cary." This name is corrected to Court in a subsequent note, but I suspect he merely drew this conclusion from the circumstance of there being an apothecary of that name at Stratford in 1616, not from an actual statement that he had attended the poet.

Shakespeare was buried in the chancel of Stratford church, a few paces from that part of the wall against which the charnel-house was erected. A flat stone covers his remains, with the following inscription,

but the poet's name does not appear. No reasonable doubt, however, can be raised as to the fact of this being his last resting-place. It is parallel with the graves of the other members of the family, and Dugdale, in 1656, expressly states that "his body is buried" underneath this stone. The letter quoted at p. 88, asserts that this epitaph was made by himselfe a little before his death," a late belief,

well known, was a Warwickshire man, and he and Shakespeare are mentioned together in the following epigram on Dugdale,

Now, Stratford upon Avon, we would choose
Thy gentle and ingenuous Shakespeare muse,
Were he among the living yet, to raise
T'our antiquaries merit some just praise:

And sweet-tongu'd Drayton, that hath given renown
Unto a poor (before) and obscure town,
Harsull, were he not fal'n into his tombe,
Would crown this work with an encomium.
Our Warwickshire the heart of England is,
As you most evidently have prov'd by this;
Having it with more spirit dignifi'd
Then all our English counties are beside.

Cokain's Small Poems, 1658, pp. 111-112.

unnoticed earlier than 1693. It is unnecessary to say that such wretched doggrel never could have proceeded from Shakespeare's pen, yet those have not been wanting who have told us that they did so, and that his horror of the charnel-house, so near this spot, was the occasion of them. The Gothic doorway, within a few steps of Shakespeare's grave, opened into this building, which, says Ireland, "contains the greatest assemblage of human bones I ever saw." It is now pulled down, but Captain Saunders has fortunately preserved a very careful drawing of its interior, the most curious record of this charnel-house that has been preserved,

Or shut me nightly in a charnel house,

O'er cover'd quite with dead men's rattling bones,
With reaky shanks, and yellow chapless sculls,

Things that to hear them told have made me tremble.

On the north wall of the chancel, elevated about five feet from the floor, is erected a monument to Shakespeare. He is represented with a cushion before him, a pen in his right hand, his left resting upon a scroll. This bust, says Wivell,

"is fixed under an arch, between two Corinthian columns of black marble, with gilded bases and capitals, supporting the entablature; above which, and surmounted by a death's head, are carved his arms; and on each side is a small figure in a sitting posture, one holding in his left hand a spade, and the other, whose eyes are closed, with an inverted torch in his left hand, the right resting upon a skull, as symbols of mortality." The monument was erected before 1623, for it is mentioned by Leonard Digges in some verses prefixed to the first folio; and it was executed by Gerard Johnson,* an eminent sculptor of that period. It was originally coloured, the eyes being represented as light hazel, the hair and beard auburn, the dress a scarlet doublet, over which was a loose black gown without sleeves. In 1748, it was repainted, the old colours being faithfully imitated; but in 1793, Malone caused it to be painted white, not delicately and artistically, but by a common house-painter, It is to be feared that this injudicious act has irretrievably lost to us some of the more characteristic features of the bust, and the regret is the greater, because no representation of the bard is so authentic. The portrait in the first folio, 1623, although it receives the tribute of rare Ben, written, it may be, before he saw the engraving, is not a creditable work of art, but it ranks next to the bust in point of authority, and a general resemblance is to be traced between them.+ Several paintings of Shakespeare have been produced, but the genuineness of most of them may be doubted, for fabrication has been as industrious with the poet's likeness as with his autograph. The Chandos portrait, in the posses

"Shakspeares and John Combes monumts. at Stratford sup' Avon made by one Gerard Johnson."-Dugdale's Diary, 1653, 4to. ed. 1827, p. 99. This diary is printed from a series of interleaved almanacs preserved in the collection of Dugdale Stratford Dugdale, Esq., M.P. at Merevale, co. Warw.

"Now if we compare this picture with the face on the Stratford monument, there will be found as great a resemblance as perhaps can well be betwixt a statue and a picture, except that the hair is described rather shorter and streighter on the latter than on the former."-Gent. Mag. 1759, p. 257.

sion of the Duke of Buckingham, is said to have been traced back to a former owner, Sir William Davenant, and as this can, I am told, be substantiated by evidence, the picture" bears greater authenticity than any others that have been asserted to be original likenesses of the great bard. Kneller painted a picture of Shakespeare which he gave to Dryden, but no portrait which cannot be traced much nearer Shakespeare's time can be regarded as an original authority, and so little critical judgment was formerly displayed in such matters, that a painting of James I. was palmed upon Pope as a representation of the poet. The bust in the chancel of Stratford Church is beyond the reach of any such doubt, and is in no way assailable to hesitating criticism. It is at once the most interesting memorial of the dramatist that remains, and the only one that brings him before us in form and substance. There is a living and a mental likeness in this monument, one that grows upon us by contemplation, and makes us unwilling to accept any other resemblance.* Let us repeat the lines that are inscribed beneath this memorial (p. 87), and implore the reflective observer to pause before it,

*The reader will find a woodcut of this bust at the commencement of the work, and, I believe, it is the first in which all the characteristic features of the original have been scrupulously expressed. Mr. Fairholt's pencil has ex

I have elsewhere noticed a popular belief that Shakespeare's union was not productive of much social happiness, and an interlined clause in the will has unnecessarily tended to perpetuate this notion,—“ Item, I gyve unto my wief my second best bed with the furniture.' So far from this bequest being one of slight importance, and exhibiting small esteem, it was the usual mode of expressing a mark of great affection. The first bequest in the will of Joyce Hobday,* of Stratford, dated March 28th, 1602, is, "I geve and bequeth to my brother Rychard Ward of Warwycke my best fether bed, one boulster, a pillowe, and the best coveryng for a bed." Henry Harte, of Andover, whose will (in the Prerogative Office) was proved in 1586, gives "unto John Harte one bedde one the right hande comminge in at the doore in the Starr Chamber with all the furniture, and twoe other beddes, with twoe coverletts, and twoe bolsters, and twoe blanketts; item, I give to William Harte one bedd with all the furniture in the chamber called the Hallffe Moone." William Underhill, in his will dated 1595, proved in 1599, in the same office, bequeaths two similar legacies of beds with their furniture to near relatives; and John Sadler, whose will is dated in 1625, gives and bequeaths "to my sone John Sadler of London the bed and whole furniture therunto belonging in the parlour where I lye." These instances might be multiplied, but what is here before us is quite sufficient to show that the ordinary opinion concerning this often-quoted bequest of Shakespeare to his wife is

hibited to us every fold and wave of the garment, and the positions of the fingers and hands, which are extremely appropriate and beautiful in the original, are not well shown in any representation hitherto published.

*It should be remarked that this lady was possessed of considerable property, and that therefore the bequest here mentioned, which now appears so trivial, was not by any means the result of poverty. Similar entries occur in many other old wills. One other entry from this may be quoted: "Item, I geve and bequeth unto Frauncis Smyth aforenamed a ffetherbed wyth the furnyture therof."