John Hampden, of Hampden, in co. Bucks, and had, besides his eldest son
and heir Sir John, esquire of the body to Henry VII, five sons, Martin,
Thomas, Robert, Henry, William; Martin being placed as the second son,
and Thomas as the third. But Thomas is given as second son and Martin
as third, in Harl. MS. 1167, from which the visitation is published.
(Compare Harl. 853, ff. 113-114; 1110, f. 24b; 1563, f. 5, f. 39; Harl.
2011, ff. 64b, 65, f. 75.)
The will of Walter Arden in 1502 (31 July, 17 Hen. VII) at Doctors’
Commons proves that at that date he had a son Thomas, named second
in order. “Thomas Arden and John Charnells,[11] Squires,” attest the
document. (See French, p. 452.)
I will that my sonne Thomas have dureing his lief x marcs whiche I
have given to him. And that my sonne Martin have the Maner of Natfield
dureing his lief according as I thereof made hym astate yf it canne be
recorded, And yf not, thenne I will that the same Martyn and every of
my other sonnes, Robᵗ, Henry, and William, have eche of them v marcs
by yere duryng eche of ther lifes. And that my feoffees of my landes
make eche of them a sufficient astate of landes and tenements to the
yearely value of v marcs duryng eche of their lifes.
This is an income too small for a younger brother to live on, even
in those days, and we must imagine that the father had either placed
them, married them well, or endowed them in some way during his life.
He could not be expected to do much. His father Robert had spent his
substance in the Wars of the Roses, and was brought to the block in 30
Hen. VI (1452). Park Hall would be forfeited to the Crown and its acres
impoverished. When Walter Arden was restored by Edward IV he would
probably be encumbered by debt, and his large family (for there were
daughters also) further limited his powers. This may help to account
for the smallness of the legacies. Thomas, being the second son, might
have had something from his mother or her kin. This same Thomas was
alive in 1526, for Sir John Arden then wills that his brothers “Thomas,
Martin, and Robert should have their fees during their lives.” We may,
therefore, suppose that Henry and William had meanwhile died. It is
probable that William had gone to reside at Hawnes, in Bedfordshire, as
one bearing his name and arms appeared in that place about his time.
Seeing that Sir John was esquire of the body to Henry VII, it is very
likely that his younger brother Robert was the Robert Arden, yeoman
of the chamber (indeed Leland says he was so), to whom Henry VII
granted three patents; the first on 22nd February 17 Henry VII: “In
consideration of good and true services of our beloved servant Robert
Arden, a yeoman of our chamber, we appoint him Keeper of our Royal Park
at Aldercar,” _i.e._, Altcar, co. Lanc., 17 Henry VII (second part,
pat. m. 30). In the same series, m. 35, 9th September 17 Henry VII, he
was granted the office of Bailiff of Codmore, co. Derby, and Keeper
of the Royal Park there. The third is 24th September 23 Henry VII
(first part, pat. m. 12), a grant of Yoxall, for life, or a lease of
twenty-one years if it descended to heirs, all royal rights reserved,
at a rental of £42 a year. (See Boswell-Malone’s “Shakespeare,”
Appendix, vol. ii, 544, 545.)
It is not recorded that Martin received Natfield, and it would not seem
that he did so, as he lived at Euston, co. Oxford (Harl. Visit.). He
married Margery, daughter and coheir of Henry East, of the Hayes, in
co. Worcester; and his daughter and heir Eleanor (elsewhere Elizabeth)
married first William Rugeley, of Shenston, co. Stafford, and then
Thomas Gibbons, of Ditchley, co. Oxford (Visit. Ox. Harl. Public.).
Where meanwhile was Thomas Arden? Dugdale does not mention him again.
There is no record of any Thomas Arden, either in Warwickshire or
elsewhere, save the Thomas who is found, the year before Walter Arden’s
death, living at Wilmcote, in the parish of Aston Cantlowe, on soil
formerly owned by the Beauchamps. On 16th May, 16 Henry VII, a deed was
drawn up at Snitterfield, commencing:
Sciant presentes et futuri quod ego Johannes Mayowe de Snytterfeld
dedi, concessi et hac presenti carta mea confirmavi Roberto
Throkmerton Armigero, Thome Trussell de Billesley, Rogero Reynolds de
Henley-in-Arden, Willelmo Wodde de Wodhouse, Thome Ardern de Wylmecote
et Roberto Ardern filio ejusdem Thomæ Ardern, unum mesuagium cum suis
pertinenciis in Snytterfield. (See Halliwell-Phillipps’s “Outlines,”
vol. ii, p. 207.)
The deed is in the miscellaneous documents of Stratford-on-Avon (see
Halliwell-Phillipps’s “Calendar of the Stratford Records,” p. 291, vol.
ii, No. 83).
This list of trustees is worth noting. Thomas Trussel is identified by
his residence being given. He became Sheriff for the county in 23 Henry
VII, and was of an old and well-known family (see Harl. Visit. and
Dugdale). No Robert Throckmorton in the county could have precedence
of him, save Robert Throckmorton of Coughton, who six months later, in
November of the same year, was knighted, “a noble and pious man,” says
Dugdale. He made his will in 1518, before he set out for the Holy Land.
This was proved in 1520. His son George succeeded him at Coughton.
Edward Arden, of Park Hall, was brought up in his care, and married
Mary, his son Robert’s daughter.
That a man of the same name, living at the same time, in the same
county, retaining the same family friends, under circumstances suitable
in every way to the second son of Walter Arden’s will, should be
accepted as that son, seems perfectly natural and just, when _no other
claimant has ever been brought forward_. But we _know_ that this Thomas
and this Robert were Mary Arden’s grandfather and father; we _know_
that this property was that afterwards left in trust by this Robert
Arden for his daughters; we _know_ that the Shakespeares claimed the
relationship, and that the heralds allowed it. Men should be judged
truthful until proved guilty of falsehood, and no proof has ever been
laid down against their statement. I bring forward only as a faint
sidelight[12] the fact that of Robert Arden’s seven daughters at
Wilmcote, the four younger, Margaret, Joyce, Alice, Mary, bore Arden
names. The first and third, Agnes and Katharine, had Throckmorton
names; and Joane was the name of Thomas Trussel’s unknown wife.
Mr. Nicholls’s second objection to this unbelieved-in Thomas, that he
could not be a son of the Ardens because he is styled “husbandman,”
is of little weight. The word is an old English equivalent for
“farmer,” and might be applied to any gentleman resident on his
lands. In this sense it is often used in old wills; it is so used in
Stratford-on-Avon records, and in the examination of John Somerville,
who stated that he had received no visitors but “certain husbandmen,
near neighbours” (S.P.D.S. Eliz., 1583). “The kingdom of heaven is like
unto a husbondman that went out first bi the morowe to hire werkmen
into his vineyard” (Matt. xx, 1, Wycliffe). Even Dryden, in “Threnodia
Augustalis,” says “The Royal Husbandman appeared”; and Mr. French notes
other uses of the word: “The Arden Husbandman of Wilmecote in 1523
and 1546 paid the same amount to the subsidy as the Arden Esquire of
Yoxall, 1590” (French, “Shaks. Gen.,” p. 423). It is more than probable
that this Thomas married an unambitious wife. There is even yet a
chance of finding her name through some will or deed.
Mr. Nicholls’s third assertion, that the heralds scratched out the arms
of Arden of Park Hall because they dare not quarter them with those of
the Shakespeares, requires to be more fully dealt with.
Drummond, in his “Noble British Families,” exemplifies many varieties
of the arms of Arden, and traces them back to their derivation. He
notes that “none of the branches or sons of the Earls of Warwick bore
their arms, but only the eldest son, who was earl”; and that “the elder
branch of the Ardens took the arms of the old Earls of Warwick, the
younger branches took the arms of Beauchamp with a difference.” Now it
is quite true that the Ardens of Park Hall bore Ermine, a fesse chequy
or and az., arms derived from the Earls of Warwick, and that this was
the pattern scratched out in Shakespeare’s quartering. But no critic
seems to have noted the reason. Mary Arden was heiress not in the
eldest line, but _through a second son_. The true pattern for a second
son was three cross crosslets fitchée, and a chief or. As such they
were borne by the Ardens of Alvanley, with a crescent for a difference.
They were borne without the crescent by Simon Arden[13] of Longcroft,
the second son of Thomas, son of Sir John, and full cousin of Mary
Arden’s father. It is true that among the tombs at Yoxall the fesse
chequy appears; but that branch gained a right to this coat after the
extinction of the elder line in 1643.
Glover’s “Ordinary of Arms” mentions among the “marks of cadency” a
martlet. Martin Arden, of Euston, co. Oxford, was clearly in the wrong
to assume as he did the arms of his elder brother. William Arden, of
Hawnes, in co. Bedford, correctly bore the three cross crosslets and
the martlet. The three cross crosslets fitchée were the correct arms,
and the martlet the correct difference, for Thomas Arden, as the second
son of an Arden who might bear Ermine, a fesse chequy or and az. Thus
Glover enumerates (vol. ii, ed. 1780) among the arms of Warwickshire
and Bedfordshire: “Arden or Arderne. Gu., three cross crosslets fitchée
or; on a chief of the second, a martlet of the first. Crest, a plume of
feathers charged with a martlet or.” It is strange that Mr. Nicholls
omitted to consider this. Camden and the other heralds of the sixteenth
century were only seeking correctness in the restitution of arms, which
were impaled in John Shakespeare’s case on the right, as of the older
and nobler origin.
A similar contention arose about Edmund Neville, Edward Arden’s nephew
(S.P.D.S. Eliz. 185, 72):
Pedigree of Neville and statement that he may bear Latimer’s arms.
Richard Lord Latimer’s eldest son was John, Lord Latimer; his second
son, William Neville of Latimer. John’s son John, Lord Latimer, died
without male issue, leaving four daughters, his heirs, who divided
his lands, and may quarter his arms. William Neville’s son was
Richard Neville, who married Barbara, sister of Edward Arden of Park
Hall, and their son is Edmund. By the custom and usage of England,
after the decease of John, Lord Latimer, without issue male, Richard
Neville, his cousin german, may bear the arms of the family, _without
distinction or difference_.
If heraldry, therefore, has anything to say to this dispute, it is to
support the claim of Thomas to being a cadet of the family of the Park
Hall Ardens.
Nothing is recorded to account for Shakespeare allowing the arms of his
mother, impaled on his father’s shield, to lapse from his own. It may
be that, on his father’s death in 1601, he thought of the old meaning
of quartering, “that it may be known whom a man hath married”; it may
be that, tender of his Anne’s feelings, who had no arms to quarter,
he let his spear shine alone on his shield; or it may be that, having
proved his pedigree, he felt that
Honours best thrive
When rather from our acts we them derive
Than our fore-goers.
--“All’s Well,” Act II, sc. iii.
_“Athenæum,” 10th August 1895._
FOOTNOTES:
[11] John Charnells of Snarston had married his daughter Joyce.
[12] A strong proof of the connection lies in the fact that this Sir
Robert Throckmorton was intimately connected with the Ardens of Park
Hall, and that Sir John Arden a few months later made him also trustee
of property for his younger children. (See my “Shakespeare’s Family,”
p. 184.)
[13] See Fuller’s “Worthies.” He was Sheriff of Warwickshire, 12 Eliz.
V
STRATFORD’S “BOOKLESS NEIGHBOURHOOD”
In writing his “Outlines of the Life of Shakespeare,”
Halliwell-Phillipps determined not to give the reins to his
imagination, and to accept nothing that he did not think he could
_prove_. At times, however, his treatment of probabilities seems to
suggest that he had made up his mind that Shakespeare had grown up
under conditions which make it hard to understand the possibility of
the development of the _poet_ in the _man_. Many of his statements
have been pressed into the service of the peculiar people who deny
Shakespeare to be a poet at all. One of these, given as a fact, is
that Stratford was a “bookless neighbourhood.” It is always rash to
use universal propositions when they are not built up from a thorough
examination of all possible particulars, as it leaves them liable to be
proved untrue by a very limited opposite. Very little would serve to
prove Halliwell-Phillipps to be mistaken in his statement, and, with
him, all the crowd of copyists who follow him in everything they please
to select from his work and opinion. This may be done both generally
and specially.
I. Generally.--We know that Becon, in dedicating “The Jewel of Joy”
to the Princess Elizabeth in 1549, speaks of Warwickshire as the
most intellectual of English counties. We know that Stratford, as a
town, was intelligent enough to pay its schoolmaster far above the
average. Indeed, the master of Stratford Grammar School received a
salary _double_ that of the master of Eton. It is therefore more
than probable that Stratford had the best masters going at the time.
And good masters imply good books. From several sources we know the
curriculum of the grammar schools of the day, and the classical books
that were used. A master who could teach from such books would be sure
to have, like Chaucer’s clerk,
Standing at his bed’s head,
Twenty books y-clad in black or red.
The vicar of Stratford Church and the curate of the chapel would most
likely have a selection of volumes in their possession; the attorneys
would have their law books, the doctors their medical books. We _know_
from his will as well as from John Hall’s “cures” that Shakespeare’s
son-in-law had a notable library, which people from a distance, even,
came to see. Richard Field, the Stratford printer in London, had a
very large and important list of publications, some of which were sure
to have found their way down to his native town. Many Warwickshire
men were London printers. There is every reason to believe that the
first Sir Thomas Lucy had a library at Charlecote, which had become
enriched in his son’s time, and is remembered in his will and on his
tombstone. Sir Henry Rainsford, in the neighbourhood, the friend and
patron of Drayton the poet, was little likely to be unprovided. Sir
Fulke Greville, the Recorder of Stratford, was a reading man, and not
only was a possessor, but also a creator, of books. Clement Throgmorton
of Haseley, was a learned man; and his notable son Job was entangled
in the Martin Marprelate controversy. Every recusant’s arrest and
trial were based on his possessing “books” of a kind other than the
Government approved. One can in this way almost indefinitely widen the
sphere of the _general_ existence of books. But generalities have not
the convincing power of specialities, and as I have found, without
much searching, the _names_ of some of the books in Stratford and its
immediate neighbourhood, there may yet be found many more existing to
prove the rashness of Halliwell-Phillipps’s assumption.
II.--Specially.--Among the legal cases brought before the Town Council
were some referring to special books. For instance, in 1604 “Valentine
Palmer was attached to answer Philip Rogers, for unlawfully detaining
a certain book called ‘Gailes Kyrirgery,’ valued at ten shillings and
twopence.” This refers to “Certain Workes of Chirurgery,” by Gale,
published in 1563, and reprinted in 1586 (see Miscellaneous Documents
of Stratford-on-Avon, 2 James I, No. 23). No. 149 of the same series
gives “the answer of Philip Rogers to Valentine Palmer about ‘Gailes
Kyrirgery.’” The one book in itself is important enough to overthrow
the sweeping assertion.
But in support of the natural opinion that the clergy would have books,
we have at least one will, one inventory, and one list of prices of the
books of a curate in the very parish of Stratford--that of Bishopton.
There may have been more books, worn and valueless, but we are told the
names of those in good enough condition to have some marketable price.
The Rev. John Marshall, curate of Bishopton, died, not young, in the
fourth year of James I (1607). He left by will to his kinsman Francis
Jeccoxe “Babington upon Genesis”; to Richard his son “Martin Luther
upon 1st and 2nd epistle of St. Peter”; to John Jeccoxe, “my godsonne,
my boke called ‘The Image of God.’”
In the Inquisition of his goods taken 10th January 1606-7, by Abraham
Sturley, Ralfe Lorde, Francis Ainge, William Ainge, and Thomas Cale,
we find that some of these, or all of them, knew enough about books
to affix a contemporary saleable value, which, though it seems small
to us, must be reckoned according to the money rates of the time.
As their inventory has not been printed, and as it gives a fair
illustration of the class of libraries owned by the minor clergy, it
seems worth giving _in extenso_. It will be seen that it contains
various irregularities and contractions:
Bookes.
The Apologie of Thomas Moore, 6_d._ Palengenius Englishe, 4_d._ A
Latine Grammar, 6_d._ Lʳ Evans, Dictionary, 3_d._ Mr. Latimer’s
Sermons, 12_d._ D. Erasmus, Method Theologie, 3_d._ Sententiæ
Pueriles, 1_d._ Mr. Latimer’s Supplication, 6_d._ The Voiage of
the Wandering Knight, 2_d._ An epitome of common Prayer, 6_d._ The
Testament and Psalmes, 16_d._ Evagatrium Latine, 6_d._ A newe postill,
18_d._ An Exposition of the whole booke of Psalmes, 2_s._ 6_d._
Arsatius Shafer euarnes Evangelica, 8_d._ Nich. Hemingius, postallæ
Evangel, 2_s._ H. Holland, Aphorisms, 6_d._ An old Latine Grammar,
3_d._ Calvin’s Harmony, English, 4_d._ Stockwood’s Greek Grammar,
12_d._ Roger Ascham’s Schoolmaster, 10_d._ Nowell’s Catechisme, 6_d._
Letters in Englishe, 6_d._ A breife of prair by the Kinge, 2_d._
A breife of Calvin’s Institutions, 16_d._ A Latin Bible, 16_d._
Accidentia Stanbrigiana, 8_d._ Parte of H. Smith’s Sermons, 12_d._
D. Sutclife’s Chalenge, 12_d._ Aretius in evangl. Mar., 12_d._ G.
Gifford on Witches, 2_d._ A Catechisme, 1_d._ Calvin’s Institutions
Lat., 4_s._ J. Piscator in Epistol, 2_s._ Stockwood’s Grammar, 6_d._
B.B. Canons, 6_d._ Hyperius in Epist., 6_d._ Ovid de Tristibus, 4_d._
Aretius in Math., 2_s._ 6_d._ Enchiridion Alexd. Ariostis, 4_d._ John
Dodde. Robert, Clever, Commands, 12_d._ Piscator in epistoli Petri,
&c., 20_d._ Lupton’s perswasion from papistry, 16_d._ D. Westfaling’s
Sermons, 12_d._ B. Babington’s Commands, 16_d._ Northbrook’s Pore
man’s Garden, 12_d._ Piscator in Matheu, 12_d._ Testament Vet., 4_d._
... ts Vocabular Vet., 6_d._ B. Babington on Genes given away by will.
A booke of Statutes, 4_d._ The plaine man’s pathway to heven, 12_d._
Epitheta Jh. Rinij, 12_d._ D. Sparkes & D. Sed. Catechisme, 10_d._
D. Foulki revelation, 2_s._ The Course of Christianity, 6_d._ Common
praier Lat., 16_d._ Heilbourner in Epistle ad Timoth., 6_d._ Pasquin’s
Trance, 6_d._ Hemigs. ad Hæbros, 12_d._ Calvin upon St. John, 6_d._
Palengenius Lat., 8_d._ An old praier-booke with a Kalendar, 4_d._
Joh. Calfled, the cros, 12_d._ Calvin upon ye commandments, 12_d._
John Bell, Pope’s Funerall, 12_d._ Eras. Colloquiū., 10_d._ Virgill,
12_d._ Terents, 8_d._ Ed. Bulkler’s vetuste Testimento, 8_d._
Enchiridion Militis Christ., 4_d._ Robert Crowle’s discourse, 4_d._
Constitutiones, 4_d._ Terra florid., pamphlet, 1_d._ Eras. cap.
Fabor, &c., 8_d._ Leonard Cutman de ægrot. consolues, 6_d._ Erasmi
colloquia, old, 4_d._ B. Babington’s Lords Praier, 16_d._ Homilia de
Haimonis, 8_d._ Testamentum Lat. Vetus, 6_d._ Pars erat Ciceronis,
10_d._ T. Offic. Engl., 6_d._ Besa, Testamentum Lat., 18_d._ Ursinus,
Catechismus engl., 2_s._ 6_d._ Morall Philosophi Engl., 6_d._
Beuerley, English Meeter, 3_d._ Martin Luther, servū. arbitrum, 10_d._
Psalmi Lat., 6_d._ An old gramer, 4_d._ English psalms meter, 6_d._
Law precedents, 10_d._ Com. praier, Eng., 8_d._ Æsopi fabula, 3_d._
Ternts Lat., 8_d._ Castal, Dialog., 4_d._ Ciceronis Epistol. pars,
4_d._ Christian Instructions, old, Engl., 6_d._ Corderius, Colloquia,
4_d._ Precatio Dominica lat., 6_d._ Castalionis Dial. Lat., 8_d._ The
anatomy of the minde, 8_d._ Lodo. Vives, 3_d._ Godlie privat praiers,
&c., 8_d._ Æsop fabl., engl., old, 2_d._ Acolastus de filio et digo,
2_d._ Methods Hegindorph, 2_d._ D. Erasmus, instructio grammaticalis,
2_d._ A booke of praier specially appointed, 2_d._ Accidens and
instructions, old, 2_d._ An old Dictionary or Lexicon, 1_d._ Tithes
and oblations, 2_d._ A booke of religious discourses, popish,--. A
pathway to reading, old, 1_d._ An old portice pars II. Testamentu.
duod. patriarchr’., 2_d._ John Calvin’s sermons, 6_d._ Grammatica
Hæbr., 4_d._ Joh. Leniceri grammatice Græc., 6_d._ Carvinge and
Sewinge, 1_d._ B. Babington’s Sermons, 2_d._ Udall’s Hæbrew Gramer,
16_d._ Testamentu. Græc., 16_d._ A conference of the faith, and the
some of religion, 3_d._ H. Smythe, benefit of contentacion, 2_d._ A
solace, 2_d._ A Salve for a sicke man, 4_d._ A regiment of Health,
4_d._ Exposition of the Psalmes, 3_d._ Art of Anglinge, 2_d._ The
Sacred doct. of Divinity, 2_d._ Six principles of religion, 2_d._ An
a. b. c., 1_d._ John Parkins of a minister’s calling, 2_d._ Thaffinity
of the faithfull, 1_d._ A schole-book, English and Latin, 1_d._
Aristotle’s problemes, English, 6_d._ Demtes Catechisme, 2_d._ Dⁿᵒ
Fenner on the Lawe, 2_d._ Catechisme, Latine, 1_d._ Cæporius, Greeke
Grammer, 10_d._ And. Pola. p’litiones, 8_d._ Liber Hæbreus, 8_d._ A
sermon at the Tower, 1_d._ H. Smithe, Mar. Choice, 2_d._ A consolation
of ye soule, 2_d._ Thenemy of Securitie, 8_d._ Canons, 1_d._ A tract
of the Lord’s Supper, 2_d._ H. Smythe, prepative to marge., 1_d._ Good
huswives closet, 2_d._ Epitheton tropor, 1_d._ Epistolar’ Ciceronis
Libri 4to, 2_d._ Pa-t Err. Pateris, 1_d._ Stockwood’s Questions
gra:, 2_d._ The Castell of Health, 6_d._ St. Peter’s Chaine, 4_d._
D. Barlow’s Sermons, 1_d._ Gramer, a pamphlet, 2_d._ A dreame of the
De. and Dives, 1_d._ P’cationes Episc. Roffens., 1_d._ The sick man’s
salve, 6_d._ A bible of Ralph Smythes, 5_s._ Virgill, Engl., old....
Hulett’s Dictionary, 2_s._ Marloret on Mathew, 4_s._ An English
concordance, 4_s._ An old postill written on parchment.... Martin
Bucer in Evangelium, 5_s._ Cap’s Dictionari, 6_s._ 8_d._ Junius,
Apocalypse, 4_d._
This list--fairly long in classics, divinity, and law for a country
clergyman even of to-day--suggests that the Rev. John Marshall was a
teacher as well as a preacher. It suggests also that he had long been
a collector of books, and that he did not altogether despise the study
of lighter literature. The duplicates suggest that he might be ready to
lend his books. The list may help the bibliographer in regard to old
editions. Vautrollier and Field had the monopoly of Calvin’s works.
This library certainly helps the Shakespearean to realize the class of
clergy among whom the poet lived, and of itself redeems his birthplace
from the charge, so often brought against it, of being altogether “a
bookless neighbourhood.”
Curiously enough, shortly after this the Chamberlain enters in his
accounts, “For the carriage of books to London, 1_s._” The town council
were always very careful to have “a sufficient scholar from Oxford for
the Usher’s place.” It may be well to add that one of Shakespeare’s
sons-in-law was a great physician, the other a French scholar, and that
the latter’s brother, George Quiney, usher and curate, was described
as “of a good wit, expert in tongues, and _very_ learned.” His fellow
usher, Mr. John Trapp, afterwards head-master, “for his piety and
learning second to none,” by overmuch study brought on a fit of
melancholy, and he was rescued “from the jaws of death.” How could all
these, and more, study without _books_?
_“Athenæum,” 23rd February 1907._
VI
“MR. SHAXPERE, ONE BOOK,” 1595