for Halliwell-Phillipps says: "It is recorded that the party was a jovial one, and according to a somewhat late but apparently reliable tradition when the great dramatist [Shakespeare of Stratford] was returning to New Place in the evening, he had taken more wine than was conducive to pedestrian accuracy. Shortly or immediately afterwards he was seized by the lamentable fever which terminated fatally on Friday, April 23rd."

The story of his having to leave Stratford because he got into very bad company and became one of a gang of deer-stealers, has also very early support.

We have already proved that Shakspeare could neither read nor write. We must also bear in mind that the Stratford man never had any reputation as an actor.

Rowe, p. vi., thus writes: "His Name is Printed, as the Custom was in those Times, amongst those of the other Players, before some old Plays,¹¹ but without any particular Account of what sort of Parts he us'd to play; and tho' I have inquir'd I could never meet with any further Account of him this way than that the top of his Performance was the Ghost in his own Hamlet." The humblest scene-shifter could play this character, as we shall shew later. What about being manager of a Theatre? Shakspeare never was manager of a Theatre. What about being master of a Shakespeare company of actors? There never existed a Shakespeare company of actors. What about ownership of a Theatre? Dr. Wallace, says in the Times of Oct. 2nd 1909, that at the time of his death Shakespeare owned one fourteenth of the Globe Theatre, and one-seventh of the Blackfriars Theatre. The profit of each of these was probably exceedingly small. The pleadings, put forth the present value at £300 each, but as a broad rule, pleadings always used to set forth at least ten times the actual facts. In the first case which the writer remembers witnessing in Court, the pleadings were 100 oxen, 100 cows, 100 calves, 100 sheep, and 100 pigs, the real matter in dispute being one cow and perhaps one calf. If we assume, therefore, that the total capital value of the holding of W. Shakespeare in both theatres taken together amounted to £60 in all, we shall probably, even then, considerably over-estimate their real worth. Now having disposed of the notion that Shakespeare was ever an important actor, was ever a manager of a Theatre, was ever the master of a company of actors, or was ever the owner of any Theatre, let us consider what Rowe means by the statement that the top of his performance was the Ghost in "Hamlet."