" We have it, and how is the critic to get over or round the
fact? Thus, "We know that this statement" (about the almost blotless
lines) "is ridiculous; that if the players had any unblotted
manuscripts in their hands (which is by no means probable) they were
merely fair copies . . . "
Perhaps, but the Baconians appear to assume that a "fair copy" is
not, and cannot be, a copy in the handwriting of the author.
As I have said before, the Players knew Will's handwriting, if he
could write. If they received his copy in a hand not his own, and
were not idiots, they could not praise him and his unerring speed and
accuracy in penning his thoughts. If, on the other hand, Will could
not write, in their long friendship with Will, the Players must have
known the fact, and could not possibly believe, as they certainly
did, "on Jonson's testimony" in his authorship.
To finish Mr. Greenwood's observations, "if they" (the players)
"really thought that the author of the plays wrote them off currente
calamo, and never" (or "hardly ever") "blotted a line, never revised,
never made any alterations, they knew nothing whatever concerning the
real Shakespeare." {258a}
Nothing whatever? What they did not know was merely that Will gave
them fair copies in his own hand, as, before the typewriting machine
was invented, authors were wont to do. Within the last fortnight I
heard the error attributed to the players made by an English scholar
who is foremost in his own field of learning.
Pages:
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231