) is
found to have been conspicuously before the town. "There is nothing
at all to prove that Meres, native of Lincolnshire, had any personal
knowledge of Shakespeare." There is nothing at all to prove that
Meres, native of Lincolnshire, had any personal knowledge of nine-
tenths of the English authors, famous or forgotten, whom he mentions.
"On the question--who was Shakespeare?--he throws no light." He
"throws no light on the question" "who was?" any of the poets
mentioned by him, except one, quite forgotten, whose College he names
. . . To myself this "sad repeated air,"--"critics who praise
Shakespeare do not say WHO SHAKESPEARE was,"--would appear to be, not
an argument, but a subterfuge: though Mr. Greenwood honestly
believes it to be an argument,--otherwise he would not use it: much
less would he repeat it with frequent iteration. The more a man was
notorious, as was Will Shakspere the actor, the less the need for any
critic to tell his public "who Shakespeare was."
As Mr. Greenwood tries to disable the evidence when Shakespeare is
alluded to as an author, so he tries to better his case when, in the
account-book of Philip Henslowe, an owner of theatres, money-lender,
pawn-broker, purchaser of plays from authors, and so forth,
Shakespeare is NOT mentioned at all. Here is a mystery which,
properly handled, may advance the great cause.
Pages:
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149