תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

unquestionably would have called him his grandfather. Viewing the assertion made by the heralds

9 So, also, Sir John Hubaud, of Idlicote, in Warwickshire, in his will, made in 1583, constitutes his cousin George Digby, his brother John Egeock, and his servant Richard Clark, his executors; and Edward Coombe, in 1597, makes Christopher Hales, who had married his sister, and whom he calls his brother, one of his executors. The appellations, father-in-law, and son-in-law, seldom occur in that age. So fond were our ancestors of extending the circle of relations, that they frequently considered a mere connection as a ground of this kind of designation: thus Philip Henslowe was, in fact, no relation whatsoever of Edward Alleyn, though he constantly called him son. Bishop Hall, in the Dedication of his Quo Vadis, in 1617, addressing Lord Denny, calls Lord Hay his noble son, in consequence of his having married Lord Denny's daughter; and Bayle, taking Hall's words in a literal sense, supposed Lord Denny to be actually father to Lord Hay. See Gen. Dict. v. 716, note H. So Lord Strafford, in 1637, writing to the mother of his first wife, styles himself her obedient son (Straff. Lett. ii. 123): and our author, in Julius Cæsar, styles Cassius the brother of Brutus, though, in truth, only his brother-in-law. The term, indeed, of son-in-law, or brother-in-law, rarely occurs in that age. At a subsequent period, Oliver Cromwell, and Waller, the poet, called each other cousins, only because John Hampden was cousin to them both.

With respect to the relations of a wife, the husband always addressed them, and spoke of them, as standing in the same degree of relationship to him. Thus Thomas Killigrew dedicates his play, entitled The Princess, to his dear niece the Lady Anne Wentworth, who was in truth only his wife's niece.

It was the constant custom in old times, and the practice is not wholly disused, for a nephew to call his great uncle, only uncle; and the wife's grandfather and grandmother were always considered and called the grandfather and grandmother of the husband; with equal laxity, grandmothers denominated a grandson by the nearer appellation of son. So Joan, Lady Abervagenny, in her will in 1436, calls Sir James Ormond her son, though he was in fact her grandson. From these usages it is clear, that the inter

in this light, all the difficulty vanishes; for the father of that Robert Arden, whose daughter John Shakspeare married, or, in other words, the grandfather of Mary Shakspeare, who, according to the usage abovementioned, was popularly called the grandfather of John Shakspeare also, had been very highly distinguished and rewarded by King Henry the Seventh, as the heralds rightly state the matter, in general terms, in their first draft in 1596'. Sir John Arden,

pretation given in the text, of the ambiguous words in the grant of the heralds to our poet, is by no means fanciful or far-fetched.

I may add, that a similar error to that, which I believe has prevailed for near a century, of supposing Shakspeare to be descended from a paternal ancestor who had been rewarded with a royal grant of lands, instead of a maternal one, has happened in the case of Oliver Cromwell, who was thought by many to be descended from Cromwell, Earl of Essex; because forsooth his wife was descended from a nobleman with that title; not indeed Thomas Cromwell, but William Bourchier, Earl of Essex. See Dugdale's Bar. ii. 132.

In their subsequent grant, indeed, in 1599, they have deviated from their original statement, and added that he was rewarded with a grant of lands in Warwickshire, which we shall presently see was not the fact. But this slight inaccuracy in the latter instrument cannot affect the present hypothesis, when we recollect, that, after having rightly stated, in the grant of 1596, the degree of his relationship to John Shakspeare (grandfather), his son's place of residence, "Wilmecote," and his grand-daughter's Christian name (Mary), they, in two of these particulars in their grant of 1599, are inaccurate; and the third, they have wholly omitted. I may add, that grants of lands in Warwickshire having been made by King Henry the Eighth to the elder branch of Robert Arden's family (see p. 38, n. 9), the heralds being instructed that Henry the Seventh had been equally liberal to one of the younger branches, might have taken it for granted that the lands conferred on him were in that county, where his family had

the elder brother of our Robert's grandfather, was Squire for the body to that king; the duty of which

long resided; and as they express it," had continued by some descents in good reputation and credit." Heralds, when once they were satisfied that there was a sufficient ground for granting the arms which were claimed, were not very rigid in examining into the title-deeds of men's estates.

2 Dugdale's Antiq. of Warwickshire, p. 653, edit. 1656. For this assertion he only quotes Holgrave, qu. 19, by which is meant the nineteenth quire of the book so denominated in the Prerogative Office; but in that quire there is no will of any person of the name of Arden. I suppose, therefore, that in the will of some other person contained in the quire cited, Sir John Arden is mentioned (probably as one of the feoffees in some feofment), and is described as Squire for the body to King Henry the Seventh; but the laxity of this reference prevents me from furnishing my readers with the words alluded to by Dugdale. A passage, however, in Sir John Arden's will, which is in the Prerogative Office (Parch. qu. 8), proves that he was frequently honoured by the visits of the King, whom he probably attended in Bosworth field. By his will, which was made on the 4th of June, 1526 (not 1525, as Dugdale has it), he gives to his son Thomas, as "heire lomys and to remayne in the maner of the Loge from heire to heire, a standing cup with a cover well gilt, and the best salt with a cover." He likewise bequeaths to him "a paire of swannys, breedyng in the mote; a great pott with a great paire of gobbards; a great broch; a paire of andyrons for the hall; a folding table with the kerven cupbord; the bedde in the king's chamber with all that belongeth of the best, with a hanging of the same, rede and grene." To his son John, a gowne furred with foye, a blak gowne furred with booge, a blak velvet doublet; "

[ocr errors]

his "best hose, the secunde salt with a cover, the secunde wayne, two oxen, an oxe-harrowe, with the hole tynys, two candlesticks, a better and a worse." To his wife Elizabeth, "all the goods that she brought, both here and at the Holt." Of his brother Robert, who is one of the witnesses to his will, he thus speaks: "Item, I will that my brothers, Thomas, Martin, and

[blocks in formation]

office, requiring a personal attendance on his sovereign both by day and night, accompanied with a constant familiar intercourse, he necessarily had frequent op

Robert, have their fees during their lives." This will was proved, June 27, 1526; and it appears from the Office found after the death of the testator, that he died on the day on which his will was made. Esc. 18 Hen. VIII. p. 1, n. 9. Dugdale was unacquainted with the exact time of his death.

3 See a manuscript in the Herald's Office, M. 7, entitled "The Services of Divers Officers of the Courte," one part of which was written in the time of King Henry VII. another in the 13th year of Henry VIII.

"As for the Squyers for the body, they ought to aray the kyng and unaray, and no man else to sett hand on the kyng, and the yeman or grome of the robes to take to the Squyer for the body all the kyngs stuffe, as well his shone as his other gere. And the Squyer for the body to draw theym on. And the Squyer for the body aught to take the charge of the cupborde for all nyght; and if please the kyng to have a palett about his traverse for all night, there must be two Squyers for the body, or ells one knyght for the body; or els to lye in their owne chambers. And the usher must kepe the chamber dore untill the kyng be in bedd: and to be thereat on the morowe at the kyngs uprysyng: and the usher must see that the watche be sett, and to know of the kyng where they shall watche." P. 33, verso.

"Item, a Squyer for the body or gentleman huisher owght to sett the kyngs sworde at his bedd hed.

66

Item, a Squyer for the body owght to charge a secret grome or page to have the kepyng of the said bedd, with a light until the tyme the kyng be disposed to go unto hit." Ibid. p. 20, verso.

"At dinner (says a late writer on the nature and duty of this office), there was another office to be performed by the esquire; for the ordinances of King Henry VII. tell us, that one of the esquires of the body is to be ready and obedient at dinner and supper, to serve the king of his pottage at such time as he shall be commanded by the sewer and gentleman usher.

"Though we have now left the king in his privy chamber, and in the hands of the servants of that department, yet we must not

portunities of ingratiating himself with his master, and a ready access to the royal favour. He died

entirely dismiss the esquire; for Sir H. Spelman says, that when the king went out, the office of the esquire was to follow him and carry the cloak.

"Thus much for the office of the esquire of the body by day; but the principal, most essential, and most honourable part of his duty was at night; for when the king retired to bed, the esquire had the concentrated power of the gentleman ushers, the vice chamberlain, and lord chamberlain, in himself; having the absolute command of the house both above and below stairs. At this period [the reign of King Henry VIII.], and till the close of the last century, the royal apartments, from the bedchamber to the guard-chamber inclusively, were occupied in the night by one or more of the servants belonging to each chamber respectively. The principal officer, then the gentleman, now the lord of the bedchamber, slept in a pallet bed in the same room with the king; and in the ante-room between the privy chamber and the bedchamber (in the reign of King Charles II. at least) slept the groom of the bedchamber. In the privy chamber next adjoining, slept two of the six gentlemen of the privy chamber in waiting; and in the presence chamber, the esquire of the body on a pallet bed, upon the haut pas, under the cloth of estate; while one of the pages of the presence chamber slept in the same room, without the verge of the canopy, not far from the door. All these temporary beds were put up at night, and displaced in the morning, by the officers of a particular branch of the wardrobe, called the wardrobe of beds.

"After supper, previous to the king's retiring to his bedchamber, the proper officers were to see all things furnished for the night, some for the king's bedchamber, and others for the king's cup-board, which was sometimes in the privy chamber, and sometimes in the presence chamber, at the royal pleasure, and furnished with refections for the king's refreshment, if called for. After this, the officers of the day retired, and committed all to the charge of the esquire of the body. This domestick ceremony was called the Order of All Night; the nature of which I shall now give at large from an account preserved in the Lord

« הקודםהמשך »