The Hawaiian gazette., 1869-01-06

stage of the inquiry 1t is this: Those who
| impugn Shakespeare authorship assert,
though they adduce no evidence Tor the as
sertion, which is the foundation OF the case
that the concealment OF the true author OF
authors was a deliberate scheme, and thai
! Shakespeare was put forward as the ostensi'
/ BILE author in order to screen the true authors
/ from public recognition. We may ask
whether there is any instance in the whole
course of literary history of such secret
being so long and so faithfully kept, extend
/ ing as it must have done to such multitude
of particular instances of concealment
Stat Roninis tpibra-the name remains,
the man who is shaded by the name may be
undiscovered There was no ayowed and
admitted claim Of authorship during \ the
period of publication, to be received without
scruple for two centuries and half and then
suddenly questioned. Shakespeare is real
historical parsonage, moving about actively
in his day, having large circle of acquain-
/ tances in all ranks, and honored from the
throne to the green-room and the pit for the
brilliant succession of comedies and tragedies
brought forward as the fruits Of his amazing
genius. If he were not the author, ii is in
| conceivable that the secret should have been
SO successfully kept as never to have been
suspected by any of the thousands who had
been delighted by his productions that no
intimation should ever have been given of
any incongruity between the character, con-
duct, and talents of Shakespeare, and the I'M
rivaled credit which he enjoyed for his repu-
ted works.
The project of discarding Shakespeare
claims could only arise on the presumption
that our knowledge of the Elizabethan age
was fragmentary, imperfect, and inadequate,
and that, therefore, there was as much room
for ingenious conjecture to supply defect
i've information. But exactly the reverse
fa ha lon, of rraa an
Elizabeth to the restoration of Charles II.
our sources of information are singularly
numerous, and our knowledge Is SO minute
and SO free from suspicion, after the different
authorities have been carefully collated, that
there is less excuse or opportunity for con-
lecture than in almost any earlier or later
period of English history. There may be
ample room for diversity of Interpretation,
there can scarcely be any for dispute in re-
gard to important facts.
There is one preliminary delusion which
has evidently suggested the doubt of the ac-
credited authorship of the works of Shai-
speare, and given to the argument on the sub
'ect what little plausibility II may possess.
| This delusion grows out of the assumption
that Shakespeare was an unlearned and uned-
ucated man, though the plays bear continual
evidence of varied information, extensive
reading, and considerable scholarship, as
well as minute and acute observation. The
natural conclusion from this fragrant incon-
gruity would be that Shakespear was not so
devoid of culture AS he had been represented
to be. The hasty inference drawn by Miss
Della Bacon and Judge Holmes Is, that an
unlettered man could not have composed
these works, and that, as Shakespeare was
unlettered, he could not have written them.
The conclusion rests upon purely arbitrary
assumption-an assumption wholly unwar-
ranted in the presence Of the evidence affor-
ded by the works themselves The accep-
lance of the hypothesis of Shakespeare's
want OF education necessitated the discovery
OF some contemporary possessed Of the requi-
site learning as well as genius for their COM
position, in utter forgetfulness of the fact
that the world has not produced more than
one Shakespeare, and that none but himself
can be his parallel. We are not going to
argue the question Of Shakespeare's acquire
ments here, but we may venture to say that
his scholastic learning was but little inferior
TO Raleigh's, and not very far below Bacon's.
The prevalent misapprehension, which has
SO long beguiled the literary public, and so
egregiously misled both Miss Bacon and
Judge Holmes, rests upon the misconception
OF Ben Jonson's language in the eulogy al
ready alluded to. Rare Ben says:
Though thou hadst small Latin and less Greek
From thence to honor thee.
The obvious Specification Of this is that
Shakespeare's scholarship was not such as to
entitle him to commentator on account of
any extraordinary erudition. 1t admits an
acquaintance, though not extensive, with
Latin literature, and some knowledge, pro-
badly only smattering, of Greek. But the
full import of this expression connot be ap-
pretended until 1t is remembered that Ben
JonsOu was himself one Of the finest schol-
ars and most learned men of his age-the
favorite pupil Of Camden-the friend and
companion of Bacon, and afterwards of
Hobbes-the associate Of the profound clas-
steal and antiquarian researches of John
Selden. What would be very "small Latin
and less Greek " in the estimation of Ben
JonsoD, would be copious erudition for any
ordinary student. "Hinc origo malor1na ~
hence has proceeded the continual miscon-
ceptiOn of Shakespeare's attachments. From
this first erroneous assumption have proceed
ed the wild hypothesis of the writers whom
we are noticing. Admit that Shakespeare
possessed the moderate share of classical and
other aeademical learning evinced by his
plays, and there is no necessity and no ex-
cuse for looking elsewhere for their author.
The first postulate, therefore, of the Boston
Maiden and the Missouri Judge fails utterly.