^FCAllFOff^ I a ^OFCAUFOi?^ Al o ^^^ S %a3AiNa-3ftV' ^lllBRARYO^ )^l JJO>' -^^^tUBRARY^^, i I •^jBAiNnmv^ 'FOP//. ^ It % -r o i 3 ^ P. Mojito \\ i JO^ *• llir ^'^^ ^^ <-'4Ujn ■'/Auvaai Q ■^aaAiNaaw^ %a3AiNn3V&i' ••^ ^6>Aavaaiii '^ (!lZ^% <=3 i i \?.llRRADV/0/ •<«MINIVFW/x .v-in^Anrnpr, .>\UV .y\\i ^^WE•UNIVER% ^lOSAHCElfj^ ^J^30Nvsoi^ "^sMAiNn-itf^ '-^-^Aavaafl-ivv^ ^w'w iunrl iiir ^0F-CAIIF0% .\MEUNIVERjy, I .^WE'UNIVERV/ =13 S _ ^OF'CAU •'•JUJ/>l!lli ^ ..\WEUNIVER5/A .vv:l05 RYAt ^'»i>.>\*,. A^'V ¥ A <»>; -, n^ >•" ."»' ^4t^.' L jSF J iiilliHi THE "GRAFTON" PORTRAIT ^ HE Story of the ^^Grafton^^ Portrait of William Shakespeare "^TATJS SV^ 24, 1588" with an account of the Sack and Destruction of the Manor House of Grafton Regis by the Parlia^ mentary Forces on Christmas Eve, 1643 BY THOMAS KAY LONDON: S. W. Partridge 8c Co., Ltd. Old Bailev. 1914 n Plain pathed experience the unlearned's guide, Her simple following evidently shews Sometimes what schoolmen scarcely can decide, Nor yet what reason absolutely knows." Michael Drayion. CONTENTS page I. Preface .. 5 II. The Grafton Shakespeare .. 9 III. Grafton Regis . . 47 IV. The Sack of Grafton House . . ..59 V. Appendix ■■75 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PAGE Photograph of the Grafton Shakespeare Frontispiece The Bridgewater Arms, Winston Portrait of the Grafton Shakespeare Portrait of James I. The " Chandos " Portrait Parallel-lined Photographs of the " Droeshout Original " and " Grafton " Portraits . . Photographs of the Bust in the Church at Strat- ford-upon-Avon, AND of the Illustration in Dugdale's " History of Warwickshire " View of Grafton House from the Lawn The Burnt-out House of the Smiths The Church of Grafton Regis . . The Queen's Oak . . The Burning of the Manor House The Last of the Smiths . . Photograph of the Date " i • 5 • 8 • 8 " The Grafton Shakespeare Ln the Village of Grafton Regis 10 18 20 22 25 26 45 49 50 54 59 75 79 80 80 ICOPYRIGHT.) I. PREFACE The telling of the following story has been prompted by the discovery of a picture which the author, from evidence collected by him and set out in these pages, submits to be a genuine portrait of Shakespeare painted during his lifetime. The portrait has painted upon it an age " 24 " and a date " 1588," the age corresponding with that of Shakespeare in the same year. An analytical comparison is made between this and other recognised portraits of Shakespeare. An account is also given of the sack and destruc- tion of Grafton House, Grafton Regis, on Christmas Eve, 1643, by the ParHamentary forces when the house was plundered of its pictures and treasures. The circumstances above related may with further investigation throw some light upon that little-known period of Shakespeare's career preceding the first production of his works. Since very little is really known about William Shakespeare, any scrap of new information, no matter how trifling, especially about his youth, is of the greatest value when it affords the oppor- tunity of obtaining a clearer view of his personality or of penetrating the mystery that surrounds every period of his life. While we know a great PREFACE deal about Dante from contemporary portraits and allusions, our knowledge of Shakespeare is confined to a few facts that could be written on a sheet of notepaper. As the poet's admirers are not satisfied that the bust above his grave in the Church, or that any other portrait gives a true presentment of his features, except the engraving in the " First Folio," which is an inartistic picture of the man in his declining years, it is of manifest importance that no picture with honest claims should be rejected until the evidence brought forward in its favour has been thoroughly scrutinised and placed on record, lest that which is so much to be desired should be lost. The " Grafton " picture has therefore been acquired, registers and other records have been consulted, and every effort has been made by personal enquiries in and around Grafton Regis to obtain information as to the occurrences at Grafton House and the traditions and other matters relating to the Smiths— the yeoman family who held in their possession from the early part of the 17th century a painting of so much importance. Moreover, the possibility that England might lose the possession of the picture increased the desire to purchase it. An offer was made to and accepted by the owners, who, however, from its 6 Note by the Executors of the late Mr. Thomas Kay ^ The publication of this work, which it was intended should take place in the autumn of 1914, has unavoidably been postponed owing to the illness and lamented death of the author and the outbreak of war. ^ The Grafton Portrait was bequeathed by Mr. Kay to the John Rylands Library, Man- chester, and has been accepted by the Governors of that Institution. Stockport, June, igi5. PREFACE having been long in the possession of the family, were reluctant to part with it. The portrait was purchased on February 8th, 1909, and was first exhibited at Manchester on the next day at a meeting of the " Fortnightly Society " on the occasion of a recital by the writer and his friends of his "Songs from Sentences in Shakespeare." The owner of the picture is making arrange- ments for presenting it to some suitable institution in which it may be preserved for exhibition, so that it shall not be allowed to leave England. Stockport, May, 1914. N II. THE "GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE " Mine eye hath play'd the painter and hath stei'd Thy beauty's form in table of my heart ; My body is the frame wherein 'tis held, And perspective it is best painter's art. For through the painter must you see his skill, To find where your true image pictur'd lies, Which in my bosom's shop is hanging still, That hath his windows glazed with thine eyes. Now see what good turns eyes for eyes have done : Mine eyes have drawn thy shape, and thine for me Are windows to my breast, where through the sun Delights to peep, to gaze therein on thee ; Yet eyes this cunning want to grace their art, They draw but what they see, know not the heart." Shal(espeares Sonnels, XXIV. On February i8th, 1907, there appeared in the pages of the Manchester Guardian a photographic reproduction of what was described as " the supposed portrait of Shakespeare which has been found in a village inn near Darlington." An- THE ^^GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE nouncements of a similar kind, together with reproductions of the picture, also appeared in most of the leading newspapers, with the result that the subject aroused considerable public interest. The present writer, being possessed of the necessary leisure and having had considerable experience in portraiture, put himself in commu- nication with the owners of the picture, the Misses Ludgate of Winston-on-Tees, and eventually journeyed thither to inspect it. A feeling of disappointment was experienced at the first view of the portrait in its mean-looking frame and bearing marks of neglect and maltreat- ment, but it was some consolation to find that it had not been violated by the hand of any pseudo- restorer, that no attempts had been made to hide its defects or to improve its appearance, and that, however much the picture had suffered from neglect and ignorance, it possessed intrinsic merits of style and treatment which artistically are extremely interesting. At the time the portrait was first exhibited in Manchester there appeared in the pages of the Connoisseur for February, 1909, an article which for its able criticism upon this picture in particular is worth quoting. It is entitled " The Grafton 10 THE BRIDGEWATER ARMS, WINSTON HISTORY OF THE PORTRAIT Portrait of Shakespeare." The writer says that in response to a letter of enquiry addressed to the Misses Agnes and F. Ludgate (Mrs. Ludgate having passed away) they with great courtesy gave him the history of the picture. He then proceeds : — " The facts are these : The portrait had been in their family for five or six generations at an old farmhouse belonging to the Dukes of Grafton^ in the village of Grafton, tenanted for more than two hundred years by their forefathers, who farmed under successive Dukes. At the death of Miss Ludgate's grandfather, about the year 1876, it came into the possession of her mother, and when she died it descended to herself and her sister. It had come into their immediate family through a rich old uncle of their mother's great-grandfather who lived in or near Grafton, where he died; and Miss Ludgate added, her forefathers all had lived to a good old age. ''On their father's side the present owners are descended from a Southerner, at one time head-keeper on the Ashbridge Park Estate at Great Berkhampstead belonging to Lord Brownlow; their father was Station- master at Castle Ashby, who had married Miss Smith, of Grafton Regis, Northamptonshire, the daughter of a farmer-stock. 1 The first Duke of Grafton was the son of Charles II. by Barbara Villiers. Grafton Manor was presented to him by his father in the latter part of the 17th Century. II Bx THE "GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE ''On his retirement from the Railway Service, Mr. Ludgate settled at Winston-on-Tees, and when he died his widow took over the license of 'The Bridgewater Arms/ which duly devolved on the daughters.^ " When Mrs. Ludgate (nee Smith) brought the picture into the family, her husband regarded it with so much pride and veneration that he spoke of it as an heirloom, but it may be explained, it is not strictly so regarded by his daughters.^' Further, on page 98, we read that a large photograph of the portrait was taken. He goes on to say : — "This photograph was forwarded without loss of time, with an expression of the desire that I should give my opinion upon it. To that I replied that, judging merely from the photograph — for a photograph is always an uncertain and sometimes a treacherous guide — the picture appeared to me to be an interesting one, and, as far as I could then tell, a genuine painting of the time to which it apparently belongs. But as to its claim to be a likeness of the poet, I could not say a word. . . To describe the picture. It is painted on panel, and measures 17^ by 15| inches. This panel is of oak of undoubted antiquity, not planed, of course, but hewn at the back, and to some extent worm-eaten. In the upper left and right corners is painted in raised yellow letters ^ " The Inn, we are told, owes its name to the fact that the Manor of Winston passed into the possession of Scrope Egerton, Duke of Bridgewater, on the execution of Henry Scrope for high treason against Henry the Fifth." — The Connoisseur, Feb., 1909. Fol. 97. 12 DESCRIPTION OF THE PORTRAIT (doubtless formed of gesso or heavy impasto of paint) the following inscription : — "it SVJE, 24, 1588." A shock of curly hair, dark-brown to blackish, covers the head, and falls down to the base of the neck. The slashed doublet is of crimson or carnation colour, good in tone, but unusual in a garment of the period. The painting of it, and of the gauze collar are vastly inferior in merit to the head, so that it may be believed that the painter of the face left the execution of the ' drapery * to a pupil, according to the fashion which was then common enough, and which was openly practised down to the beginning of the last century. The head is well and incisively drawn, and the character good, suggesting the hand of a follower of Holbein, Bettes, or Stephen, or some other Netherlandish or English painter of that class— of an artist too sensitive to have left so crudely the obtrusive crosslines of the collar and the slashings of the doublet without seeking to modify or soften the effect. But in fairness to the picture it must be stated that the glazings, if such there had been, may well have been removed during the rigorous cleaning which the late Mrs. Ludgate once administered to it according to the strictest rules of hygienic effectiveness and pro- priety, with soda and scrubbing brush. The nose is thick, especially towards the end, without the marked columna nasi common to the Stratford bust and the other leading portraits of repute, and the nostrils are of essentially different shape to what we find in the Droeshout print, which, however, it curiously resembles 13 THE "GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE in two not unimportant particulars. The medial lobe of the upper lip dips in exaggerated fashion in the middle, at what might be called the inverted apex of the Cupid's bow, and the curve of the lower lip towards the left ends abruptly, rising in an almost perpendicular line to the upper lip — exactly as we see in the Ely Palace and the Flower ( the so-called ' Droeshout Original ' ) portrait. It also agrees with the Ely Palace portrait and the 'unique proof of the Droeshout engraving in the character of the small moustache, and further with the last-named m the curviform construction of the eyebrows. . . . Much has been made of the fact that on the back of the stretcher there is branded ' W + S.' That is something more than the '1616' which, scratched on the back of the 'Death Mask' of Shakespeare, is considered by some to be satisfactory, if only partial evidence of its authenticity. But even supposing that the mark were contemporaneous there is nothing to suggest that it did not refer to some Walter Smith or William Salisbury. As a matter of fact, this sunken device is quite modern. For when Miss Ludgate had the courtesy to bring the picture for me to examine, she told me, and confirmed to me in writing, that she remembers her father branding on the letters himself, remarking that inasmuch as the portrait evidently represented Shakespeare he might as well set it upon record for the guidance of future owners. His act was thus committed in good faith, and not in any- wise for the purpose of deception. "When it was that the picture was first called by the name of the poet there is nothing to show. . . It had 14 THE RAISED FIGURES always been known by tradition in the family of the owners as ^ Old Matt/ ^ a name which has not even yet forsaken it. Although it is a genuine old portrait in the dry manner of the period, smoothly painted, it is without clearly defined shadows ; that is to say, it is allied to Zuccaro's earlier manner, and of that of Mark Gerrard. These shadows are needful to give solidity and projection, and the quality which Mr. Berenson calls ' tactile values,' and the absence of them is characteristic of portraits painted, roughly speaking, down to the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign. . . . It is true that raised lettering, which is the hall-mark of several exploded Shakespeare portraits, in itself provides an element of doubt; but, in this case I believe it to be genuine enough." It is hardly possible to speak too highly of the acumen and the delicate discrimination shown in this examination and report. With reference to what the writer of the article calls the " raised lettering " there is one matter which is not noticed by him, namely, that under the figure " 4 " of the " 24 " there is the trace of an effaced " 3," which seems to show that the artist commenced the portrait before or in April, 1588, when Shakespeare was 23 years of age, and that it was completed after he had passed his 24th birthday in the same year, hence the altera- ^ It was so called for the reason that a local character Matt. Blunt wore a collar similar to that in the portrait. This may be an illustration of the persistence of fashion in country districts. 15 THE "GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE tion which one would hardly think to be necessary, except it be that, as a young man, the sitter may have desired that he should not be thought younger than he was. The writer of the preceding interesting analysis disclaims any responsibility for the sensational reports made upon the picture, and also gives reasons for his personal objections. These will be dealt with in proper sequence. As to the portrait itself ; the scars on the face are ancient scars, the pitted holes are not recent, the art is excellent art, and the worm-eaten parts are not sophisticated. The date upon it is genuine, and the panel is of the quality and character in use at the period. As to its value as a likeness the observer must be the judge after making due allowance for the effect of exposure, unprotected by glass during the 326 years that have elapsed since it was painted, under the harshness of our trying and variable climate and the neglect and maltreatment by its ignorant owners. No other portrait of Shakespeare at so early an age is known ; in fact, the only one at any period, and that was a late one, of his life for which authenticity can be claimed is the " Droeshout " engraving which Ben Jonson has stamped with his fiat as being a likeness. As in the analysis of any organic or inorganic body many considerations have to be thought out 16 PANEL AND CANVAS PAINTING before the dissociation of the elements can be attempted, so it must be in such a composite matter as this picture. It is painted on an oak panel which had previously been smoothed and prepared by priming for the artist, as was the common manner of the time. It was only after 1600 that the Italian fashion of painting on canvas came into England, and this revolutionised to a certain extent the manner of it. This will be readily understood by a consideration of the two surfaces — the one of canvas, with partial but regular interstices, and the other of close-grained irregular woody fibre smoothed to a fine and delicate level. This smoothed wooden panel was first of all primed with an oil preparation or with egg albumen mixed with a white pigment to form the ground work, and this was afterwards rubbed down with pumice or other method of attrition, the same being renewed again and again if needed until a suitable surface for the reception of paint was formed and it had become dry and hard. It is upon such a surface that the " Grafton " portrait has been painted, and it is one capable of receiving touches and tones of the utmost delicacy and nicety. A canvas picture such as the " Chandos " portrait has first to be surcharged with priming and allowed to dry. Its smoothness has to be 17 THE ^^GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE made by the adroit use of a brush or the soft priming flatted by a palette knife, or by scraping. The " Chandos " portrait has been heavily primed, and whether it is an original portrait or not, it seems to have had its surface repainted at some later period — maybe by such an artist as Dobson, and from the fact that it is on canvas it must have been painted after 1600. The National Portrait Gallery serves a useful purpose in affording examples of the varying methods of artistic creation, and some of the por- traits by Holbein, Mireveldt, Gerrard, &c., make many modem artists envious of their great beauty and continued freshness. It is truly wonderful to observe how well they have been preserved. The regret is that the " Grafton " portrait should have been carelessly kept and ignorantly maltreated. For 320 years it has been without covering. For a long period it was kept in the secret chamber of an old farmhouse, after which it hung in the best bedroom. In the process of whitewashing the room it has evidently been splashed with lime, which has burnt through the paint down to the woodwork below. One is strongly tempted to fill up these pits, to restore a few lights and take out some scratches ; but that would rob the observer of the deductions he could make or inductions he could form which are common to all intelligences. The simplest plan would be to make an emendation upon a 18 THE "GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE Copyright THE DATE 1 • 5 • 8 • 8 photographic reproduction only and to leave the painting untouched. There is one curious fact in regard to old pictures painted on wooden panels— the ligneous fibre of which they are composed is never abso- lutely dead. There is a life in it which sometimes raises little knots or excrescences. Oak is the most liable of all woods to twist, as the beams, roofs, and floors of old houses bear witness, and hence these vagaries of old oak, upon which a white priming is superimposed, give rise to peculiarities which often deceive experts, some of whom have imagined that there is a " 3 " under the last figure "8." This deceptive appearance having led some to doubt the authenticity of the picture, the opinion of qualified experts in several branches of Art are given in the Appendix^ to show that under the figure "8" there never was painted a "3" or any other figure. Surface streaks or scratches, of which there are many on the " Grafton " portrait, are from external abrasions. A distinguished art critic asked if there was not to be noticed some lines which seemed to take the form of a hood. There are external inscribed scratches or cuts which may be construed into that form, but these marks are, on a mere superficial observation, found to be cut in the varnish and some of them seem to be bruised as if by the end of a scrubbing-brush or the grit in a sponge. In * See Appendix IV., page 79. 19 THE ^^GRAFTON^' SHAKESPEARE the course of time these scratches have become filled with dust or dirt, and so are apparent on the first photograph, but they wholly disappeared on passing a soft wet rag or sponge over the picture, the dirt accumulated since the applica- tion of Mrs. Ludgate's brush being thus easily removed. The frontispiece photograph was taken while the surface was rendered smooth and clear by means of a wet sponge. It must be noticed that the moisture on the surface also acts as a varnish, to the picture, causing many things to be seen which are not otherwise visible, as the hair, &c. We must now try to find the name of the unknown artist by the characteristics of this picture, which may be similar to those of pictures by known artists. As for instance, it is not difficult to recognise the unsigned work of artists of the present day from the form, the quahty of colour, method of work, whether of figure, land- scape, or a combination of both, and the treatment in pose, background, and style, or from the subject matter of it. Thus, it is easy to tell a Millet from a Millais or a Tadema from a Herkomer. Confining oneself to portraiture as exhibited in the National Portrait Gallery, Vandyke gives one type or style, Sir Peter Lely another, Hogarth another, and Gainsborough is different again. Some special individual quality or style is to be found in every artistic work of mark ; each artist 20 KING JAMES I. Colour Sketch r.v the Author, from the National Portrait Gallery Copyright OCHRE AND SIENNA sets his own type so to speak— mixes his own colour upon his own palette, and also makes his own style of background. Now, there are many ways of painting portraits, as well as having them painted — for instance, a well-known Bey of Cairo, head of the Survey Department, sent for Signor Scognamiglio, an Italian artist, when as a holder of the Grand Prix de Rome, he was working in Egypt. On the painter's appearance, he called in his head Surveyor, and said to him : " This gentleman is here to paint my portrait and as I have many engagements I want you to take the measurements of my face, so that he can go on with his work. You will measure the nose, chin, mouth, forehead, eyes, and ears, height of the whole, with any other particulars he may desire." Needless to say the painter had to persuade the Bey to sit and allow him to take his own measurements. It is an old axiom in painting that any portrait can be realised by the aid of three colours— red, blue, and yellow — and of each colour there are many kinds. Painters of the modern school use ochre for their yellow effects, with rose-madder and light or other reds, and some kind of green, blue, or black for their greys and shadows. In the time of Elizabeth and that of James I. there was a painter, or a school of painters, who preferred to use raw sienna earth for the yellow, and burnt sienna with combinations of light red or carmine 21 THE "GRAFTON'^ SHAKESPEARE to produce the ruddy effect. In the National Portrait Gallery there are some remarkable examples of these two qualities of painture. The portrait of Sir Horace Vere, No. 8i8, is of the yellow-ochre type, and immediately adjacent is the portrait of Arthur Hildersham, No. 1575, of the Sienna type, painter unknown. An example of the first character, of what may be called the yellow-ochre type, may also be seen in the " Chandos " portrait of Shakespeare, which is painted on canvas and from outward appear- ance is of a later date than the portrait of James I. of England, No. 549. This portrait of King James is peculiarly an example of the raw and burnt sienna style of portraiture, as is that of Arthur Hildersham, and the " Grafton " portrait is of a similar class, nature, and quality of colour. The name of the artist does not seem to be known ; but it may be accepted that these two portraits and that of the " Grafton " Shakespeare are of one school if by different artists. But what can be said of the " Grafton " portrait itself ? It is dated 1588, in which year we have unquestionable evidence that Shakespeare had reached the age of 24 years, the age recorded on the portrait. It has been asked how came he to have his portrait painted at so early an age ? The answer to this question is perfectly simple. Let it be conceded that at all times in the history 22 THE "CHANDOS" PORTRAIT Colour Sketch r,v the Author, from the National Portrait Gallery Copyright SHADOWLESS PORTRAITS of portrait painting it has been necessary for an artist to practise his craft freely with a view to acquiring facihty and efficiency in his work before he can hope to be entrusted with the execution of more important commissions. So it may readily be conceived of this " Grafton" panel that it was a studio picture— a portrait done without fee or reward, merely in exercise of the painter's craft, or, it may be, a specimen work for exhibition to wealthy patrons with a view to securing com- missions of a remunerative character. One may be permitted to imagine such a portrait being taken by the artist to the Court, or to the chambers of the nobility. If it was taken to the Court of James L, it is conceivable that the thrifty monarch might retain it, and probably commission his own portrait to be painted by the same artist or one of the same school. Again, the shadowless portrait faces are peculiar to the Elizabethan era. It may not have been generally observed that the Virgin Queen never had a shadow painted on her face. It interfered with the purity of her complexion, and perhaps, as she may have thought, her character. Looking in a mirror at one's own face in direct light these shadows are hardly discernible, hence a greater delicacy of art was required in painting a portrait at that period than at the present day, 23 THE "GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE when strongly shadowed Rembrandtesque effects are more in vogue. In the " Grafton " portrait we have this EHzabethan fashion depicted, except that the chin is reheved by a shadow below and traces of a slight beard near the ear. This shadowless face gives an appearance of greater width to the end of the nose by reason of the right subjective lobe being merged into it, while the want of prominence is caused by the lighted surface having been removed either by time's decay or by Mrs. Ludgate's cleansing pro- cess. A very slight touch of light upon the nasal column to replace that which is lost affords a rather exaggerated but effectual restoration, as is shown in the accompanying parallel-lined photo- graphs. With reference to the much-debated subject of Shakespeare's portraits there are several characteristics that have come to be recognised as appertaining to them. They must all be judged by the standard established by the only one upon which full reliance can be placed, which represents Shakespeare in his later days. This is the " Droe- shout " engraving in the First Folio Edition of his Plays published in 1623. Shakespeare died in 1616. The lines written by Ben Jonson, Shakespeare's personal friend, testify to the truth of the likeness in the portraiture, poor and un- flattering as that portrait is. 24 (U c y Mr. Wiville, of Birmingham (probably a descendant of the ancient Wyvilles of Grafton House), and the information gleaned therefrom indicates that many of the old pictures, of which there is no authentic history, are fanciful or careless copies. The portraits known as the " Chandos," the " Ely," the " Stratford," the " Felton," and others, varying as they do in dress, style, &c., are all of 27 THE ^^GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE great value although their pedigrees are not perfect. It is also to be remembered that at the great Fire of London, which occurred only half a century after Shakespeare's death, many relics and portraits of him would be destroyed, whilst those in the country would stand a better chance of preservation, the more so if by State disrup- tions and consequent change of possessors, their identity for the time being should have been lost. It is worthy of notice that the portrait of Ben Jonson (No. 363, National Portrait Gallery), which was formerly hung alongside that of the " Chandos " Shakespeare, has been obviously " touched up " by the replacement of perished high Hghts. After the quality of the painting of the " Grafton " portrait the next consideration is the character of it. We know that with age the fore- head becomes flatter and that the signs of prema- ture baldness are usually first observable in the retreat of the hair from it, although sometimes the first sign is seen on the crown of the head, where it gradually widens until the clerical ton- sure is developed. In all the portraits of Shake- speare this denudation of the hair from the fore- head is a distinctive mark as it is in that of the poet Tennyson. The physiognomy as revealed in the " Grafton " portrait may now be considered. In the first 28 THE "GRAFTON" PORTRAIT place the shape of the head is a long oval, and in this respect it resembles the " Droeshout " por- trait, being evenly balanced and well set up, with eyes of an open liquid character which could be either fiery or languishing. The ears are set well back, leaving a noble forehead and plenty of mental equipment in front. The eyes have been set by the painter to secure the result of seeming to follow the spectator from every point of view — a simple artistic effect ob- tained by making the model gaze steadfastly into the face of the artist when painting the pupils of the eyes and by adding the glistening light thereon. Traces of these still appear in the portrait, although under time and rough usage they have almost disappeared. The mouth seems to smile, but suggests withal the presence of a serious and thoughtful disposition. The nose, as it appears in the picture, is narrow on the bridge, like that in the ** Droe- shout " painting, but broader at the tip. This apparent bluntness is entirely due to the absence of the high light which would give it prominence and elevation. There can be no doubt but that this high light was formerly present in the picture, and its disap- pearance is entirely due either to the ravages of time, or to the severe cleansing it is known to have received. There is, indeed, upon minute obser- 29 D THE "GRAFTON'^ SHAKESPEARE vation, a clear indication of this light still to be found on the portrait. It is also worthy of note that the human nose is, as a rule, much more full and fleshy in youth than in later life. This fact is pathetically noted by Shakespeare in describing the death of Falstaff, of whom Dame Quickly says : "I knew there was but one way ; for his nose was as sharp as a pen, and a babbled of green fields." The collar and the dress, which latter is a slashed doublet, are of an elegant and sumptuous quality, but rather bizarre. Polonius says : — " Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy, But not express'd in fancy; rich, not gaudy, For the apparel oft proclaims the man; And they in France of the best rank and station Are of a most select and generous sheaf in that.'' It may possibly be that the dress is a fancy costume, and it might be a character-dress apper- taining to a masque, a court function, or a stage play. Consideration must also be given to the fact that in Elizabeth's day a person was clad according to his quality or station in hfe, just as a clergyman, the sailor, the waiter, &c., are known to-day by the fashion of their raiment. Let us consider also the position Shakespeare would occupy in the year of grace 1588, having arrived in London in 1582 at 18 years of age. Six years after his arrival he was a member of the Earl 30 SHAKESPEARE IN LONDON of Leicester's Company of Players and under the protection of the great Earl's name he is certain to have filled no inconspicuous niche in the temple of that little world of art and letters. He was a youth of remarkable poetic gifts rising into celebrity and possessed, as we see from his por- traits, of an attractive appearance. To whom would he be more likely to recite his verses than to the nobles, wits, artists, actors and others who were drawn towards that gay Bohemian world ? His genial disposition would commend him to the notice of the scholars and travellers of the day, for we find that Ben Jonson and Lord Southamp- ton were among his earlier associates. Business capacity would enable him at an early period to lay the foundation of the fortune that eventually made him the wealthiest man in his native town. A wonderful gift of mental illustration, a power of expression, the poetic faculty, a wide knowledge of field and flood, and a tender grasp and faculty of understanding and comprehension would make him not only a most charming companion but a beloved friend. He revelled in description, the beauties of heaven and earth were an open book which he could read with facility and render to admiration. Once known, he would never be forgotten. All studios would be open to him and artists would be proud to try a sketch of his face. It is unlikely that he would long escape the atten- tion of portrait painters. 31 THE ^^GRAFTQN" SHAKESPEARE Such may have been the circumstances under which this " Grafton " portrait was produced. It may have been painted on an old used panel with the original subject erased— for economical artists do these things — and some, to my knowledge, prefer old canvases to paint upon because of their prepared condition, and it is the same with wooden panels, the pores being more completely and firmly filled. It is not difficult to imagine Shakespeare on a summer's day at " The Falcon," " The Three Cranes," or other inn, overlooking the river, with Ben Jonson, Richard Burbage, Alleyn, Heming, Will Sly, with " face-painters " — artists from the Netherlands —Van Somers to wit, and others sojourning in Merry England, discussing the news of the defeat and dispersal of the Spanish Armada. One can almost hear the merry jests and the joke of Sir Julius Caesar, " Venit, vidit, fugit " (which was afterwards struck on a medal), and young Will. Shakespeare sitting quietly observant and mentally noting details of the ruin of the enemy's fleet — as recounted by a mariner who had served under Drake, Hawkins, or Effingham in their memorable Channel fight ; "his complexion is perfect gallows," as Gonzalo says of the Boatswain in " The Tempest." The call of the pot-boy " Anon ! Anon ! " with scurrying steps and clashing pewters, the arrivals and departures, the wherries and their 32 SHAKESPEARE IN LONDON owners — State barges and officials —jugglers and dancing girls, with the pets of the ring, et hoc genus omne ; and there was the Puritan Preacher, John Field, who railed at them upon the iniquities of Bankside, its lewdness, riotings, and degrada- tion of the Sabbath. He wrote " a Godly exhor- tation by occasion of the late judgment of God shewed at Paris Garden " upon the occasion of a great accident which had happened in that place of assembly. John Field was the father of Nathan or Nat Field— who afterwards became an actor of some prominence, and whose portrait is in the Dulwich Gallery along with that of Richard Burbage, William Sly, and others of the stage. To revert to the distinguished writer and critic previously quoted. He says : 'Mt must be borne in mind that the painting of a man's portrait was a serious thing in the sixteenth century ; nobles and men of wealth and leisure would indulge themselves in it and persons of mark and learning would sit to ' face drawers ' and * face makers ' for their portraits. But what was Shakespeare's position at the time ? Why should he, who held some inferior, perhaps, as we are told, a 'servile' position at a play-house — none too reputable a place in the consideration of contemporary society — have been honored by the artist's attention ? We know nothing of him at that date : not for four years, in 1592, was he to be heard of so far as dramatic history reveals. Likely enough he had not yet arisen above the situation of call bey. Is it credible 33 THE ^GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE that an obscare youth, occapied in a vocation more or less inglorious, should have been honored by a painter of ability in a manner usually reserved for men and women of position or established reputation?^' — Connoisseur, Feb. 1909, p. 100. The answer to these questions is that there is no trustworthy record of Shakespeare having in 1588 occupied a servile position at a play-house, or that " he had not risen above the situation of call-boy " if he ever had been one. This allusion to Shakespeare's inferior position in the play-house is probably founded upon two of the least trustworthy traditions relating to his early days in London. The first reference to this particular tradition was published in the year 1753 in " Gibber's Lives of the Poets of Great Britain," in which is related a story "which Sir William Davenant told to Mr. Betterton, who communi- cated it to Mr. Rowe; Rowe told it to Mr. Pope, and Mr. Pope told it to Dr. Newton, the late editor of Milton, and from a gentleman who heard it from him ^ 'tb here related ' to the effect that * Shakespeare driven to the last necessity went to the play-house door and picked up a little money by taking care of the gentlemen's horses who came to the play.' " The other tradition, although it has reached us by a less circuitous route than that just related, is still more untrustworthy, and appears in a letter, supposed to have been written by one John Dowdall, in 1693, in which it is stated that he 34 SHAKESPEARE'S EARLY PROMINENCE was informed by "the clarke that shewd me this church (Stratford-upon-Avon) . . . that this Shakes- peare was formerly in this Towne bound apprentice to a butcher; but that he run from his master to London and there was received into the play-house as a serviture." Mr. J. W. Gray pronounces this letter to be one of Collier's numerous forgeries, probably suggested by a reading of the tradition that passed through so many mouths before it reached Gibber.^ Moreover, the term " servile " as apphed to Shakespeare's early occupation at the theatre is hardly justified by the word " serviture " used in the Dowdall forgery. It must be noted that a servitor is one who receives a free tuition in return for some perhaps menial duties, and is not a paid servant. Moreover, it is quite probable that in 1588 Shakespeare, having arrived in London in 1582, had already become prominent on the Stage, and that he occupied a position equal to that of some contemporary actors whose portraits now grace the walls of Dulwich Gallery.'' There is no justification to be found in the annals of Art for the theory that at any period no face would be 1 " Shakespeare's Marriage and Departure from Strat- ford," pp. 82 and 250-1. 2 Vide catalogue of the pictures in the Gallery of Alleyn's College of God's Gift at Dulwich. 385 (50) Nathan Field, an actour. 390 (52) Tom Bond, an actour. 391 (49) William Sly, an actour. 395 (48) Richard Burbage, actour. 411 (31) Young Mr. Cartwright, actour. 443 (11) Edward Alleyn, actour. 35 THE "GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE *' honored by the artist's attention which had not a reputable place in the consideration of contemporary society." Dr. Fumival tells us that in 1592 Shakespeare was well known as " both actor and author/'^ and in the same year, four years after the date of the portrait, he is of sufficient importance to be attacked by Green in his " Groat's worth of wit." Before elaborating this argument it will, perhaps, be well to give an account of the main events of Shakespeare's life. 1 " Life and Works of Shakespeare," Fol. 176-7. 36 FACTS OF SHAKESPEARE'S LIFE A CHRONICLE. 1564. ) Baptism, " Gulielmus Filius Johannes Shaks- April 26. / pere." 1582. 1 A licence was granted for the marriage of Nov. 27. j William Shaxpere and Anne Whateley (evidently a mistake for Hathaway) of Temple Grafton. Bishop Whitgift's Register, folio 43b. — Diocesan Registry, Worcester. 1582. 1 A bond was executed for the grant of a Marriage Nov. 28. J Licence to William Shagspere, and Anne Hathwey of Stratford upon Avon. — Diocesan Registry, Worcester. 1582. Aubrey's date of Shakespeare's departure from Stratford. 1583. ") Baptism, " Susanna daughter to William Shaks- May 26. J pere." 1584-5. ) Baptisms, " Hamnet and Judeth, sonne and Feb. 2. / daughter to Willia Shakspere." 1585-7. Shakespeare wrote " Venus and Adonis." 1588-9. Shakespeare wrote " Titus Andronicus," "Love's Labour's Lost." 1603. 1 Under a Warrant from King James r, Shakes- May 17. J peare's Company of players received a licence " freely to use and exercise the arte and faculty of playing comedies, tragedies, &c." The names mentioned are Laurence Fletcher, William Shakespeare, Richard Burbage, Augustine Phillippes, John Hem- mings, Henrie Condell, William Sly, Robert Armyn, and Richard Cowlye. — Public Record Office Museum. 1616. ) William Shakespeare's last will and testament March 25. j bears this date. . ..' \ William Shakespeare died. April 25. Burial, " Will. Shakespere, gent." 37 E THE ^^GRAFTON'^ SHAKESPEARE Commenting upon the period immediately following Shakespeare's marriage in 1582, Rowe says : " In this kind of settlement he continued for some time until an extravagance that he was guilty of forced him both out of his country and the way of living he had taken up." ^ It has been the custom of nearly all the poet's biographers to form their opinions as to the date of his departure from Stratford, upon Rowe's indefinite expression " for some time," which is interpreted by Halliwell Phillips as " three or four years after his union with Anne Hathaway," a rendering for which there is no justification in any of the known facts of Shakespeare's life. This and other similar readings of Rowe's words are supposed to receive support from the fact that Shakespeare's twin children, Hamnet and Judeth, were baptised at Stratford-upon- Avon, in February, 1584-5 ; but the force of this argument is much discounted by the consideration that the poet when residing in London could, with little difficulty, have visited his native town even if circumstances had compelled him to walk the whole distance. Other authors suggest dates as late as 1588 for the commencement of Shakespeare's residence ^ " The Works of William Shakespeare." Rowe, 1709. It should be noted that Rowe wrote at a later period than Aubrey, and that his account therefore is of less value. 38 AUBREY^S ACCOUNT in London, and appear to ignore the opinion of the poet's eadiest biographer, Aubrey, who, in the few words he bestows upon the subject, says : " This William . . . came to London I guesse about 18; and was an actor at one of the play houses." * Although Aubrey uses the words " I guesse," it will be seen that his evidence is of great value and cannot be disregarded. He visited Stratford-upon-Avon within 50 years of the poet's death, and the results of his inquiries created in his mind the impression which he thus interprets. There are, fortunately, still in existence sources from which Aubrey's guess receives cor- roboration, and those who are curious about the matter may refer to Mr. J. W. Gray's " Shake- speare's Marriage and Departure from Stratford," pp. 70-96, in which the evidence is dealt with at some length in support of his contention that the poet was installed as an actor in London in or about the year 1582. This indicates that he had been pursuing his avocation in London for six years at the time the *' Grafton " portrait was painted (1588). The poem of " Venus and Adonis " and some of the earlier plays are ascribed by Dr. Furnival, one of the most trustworthy of Shakespearean writers, to the same year. If the view be taken that he left Stratford in 1582 it will be perceived ^ Brief Lives, Chiefly of Contemporaries, Aubrey, 1669-1696. 39 THE "GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE that he had abundant opportunity of devoting himself to his work, and it harmonises with a view founded upon another of Aubrey's statements, derived from Beeston, that Shakespeare '^under- stood Latin pretty well, for he had been in his younger years a schoolmaster in the country." The year 1582 brought the son of the Warwick- shire yeoman to the turning point in his career. He then married, and it is almost certain that about the same time he also made the other great change that led him to fame and fortune, for it cannot be doubted that residence in London supplied the environment that enabled him to make full use of two qualities seldom found in combination — genius and great business capacity. The circumstances connected with the grant of the marriage license, the records of which are still preserved in the muniment-room of the Episcopal Registry at Worcester, indicate considerable haste in the preparations for the ceremony. It was evidently inconvenient to wait until the banns had been published in the ordinary manner, and it cannot reasonably be supposed that the expense and trouble involved in obtaining a license, allowing of one proclamation of banns at the time of the ceremony, were lightly undertaken by a youth whose father, although a former bailiff of the town, was then in financial difficulties. A hurried departure from Stratford is held to have been the motive for that costly procedure. 40 SHAKESPEARE'S MARRIAGE An offence against the Game Laws that aroused the ire of Sir Thomas Lucy finds considerable favour as the prime cause, and it does not seem improbable that youthful exuberance led him into some difficulty that brought his residence at Strat- ford to a sudden close. The marriage took place late in November, 1582, and the first child of the union was baptised in May, 1583, within six months of the marriage. This short interval points to a desire on Shakespeare's part to do that which is not un- common even at the present day, viz., " to make an honest woman " of Anne under their contract of marriage. This was quite an ordinary mode of procedure in and before the time of Queen Eliza- beth. Having incurred marital responsibilities, it became an urgent necessity that he should at once seek his fortune. The cumulative evidence now available cor- roborates Aubrey's " guess " that at the age of 18 Shakespeare commenced his life as an actor in London, and we may feel assured that he made good use of such opportunities as were no doubt afforded by a long acquaintance with the members of the travelling companies of players who fre- quently visited Stratford. That he was not without friends in London from the first is also certain from what we know about the Stratford men who were already settled there and who would 41 THE ^^GRAFTON'^ SHAKESPEARE readily advance the interests of their talented townsman. It is therefore submitted that Shakespeare had already made his mark as an actor in 1588, and that this, together with his social and financial position, entitled him to the honour of sitting to " a painter of ability," in like manner to his confreres of the stage, Nat Field and the rest. The evidence, such as it is, favours the assumption that instead of being the suitor for such favours, he was far more likely to have been in a position to bestow them. By way of summary, it may be said that the statements by the former owners of the " Grafton " portrait are genuine, and testimony is given as to the transparent honesty and good faith that has stood the test of all investigations. While the grounds upon which the picture is claimed to be a portrait of Shakespeare may be considered a worthy subject of inquiry, its past history is not without significance. It has long been adrift from its former associa- tion with other pictures, but it has been traced with some approach to success, as may be found by reading the chapter upon Grafton Regis. The lost identity of the picture may be readily under- stood when it is considered that after the restora- tion of King Charles II. he would have been a bold man and a foolish one who would allow it to be known that plunder taken from Grafton House 42 Features of "Droeshout" and "Grafton ?) was in his possession. For this reason it is extremely unhkely that the Duke of Grafton ever saw it, hidden away as it was in the Secret Chamber of a farmhouse. Even if the " Grafton " picture had previously been known as the portrait of an actor, puritanical prejudice would have prevented any mention of the fact, and it would gradually sink into an oblivion to be still further deepened by its later vicissitudes until not only the identity of the portrait, but the circumstances under which it was acquired by the ancestor of the late owner would be completely lost, and so the habit of keeping the picture hidden from public view survived after the motive for secrecy was for- gotten. On the other hand, we have the circumstances already stated, including the general agreement of the features in the " Grafton " portrait with those of the " Droeshout original," and the coinci- dence of the age of the man represented with that of Shakespeare in the year painted on the panel. "iE SV^ 24, 1588." There is also the denudation of the high lights from the picture, and in particular from the nose. Without these lights it loses the natural projection or elevation which is common to the reputed portraits of the poet. The great changes in appearance brought about by the transition from youth to middle age, com- bined with those imposed by fashion in dress, 43 THE "GRAFTON" SHAKESPEARE explain the difference between the " Grafton " and the "Droeshout original " and other portraits of Shakespeare. If the " Droeshout " picture truly represents Shakespeare, his face had no claim to beauty in his later years, and whatever share of that quality he may have possessed in his youth seems to be discernible in the " Grafton." The skull is the same as that of the " Droeshout original," covered with a full complement of expanding flesh. In the foregoing pages the claims of the " Grafton " picture to a place among the portraits of Shakespeare, and therefore to careful preserva- tion, are based mainly upon internal evidence. In the next chapter these claims will be supported by tracing the history of the picture to a former connection with the Manor House of Grafton Regis, and by a description of the tragic circumstances in which it probably came into the possession of an ancestor of its late owners. 44 VIEW FROM LAWN OF THE PRESENT GRAFTON HOUSE III. GRAFTON REGIS 45 III. GRAFTON REGIS Alas ! for the erstwhile favourites of Fortune — " They perish as a robe outworn As faded leaves they float away." Such reflections are inevitable when the magnificent Eleanor Cross meets the eye about a mile south of Northampton on the London Road which leads by Grafton Regis to Stony Stratford. ^ This pious relic of a regal love is one of the three remaining crosses erected by King Edward I. to commemorate the resting-places of the pro- cession which brought the body of his beloved Queen Eleanor from Harby in Nottinghamshire to Westminster. For upwards of six hundred years the Cross has stood sentinel by the roadside, and it remains to this day a glorious relic of an- tiquity in a splendid state of preservation. The steps at its base form a pleasant resting-place for the weary traveller, and the broken pillar of the Cross seems a fitting emblem of the vanity of human things. This monument has seen the rise and fall of many kings, and if a panorama of its passers-by could be painted, what a strange picture would appear — itinerant monks and hedge priests, swashbucklers, play-actors, and charla- tans ; kings and peasants and nobles, knights and dames with their servants, these and many others have swept by on their journeys between 1 In the compilation of this part I have to acknowledge the valuable assistance of Mr. Tinsley Pratt. 47 GRAFTON REGIS London and Northampton. The echoes of their footsteps Hnger in the corridors of Time. They hved and loved — laughed, sang, and feasted. They had their day and passed into the great silence. But still the Cross remains. Fire and sword have left it inviolate, and the storms of centuries have broken over it in vain. Grafton Regis, the chief object of this pilgrimage, is about eight miles beyond the monu- ment, but it may be approached from the south by way of the old town of Stony Stratford where the sluggish Ouse is choked with reeds and water- plants, the mill streams are overhung with willows, and many quaint buildings and mouldering churches still abide and decorate the district. It is, indeed, a land of dreams. In this brooding land of silent lanes and thatched dwellings, old tales and superstitions still linger. Thus, in the churchyard at Passenham, near Stony Stratford, there is shown the grave of a Mrs. Day who declared that if there was a God a gooseberry bush would grow upon her grave. Such is the tale which is told in the district, and the goose- berry bush is very much in evidence — a sturdy, flourishing tree which has thrust the stones aside to find the genial light of the sun. Turning northward along the High Street of Stony Stratford, the wanderer crosses the bridge over the Ouse and old Stratford is reached, a scattered hamlet of a few cottages and an inn. There is a sharp turn to the right and he enters at once into the absolute quiet of the countryside. 48 The secret chamber THE BURNT-OUT HOUSE OF THE SMITHS THE VILLAGE A chance wayfarer, a rural postman on his rounds, or a farmer's cart are all the persons or objects likely to be met. The grey road stretches on and on by hedgerow and woodland, meadows and cornfields, and by thatched cottages and farm- houses from which rises the white, sweet-smelling smoke of the wood fires ; and after three miles of tramping he finds himself in the hamlet of Yardley Gobion— an old-world place, full of picturesque nooks and corners which seem to await discovery by some appreciative artist. If disposed to follow old Shenstone's habit to find a welcome in an inn, the " Coffee Pot " Tavern opens its doors on one hand or the " Pack Horse " on the other. If, however, neither of these places offers any temptation to linger, a further walk of two miles brings the wayfarer to Grafton Regis. On climbing the hill to the little place, it will doubtless be recalled that England's kings and queens have oft-time travelled over this road —gay young Edward IV., Richard III., and their Queens, Henry VIII. with Ann Boleyn, Queen Elizabeth, James I., each at one time or another made it his or her business or pleasure to visit the stately manor house of Grafton Regis. The high road runs northwards through the hamlet to Northampton. On the right hand there will be observed a roofless burnt-out dwelling-place. This was long the home of the " Grafton " picture and of the last of the Smiths of Grafton Regis, its former owners. By passing down the second lane that branches to the right and by the modern 49 GRAFTON REGIS village school, the cottage post-office and another quaint building or two, the traveller reaches the manor-house, the church, and the rectory, and it is around the manor-house that many historical associations gather. It is a somewhat common- place-looking building of moderate size, surrounded by trim gardens, lawns, and orchards, and was once the seat of the Duke of Grafton. Adjacent is the church, and, in a quiet hollow near by, the rectory hides itself away from the eyes of the curious. The mansion, standing on the site of the earlier house, is mainly a seventeenth-century building, erected by the first Duke of Grafton (a son of King Charles II. and Barbara Villiers) between the years 1675 and 1690. The second Duke, however, became Ranger of Whittlebury Forest in 1712, and removed to Wakefield Lodge, Potterspury, which he rebuilt and which has since been the seat of the Dukes of Grafton. In the eighteenth century Grafton House was occupied by " the tenant of the manor farm," and it is from a descendant of this tenant, Joseph Smith, that the portrait has been obtained. But there was an earlier Grafton House upon the site of the present building — " the bravest and best seat in the Kingdom," ^ as a writer in the seven- teenth century described it. Undoubtedly this earlier building must have been a place of mediaeval splendour. In the fifteenth century it was the residence of Sir Richard Woodville, a Lancastrian knight, who had married Jacqueline of Luxem- ^ Bridge, " History of Northamptonshire." 50 THE CHURCH OF GRAFTON REGIS GARRISONED BY THE ROYALISTS, 1642 THE LADY GRAY bourg, daughter of the Count of St. Pol, and widow of John, Duke of Bedford. In Grafton House their beautiful but ill-starred daughter Elizabeth was born. This lady married Sir John Gray of Groby, and when her husband was slain on the side of Lancaster at the second battle of St. Albans she returned with her two sons to the home of her childhood. And now began a chapter in the life of Elizabeth Gray which opened with such fair promise of happiness, but which was to end in unutterable misery for herself and violent deaths for the two Edwardian princes born to her. It was in the month of April, 1464, that young King Edward IV. stayed in the woods of Whittle- bury instead of joining his army in the north. '^ The Lady Gray was still young, and her remark- able beauty was little impaired by the sorrows she had endured; and the King, while hunting, chancing to visit Grafton, she took the opportunity to throw herself at his feet, and entreat the restoration of her husband's estates for the sake of her unfortunate children. At the sight of her beauty, heightened by her suppliant attitude, the inflammable king fell suddenly and deeply in love with her. He in his turn became a suitor, and as her prudence or her virtue would not allow her to listen to dishonourable proposals, the infatuated monarch privately married her." ^ There is a more pastoral view of this story told in ballad form. It is said that hearing of the King hunting in Whittlebury Forest the Lady Elizabeth Gray sought for him there. ^ Maunder's " Treasury of History." Fol. 247. 51 GRAFTON REGIS YE KING AND YE LADYE GRAY A BALLAD OF GRAFTON REGIS Air — Traditional. i^^^s ^ J i#- ^ I -H :J=zm>zJ=:i^ ^. Ye La-dye Gray a wi-dow left, Her children of their lands be-reft, Went in ye woods so neat and deft, To sue King Edward's mer-cies. She :il=itit=»t:i^ ■w—w-w— W- :?^=** g *=iCi^tt^^^^ met a youth with bow and speare, Swift on ye track of wounded deere. She ^,-J-S^-=M-. I g-** J -1^ ■ i ^ call'd him,"Sir,please you come here. And tell me where ye King is. 52 A BALLAD The youth, he stopped, concealed a sneere " What would you with the King, my deare ? " When in her eye there sprang a teare, He said — " Why here the King is." Behold them now each one beside. The King he woos her for his bride. She will his wife or nought betide The King at Grafton Regis. Ye Ladye Gray had many a fighte. The King her favours found but slighte. He married her at dead of night, The bride of Grafton Regis. Twas on the first of smiling May When birds do sing and lambkins play, A Queen was made of Ladye Gray^ His Queen at Grafton Regis. And when she came to London towne, The Lords and Dukes and Earls did frowne That she should dare to weare the crowne Above their gracious lieges. Her father, he was made an Earl, Advancement made to many a churl, While to the King she was the pearl He found at Grafton Regis. T. K. Cark/^