119 Arden of Faversham. As the name of Shakespeare has been associated with the above play a brief account of it may not be uninteresting. Arden of Faversham was printed anonymously, first in 1592, and performed, probably, a year or two earlier. It was reprinted in 1599 and 1633, and again in 1770 by Jacob, who was the first, on the strength of certain parallel passages, or passages which he thought parallel, to assign it to Shakespeare. Jacob generally selects mere conventional expressions and common phrases at the time, in proof of his hypothesis. But many contemporary plays, written between 1592 and 1600 would stand such a test far better than Arden does, especially A Warning for Fair Women, printed in 1599, but composed and produced several years before that date. Like Arden, this drama relates to the murder of a London merchant named Sanders, by one Brown, his wife's paramour. There is, among the dramatists of the sixteenth century, and in the early part of the seventeenth, a species of representation that forms a class by itself; it may be called "Domestic Tragedy," and pieces of this kind were founded upon comparatively recent events in England. Of these, besides Arden, and a Warning to Fair Women, are extant, Two Tragedies in One, founded upon the assassination of a London merchant of the name of Beech, by a person called Thomas Merry, also the Fair Maid of Bristol, originating in a recent tragical incident. The Yorkshire Tragedy, a little later, founded on an event in 1604, was played at the Globe (Shakespeare's) Theatre, and probably was revised and touched up by him. A tragedy, once ascribed to Shakespeare, and at first printed with others among his unquestioned plays, may be presumed, even allowing for the rudeness of the time in which it was written, to have possessed no ordinary merit. Professor Tieck, whose "Essays on Shakespeare," and translation of his plays, entitled him to give a sound opinion on the matter, inclined to think that Arden of Faversham is a genuine work of our great national poet, but perhaps his judgment would have been different had he been a native of England, and not merely an excellent English scholar. True it is, that the speeches in this tragedy have in them some passion and pathos, but there is a great sameness, a lack of variety and contrast. There are no traces of the active fancy and exuberant art of Shakespeare. To fathom the bent or depth of thought-to follow his images-Shakespeare requires strict attention in the reader, whereas he that runs may read and fully comprehend Arden of Faversham, allowance, indeed, being made for the age of the language in which it was written. It The murder of Arden occurred in the time of Edward VI., but the play was not published till 1592. Murderous Michael was, perhaps, an early version of Arden of Faversham. was performed before the Queen (Elizabeth) in 1578, Michael being a very prominent personage, and one of Arden's assassins. Possibly the play might be founded upon the elder performance although Michael in Arden of Faversham is one of the least guilty of the whole party concerned in the murder. Michael's character may be judged of from the following speech when contemplating the murder of Arden, his master : "I, that should take this weapon in my hand, Let pity lodge where feeble women lie, I am resolved, and Arden needs must die." This tragedy, independent of its local interest, as connected with the county of Kent, is not devoid of archæological value. It is one of the earliest English domestic dramas written in blank verse. It is also one of the comparatively few plays of the sixteenth century, of which the plot and action are founded upon English life and manners. It is founded upon a home-bred story, and represents the life and the household of a rich country gentleman. In its scenes you may find many features of the stormy days of Edward VI. and the Protector Somerset. As it is possible that some of our readers, even if acquainted with George Lillo's later drama (finished by Dr. J. Hoadly) on the same subject, may not have looked at the play which Lillo altered, it may be convenient to sketch the plot of Arden: Alice, the wife of Arden, young, tall and well-favoured in shape and countenance, is in love with Mosbie, a man of low extraction residing in the same place. Her guilt is the more flagrant, because not only is her husband a kind and indulgent one, but also a handsome and prosperous gentleman, whereas her lover is a soulless wretch, a vulgar and ugly fellow, a black swart man, originally a tailor, but by a transmutation like Christopher Sly's, who tell us that he was 'by birth a pedlar, by education a cardmaker-by transmutation a bear-herd,' a servant to Lord North. "The wife and her ill-favoured lover determine to rid themselves of Arden and lay several plots against his life. Two or three of them are marred unexpectedly, but at last the murder was perpetrated. "Their first scheme was to get him dispatched in London, whither he went on business, and in those troublous times when the distraction and distresses, occasioned partly by the change in religion, and partly by the confusion following on Henry the Eighth's death, a sickly boy on the throne, and ambitious noblemen striving for the government of him and the realm, threw on society hundreds of ruffians, ready for any work that might put money in their purses. 'Dame Arden and ex-tailor Mosbie found murderers as easily as Macbeth does, when he wishes to get rid of an inconvenient and suspicious friend. They employed three assassins, Black Will, Shakebag, and Greene, together with Michael, Arden's servant, for their purpose. Black Will and Shakebag were professionals in the art of killing. Greene considered himself wronged by Arden, to whom the Protector had granted some land hitherto occupied by him. And here is a sign of the times, for it was land once appertaining to Faversham Abbey that Greene lost and Arden got. The Protector Somerset, like the most dread sovereign, Henry, bestowing liberally to others, both goods and land, that never lawfully were his to have, to hold, or give to others. "The bribe to Michael the serving man, was the hand of Mosbie's sister, Susan, who being it would seem, a servant-of all-work in Arden's house, made herself very useful when her master was dispatched but not disposed of. The London plot failed; the ruffians, however, followed their intended victim to Faversham, intending to effect their purpose in the Isle of Sheppy, but they are once more disappointed, Arden meeting on his road with Lord Cheney and his men, who were too many in number for the plotters to do their errand safely for themselves. "Thus thwarted they came to the conclusion that there is no place like home for earning their money, so they wait, though vexed with one another, and with the perverse Arden himself. Arden most unaccountably has taken Mosbie into some sort of favour, so the latter has no difficulty in getting his agents into the house. "They conveyed Black Will into Master Arden's house, putting him into a closet at the end of his parlour. Before this, they had sent out of the house all the servants, those.excepted which were privy to the devised murder. Then went Mosbie to the door, and there stood in a nightgown of silk girded about him, and this was betwixt six and seven of the clock at night. Master Arden, having been at a neighbour's house of his, named Dumpkin, and having cleared certain reckonings betwixt them, came home, and finding Mosbie standing at the door, asked of him if it were supper time? I think not (quoth Mosbie)-it is not ready. Then let us go and play a game at the tables in the mean season, said Arden; and so they went straight into the parlour: and as they came by through the hall, his wife was walking there, and Master Arden said: How now, Mistress Alice? But she made small answer to him. In the meantime one chained the wicket door of the entry. When they came into the parlour, Mosbie sat down on the bench, having his face towards the place where Black Will stood. Then Michael stood at his master's back, holding a candle to shadow Black Will that Arden might by no means perceive him coming forth. In their play Mosbie said thus: (the watchword for Black Will's coming forth), 'Now, may I take you, Sir, if I will?' 'Take me '-(quoth Arden-)' which way?' With that Black Will stepped forth and cast a towel about his neck, so to stop his breath and strangle him. Then Mosbie, having at his girdle a pressing iron of fourteen pounds weight, struck him on the head with the same, so that he fell down, and gave a great groan, insomuch that they thought he had been killed."* They now all lend a hand to the murder, Mrs. Arden seemingly giving the coup-de-grace, for why should this marplot any longer hinder Mosbie's love and hers? She is reported to have given him "seven or eight pricks in the breast." The body is secretly conveyed to a field behind the house, but bloody stains are left on the floor, and it being winter time, the steps of the murderers are imprinted on the snow that had suddenly fallen before the murder, and inconsiderately left off just at the time it might have done Black Will and his company some service by hiding the footmarks. Guests have been invited by the now late Mr. Arden, and arrive rather too punctually for the interests of the survivors in the house; and worse than guests, the Mayor of Faversham with the watch at his heels arrives too, making particular inquiries for Black Will, for whose apprehension his Worship *From Hollinshead's Chronicle, p. 1,703, col. 2. Concealment is no has in his pocket a Council's warrant. longer possible, the body is found. Mistress Arden and Mosbie confess, and, together with Susan and Michael (whose wish to be united is gratified by their being hanged together), are led forth to execution. No one indeed of the parties concerned in this foul and unnatural murder dies in his or her bed. Bradshaw was executed in Faversham, and the epilogue informs us that Shakebag was eventually murdered in Southwark. Black Will was burnt in Flushing at a stake, Greene was hanged at Ospringe, and Dame Arden was burnt at Canterbury-hanging in those days being thought too light a punishment for such a crime as hers. The writer of the epilogue seems to have thought that Master Arden was served as such a sacrilegious varlet deserved to be, for he adds to his brief Newgate Calendar "But this above the other, the rest is to be noted, Which he by force and violence held from Reade, For years and more after the deed was done." The epilogue in these words resembles closely the winding up of a Greek chorus, explaining and justifying matters to the audience after almost everybody is killed. Those who are of opinion that this drama is the production of Shakespeare have laid stress on the name, his mother's name, of Arden—a name (in her case) "probably derived from some remote ancestor, who had emigrated from the forest of Ardennes," or from some of the many Ardens in his native county and so might have attracted his attention. It would, however, we think be a quaint way of honouring and perpetuating his mother's name by linking it with that of a murderess. The Earl of Leicester's players were in Faversham in 1590, and if Shakespeare was connected with the Earl of Leicester at this time, this fact would throw an air of probability over the claim for the Shakespearian authorship of the play. The plot also is taken from a book which Shakespeare had carefully read-" The Chronicle of Hollinshead." It can scarcely be held that Arden of Faversham is wholly or mainly Shakespeare's work; but it is by no means improbable that he may have thought it worth his while to take a hint or two from it which may account for some resemblance, or may even in his earlier days have revised it for his own theatre. The very ascription of it to Shakespeare, though made so |