← Table of ContentsShakespeare's family

CHAPTER IV

THE SHAKESPEARE COAT OF ARMS

[Illustration: NON SANZ DROICT.]

None of the family seem to have risen above the heraldic horizon till

John Shakespeare applied for his coat of arms. Into the contest over

that application it is well to plunge at once, and thence work backwards

and forwards. Four classes of writers wage war over the facts: the

Baconians, like the late Mr. Donnelly, who deny everything; the

Romanticists, who accept what is pleasant, and occasionally believe

manufactured tradition to suit their inclinations; the agnostic

Shakespeareans, like Halliwell-Phillipps, who really work, but believe

only what they can see and touch, if it accords with their opinions; and

the ingenuous workers who seek saving truth like the agnostics, but

bring human influences and natural inferences to bear on dusty records.

Now, Halliwell-Phillipps does not scruple to affirm that three

heralds,[51] the worthy ex-bailiff of Stratford, and the noblest poet

the world has ever produced, were practically liars in this matter,

because they make statements that do not harmonize with the limits of

his knowledge and the colour of his opinions. From his grave the poet

protests--

"Good name in man or woman, dear my lord,

Is the immediate jewel of their souls.

Who steals my purse steals trash....

But he who filches from me my good name

Robs me of that, which not enriches him,

But leaves me poor indeed."

_Othello_, Act III., Scene 3.

We must therefore at least start inquiry with the supposition that these

men thought they spoke truth. There was no reason they should not have

done so. Sir John Ferne[52] writes: "If any person be advanced into an

office or dignity of publique administration, be it eyther

Ecclesiasticall, Martiall or Civill ... the Herealde must not refuse to

devise to such a publique person, upon his instant request, and

willingness to bear the same without reproche, a Coate of Armes, and

thenceforth to matriculate him with his intermarriages and issues

descending in the Register of the gentle and noble.... In the Civil or

Political State divers Offices of dignitie and worship doe merite Coates

of Armes to the possessours of the same offices, as ... Bailiffs of

Cities and ancient Boroughs or incorporated townes." John Shakespeare

had certainly been Bailiff of Stratford-on-Avon in 1568-9; the draft

states that he then applied for arms, and that the herald, Cooke, had

sent him a "pattern." Probably he did not conclude the negotiations

then, thinking the fees too heavy, or he might have delayed until he

found his opportunity lost, or he might have asked them for his year of

office alone. No doubt John Shakespeare was deeply impressed with the

dignity of his wife's relatives, and wished, even then, to make himself

and his family more worthy for her sake. The tradition of this draft, or

the sight of it, may have stimulated the heart of the good son to honour

his parents by having them enrolled among the _Armigeri_ of the county.

John had appeared among the "gentlemen" of Warwickshire in a government

list of 1580.[53]

The Warwickshire Visitations occur in 1619, after the death of the poet,

without male heirs, and are no help to us here. In the first 1596 draft

the claims are based on John's public office, on a grant to his

antecessors by Henry VII. for special services on marriage with the

daughter and heir of a gentleman of worship (_i.e._, entitled to

armorial bearings). Then a fuller draft was drawn out, also in 1596,

correcting "antecessors" into "grandfather." Halliwell-Phillipps only

mentions one at that date, but Mr. Stephen Tucker,[54] Somerset Herald,

gives facsimiles of both. Halliwell-Phillipps calls these ridiculous

assertions, and asserts that both parties were descended from obscure

country yeomen. The heralds state they were "solicited," and "on

credible report" informed of the facts. We must not forget that all the

friends intimately associated either with the Ardens or the Shakespeares

(with the exception of the Harts) were armigeri.

Nobody now knows anything of that earlier pattern, nor of the patents of

the gifts "to the antecessors." But seeing, as I have seen, that sacks

full of old parchment deeds and bonds, reaching back to the fifteenth

century, get cleared out of lawyers' offices, and sold for small sums to

make drumheads or book-bindings, and seeing that this process has been

going on for 400 years, it does not seem to me surprising that some

deeds do get lost. Generally, it is those we most wish to have that

disappear. Lawyers do not, as a rule, concern themselves with historical

fragments, but with the soundness of the present titles of their clients

and their own modern duties. (I do think that historical and antiquarian

societies should bestir themselves to have old deeds included among the

"ancient monuments of the country" and entitled to some degree of

protection.)

We must also consider how illiterate the inhabitants of the country were

in the reign of Henry VII., how the nation was bestrid by officials of

the Empson and Dudley type, and we have reason to believe that various

accidents, intentional or otherwise, caused many an old grant to

disappear at that period.

It has struck me as possible that John Shakespeare may have intended

ancestors through the female line. The names of his mother and

grandmother are as yet unknown, and the supposition has never been

discussed. But in support of John Shakespeare's claim, and in opposition

to Halliwell-Phillipps's contradiction, we can prove there _were_

Shakespeares in direct service of the Crown, not merely as common

soldiers, though in 28 Henry VIII. (1537), Thomas, Richard, William and

another Richard were mentioned as among the King's forces.[55]

But one Roger Shakespeare was Yeoman of the Chamber to the King, and on

June 9, 1552, shared with his fellows, Abraham Longwel and Thomas Best,

a forfeit of £36 10s.[56] This post of Yeoman of the Chamber was one of

great trust and dignity; it was the same as that held earlier by Robert

Arden, of Yoxall, the younger brother of Sir John Arden, and the

election to it suggested either inherited favour, Court interest, or

signal personal services. His ancestors might have been also the missing

ancestors of John Shakespeare. He himself may be the Roger who was

buried in Haseley in 1558, supposed by some to have been the monk of

Bordesley. He may also have been the father of Thomas Shakespeare, the

Royal Messenger of 1575, noticed later.

This record proves nothing beyond the inexactitude of

Halliwell-Phillipps's sweeping statements, but it gives us a hope that

something else may somewhere else be found to fit into it and make a

fact complete. One of the facts brought forward as a reason for the

grant of arms to John Shakespeare was "that he hath maryed Mary daughter

and one of the heires of Robert Arden in the same countie, Esquire."

"Gent" was originally written, and was altered to "Esquire."[57]

Some have doubted that the grant ever really took place, but Gwillim, in

his "Display of Heraldrie," 1660, notes, "Or, on a bend Sable, a tilting

Spear of the field, borne by the name of Shakespeare, granted by William

Dethick, Garter, to William Shakespear the renowned poet." Shakespeare's

crest, or cognizance, was a "Falcon, his wings displayed, Argent,

standing on a wreath of his colours, supporting a speare, gold." His

motto was, "Non Sans Droict."

It is said there were objections made to this pattern on the ground that

it was too like the old Lord Mauley's.[58] Probably they were only notes

of a discussion among the heralds, when it was decided that the spear

made a "patible difference," and a résumé of the qualifications was

added.

This was answered on May 10, 1602, before Henry Lord Howard, Sir Robert

Sidney, and Sir Edward Dier, Chancellor of the Order of the Garter: "The

answere of Garter and Clarencieux Kings of arms, to a libellous scrowle

against certen arms supposed to be wrongfully given. Right Honorable,

the exceptions taken in the Scrowle of Arms exhibited, doo concerne

these armes granted, or the persons to whom they have been granted. In

both, right honourable, we hope to satisfy your Lordships." (They

mention twenty-three cases.) "Shakespere.--It may as well be said that

Hareley, who beareth gould, a bend between two cotizes sables, and all

other that (bear) or and argent a bend sables, usurpe the coat of the

Lo. Mauley. As for the speare in bend, is a patible difference; and the

person to whom it was granted hath borne magestracy, and was justice of

peace at Stratford-upon-Avon. He married the daughter and heire of

Arderne, and was able to maintaine that estate" ("MS. Off. Arm.," W. Z.,

p. 276; from Malone).

It has struck me that the attempt to win arms for his father was in

order to _continue_ them to his mother.

In the Record Office I found the other day a note that explains what I

mean: "At a Chapitre holden by the Office of Armes at the Embroyderers

Hall in London Anno 4^o Reginæ Elizabethæ it was agreed, that no

inhiritrix eyther mayde wife or widdow should bear or cause to be borne

any Creast or Cognizaunce of her Ancestors otherwise than as followeth.

If she be unmaried to beare in her ringe, cognizaunce or otherwise, the

first coate of her Ancestors in a Lozenge. And during her Widdowhood to

Set the first coate of her husbande in pale with the first coate of her

Auncestor. And if she mary one who is noe gentleman, then she to be

clearly exempted from the former conclusion."[59]

FOOTNOTES:

[51] Cooke, Dethicke and Camden.

In the description of England prefixed to Holinshed's Chronicles it is

stated:

"A gentleman of blood is defined to descend of three descents of

nobleness, that is to saie, of name and of armes both by father and

mother" (p. 161). "Moreover as the King doth dubbe Knights and createth

the barons and higher degrees, so gentlemen whose ancestors are not

knowen to come in with William Duke of Normandie (for of the Saxon races

yet remaining wee now make none accompt, much lesse of the British

issue), doe take their beginning in England, after this manner in our

times. Whosoever studieth the lawes of the realme, whoso abideth in the

Universitie giving his mind to his booke, or professeth physicke and the

liberall sciences, or beside his service in the roome of a captaine in

the warres, or good counsell given at home, whereby his commonwealth is

benefited, can live without manuall labour, and thereto is able and will

beare the port, charge, and countenance of a gentleman, he shall for

monie have a cote and armes bestowed upon him by heralds (who in the

charter of the same doo of custome pretend antiquitie and service, and

manie gaie things) and thereunto being made in good cheape be called

master, which is the title men give to esquires and gentlemen, and

reputed for a gentleman ever after" (Ed. 1586, pp. 161-2).

The same is repeated in "The Commonwealth of England and Maner of

Government thereof," by Sir Thomas Smith, London, 1589-1594, Chap. XX.

In a contemporary play, quoted by John Payne Collier, the herald is made

to say:

"We now are faine to wait who grows in wealth,

And comes to beare some office in a towne,

And we for money help them unto armes,

For what can not the golden tempter doe?"

ROBERT WILSON: _The Cobbler's Prophecy_.

[52] Sir John Ferne in "The Glory of Generositie," 1586.

[53] State Papers, Dom. Ser., Eliz., cxxxvii. 68. The gentlemen and

freeholders in the countye of Warwick. Among the freeholders of

Barlichway, John Shakespeare, father of William and Thomas Shakespeare,

69. In Stratford-on-Avon John Shaxspere, and at Rowington Thomas

Shaxpere, April, 1580.

[54] "Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica," 2nd Series, 1886, vol. i.,

p. 109, since published in a volume.

[55] The Musters. Archers of Rowington and Wroxall, S.P.D.S.

[56] State Papers, Domestic Series, Edward VI., vol. xiv., Docquet.

[57] Nichols's "Herald and Genealogist," vol. i., p. 510, 1863; and

"Miscel. Gen. et Herald.," Series II., vol. i., p. 109.

[58] See the papers in the Bodleian Library, Ashmol. MS. 846, art. ix.,

f. 50 _a_, _b_. "The answers of Garter and Clarencieux Kings of Arms, to

the Scrowle of Arms, exhibited by Raffe Brookesmouth, caled York

Herald," wherein they state that there is "a patible difference."

[59] State Papers, Domestic Series, Eliz., xxvi. 31, 1561.