History – Page 15 – The View From Sari's World

Is this Shakespeare's death mask? Professor Stanly Wells says "No". — Is this Shakespeare’s death mask? Professor Stanly Wells says “No”.

As you know 2016 marks the 400^th anniversary of Shakespeare’s death. What we don’t know is the exact cause his untimely death. The man was 52 years old and from all accounts seemed to be in good health. Yes, he did retired early, but given that he was a wealthy man this shouldn’t be all that surprising. Perhaps he was burned out; London or the stage’s allure may have finally run thin. The quiet country life he escaped from as a young man may all of a sudden seem like the ideal place to escape to.

Shakespeare’s cause of death remains a mystery. What little factual information we have of his death comes from an entry in the diary of John Ward, the vicar of Holy Trinity Church in Stratford (where Shakespeare is buried). In the diary, Ward notes that “Shakespeare, Drayton, and Ben Jonson had a merry meeting and it seems drank too hard, for Shakespeare died of a fever there contracted.”

We know people just don’t catch fevers from drinking, unless the drinks in question contain some type of infectious bacteria, and given the hygienic practices of the day, this could be a possibility. Yet we know that Shakespeare amended his will only a month before his death. Is it possible Shakespeare knew he was dying?

Like with so many other “Shakespeare mystery’s” some scholars think that yes, not only did he know he was dying, they go on to suggest this is why he retired early and amended his will. We will get into another possible reason for this sudden change in a moment.

But first, let’s look at some other possibilities for his early death, or as some might say, death conspiracies.

Shakespeare’s own son –in- law John Hall is purported to claim:

I have formed the opinion that it was more likely than not in the nature of a cerebral hemorrhage or apoplexy that quickly deepened and soon became fatal. There are three reasons for this. Firstly, the hurried reconstruction and inter-lineated clauses of the Will not allowing time for it to be copied afresh before signature; Secondly, the earliest and clearest impressions of the Droeshout frontispiece of the First Folio show outstanding shadings, suggesting marked thickening of the left temporal artery– a sign of atheroma and arterio-sclerosis; and thirdly, such a termination is quite common in men who have undergone such continuous mental and physical strain over a prolonged period as our actor-manager-dramatist must have been subjected to throughout his, undoubtedly, strenuous career. Richard Burbage who daily shared the same theatrical life, himself died of such a seizure after twenty-four hours illness [in 1619]”

It has to be pointed out that of all people, Hall had the most to gain from a sudden death explanation. Hall was not only Shakespeare’s son-in-law; he was the family doctor. To note that the playwright’s sudden death was caused by “mental and physical” strain” may have been an attempt to absolve himself of his father-in-laws death. He may have been trying to deflect blame in order to save his own reputation.

As I said earlier, Shakespeare amended his will a month before his death. This fact has led some scholars to believe the man was in very poor health and at death’s door. They point to his “shaky” signature as proof of their claim. The problem with this is two fold. One; Shakespeare’s signature always appears shaky, and two; Shakespeare’s youngest daughter had just become engaged, causing Shakespeare to adjust what he felt she was owed and to include provisions for any future children she may have.

a) From the 1612 Mountjoy suit deposition: Willm Shackper
b) From the 1612 Blackfriars Gatehouse deed: (William) Shakspear
c) From the 1612 Blackfriars mortgage: Wm Shakspea
d) From the 1615 will, page 1: William Shackspere
e) From the will, page 2: Shakspere
f) From the will, page 3: (by me William) Shakspear

Author Simon Andrew Sterling takes the prize for the most outlandish idea. In his 2013 book, “Who Killed Shakespeare”, Sterling not only suggests Shakespeare was murdered but was killed by Protestant spies, (Shakespeare being a closeted Catholic) “in order to curry favor with the court”. Sterling seems to have forgotten that Shakespeare’s theater group was called “The Kings Men” because he loved their plays, so killing the King’s favorite author would not be the best way to curry his favor.

Life in 17^th century was surrounded by death. Despite the myth that 17^th century life was short, the fact is, it was possible to live a long life, if you were lucky. Death could come in many forms: war; disease; (the plague broke out twice in Shakespeare’s life time) poverty; bad hygiene; and religious persecution just to name a few. Yet despite all of this, we know from records that wealthy people with access to a proper diet did live to see old age. So this again makes us wonder, just what did Shakespeare die of? Was it cancer, tuberculosis or god forbid, syphilis?

Let’s take one more look at the diary of John Ward. At first glance his words may sound silly, but records from 1616, the year of Shakespeare’s death, inform us that a new strain of typhus was spreading across England. The name of this mortal infection? The new fever. So yes, Shakespeare may have died of a fever after all.

Works referenced

C. Martin Mitchell,The Shakespeare Circle

Politicworm. Shakespeare Authorship

Shakespeare Birthplace Trust

Shakespeare-Online

Simon Andrew Sterling, Who Killed Shakespeare?

Inscription thought to be commissioned by Shakespeare himself

Have you heard about the latest Shakespeare mystery? Someone has stolen his skull! There is a very real possibility that somewhere, someone is in possession of the beloved poet’s head and is keeping it a secret. Or, maybe not. There may be much ado about nothing. Let’s start from the beginning.

Argosy, an early 19^th century English magazine, now considered to be the first published collection of “pulp fiction”, is our starting point or should I say reference point for the case of the missing skull. Here too we have a slight mystery on our hands, as the date of the magazine’s first issue is in question. Some Internet sites say it started in December of 1882, yet a bound collection of some of its earliest stories titled, Argosy Volume 28, notes that the stories are from 1879. And if this is volume VIII, wouldn’t this suggest even an early date of publication? But no matter, what is important is that at some point in history, one of the stories published in Argosy was a story titled, “How Shakespeare’s Skull was stolen” authored by A Warwickshire Man. The story is part of the Volume 28 collection, which is still in print today. I read it thanks to Google Books, though it is such a mess of a story that I don’t recommend you bother.

The story is narrated from a first person’s perspective. One man retells a tale he was told as well as readings he got from a diary. As a piece of fiction goes it’s a little messy but readable, but from a historical account may leave the reader with a lot of unanswered questions and some major plot holes. If it is to be believed, a young brash and arrogant doctor, Frank Chambers, pays two well-known grave robbers to dig up Shakespeare’s skull, because, well, why not! After all the doctor already had one skull and felt he needed a second “to bear him company; the poor fellow finds it unked here o’nights since he was swinging free and easy on Mappleborough Green”. So it seems the doctor had the skull of a hanged man and wanted to balance that out with a poet. Doesn’t sound like a likely pair for bookends to me.

The story continues as slapstick comedy; the two grave robbers set out dig up Shakespeare, but because they rely on a local Stratford maid who cannot read, and has never heard of William Shakespeare, ends up digging up the wrong skull. (if this reminds you of the brain stealing scene in Young Frankenstein, you are not alone) After being admonished by Chambers, the pair sets out again, key to the Church in hand, and finally steals away with the right skull.

As I said, as a piece of fiction it’s a little messy but entertaining enough and should be regarded as such, but of course it is not. Some scholars (though no one I know) renamed this a rumor and have long wondered if Shakespeare’s skull is really missing.

Well, if you are lucky enough to live in the U.K. and are interested in this mystery you are in luck! BBC 4 will broadcast the findings of a 2014 archaeological investigation of Shakespeare’s grave at Holy Trinity church in Stratford-on-Avon tonight. The investigation set out to either dispel or confirm some of the rumors surround Shakespeare’s burial:

Was he buried standing up?

Why are flagstone markings so short?

Is this marked spot empty and is he buried somewhere else?

The answers to these questions suggest that both William and Anne are buried in the church and that the bodies extend past the markers. And no, he is not standing up but is laying just a few feet down.

But the real mystery, at least according to the researchers, is that the ground around Shakespeare’s head appears to have at one time been disturbed, suggesting that this rumor of theft could turn out to be true. However, the vicar of Holy Trinity, the Rev Patrick Taylor, is not convinced. After all, it is one thing to steal from the corner of some dark cemetery, it is quite another to steal into a locked church, removed some flagstones, remove the dirt, dig up a skull and put it all back again without anyone every noticing. Impossible? No. Improbable? Yes.

We should reserve judgment until after the documentary airs, but in honesty, this seems much ado about nothing.

Works Referenced

The Guardian, Shakespeare’s skull probably stolen by grave robbers, study finds

Google Books Argosy Volume 28 How Shakespeare’s Skull was stolen

Pulpmag.org The Argosy

Category: History

The Mystery of Shakespeare’s death

Much ado about the Case of the missing skull

Share this:

Share this: