The Ghost of Hamlet

William Shakspere Of Stratford
“This is a parlous world,” says an old thinker, “because of its errors,” and, unhappily, its errors outnumber its truths. Were it not for this, the above title would never have been penned, and the world would have been saved from much distracting controversy; yet an eminent philosopher tells us that there is ‘A law of compensation universal in its action’; and so even in controversy may we not expect it to serve a beneficent end, since many a precious truth has been picked out of the sludge of dissent? Whatever the manner in which some have expressed their sentiments with regard to the subject we are now to consider, we can hardly exaggerate the influence which the works bearing the name Shakespeare have exerted on the English speaking world. Had not the author of these works been born, Elizabethan literature would have been a failure; indeed, what the immensity of the loss to the literary world of today would have been is beyond conjecture; certainly a greater loss than if Pisistratus had failed to give the Homeric poems to Hellas, important as that act was in quickening the national spirit and uniting the Hellenic peoples. No thoughtful mind can fail to appreciate the inestimable importance of the Shakespeare Works to mankind; no heart, which is attuned to the love of genius but desires to become acquainted with the immortal genius who was their author. Yet, strange as it may seem, the paternity of this Greatest Birth of Time is in question, and the world is about equally divided upon it; many holding to the earlier faith that it belongs to the Stratford actor, and others to the later, that it should be ascribed to Francis Bacon. This is a question, which demands careful scrutiny, a mind open to conviction, and, to reach a satisfactory conclusion, an intimate acquaintance with the two men, and with their works. We must compare their characters, satisfy ourselves whether both are competent to be the author of this prodigy, and whether it reflects the lineaments of both or either. Knight exclaims: “Let it not be said that these statements were the rodomontades of heraldry honours bestowed for mere mercenary considerations upon any pretenders to gentle blood. There was strict inquiry if they were unworthily bestowed. Two centuries and a half ago such honours were of grave importance, and there is a solemnity of tone in these very documents.” Having satisfied himself that a coat of arms was really bestowed, he again exclaims: “And so forever after he was no more goodman Shakspere, or John Shakspere, yeoman, but Master Shakspere.” 1

Thomas Fuller, in whose Worthies, published forty-six years after the actor’s death, said: “Many were the wit-combates betwixt him and Ben Jonson, which two I behold like a Spanish great Gallion, and an English man-of-War, Master Jonson (like the former) was built far higher in Learning; Solid but slow of performances.” 2