Thomas Hearne, Neville Wantonness, and Merry Wives of Windsor

Thomas Hearne was an antiquarian and diarist who lived in Berkshire near Billingbear, the ancestral home of the Neville family.

In his diary entry from 1706 he writes the most amusing and nasty anecdote about the Neville family's love of music on Sundays. The reference here is to "Grey Neville"  (1681–1723):

Mr. Nevil Junior Parliament Man for Abbingdon being lately married, to entertain his Lady he had some Extraordinary Musick for about a Fortnight or three Weeks at his Father's House at Billingbear in Berks, for performing which were three Musicians, two of them Oxford men, one of whom told me that he had dancing & musick upon this Occasion one Sunday night for three or four Hours. Such is the Religion of these pretended Hypocritical Saints; who always have reviled King James I. & K. Charles I. for allowing innocent Recreation in Publick on ye Lord's Day, when they themselves give themselves up to chambering and wantonness on the same day; but not with the like Innocence: it being father observable that the said Person told me yt all the time he was in ye House he saw not the least shew of Appearance of Religion, nor indeed any thing becoming a Gentleman (which this Nevil so much pretends to, & for which he is cry'd up among the Rascality of Whiggs & Low-church men) they being forc'd to come with very little Satisfaction for their Pains.

Of course, in Merry Wives of Windsor there is the legend of Herne the Hunter and Herne's Oak.

Well, at least we know in 1706 there was a "Hearne" living close enough to Billingbear to gossip about its inhabitants. His father George Hearne was born in the same location in 1649. So maybe a Hearne ancestor inspired the story. Interesting area for further research.

Neville Letters: Material

“Material” was not an unusual word around 1600. But Shakespeare first uses it in As You Like It and then uses it in many later plays. 

This is a subtle point, but I have discovered several examples like this. There are words that Neville uses regularly in his correspondence in 1599 and that enter the Shakespeare canon around the same time. They are then used often in later plays.

There are many examples like this, and they demonstrate a pattern. I think the explanation for this pattern is that a word like "material" was also common at that time as a French word. The word probably entered English initially from French, but they also existed in parallel. As ambassador to France, Neville was speaking, reading, and writing in French on a daily basis. So it is only natural that French words would enter his working vocabulary. And those words would find their way into his creative writing, i.e. the plays of Shakespeare.

Examples like this do not provide "proof of authorship," but they demonstrate that the Neville hypothesis is consistent with known historical textual evidence. Taken together, they do provide a strong piece of circumstantial evidence for Neville as the author of most or all of the Shakespeare canon.

Here the word "material" appears in Neville’s letters from 21 June 1599, 13 July 1599, and 9 April 1600:

What Restraints have been made for bringing thither the Commodities of this Country; which will be material for me to know, when I shall Treat with the Counsel here. (WW, 1.51)

Not to frustrate so good an Intention, upon a Circumstance so little material unto them. (WW, 1.64)

I wrote unto you lately by a Servant of mine own, advertising you what Propositions I had made unto the King, to discover his Intentions in the most material Points I had negotiated with him since my coming. (WW, 1.168)

And it appears thereafter regularly in Shakespeare’s plays, in the same sense as in the letters:

A material fool! (As You Like It 3.3)

She that herself will sliver and disbranch

From her material sap, perforce must wither

And come to deadly use. (King Lear 4.2)

Whose absence is no less material to me

Than is his father's, must embrace the fate

Of that dark hour. Resolve yourselves apart:

I'll come to you anon. (Macbeth 3.1) 

I have outstood my time; which is material (Cymbeline 1, 6)

He would not stay at your petitions: made

His business more material. (Winter's Tale 1.2)

Neville Letters: Vehemency and Celerity

On 28 August 1600, Neville wrote from London:

Prosecute those Things which you have in charge, with such Vehemency and Celerity, as conveniently you may. (Winwood's Memorials, 1.248)

Both words don't appear in pre-1599 plays but they do appear in 1599 and after. Once again, neither word is particularly uncommon. But we can date its entry into the canon roughly in-line with its use in a Neville letter. "Celerity" in particular is a French borrowing; perhaps it's a word he started to use in France.

Nay, I prithee now, with most petitionary vehemence, tell me who it is. As You Like It, 3.2

Would it apply well to the vehemency of your
affection, that I should win what you would enjoy? Merry Wives of Windsor, 2.2

Stands without blemish. Next, it imports no reason
That with such vehemency he should pursue Measure for Measure, 5.1

Fail not to use, and with what vehemency
The occasion shall instruct you Henry VIII, 5.1

Thus with imagined wing our swift scene flies
In motion of no less celerity Henry V, 3.0

Ay, with celerity, find Hector's purpose
Pointing on him. Troilus and Cressida, 1.3

Hence hath offence his quick celerity,
When it is born in high authority: Measure for Measure, 4.2

Than let him so be lost. O most kind maid,
It was the swift celerity of his death, Measure for Measure, 5.1

she hath such a celerity in dying. Antony and Cleopatra, 1.2

Celerity is never more admired
Than by the negligent. Antony and Cleopatra, 3.7

Neville Letters: Caution (Strong Evidence of Authorship)

In a previous post I gave the example of "exasperate" and how it appears in a letter from Neville before it appears in in the Shakespeare canon several times.

I have discovered a much stronger example, "caution." According to the OED, "caution" has a long history in English and a search on EEBO shows it to be relatively common. However, the word doesn't appear at all in the Shakespeare canon before 1600 and it occurs afterwards seven times. The word is a direct borrowing from the French. Here Neville uses it in a letter from 12 March 1600:

We have evoked the matter before the Counsail, where I labour to gett him enlarged, upon his Juratory Caution, and such other Caution as he is able to give... This is all I can doe for him, if I can effect that. They require Caution of Burgesses, or men known here to be sufficient Estate. (Winwood, 1.160)

Note that Neville is using it here in a technical legal sense which the OED defines as "security given for the performance of some engagement; bail; a guarantee, a pledge."

What I am suggesting is that as ambassador to France, Neville started using this word in his official duties. It entered into his active working vocabulary, and then he started using it in his creative writing. I have shown many similar examples, and I am working on ways to present this evidence in a convincing way. But it is extremely strong evidence of authorship.

Here are the examples from the Shakespeare canon. Note especially the example of All's Well That Ends Well. It's spoken by the King of France and it is used in the precise technical sense mentioned above. Compare to my post about "credence".  Taken together, these two posts actually provide strong evidence of authorship.

There is a very specific trajectory of diplomatic language being used by Neville as ambassador and it appearing a few years later in Shakespeare's plays. I have shown many more examples of this. This is a consistent pattern. See this post for several impressive examples.

Hamlet, 1.3:
POLONIUS. If it be so- as so 'tis put on me,
And that in way of caution- I must tell you

All's Well That Ends Well, 1.2
KING OF FRANCE. A certainty, vouch'd from our cousin Austria,
With caution that the Florentine will move us

King Lear, 2.1:
Been well inform'd of them, and with such cautions
That, if they come to sojourn at my house,
I'll not be there.

Macbeth, 3.6:
LENNOX. And that well might
Advise him to a caution, to hold what distance

Macbeth, 4.1:
MACBETH. Whate'er thou art, for thy good caution, thanks;
Thou hast harp'd my fear aright: but one
word more,—

Coriolanus, 2.2
JUNIUS BRUTUS. Most willingly;
But yet my caution was more pertinent
Than the rebuke you give it.

Henry VIII, 2.4:
That many mazed considerings did throng
And press'd in with this caution. First, methought

Note: Please Compare This to Other "Candidates"

These are time-specific examples that connect Neville's life experiences directly with the content of the plays. Neville was ambassador to France in 1599-1600. Henry V includes French dialog, As You Like It is set in France, as is All's Well That Ends Well. Those are the only two plays in the entire canon set entirely in France and they both appear within a few years of Neville's ambassadorship.

All's Well That Ends Well features the King of France as a main character; as the ambassador to France, Neville had many audiences with Henry IV. He is simply writing what he knows. He has experiences and he incorporates that into his creative writing. This is a normal process one would expect. It's only in the delusional world of Shakespeare studies where that is not expected.

How do "orthodox" researchers explain Shakespeare's sudden interest in France and French language? How do they explain his detailed knowledge of Windsor Forest? Why did the tragedies begin around 1601/2? etc. etc. etc. People have grown to accept the anomaly of an author completely disconnected from his work as normal. It's not normal. It's a huge anomaly.

Neville Letters: Exasperate

In a letter from 12 March 1600, Sir Henry Neville wrote to Robert Cecil:

The States have at length suspended their proceeding against the French, and have rendred the Shippes they had taken; which hath pacified the King and his Counsail, who were greatly exasperated against them. (Winwood's Memorials, 1.159)

Note the word "exasperated". It wasn't a rare word at the time, according to EEBO, but it also wasn't too widely used. Neville's correspondents, Cecil and Winwood, used it too in their letters. However, the first appearance of this word in the Shakespeare canon appears in Twelfth Night, 3.2:

She did show favour to the youth in your sight only to exasperate you, to awake your dormouse valour, to put fire in your heart and brimstone in your liver.

Then in King Lear, 5.1:

If both remain alive. To take the widow
Exasperates, makes mad her sister Goneril;

And Macbeth, 3.6:

Hath so exasperate the king that he
Prepares for some attempt of war.

And Troilus and Cressida, 5.1:

No! why art thou then exasperate, thou idle
immaterial skein of sleave-silk, thou green sarcenet

This is interesting evidence of authorship. It shows a word in Neville's vocabulary that works its way into the later Shakespeare canon. One example isn't proof of anything, of course. I have several dozen of these examples accumulated, some much more interesting (like the ones in this post), but that doesn't really prove anything either.

One of my projects is to develop a scientific, verifiable, and falsifiable method to track these usages and compare them with controls. I haven't figured quite how to do that yet, but it's a very promising direction for demonstrating Neville's authorship in an objective manner.

One challenge is that the vast majority of the written texts we have from Neville are from the period 1599-1601. We have very few letters from 1588-1598 and a handful from 1602-1615.

In any case, in the absence of some kind of "smoking gun" evidence, I think this type of corpus analysis has the best chance of providing convincing evidence of Neville's authorship of the plays and poems.

Cannons in the Canon 6: Overcharged

This is by far my favorite Neville cannon example. It's such an evocative metaphor and Neville calls on this metaphor in his deepest moment of despair.

As I have explained before, Henry Neville owned and operated an ironworks that produced cannons (ordnance) from the mid 1580s to the mid 1590s. This imagery, therefore, spans the entire Shakespeare canon. The timing matches with Neville's personal experience. A search on EEBO reveals this sense of "overcharge" (putting too much gunpowder in a a musket or cannon) to be quite unusual in printed English books at the time.

The fist example comes in Henry VI, Part II, 3.2; this sense could refer to a cannon or a musket of some kind:

QUEEN MARGARET. Enough, sweet Suffolk; thou torment'st thyself;
And these dread curses, like the sun 'gainst glass,
Or like an overcharged gun, recoil,
And turn the force of them upon thyself....

VAUX. To signify unto his majesty
That Cardinal Beaufort is at point of death;
For suddenly a grievous sickness took him,
That makes him gasp and stare and catch the air,
Blaspheming God and cursing men on earth.
Sometimes he talks as if Duke Humphrey's ghost
Were by his side; sometime he calls the king,
And whispers to his pillow, as to him,
The secrets of his overcharged soul;
And I am sent to tell his majesty
That even now he cries aloud for him.

Then we have Henry Neville writing to Robert Cecil from prison on 3 April 1602. I quote at length, spelling modernized. I urge you to read this very carefully and realize this was written approximately at the same time as Hamlet was written and/or revised. Note also that Cecil and Neville's wife Anne Killigrew were first cousins (their mothers were sisters). The use of "overcharged with grief" or "overcharged with sorrow" was relatively common at the time:

[I] beseech you to yield me your good favour in it as you have done in all the rest, that I may hope to have an end of my misery; which I do the rather and more instantly desire at this time in respect of my poor wife, whose state I do much fear, as being overcharged with grief & sorrow, besides my troubles, with the late loss of one of her children, and the likelihood to lose another: These afflictions coming one upon another I doubt will much endanger her weak body and mind, unless she may receive some comfort in some other kind: I beseech your Honour to take more compassion upon us.

And then we have Macbeth, 1.2 (this is considered another anachronistic use, just as iron ordnance in King John was anachronistic):

Yes;
As sparrows eagles, or the hare the lion.
If I say sooth, I must report they were
As cannons overcharged with double cracks, so they
Doubly redoubled strokes upon the foe:
Except they meant to bathe in reeking wounds,
Or memorise another Golgotha,
I cannot tell.
But I am faint, my gashes cry for help.

Here is an example from 1590 of the sense in which Shakespeare/Neville is using the word. Here is the wiki entry for "arquebus":

Certain discourses, vvritten by Sir Iohn Smythe, Knight: concerning the formes and effects of diuers sorts of weapons

whereas harquebuziers haue not onlie the same let, in case their peeces by ouercharging, or ouerheating, or crackes, or rifts, doo breake, but also if that through the negligence of the harquebuziers

And another example from 1594 by the same author:

[Certen] instruct[ions, obseruati]ons and orders militarie, requisit for all chieftaine

t in this case the mosquetiers must take great heed, that they do not ouercharge their peeces with powder, nor with aboue the nomber of:5: or:6: haileshott of warre at the most, as aforesaid; least that their peeces should break or recoile, and so ouerthrow them to the trouble of the piquers, from vnder whose piques they are to discharge their peeces: and this manner of discharging of haileshot of warre by mosquetiers is for diuers times and places of seruice, of great effect, so as they giue no volee at the enemie aboue:20: paces at the furthest

Neville Paradigm: Stratfordian Argues for Neville in 1903

The 1903 Contemporary Evidence of Shakespeare's Identity by Richard Lewis Ashhurst is a wonderful little book published by the Shakespeare Society of Philadelphia.

The purpose of the book is to counter Baconian and other "anti-Shakespearean" theories of Shakespeare authorship. It's a clearly written book that goes through the exact same arguments which are debated today, 115 years later. It's important to remember that almost nothing is new in these debates except one thing: Henry Neville. Neville's wasn't proposed as an authorship candidate until 2005.

James, Rubinstein, Casson, et al. have made a case for Neville in the past 13 years that far surpasses any case made for any candidate in the past 150 years. It's not even close. Not even sort of close. But the case for Shakespeare really hasn't changed.

On Page 33 Ashhurst makes a very interesting argument. He argues that Shakespeare was obviously a supporter of Essex, especially considering Shakespeare wrote nothing to honor the death of Queen Elizabeth, and since the "Phenix and Turtle" and Richard II are so critical of Queen Elizabeth. In fact, Shakespeare was a "devoted follower and friend of Essex and Southampton, trembling perhaps each hour while the Queen lived, lest he should be called to account for Richard II."

Of course, these words actually apply to Henry Neville, and have nothing to do with William Shakespeare. And, once again, they explain why Neville chose to produce his works under an assumed identity. Here are the relevant paragraphs with a few things in bold:

That the "Phenix and Turtle" is written by the same hand that wrote "Venus and Adonis," the "Rape of Lucrece," and the sonnets is reasonably clear; further, the intention of the production appears to have been distinctly political. It is set out as being "consecrated by them all to the noble knight Sir John Salisburie," who like Chester himself and Shakespeare's patron, Southampton, was deep in the Essex Plot. Therefore, if we accept Shakespeare as the author of his own poems and plays, his joining in Chester's enterprise was quite natural; but it would be strange company for Bacon, one of Elizabeth's most trusted and apparently devoted counsellors.

In 1603 Queen Elizabeth died. Not a poem, a stanza, or a line by Shakespeare, lamenting her death, or celebrating her glorious reign, appeared. Contemporary literature is full of appeals to Shakespeare to properly remember the occasion in verse, but he remained obstinately silent. This was most natural for the devoted follower and friend of Essex and Southampton, trembling perhaps each hour while the Queen lived, lest he should be called to account for Richard II.; but how can we account for Bacon's silence under such circumstances? Even if he found praising his dead mistress might not be pleasing to her successor, the well-kept secret of his pseudonym would have enabled him without danger, to have described the glories of the great Queen's reign and lamented her death. In his own person [Bacon] wrote the well known Latin encomium on his dead mistress, though it was not published until later.

Neville Paradigm: Nevilles in Henry V

As I have explained in several previous posts, if the Neville hypothesis is correct, then people should have been uncovering evidence of it for centuries. They didn't have the theoretical framework to interpret that evidence.

One strong evidence is the pro-Essex political message that many people have discovered in Shakespeare's plays, especially in Henry V. I posted about a paper from 1995 that makes this point beautifully.

I have just uncovered another similar paper. It is from 1929. The argument doesn't completely make sense, because after all, how could Shakespeare have known that Henry Neville was an Essex partisan writing Henry V in 1599? However, under the Neville Paradigm, this makes perfect sense, if Neville wrote the play himself:

Sharpe, Robert Boies. “We Band of Brothers.” Studies in Philology, vol. 26, no. 2, 1929, pp. 166–176. JSTOR,

The paper begins by saying how pro-Essex interpretation of Shakespeare (around 1929) was becoming popular:

 Miss Albright's important addition to the rapidly growing body
 of comment upon the pro-Essex spirit in Shakespeare's plays
 is to me especially interesting because of a remark which she
 makes upon the family interest to be found in the histories, by
 certain members of the Essex party: "... My present
 purpose is to show how Shakespeare's partisanship reveals itself in
 his account of the battle of Agincourt

Then he explains how a Neville ancestor/relative was added to Henry V:

 The Earl of Westmorland was an ancestor of Charles Blount,
 Lord Mountjoy, a highly important figure in Essex's calculations
 at and soon after his return from Ireland. The contemporary
 Earl, Charles Neville, was grandson of the first Earl of Rutland,
 and thus related to a family which was very friendly to both Essex
 and Southampton. He had been forced to flee the country by the
 failure of the Catholic uprising of 1569; there was hope for such
 exiles in the Essex policy of toleration. A relative, Edmund
 Neville, confined in the Tower as a result of the same uprising, was
 liberated soon after 1595. A Sir Henry Neville, who was just
 Shakespeare's age, was ambassador to France and was knighted in
 1599. He was in the confidence of Southampton and took some
 part in the Essex plot; he was imprisoned for a while, then re-
 leased with a fine. His danger is alluded to in one of Jonson's
 epigrams. Honor may have been reflected from the title of West-
 moreland to the family name of Neville in this case at least as easily
 as dishonor in the case of the Greys and the Earl of Kent.

Neville Paradigm: Jaw-dropping paper from 1995 on Henry V

I'm going to start a new series of posts on the "Neville Paradigm". To fully understand, please read my essay on Kuhn's paradigms about applying lessons from his masterful book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

The main point is that lots of outstanding Shakespeare scholarship has been done based on the "William Shakespeare" paradigm. Re-evaluating that scholarship under the "Henry Neville" paradigm produces a much deeper understanding of that very scholarship.

I have found an astounding example of this in this paper from 1995:

Womersley, David. “France in Shakespeare's ‘Henry V.’” Renaissance Studies, vol. 9, no. 4, 1995, pp. 442–459. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24412297.

If we consider Henry V in the light of these general considerations, we can see that Shakespeare's depiction of the French is both complex and unusual. Shakespeare combined respect, and even compassion, for the French, with moments of scorn which were both more offensive, and aimed with greater precision, than anything in a precursor such as The Famous Victories of Henry V. Investigation of the high-political rumours current during the play's moment - the summer of 1599 - allows us to explain this distinctive enfolding of aggression within appeasement by reference to the likely interests of the Essexian faction the play seems designed to serve.

Just read that paragraph and compare it with a profile of Sir Henry Neville. Read the whole paper and realize that the detailed knowledge Neville had, and was reflected in the play, was not actually current among everyone in London. It just appears that way because we now have access to people's private letters and government documents.

As ambassador to France, Henry Neville had privileged access to the latest information on every issue discussed in this article.

But more astounding is how Womersley's analysis lines up with Neville's political leanings. Aligned with the "Essexian faction"! What could possibly be MORE spot on? The discussion in the paper on the niceties of the "Salic Law" and its emphasis in the play... Just amazing. And he brings Richard III into the discussion... The most Nevillian of all Neville plays for a dozen different aspects.

Lots more to digest in this paper, but that's enough to make the point.

And this answers the question, of course, of why Neville wanted to publish anonymously. This way, he could express political opinions to a wide audience without attaching his name to it. Shakespeare gave him cover to express his views openly in a way he couldn't by writing plays as "anonymous".

Neville Family Legend? Oak Walk of Billingbear

A possible Neville family legend that Henry Neville wrote the works of Shakespeare is a very important research direction. This discovery may be one piece of that puzzle.

I have found two poems from the 18th and early 19th centuries describing the "Oak-Walk at Billingbear." Sir Henry Neville grew up in Billingbear in Berkshire and returned there after his father's death in 1593.

The first poem is from the 1745, A collection of original poems and translations, by John Whaley, M. A., Fellow of King's-College, Cambridge:

The second poem is even more interesting, published in 1805, Edward Coxe, Esq. Miscellaneous Poetry,

The poem is titled "Inscriptions for the Grotto, At the end of the Oak Walk, at Billingbear."

Here are some excerpts, it begins from the perspective of outside of the walk looking in:

Nor Parian stone, nor costly shell,
Adorns this humble moss-grown cell;
This lowly roof should ne'er supply
A thought that tends to luxury.

But if a rustic plain retreat,
Fit shelter for a hermit's feet,
Can tempt thee from the open glad,
To rest beneath the tranquil shade;

Then inside:

Embow'ring oaks, a stately row,
Around their spreading branches throw,
And tow'ring with gigantic size,
Life their proud summits to the skies.

On either side a verdant lawn,
Glitters with dew-drops in the dawn;
In playful herds the speckled deer
Crop the sweet turf, and wanton here.

Then fancy sees, or seems to see,
Beneath each venerable tree,
Dryads and Hamadryads rove,
Along their consecrated grove:

And as they tread the sacred ground,
Aerial music breathes around,
And choral streams, distinctly clear,
Thus break upon the ravish'd ear: --

For here the Nevilles and the Greys
Protection to the wood-nymph raise;
who hail the best auspicious hour,
When first they chose this sacred bow'r.

And though ye can recall no more
Your Druid Bards' prophetic lore,
Ye still the Poet shall inspire,
And harmonize the British Lyre!

I've bolded the most interesting bits. To me it seems like the author is consciously connecting these woods to Shakespeare's plays. Even if he's not, there are obvious parallels here. The reference to "Druid Bard" very well could directly reference Shakespeare; "Bard of Avon" was already common in the 18th century.

These are the woods of Henry Neville's youth and adulthood. If he did indeed write the plays and poems of William Shakespeare, they almost certainly inspired him.

The more interesting question is whether this poem offers evidence of a family legend about Henry Neville writing the works of Shakespeare. The book is dedicated to Lord Braybrooke:

"As my first attempts at poetical composition were encouraged by Mr. Neville, your late excellent Father, and as several of the earliest pieces in this Miscellany were weritten at Billingbear, where I passed in your society so many of the happiest hours of my life"

The Mr. Neville here refers to Richard Aldworth Neville. I have uncovered some evidence that Richard Aldworth Neville may have known a family legend about his great-great-great-great-grandfather Henry Neville writing the works of Shakespeare. This could possibly be another piece of evidence in that direction.

I could pull up many examples of this poem referencing Shakespeare, but here are a few choice ones that show how someone who grew up at Billingbear might have used the Oak Walk as inspiration and how that might have inspired this poet in the late 18th century: 

 As You Like It, 4.3:

Within an hour; and, pacing through the forest, 

Chewing the food of sweet and bitter fancy, 

Lo, what befell! He threw his eye aside, 

And mark what object did present itself. 

Under an oak, whose boughs were moss'd with age, 

And high top bald with dry antiquity, 

A wretched ragged man, o'ergrown with hair, 

And this from As You Like It, 2.1, the famous deer hunting scene:

To-day my Lord of Amiens and myself 

Did steal behind him as he lay along 

Under an oak whose antique root peeps out 

Upon the brook that brawls along this wood! 

To the which place a poor sequest'red stag, 

That from the hunter's aim had ta'en a hurt, 

Did come to languish; and, indeed, my lord, 

The wretched animal heav'd forth such groans 

That their discharge did stretch his leathern coat 

Almost to bursting; and the big round tears 

Cours'd one another down his innocent nose 

In piteous chase; and thus the hairy fool, 

Much marked of the melancholy Jaques, 

Stood on th' extremest verge of the swift brook, 

Augmenting it with tears.

Remember, deer hunting was a central part of Henry Neville's life from the time he was a child. Note his letter from 1608, published first on this blog, transcribed by our anonymous benefactor:

My hope was to have killed our deere in time to have re
turned to you to dinner, But when I saw he had car[-]
ryed us out as farre as Cramborne, and that yt was
not possible for me to com back in time, I thought
yt as good to stay out his death

And this famous passage from Merry Wives of Windsor, 5.5::

About, about;
Search Windsor Castle, elves, within and out:
Strew good luck, ouphes, on every sacred room:. That it may stand till the perpetual doom,
In state as wholesome as in state 'tis fit,
Worthy the owner, and the owner it.
The several chairs of order look you scour
With juice of balm and every precious flower:
Each fair instalment, coat, and several crest,
With loyal blazon, evermore be blest!
And nightly, meadow-fairies, look you sing, 
Like to the Garter's compass, in a ring:
The expressure that it bears, green let it be,
More fertile-fresh than all the field to see;
And 'Honi soit qui mal y pense' write
In emerald tufts, flowers purple, blue and white;
Let sapphire, pearl and rich embroidery,
Buckled below fair knighthood's bending knee:
Fairies use flowers for their charactery.
Away; disperse: but till 'tis one o'clock,
Our dance of custom round about the oak 
Of Herne the hunter, let us not forget.

Cannons in the Canon 5: Iron Ordnance in King John

The anachronism of cannons in King John has been pointed out for centuries. What's really remarkable is the specificity of the anachronism. In Hamlet, there is talk of "brazen [brass] cannon" because, even though those are probably anachronistic too, at least brass cannons predate iron cannons.

But in King John it's full on "iron indignation". Cannons are even referred to as "ordnance," the technical term current in Elizabethan times. Here is a letter from Henry Neville in 1599:

This King, whatsoever his Meaning is, hath been very careful of late to furnish himself of Ordinance, and hath taken order for the casting of 50 or 60 Pieces here in the Arsenal, whereof 30 are already cast and tried. (WW, 1.130)

Of course, from the mid 1580s to the mid 1590s Henry Neville owned and operated an ironworks in Sussex that produced ordinance. The Oxford Shakespeare estimates the play was written around 1596. Specifically, at the Berkshire Records Office are these documents from 1593-1597. :

"Correspondence, etc., concerning Sir Henry Neville's transactions in the sale and shipment of 'brocken peces' of ordnance"

So we have Neville specifically using the word "ordnance" to refer to cannons in the 1593-1597 period as well as 1599 and 1600. That's some very specific dating.

But Shakespeare actually used "ordnance" from the beginning, several times in fact. Neville owned the ironworks from the mid 1580s so that makes perfect sense. For instance:

Taming of the Shrew, 1.2:
Have I not heard great ordnance in the field,
And heaven's artillery thunder in the skies?

Henry VI, Part 1:
A piece of ordnance 'gainst it I have placed;
And even these three days have I watch'd,
If I could see them.

Interestingly, George Peele uses "ordnance" in the same time period. Raises some interesting questions.

But please focus here on "iron indignation":

Act II, Scene 1:
KING JOHN

For our advantage; therefore hear us first.
These flags of France, that are advanced here
Before the eye and prospect of your town,
Have hither march'd to your endamagement:
The cannons have their bowels full of wrath,
And ready mounted are they to spit forth
Their iron indignation 'gainst your walls:
All preparation for a bloody siege
All merciless proceeding by these French
Confronts your city's eyes, your winking gates;
And but for our approach those sleeping stones,
That as a waist doth girdle you about,
By the compulsion of their ordinance
By this time from their fixed beds of lime
Had been dishabited, and wide havoc made
For bloody power to rush upon your peace.
But on the sight of us your lawful king,
Who painfully with much expedient march
Have brought a countercheque before your gates,
To save unscratch'd your city's threatened cheeks,
Behold, the French amazed vouchsafe a parle;
And now, instead of bullets wrapp'd in fire,
To make a shaking fever in your walls,
They shoot but calm words folded up in smoke,
To make a faithless error in your ears:
Which trust accordingly, kind citizens,
And let us in, your king, whose labour'd spirits,
Forwearied in this action of swift speed,
Crave harbourage within your city walls.

KING PHILIP

When I have said, make answer to us both.
Lo, in this right hand, whose protection
Is most divinely vow'd upon the right
Of him it holds, stands young Plantagenet,
Son to the elder brother of this man,
And king o'er him and all that he enjoys:
For this down-trodden equity, we tread
In warlike march these greens before your town,
Being no further enemy to you
Than the constraint of hospitable zeal
In the relief of this oppressed child
Religiously provokes. Be pleased then
To pay that duty which you truly owe
To that owes it, namely this young prince:
And then our arms, like to a muzzled bear,
Save in aspect, hath all offence seal'd up;
Our cannons' malice vainly shall be spent
Against the invulnerable clouds of heaven;
And with a blessed and unvex'd retire,
With unhack'd swords and helmets all unbruised,
We will bear home that lusty blood again
Which here we came to spout against your town,
And leave your children, wives and you in peace.
But if you fondly pass our proffer'd offer,
'Tis not the roundure of your old-faced walls
Can hide you from our messengers of war,
Though all these English and their discipline
Were harbour'd in their rude circumference.
Then tell us, shall your city call us lord,
In that behalf which we have challenged it?
Or shall we give the signal to our rage
And stalk in blood to our possession?

They know not what they say: Hamlet and the vile phrase beautified

Saw this in Wikipedia, too funny:

Greenblatt has also suggested that a line in Hamlet is a dig at Greene's phrase in Groatsworth, "beautified with our feathers". Polonius, reading a letter from Hamlet addressed to "the most beautified Ophelia", comments disparagingly that "beautified is a vile phrase".

The full quote from Hamlet, 2.2  is even better pun on "ne vile velis" and "Nevill" (how Neville spelled his own name). If Greenblatt is right that the author is referencing Greene's Groats-Worth of Wit, then this is DEFINITELY a Neville-name-motto pun:

That's an ill phrase, a vile phrase; 'beautified' is a vile phrase.

However, Greenblatt is probably just finding a coincidence here. But who knows. With a connection that tenuous, you can prove anything...

Here's Two Gentlemen of Verona, 4.1:

And partly, seeing you are beautifiedWith goodly shape and by your own report
A linguist and a man of such perfection
As we do in our quality much want

More on Deer and Merry Wives of Windsor

Compare Neville's letter from 1606:

I am very sorry that it lies not in my power to send you a half a buck; my keepers tell me that there is none in my walk; sure I am that have not seene a pasty of venison of this yeere. I did adventure to send you the side of a stag which I thought might serve your turne as well if it came sweet to you, which the heate of the weather made me fearfull of.

To this from Merry Wives of Windsor, 5.5:

FALSTAFF. Divide me like a bribe buck, each a haunch: I will keep my sides to myself, my shoulders for the fellow of this walk, and my horns I bequeath your husbands. Am I a woodman, ha? Speak I like Herne the hunter? Why, now is Cupid a child of conscience; he makes restitution. As I am a true spirit, welcome!

New Transcription of Henry Neville Letter! - 15 Sept 1608

If you're a Henry Neville aficionado, you've seen this in the Calendar of State Papers Domestic Series, 1603-1610, Page 456 for 1608:

Such a tantalizing but brief summary! Well, an anonymous benefactor has transcribed this letter for the greater good of the Neville research community:

S[i]r, I am much ashamed of the errors which were redoubled

towards you yesterday. First by my self in forsaking you

And next by my people, in their yll attending you.

My hope was to have killed our deere in time to have re

turned to you to dinner, But when I saw he had car[-]

ryed us out as farre as Cramborne, and that yt was

not possible for me to com back in time, I thought

yt as good to stay out his death, presuming of their

discrecion at home, not to have stayed your dinner

for me. But I perceave errors yo[u] not single but

one commontly begets another, as bad, if not worse

then my self. I pray you pardon both; ?Con[-]

fession and contrition you have already, which are two

parts of penance. The third, satisfaction, sall be

when ?a ?hon, you will ?Injorne yt. And so hoping,

and desyring to heere, that your comming abroade

yesterday, did you no other harme, but the losse of

your dinner, I commend me hartyly unto you, and

rest

Evermore at your commande

Henry Nevill

We can draw lots of connections between this and Shakespeare's works, but I think I like this one best, compare to bold sentence above:

He eats nothing but doves, love, and that breeds hot 

blood, and hot blood begets hot thoughts, and hot 

thoughts beget hot deeds, and hot deeds is love. Troilus and Cressida, 3.1

Here is the source image. I strongly feel that if the Neville community can work together to share research materials and findings, definitive proof will be discovered in short order.

Update 1/26/2019: John O'Donnell offers a different reading of some of these lines:  A couple of corrections to the transcription of Neville's letter: …But I perceave errors go not single but one commonly begets another, as bad, yf not worse then yt self…The third, satisfaction, shall be when & how, you will Injoine yt…

What were Henry Neville's Visiting Hours in Prison?

Interesting note on who was allowed to visit Henry Neville when he was in prison:

Why do modern editions of As You Like It show "de Boys" instead of the correct "de Bois"?

Update: Apparently the latest Oxford Shakespeare agrees with me. I didn't realize this at the time of the post.

Summary: the surname "de Boys" in modern spelling editions of As You Like It is simply a mistake; "y" and "i" were interchangeable in the 16th century and the surname was always intended as "de Bois", the French word for forest. It is not an "Anglicization."

In his masterwork Shakespeare and Ecology, Randall Martin points out that the "de Boys" surname is a change from Shakespeare's source text. Thomas Lodge's 1590 Rosalynde, Euphues Golden Legacie  refers to the deceased father as "John of Bordeaux".

In As You Like It, the family name is spelled "de Boys". Here is the text from the First Folio, the only extant text of the play:

I am no villaine: I am the yongest sonne of Sir Rowland de Boys, he was my father, Orlando my Liege, the yongest sonne of Sir Roland de Boys.

Randall suggests that this is an Anglicization of the French word "bois" meaning forest. This appears to be the conventional wisdom, and most Shakespeare editors seem to agree, since they continue to use that spelling in 2018. However, this is simply a mistake.

As we saw in the case of Amyens/Amiens, "y" and "i" are used interchangeably in this play in the First Folio. "de Boys" is not an Anglicization, it is simply "de Bois" written with the y instead of an i, just like Amiens.

There are literally dozens of examples of this in EEBO. (I believe the same thing is true for French-language texts of the time).

Obviously, the surname "de Bois" (of the forest) relates to the plot of the play. It was completely intentional. By perpetuating "de Boys" until this day, they are lessening people's understanding of the play.

What motivates this kind of thing? Well there is some assumption that Shakespeare didn't speak, read, and write French. That probably motivates some of the thinking. Another is the dogma that the "Forest of Arden" in As You Like It relates to the Forest of Arden in Warwickshire since that is where William Shakespeare came from (and his wife's maiden name is "Arden" too!)

This belief is perpetuated even though the source text for the play is about the "Forest of Arden" and is clearly set in France, and Act 1 Scene 1 of As You Like It, Oliver describes his brother as "the stubbornest young fellow of France". People speak French in the play and there are many French names, including de Bois.

So, obviously, modern editions of the play with modern spelling should have "de Bois," since "de Boys" was simply a 16th century equivalent spelling of the same French word. QED.

Measure for Measure: The Provost and the Execution

This example shows a French borrowing entering the Shakespeare canon after Neville's experience as ambassador to France. But it also raises the possibility that Neville learned about an incident during his time as ambassador and incorporated that scenario into a play. In this letter dated 30 May 1599, Neville describes the King of France ordering a provost to execute some French soldiers:

And for the same purpose, there having been lately discovered an Enterprise which the Count Maurice had upon a town called Charlemont, not far from Sedan, wherein certain French Men of the King's Garrisons adjacent were employed; the King hath sent a Provost thither to do round Justice upon them, and to proceed to their Execution. [spelling modernized]  (WW, I, 42)

The word “provost” only appears in one of Shakespeare’s works, the play Measure for Measure (ca. 1603-1604). In the play, the character named “Provost” is ordered by Angelo to execute Claudio:

LUCIO. Has censured him

Already; and, as I hear, the provost hath

A warrant for his execution.

ISABELLA. Alas! what poor ability's in me

To do him good?  (Measure for Measure, 1.4)

ANGELO: Where is the provost?

PROVOST: Here, if it like your honour.

ANGELO: See that Claudio 

Be executed by nine to-morrow morning  (Measure for Measure, 2.1)

The use of “provost” with “execution” was not common at the time, according to a search of Early English Books Online (EEBO). After all, an English executioner or jailer was not called a “provost.” Interestingly, Neville's good friend Henry Savile was the Provost of Eton at the time. One has to wonder if this wasn't partly an inside joke.  However, there is a similar example from the 1596 in The Historie of Philip de Commine, translated from the French by Thomas Danett:

But this traiterous Earle, who kept the Dukes chamber (being of timber) so straightly that no man might enter in; refused the doore to these gentlemen, saying that the Duke had commanded him to be hanged with speed; and further sent divers messengers to the Provost to hasten the execution. Thus was this Cisron hanged to the Duke of Burgundies great prejudice.  (Commynes: 167)

The sense of “Provost” used in the above examples by both Shakespeare and Danett specifically refers to a French official, as described in sense 5a in the OED:

An officer charged with the apprehension, custody, and punishment of offenders… In France many of the officials called prevost (prévôt) were specially charged with the keeping of public order and the apprehension, custody, trial, and punishment of offenders, for which they had considerable powers of summary jurisdiction.

In the Danett passage above, “Provost” is indeed a translation of the French “prevost”:

"Monseigneur veult qu'on s'avance de le pendre [the execution]"; et par messagier hastoit le prevost [provost]. (https://archive.org/details/mmoiresdephili02commuoft/page/50)

Neville’s use is also a translation, most likely, of a report he heard first in French and transmitted back to England. It’s worth noting that the use of “Provost” in this French sense in Measure for Measure is probably out-of-place, since the play is set in Vienna.

As You Like It: Lord of Amiens and Henry Neville

Sir Henry Neville wrote Secretary of State Robert Cecil a letter on 14 May 1600 "between Amyens and Abbeville." He was traveling from Paris to Boulogne for treaty negotiations with Spain, and his route took him through Amiens, France.

As You Like It is based on Thomas Lodge's 1590 Rosalynde, Euphues Golden Legacie. However, the character "Lord of Amyens" is Shakespeare's invention "Nine characters are added outright [including] Amiens" (Baldwin).

In the First Folio the character is referenced "Amyens" three times and  "Amiens" two times. According to EEBO, Amiens was the much more common spelling, several hundred examples before 1610 and only a few dozen for Amyens. Holinshed Chronicles mentions Amiens in several contexts and spells it with an "i".

What I am suggesting here is that Sir Henry Neville passed through Amiens, France in 1600, around the time that we believe As You Like It was written. The play is set in France and has a character named "Amyens" or "Amiens". Neville's experience in Amiens probably inspired him to pick that character name when writing the play.

One of the main theories I am suggesting on this blog is that As You Like It and Henry V were written all, or in part, while Henry Neville was ambassador to France. Both plays have extremely strong parallels with both the letters he wrote as ambassador as well as his experiences there. This is the some of the strongest evidence, I believe, for the Neville authorship hypothesis.

As You Like It is the first Shakespeare play set in France and Henry V is the first play to contain extensive French dialog. All's Well That Ends Well, another play written a few years later, is also set in France; the King of France, whom Neville often spoke with as ambassador, is a main character. No plays before 1599 are set entirely in France, though some earlier history plays have scenes set in France.

Neville was in Boulogne for several months. As I mentioned in this blog post, in 18 July 1600, two months after arriving in Boulogne, Neville gave a gift of venison to the Ambassador of Spain. Presumably he acquired the venison through deer hunting, and that may have inspired the deer hunting scene in As You Like It where they specifically reference venison: "Come, shall we go and kill us venison?"  (As You Like It, 2.1)

Boulogne-sur-la-mer is surround by the forest Parc naturel régional des Caps et Marais d'Opale. This forest has a lot of deer in it. Neville set the play in the Forest of Arden because that is the setting of Rosalynde. But his experiences in the forest surrounding Boulogne might have influenced the play as well.

Bonus Discussion on the Setting of As You like It

There is absolutely no question that As You Like It  is set in France, because it says in Act 1 Scene 1 that it is in France, Oliver talking about his younger brother Orlando:

OLIVER: Good Monsieur Charles... I’ll tell thee, Charles, it is the stubbornest young fellow of France, full of ambition, an envious emulator of every man’s good parts, a secret and villainous contriver against me his natural brother.

In Act 1 Scene 2 they speak French:

Bon jour, Monsieur Le Beau: what's the news?

Shakespeare even tells us that "Bon Jour" is French in Romeo and Juliet:

Romeo, bon jour! there's a French salutation to your French slop. (3.4)

(Shakespeare does use "bonjour" in a non-french sense in Titus Andronicus:  "With horn and hound we'll give your grace bonjour.")

Specifically, the play is set in the "Forest of Arden". We know that because it says so in Act 1 Scene 1 of the First Folio, the only extant version of the play:

They say hee is already in the Forrest of Arden (1.1)

Shakespeare's play is based upon Thomas Lodge's Rosalynde: or, Euphues' Golden Legacy. We know that because it is obvious from even a superficial reading. Many of the character names are the same, including the heroine Rosalynde... The storyline is very obviously taken directly from Lodge's work. Here is what that work says about the location:

THere dwelled adioyning to the Cittie of Bordeaux a Knight of most honourable

and about the forest:

 Torismond the King of France, who hauing by force banished Gerismond their lawful King that liued as an outlaw in the Fo∣rest of Arden

So As You Like It is set in France; the play makes that extremely clear from the first scene. It is based on a story also based in France that features the "Forest of Arden" which is the forest where the "lawful" King of France goes to hide. The same "Forest of Arden" is a major setting for the play.

There is a character the "Lord of Amiens". Amiens is a city in France.

Neither the play nor the story are set in Warwickshire. They are set in France. The text is unequivocal and unambiguous.

Apparently, there is also a forest in Warwickshire called "Arden" and Shakespeare's mother's maiden name was "Arden". So we have ridiculous chatter like this:
Where was Shakespeare’s Forest of Arden?

The desire to link the play with Shakespeare's life is so strong that the Folger libary's website doesn't even list As You Like It as being set in France: "sometimes considered to be in France".

The play is set in France. The text says it is in France. The text decides the issue, not the maiden name of the supposed author's wife.

Cannons in the Canon 4: Hammer'd Iron/Steel in My Head

As discussed in previous posts, Henry Neville owned and operated an ironworks in Sussex from the mid 1580s to the mid 1590s. He was directly involved in the production of "iron ordnance" (cannons). The works of William Shakespeare are suffused with imagery and metaphors from that experience.

The ironworks had a water wheel than ran giant bellows which pushed air into the blast furnace and also ran great hammers that pounded the iron. Here is a nice description of the hammering and why it was necessary (interesting website with photos):

"However cast iron was brittle, and needed remelting and hammering at a finery forge to convert it into highly durable ‘wrought’ iron. Forges now also used waterwheels to power bellows, to re-melt the sows at a high temperature, but their main function was turning huge mechanical hammers to pound the result into short thick iron bars, called anconies. The hammer was attached to a shaft on the waterwheel and could pound the iron up to 60 blows per minute, so forge production was also increased."

This must have been quite noisy! Maddening in fact. Check this:

Vengeance is in my heart, death in my hand,
Blood and revenge are hammering in my head.
Titus Andronicus, 2.3

The guiding principle of this blog is that people write what they know. They pull on their personal experience in their creative writing. This is a commonplace assumption everywhere except in Shakespeare studies. From before the time of the earliest plays and poems, Neville was involved in the ironworks. So we should expect to find it in the earliest works, and we do. Titus Andronicus is believed to be one of Shakespeare's earliest plays. A search of EEBO doesn't turn up a lot of examples of hammers in the head (click to see the full list):

Another example from one of Shakespeare's early poems:

To dry the old oak's sap and cherish springs, 

To spoil antiquities of hammer'd steel, 

And turn the giddy round of Fortune's wheel;

Rape of Lucrece

It's interesting to connect the "wheel" metaphor here with the trees that are being cut down to fire the furnaces and the springs that are being used and diverted to power the waterwheel. I leave it to you whether that is reading too much into these common metaphors and the fact that "steel" rhymes with "wheel". 

"hammer'd steel" is quite uncommon too. Very few examples, but interestingly George Peele uses the term in The Battle of Alcazar: "plant this negro moore that clads himselfe in coat of hammerd steele" published anonymously in 1594, the same year as the Rape of Lucrece. It has also been suggested that George Peele co-wrote Titus Andronicus. So it's possible this is his metaphor which Shakespeare adopted or vice versa. Very few examples in EEBO:

There are even fewer examples for hammer'd iron. Neville's foundry didn't make steel, it made cast iron. King John has a lot of "iron" talk which I will get into more later, but I leave you with this:

Are you more stubborn-hard than hammer'd iron?  King John, 4.1

Bonus passage from the non-canonical Troublesome Reign of King John:

But who so blind, as cannot see this beam,

That you forsooth would keep your cousin down,

For fear his mother should be used too well?

Aye, there’s the grief, confusion catch the brain,

That hammers shifts to stop a prince’s reign.

As You Like It: Underhand Dissuade and Victuall'd

Neville uses the phrase "underhand dissuade" in 24 Sept 1599. I also offer an example of him using "underhand".

Some have underhand let me know, that the King doth assure himself that the Queen will make Peace, and therefore makes no haste to pay her any thing. (WW, 1.65)

The King did underhand dissuade them from Peace, upon Assurance of a standing Supply from him of 200000 Crownes Yearly, besides other secret Favours. (WW, 1.107)

The OED notes that this sense of “underhand,” “In a secret, covert, or stealthy manner; by secret means; quietly or unobtrusively” was common from c1580. However, a search on EEBO shows no examples of “underhand” used together with “dissuade” in that period.

"disswade" was the most common spelling at the time followed by "dissuade". I have done a search for collocations of "dis*ad*" and "*hand*" within 6 words of each other. Here is what comes up:

Even the word "underhand" wasn't super common at the time:

So as far as I can tell, it's a very unusual usage. I post the searches so others can check my work. If you find something let me know. This database covers TCP1, it could be expanded as well to TCP2.

As You Like It is usually dated to around 1599, the same year this letter was written. Here is underhand and dissuade used together in the exact same sense:

I had myself notice of my
brother's purpose herein, and have by underhand means laboured to
dissuade him from it; but he is resolute. (As You Like It, 1.1)

What makes this important evidence isn't just that the phrase is unusual. They are being used almost simultaneously in Neville's letter and the play from Shakespeare.

Shakespeare has one other use of "underhand" in Richard III, 5.1:

By underhand corrupted foul injustice

Victualled 

Here is another very similar example of a a phrase appearing in a letter and then appearing in As You Like It. This is a more common phrase, but it's an example of Neville using a technical term in his work as ambassador and then it appearing in a figurative sense in a play.

13 July 1599:

I understand by their Agent they are victualled for a year, and that there is another Fleet preparing to be ready to succeed them in the Action, against they return.  (WW, 1.66)

This is the only use of “victualled” in Shakespeare, though the word “victual” is used in other senses in other plays:

And you to wrangling; for thy loving voyage
Is but for two months victuall'd.- So to your pleasures;
I am for other than for dancing measures. (As You Like It, 5.4)

What’s remarkable here is not the the shared use of this common term, it’s the timing. Shakespeare never used the word in this sense before 1599. Neville uses the term in its technical sense in 1599, and at essentially the same time, Shakespeare also uses it.

A Neville Reading of Randall Martin's Shakespeare and Ecology (Part 1)

Professor Randall Martin's Shakespeare and Ecology offers a fascinating study of deforestation, warfare, and other ecological concerns in Shakespeare's works. I am going to go through the book here, showing how much evidence it provides for Henry Neville's authorship of the Shakespeare plays.

"Merry Wives of Windsor [is] his most locally detailed play... Set in a small town next to a royal castle and surrounding fields and forest in eastern Berkshire, its fine-grained mosaic of natural and human eco-systems (woods, parks, chases, fields heath, mead, urban and rural buildings) is meshed by distinct corridors (the River Thames, a ditch, footpaths, roads, streets). These features direct much of the toing and froing of the plays' domestic intrigue" (Martin: 33)

In the above passage, Martin explains how the play demonstrates a detailed knowledge of the landscape of Eastern Berkshire. Of course, Sir Henry Neville is from there. Billingbear is 14 miles from Windsor Castle. He and his father were keepers of forests in Windsor; he organized deer hunting in those forests for both Queen Elizabeth and King James. See History of Parliament for extensive documentation of this. Here is Neville's description of his offices in 1601:

"The offices I held are two parks, a walk in Windsor Forest, the stewardship of the manor of Sonning, and the keeping of the house at Windsor "

Martin realizes there is an anomaly here, so he tries to explain how William Shakespeare could have such detailed knowledge:

"Shakespeare's knowledge of Windsor place names and topography might have come from the new generation of maps and chorographies, or place-writings, that represented The spatial accuracy of Shakespeare's references, however, that he also visited the area, possibly when the patron of his acting company, Lord Hunsdon, was installed as a knight of the Garter at Windsor in 1597. Mistress Quickly (playing the Queen of Fairies), alludes somewhat extraneously to its ceremonies in the final scene."

Martin suggests that the knowledge is so detailed that Shakespeare must have actually visited Windsor. Of course, Neville grew up in that area and returned there after the death of his father in 1593. So if Neville wrote the play, he would have based it on his own personal intimate knowledge of the area. 

Martin has no actual evidence that Shakespeare visited Windsor. He also has no actual evidence that Shakespeare attended a Garter installation. But he seems to think that the details in the play suggest that whoever wrote the play did attend such an installation and must have visited Windsor.

It is an undisputed fact that Sir Henry Neville attended a Garter installation at Windsor in 1595. The Folger Shakespeare Library's Chronology for 1595 says (John Casson has done extensive research into this issue):

Apr 23,Wed St George’s Day Garter ceremonies, Whitehall.

 Queen’s Lieutenant: William Brooke, 10th Lord Cobham.

 Description by Baron Breuning, the Duke of Wurttemberg’s envoy, who was

invited to attend; a coach was sent for him and his party of seven.

‘We drove down to the Thames, where one of the Queen’s eight-oared barges

awaited us. On the deck of the boat lay a bolster or cushion of gold cloth on

which I was seated in solitary grandeur by Sir Henry Neville. The others sat

apart on either side. This part of the boat was also divided from the rest by

two contiguous doors, and had an awning of red satin. The interior of the boat

was ornamented with coats-of-arms and other paintings, and the floor was strewn

with lovely fragrant flowers’.

 ‘When we arrived at court we were led by Sir Henry Neville, who never left our

side during the whole of the subsequent proceedings, into the Presence Chamber’. 

(Note, Neville had not been knighted yet at this point, but his father was already dead. So this must be a reference to him.) 

Martin goes on to discuss Shakespeare's rural identity. Of course, Neville also shares that characteristic. He spent most of his life living in the countryside, first Billingbear, then Mayfield, then back to Billingbear. Forest management was a key aspect of his and his father's professional life. Martin follows with an amazing discovery in Neville studies:

"In 1568 William Cecil, Lord Burghley, Elizabeth's most powerful minister, licensed two French glassmakers to cut wood for their furnaces in Windsor Great Park. The wood was processed by in-forest saw pits like the one Shakespeare represents in The Merry Wives of Windsor and juxtaposes spatially against the large mature tree, Herne's Oak (4.4.51, 5.4.2)."

As the keeper for Windsor Forest, Neville's father must have been involved in this license. In addition, Neville must have had detailed knowledge of the saw pit. It is extremely difficult to imagine how Shakespeare would have known such details.

Check out my article on Kuhn's Paradigm Shifts to understand what is going on here. The current paradigm, William Shakespeare Orthodoxy, doesn't account for the facts. There are anomalies that the researcher cannot explain. But a different paradigm, the Neville Authorship Hypothesis, not only accounts for the facts, it suggests new and fruitful avenues of research.

More to come on all of this! 

Henry Neville, Merry Wives of Windsor, and the Gift of Venison

Major Update to this Post:

I've found a 1606 letter from Neville that mentions a gift of deer as well as venison pasty:

I am very sorry that it lies not in my power to send you half a buck; my keepers tell me that there is none in my walk; sure I am that I have not seen a a pasty of venison of this year.

The key implication of this letter is that venison pasty is the type of thing he eats all the time... See the passage below from Merry Wives of Windsor: "Wife, bid these gentlemen welcome. Come, we have a hot venison pasty to dinner"

Neville makes mention of a gift of venison in this letter from 18 July 1600, written from Boulogne where he was engaged in treaty negotiations with Spain:

Since I sent the Ambassador Venison, he hath sent my Wife and my Sister some Spanish Gloves and Perfumes. (WW, 1.230)

I found another reference to Neville giving venison as a gift. A list of Christmas presents received by Sir James Whitelock in 1613 includes “Sir Henry Nevill of Pillingbear, a side of a doe” (Liber Famelicus of James Whitelock, Page 32).

Of special interest is the mention in Merry Wives of Windsor, where venison is also offered as a gift:

PAGE. I am glad to see your worships well.
I thank you for my venison, Master Shallow.

ROBERT SHALLOW. Master Page, I am glad to see you: much good do it
your good heart! I wished your venison better; it
was ill killed. (Merry Wives of Windsor, 1.1)

Wife, bid these gentlemen welcome. Come, we have a 

hot venison pasty to dinner: come, gentlemen, I hope
we shall drink down all unkindness  (Merry Wives of Windsor, 1.1)

Come, shall we go and kill us venison?  (As You Like It, 2.1) 

          

This is not hunters' language: he that strikes
The venison first shall be the lord o' the feast; (Cymbeline, 3.3)

Did see man die! scarce ever look'd on blood,
But that of coward hares, hot goats, and venison! (Cymbeline, 4.4)

In summary, we have two examples of Neville giving a gift of deer meat, including Neville using the word “venison” to describe the gift. Merry Wives of Windsor, probably written around the same time, includes a scene that revolves around the gift of “venison.”  As the keeper of royal forests in Windsor, he was very very involved with deer hunting with the Queen (and later King James). Many sources attest to this, I will do a blog post on this later.