Shakespeare

&

Biography




by

Robert A. Albano



1

THE SHAKESPEARE DEBATE

During the past few decades there has been a debate going on
regarding the identity of William Shakespeare. A number of individuals
claimed that a commoner from the rural countryside with no university
education at all could not have possibly been the true author of such
magnificent and highly intelligent dramatic works of literature. Not
surprisingly, the individuals who made such remarks were largely aristocrats
from the city with university educations. Their remarks clearly were made
out of prejudice or out of some other personal need to satisfy.
One of the leading recent proponents of this debate was an aristocrat
who claimed that the real author of the plays was his own ancestor, Edward
de Vere (the Earl of Oxford). He claimed that his ancestor wished to remain
anonymous, and thus he used Shakespeares name to hide his own identity.
The notion that de Vere was the true author actually originated with J.
Thomas Looney, a British schoolmaster, who proposed the theory in a book
written in 1920. However, documents and literary works that have survived
with de Veres name on it reveal a decidedly inferior writer with none of
Shakespeares ability in writing. The claim was unsubstantiated. It was, to
be blunt, nonsense.
But the floodgate was opened. Soon numerous theorists and
speculators proposed all kinds of outrageous and outlandish suggestions as to
the supposedly true identity of the author of the plays. Every name under the
sun was suggested, including many individuals who had died long before the
existence of the plays came into being. Among the names proposed were
Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, and even Queen Elizabeth. Some of
these claims were made even before 1920: Francis Bacon, for example, was
proposed back in 1785 (by James Wilmot). Christopher Marlowe was
offered in 1895 (by Wilbur Ziegler). But the case for Queen Elizabeth as a
contender did not come until 1956 (by George Elliot Sweet). During the
1970s there was again the attempt to link de Vere to the plays. And such
claims continue to be made or remade today. Many of these claims are just
downright absurd. None of them have ever been substantiated. There has
never been one real strong piece of evidence to indicate that someone other
than the rural commoner named William Shakespeare was indeed the true
author of these plays.
Two important points to note: first, all of these claims were made
long after Shakespeare was dead. No one in Shakespeares lifetime or the in
the generations following ever doubted that the man named William
Shakespeare was the true author of the plays. Second, the fact that so many
contenders are proposed (more than the four mentioned here) also suggests
that the evidence for any one of them is flimsy and unaccepted by an
2

overwhelming majority of scholars and even by most of the speculators
themselves.
A number of people, nevertheless, still persist in making ridiculous
claims in an effort to make themselves appear important or knowledgeable.
But, rather, to anyone knowledgeable about Shakespeare at all, such claims
are absurd; and the people making them are equally absurd.
As the famous scholar Louis B. Wright has said, "To those
acquainted with the history of the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods, it is
incredible that anyone should be so nave or ignorant as to doubt the reality
of Shakespeare as the author of the plays that bear his name."
Shakespeare was a genius. A genius can come from any location
(city or countryside), any class (common or aristocratic), or any time
(modern or past). There are no limitations regarding the source from which
genius may spring. But a true genius really gains an advantage when he
grows up in time and place of cultural advantage. And, most fortunately, the
genius named William Shakespeare grew up in one of the greatest times of
cultural and artistic flowering known in the history of mankind, namely, the
Renaissance.


3

SHAKESPEARE DOCUMENTS

During the Renaissance the writing of biographies was not a common
practice. To be sure, there were Lives: books on the lives of famous
people. But the usual subjects for these books were kings or saints. To write
a biography about a commoner was just something that was not done. Thus,
we do not have a significant amount of details about any author who lived
before the 18
th
century. And, so, sadly, we do not have a significant amount
of information on the life of William Shakespeare.
There have been attempts in recent times to construct a biography on
William Shakespeare. One of the best of these (and, thus, recommended to
the student) is Shakespeare (1970) by the British novelist Anthony Burgess.
Burgesss scholarly interest in Shakespeare also spilled over into his creative
endeavors, as can be seen in his highly speculative and fictional Nothing Like
the Sun (1964), which manufactures an account of Shakespeares early life.
But even in the biography by Burgess and the other really fine attempts to set
his life on paper, the writer must of necessity use his imagination. Thus, all
of the biographies rely heavily on speculation and theory. If they relied
solely on facts, their books would be very thin and skimpy accounts at best.
Thus, the student of Shakespeare must approach any biography on the great
playwright with a certain amount of caution.
Despite the fact that there was never any attempt made in the
Renaissance to write on Shakespeares life, a surprisingly large number of
documents have survived that pertain to Shakespeares life in one way or
another. There are approximately forty official documents that pertain to the
life of William Shakespeare. This is more than what exists on most
Renaissance writers or even aristocrats. In addition, there are approximately
fifty literary references to Shakespeare made by his contemporaries.
Shakespeare was a man who was well known and familiar to the people
living in London. And none of these people ever expressed the slightest
doubt that the man known as William Shakespeare was indeed truly the
author of the plays and poems.
Of course, in addition to the ninety or so documents and literary
references, there are the plays and poems. The modern biographer has
access to all of this material and combines it with the hundreds of historical
documents about the Renaissance, more generally, in order to put together a
plausible and intelligent account of Shakespeares life. Thus, by reading the
better biographies on Shakespeare, the modern reader can obtain a fairly
close approximation of what Shakespeares life may have been like.
Unfortunately, the modern reader will never be able to know as much about
Shakespeare as we do about the authors of the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries. There is still much we will never know; there is still a mystery
4

that will never be solved. And because this mystery is there, attempts are
made to fill the gaps with every possible theory under the sun.


5

SHAKESPEARES HEIGHT OF FAME

Long before William Shakespeare wrote some of his greatest
tragedies, like Hamlet and Macbeth, he was already well known in the
theater world of London as one of the best (if not the best) playwrights and
poets in Renaissance England.
Of the many contemporary literary references to Shakespeare,
perhaps the best known is the one penned by Francis Meres in his Palladis
Tamia (1598). In a fairly lengthy description of Shakespeare, Meres refers to
him as the "mellifluous and honey-tongued Shakespeare." Mellifluous
(combining the roots of the words for mellow and fluid) indicates that
Shakespeares poetic language is flowing, smooth, and tranquil. His
language is also sweet and delicious, as suggested by the expression honey-
tongued. Meres thus indicates that Shakespeare masterfully achieves the
goal of the Renaissance poet: to create a golden perfection in language that
surpasses nature.
Meres praises Shakespeare both as a poet and playwright. Meres
specifically mentions that Shakespeare is already famous for such poetical
creations as Venus and Adonis, Lucrece, and The Sonnets. In addition,
Meres specifically lists twelve plays by name for which Shakespeare is
famous. Meres concludes by giving Shakespeare the greatest praise any
dramatist could ever receive: Meres compares the playwright to Seneca for
tragedy and to Plautus for comedy. During the Renaissance, the writers
looked back to the Classical Age for inspiration and direction. In England
the dramatists were especially attracted to the Roman playwrights. In
Classical Rome the greatest writer of tragedies was Seneca, and the greatest
writer of comedies was Plautus. Thus, to compare Shakespeare to Seneca
and Plautus is to suggest that he is Englands best writer of both tragedies
and comedies.
Francis Meres made his comments back in 1598. Shakespeare would
continue to write more and even greater dramatic works for another thirteen
years. The greatest writer would become greater still.


6

SHAKESPEARES PARENTS

Shakespeares father, John Shakespeare, lived and worked all of his
life in the small town of Stratford-upon-Avon (Avon is the name of the
river that flows by the town). His primary occupation early in life was that
of a glover (that is, someone who made gloves). Gloves were made out of
leather, and a glover frequently made other leather products when his
customers requested him to do so. From glover, John Shakespeare soon also
became a shopkeeper and traded in wool and other goods. In a very short
time, he became quite prosperous and was able to own property and a farm.
Not every merchant at this time achieved this kind of success, and only a
small percentage became owners of large properties. As a successful
businessman, John Shakespeare became an active and important member of
community affairs; and from there he also became a public official in
Stratford and held the offices of alderman and mayor. However, life was not
always easy for John Shakespeare. Legal records indicate that he had
financial difficulties when his son William was in his teens. In 1580, for
example (when William was sixteen), John Shakespeare was fined for
neglecting a court summons. This was not the only legal difficulty he had at
this time.
Shakespeares mother, Mary Arden, came from a prosperous family
of landowners. In all likelihood, Marys parents probably disapproved of her
marriage to John Shakespeare, whom they would have considered to be
socially inferior. Most glovers, after all, were not then considered to be
headed on a track to success; and no one could predict when the couple was
married that John Shakespeare would achieve far more than the other glovers
of England.
John Shakespeare and Mary Arden had eight children. William was
their third child.


7

BAPTISM and EDUCATION

William Shakespeare was baptized on April 26, 1564, according to
the church records. William was probably born, then, on the April 23
because baptisms were traditionally performed three days after the birth of a
child. Birth certificates were not used then. So, there is no official record
for the birthday itself.
As a son of a public official, William would have been allowed to
attend the grammar (public) school for free. Although William would
never go on to receive any higher education at a university, there was still
much that Shakespeare could have learned in such a school that would
prepare him for his life as a poet. Latin was still considered to be the
language of education then, and so Latin learning, both language and
literature, formed the core of the curriculum. Rhetoric and logic were also
vital components (aspects) of the standard curriculum.
Learning the Latin language is a difficult task that requires a
significant amount of rote memorization. Students would be required to
memorize case endings (suffixes) for hundreds of nouns and verbs, and this
could be quite difficult and monotonous. In all likelihood, many of the boys
probably fought to get seats in the back of the classroom so they could sleep
during these Latin exercises. But an individual with an eager mind and ready
comprehension could learn the Latin language fluently at the grammar
school.
Students then were also required to read and memorize passages from
Latin literary works. William Shakespeare most assuredly would have read
and memorized long passages from Ovid, among other poets. The
Renaissance writers considered the Roman Ovid to be the premiere poet of
the Classical Age. Every writer in England made allusions to Ovid and tried
to emulate (copy) his style. Ovids poetry was rich both in style and content,
and his tales of the gods and heroes of the ancient world most assuredly
would have kindled and sparked the imagination of young William
Shakespeare.
On occasion, Greek literature and language would also be taught at
the grammar school. However, this was not so frequent an occurrence.
Grammar schools in the countryside could not always get university-
educated scholars as schoolmasters, and then not all schoolmasters knew as
much Greek as they did Latin.
Many wealthy parents sent their children to the grammar schools at
that time. Shakespeares education would not have been that much different
from the education that the aristocratic children were receiving. Of course, it
is not the education itself that is important. What is important is how one
8

applies it. And Shakespeare would certainly apply his education in a manner
that would exceed nearly all other aristocrats and commoners of his day.


9

MARRIAGE and CHILDREN

One of the official records on Shakespeare that has survived is his
marriage license. The license was issued on November 27, 1582.
Shakespeare was then eighteen years of age, and Anne Hathaway, the
woman he was to marry, was seven or eight years older. Shakespeare was,
as circumstances indicate, forced into marriage to protect the honor of Anne
Hathaway; for Anne was pregnant with Shakespeares child.
As church documents reveal, the wedding ceremony was a hurried
affair. Traditionally, the banns or announcements of marriage were made
three times in the Anglican Church. But for the marriage of William and
Anne, the announcement was only made one time. Anne Hathaway was
already three months pregnant by that time, and she probably was already
getting a little heavy with the child inside of her. In Shakespeares time a
woman who was obviously pregnant would not openly walk down the
church aisle as a bride in a wedding ceremony. The dishonor and
embarrassment would be too great.
William and Annes first child, Susanna, was born on May 26, 1583
six months after the wedding.
Because of these few facts, a number of scholars and biographers
have suggested that Shakespeare could not have possibly loved Anne and
that he was stuck in a marriage that he hated. However, this is merely
conjecture (a theory or guess).
Shakespeare could have just as easily loved his wife very much
despite the difference in their years. In fact, there seems to be more evidence
to support this view. While Shakespeare was in London, he continued to
support his family in a very extravagant manner as his financial
circumstances improved. He bought one of the most beautiful houses in
Stratford as well as adjoining property. He saw to it that his family was well
cared for even though he was away most of the year in London. He could
also have made frequent visits to Stratford. One fact is certain: Shakespeare
did continue to have a sexual relationship with his wife after their marriage,
for the couple had twins (Hamnet, a boy, and Judith, a girl), who were born
on February 2, 1585.
As suggested before, students studying the biographical and historical
background of Shakespeare should be careful to differentiate fact from
fiction. Unfortunately, too many scholars and writers propose extravagant
theories and present them as if they were facts.


10

THE DARK YEARS

From the time of Shakespeares marriage in 1582 to the time of
Shakespeares departure to London (around 1590), there is no record or
evidence of any kind to indicate the kind of work Shakespeare was doing.
How did the young genius support his family? Because records do not exist
in regards to this matter, these years are occasionally referred to as the dark
years. And because the records do not exist, a large number of guesses,
theories, and speculations have appeared. These guesses form the
Shakespeare legend stories about Shakespeares early life that have no
factual support.
One of the best guesses or legends is that Shakespeare worked for a
time as a school teacher. This is likely. Not all rural towns could obtain a
university graduate as a schoolmaster, and so often an individual from the
town who showed unusual ability would become the towns teacher. And
Shakespeare certainly had such a remarkable ability and could have easily
filled the role of schoolmaster. But, of course, that does not mean that he
did.
Other less likely guesses are that Shakespeare was a soldier in the
army or a sailor in the navy or that he became an extensive traveler to Italy
and other even more distant lands. More likely, though, is the idea that
Shakespeare stayed in Stratford during these years.
Also included in the legend are stories that suggest that Shakespeare
was forced to leave Stratford because he was a poacher (someone who is
hunting deer illegally) and that when he came to London his first job of
employment with the theater was that of a groom (to handle the horses of the
aristocrats who came to see the plays performed).
Of course, the most likely guess of all is that Shakespeare stayed in
Stratford and worked as an apprentice in his fathers shop, perhaps making
gloves and selling dry goods. The theory is rather uninteresting, though; and
that is why so many writers feel the need to invent a more elaborate and
adventurous legend about Englands greatest poet.


11

SHAKESPEARES GROWING SUCCESS

As noted earlier, Shakespeare had already achieved a high degree of
success and fame by 1598, long before he wrote most of his greatest
tragedies. But Shakespeares fame in London actually came much earlier
than 1598.
One of the earliest references to Shakespeare appeared in print in
1592. This reference is also quite amusing, for the author attacked and
criticized Shakespeare. In fact, the author, Robert Greene, who was a
playwright himself, refers to Shakespeare as an upstart crow, that is, a
young and boastful individual who is making a lot of unnecessary noise
about himself. Greene, who was at the end of his career at that time,
resented the fact that an individual who had no university education and who
had seemingly come out of nowhere was achieving a level of fame that was
already surpassing the older university-educated playwrights, such as
himself. Greene was jealous! However, by going to such pains to single out
the then young Shakespeare as the person most responsible for his own
problems, Greene was actually indicating that Shakespeare was already a
force to be reckoned with in the world of the London stage. Shakespeare
was already well on his way to success.
Most Shakespeare scholars seem to agree that Shakespeares first
play was The Comedy of Errors, performed in 1591. Thus, Shakespeare had
made himself quite well known in the relatively short space of only one year.
During the Renaissance, actors belonged to an acting troop, a small
group of men who would act only with their fellow troop members and no
one else. Usually, each acting troop would be associated with a single
theater. That is, they would only perform in that one theater and no other
(except when they were touring outside of London). Thus, each theater with
its acting troop competed with other theaters with their acting troops to gain
the most popularity and the largest audiences. Each acting troop also had its
own writer. Shakespeares acting troop performed in the Blackfriars
Theater and, later, the Globe Theater (which opened in 1599).
In 1594 the acting troop that Shakespeare belonged to became known
as The Lord Chamberlains Men. That means that the Lord Chamberlain,
a high aristocratic official in London, became their patron. During the
Renaissance, writers and acting troops depended on patronage to survive.
Most writers and actors would not even make enough money to survive if
they did not have a wealthy patron supporting their work. Patrons did not
supply writers or actors with a steady salary, but the patrons would make
monetary gifts to support such artists. Obviously, writers and actors
competed to get the wealthiest of aristocrats as their patrons.
12

In 1603, when King James I became the supreme monarch of
England, Shakespeares acting troop had another name change. They
became The Kings Men. The highest aristocrat in the nation had chosen
Shakespeares troop as the best of the land. And they were the best largely
due to Shakespeare, who wrote exclusively for his own troop. The year 1603
marks the time, then, that Shakespeares troop, and Shakespeare himself, had
achieved their greatest honor And Shakespeare had not yet written several
of his greatest tragedies: Othello (1603-04), Lear (1604-05), and Macbeth
(1606).


13

SHAKESPEARE THE ACTOR

Was Shakespeare an actor? The answer is yes, but acting was
never a major activity with him. One document from 1598 lists Shakespeare
as a principal comedian, and a document from 1603 lists Shakespeare as a
principal tragedian. But the word principal was used loosely then, and
Shakespeare never apparently performed in any starring or major roles in any
play. Back then an acting troop was relatively small, with a dozen or so
male actors. Often actors were called upon to play two parts in a single play;
and, perhaps not infrequently, stage hands and other members, who usually
worked behind the stage, were called upon to play small or non-speaking
parts when the play required a larger number of actors. From what the
records indicate, Shakespeare did not perform often. And when he did act, it
was in minor roles like Adam, the old servant in As You Like It, or the Ghost
in Hamlet. Both of these roles are minor ones with very few lines to speak.
Even during the Renaissance there were actors who were the big stars of the
program. Shakespeare was never a star.

14

A DARK MOMENT

Frequently scholars note that Shakespeare wrote primarily comedies
during the 1590s and primarily tragedies during the first decade of the 1600s.
Shakespeares plays became darker and more serious in the second half of
his career. One of the reasons for this was, most likely, the death of his son.
Hamnet died in 1596. He was only eleven years old at the time. Obviously,
this death affected Shakespeare immensely. Hamnet was his only son, and
his only male heir. Like most fathers, Shakespeare would have looked upon
his son to carry on the family name and family traditions. Hamnet, in this
sense, was the immortal part of Shakespeare.
Not missed by anyone is the similarity between the sons name and
Shakespeares greatest tragedy, Hamlet (which was probably written in
1600). Hamlet is a play about (among other things) depression. And this
was clearly an emotion that Shakespeare understood extremely well.
Shakespeare did not invent the name of Hamlet, his tragic character. But
Shakespeare is the one who portrayed Hamlet as a man who cannot
overcome his passionate grief for the death of his father. In the first act of
the play, Hamlet tells his mother that his sad outward appearance does not
even begin to indicate the severity and extent of the grief that he feels within
himself: I have that within which passeth show (I, ii: 85). The word
passeth here means surpasses. And Shakespeare himself most assuredly
would have experienced such a gnawing grief within himself, a grief so
severe and so tormenting that his outer appearance, despite the dark look of
despair, could not begin to reveal.

15

SIGNS OF SUCCESS

Shakespeare made a great deal of money in his time, but he did not
make it as a playwright. Writers made very little money at the time, and
most struggled to support themselves. But Shakespeare made money as a
businessman. He became actively involved in the business of theater, and
worked for theater in such positions that today might be called stage manager
or producer. Later, Shakespeare also became one of the owners of the Globe
Theater. As noted, Shakespeares acting troop became the most successful
in London; and the businessmen associated with their theater did quite well
for themselves.
One of the earliest indications on record of Shakespeares wealth
occurred in 1596. In that year Shakespeare obtained the title of gentleman
for his father. Such a title was the highest-ranking title a commoner could
hold. It was just one step below the aristocracy. If one did not inherit the
title, the only other way to get it would be by buying it. And such a title was
not cheap. However, with the death of his father (in 1601), Shakespeare
inherited the title.
Another indication of Shakespeares monetary success was the
purchase of New Place in 1597. New Place was a grand and elegant house
in Stratford not unlike, perhaps, what some aristocrats lived in.
Shakespeares family lived in New Place for the fourteen years before
Shakespeares retirement (in 1611) as well as during Shakespeares
retirement years. The family continued to live there long after Shakespeares
death (in 1616).
Other indications of Shakespeares prosperity occurred in 1602 with
the purchases of (1) 107 acres of farmland just outside of Stratford and (2) a
cottage and garden near New Place. Shakespeare was one of the most
successful commoners of his age despite the fact that he was paid relatively
nothing for the plays that he wrote.


16

SHAKESPEARES DEATH

Shakespeare died on April 25, 1616. He was 52 years of age. Anne
Hathaway, his wife, died in 1623 and was buried beside him.
The cause of Shakespeares death is uncertain. A document from
1664 relates a legend that many accept as truth: "Shakespeare, [Michael]
Drayton and Ben Johnson had a merie meeting, and itt seems drank too hard,
for Shakespeare died of a feavour there contracted." That Shakespeare died
by celebrating life seems appropriate, for he was a man whose literary works
symbolize the very essence of life.


17

TERMS

Quarto These are cheap printed editions of the plays based on the
manuscripts. The actual handwritten manuscripts have not
survived. Quarto editions were printed on large sheets of
paper: eight pages printed on a sheet, four on each side. The
pages would then be cut and assembled. Eighteen (18) plays
were printed in Shakespeares lifetime. For some plays, more
than one quarto version has survived. These are often
referred to as Q1, Q2, and so forth. Most of Shakespeares
plays were not printed during his lifetime. During the
Renaissance people did not want to read plays they wanted
to see them performed. Only actors actually needed copies of
the play, and such copies could be handwritten.

Folio This term is used to refer to the collected edition of
Shakespeares plays in one volume. The First Folio edition
appeared in 1623 and contained 36 plays. They were based
on the best quarto editions or on manuscripts.

Bad Quarto A quarto version based (often) on actors' memories, published
without the author's permission and usually full of many
inaccuracies.

Globe Theater The most famous of the Shakespeare
theaters. Burned down in 1613. Probably held an audience of
2000 (or perhaps even 3000) people.