The Stratford Grammar School
Part 11 of "Critically Examining Oxfordian Claims"
Oxfordians correctly point out that there is no documentary evidence of
Shakespeare's schooling, thought they often neglect to add that there are
no records of any student at the Stratford school before 1700. They
also neglect to mention that this lack of documentation does not make
Shakespeare at all unusual among his peers: as I pointed out in another
of these essays, the list of Elizabethan
playwrights for whom there is no
contemporary record of schooling is a long and very distinguished one,
including Ben Jonson (considered the greatest classical scholar in
England) [note], George Chapman (famous translator of
Homer, and another
great classical scholar), Michael Drayton (one of England's most famous
poets, mentioned by Meres in Palladis Tamia more often than
Shakespeare), John Webster, Thomas Dekker, Cyril Tourneur, etc. etc.
Oxfordians also make much of the fact that Shakespeare's father and many
of his contemporaries signed with a mark and were probably illiterate, but
they neglect to mention that Shakespeare's generation was demonstrably
much better educated than his father's, due to extensive improvements in
the schooling system (see David Cressy's Education in Tudor and Stuart
England and Literacy and the Social Order for more information).
Oxfordians often insist that a child had to be able to read to enter a
grammar school such as Stratford's, and if Shakespeare's parents were
illiterate, who would have taught him to read? As in so many other
matters, the Oxfordians are confused here: the normal practice,
especially in a country town such as Stratford, was to have a "petty
school" attached to the grammar school proper, in which an "abcedarius"
taught the youngest students to read. We know that Stratford had such a
petty school, and we know the name of at least one abcedarius, from 1600
(Thomas Parker). Furthermore, T.W. Baldwin, in William Shakspere's Petty
School, says that "Shakspere makes it abundantly clear that he learned to
read from The ABC with the Cathechism, the conventional text of his
day," which Baldwin then proceeds to demonstrate in detail with many
echoes of this work found in the plays.
As for the grammar school proper, the curriculum of the Stratford Free
School (incorporated in 1553) does not survive, but since the educational
system was nationalized under Elizabeth, we can safely extrapolate from
curricula which do survive from elsewhere. We know that the boys would
have gotten a thorough grounding in Latin and the classics, and Baldwin,
in his massive two-volume work William Shakspere's Small Latine and Lesse
Greeke, shows in great detail how the typical grammar school curriculum
of the day is reflected in Shakespeare's plays. In addition, quite a bit
of circumstantial evidence indicates that the Stratford grammar school was
an excellent one, better than most. All the headmasters while Shakespeare
was growing up were university graduates with good reputations; one of
them, John Brownsword, was sufficiently well-known as a Latin poet to be
mentioned by Francis Meres in Palladis Tamia thirty years later --- on
the same page as Shakespeare. Furthermore, several of Shakespeare's
Stratford contemporaries went on to achieve things that indicate they
received a very good education, and the natural inference is that they
received it at the Stratford grammar school. These boys all came from
the same middle-class background as Shakespeare, whose father John was a
glovemaker and longtime alderman in the town. For example:
- William Smith was born in 1564, the same year as Shakespeare, and
his father was a mercer (a maker of fancy cloth) and an alderman. He
went on to graduate from Oxford (where he would have needed a good
education just to get in) and become a schoolmaster in Essex; his older
brother Richard also graduated from Oxford and became a clergyman;
William's nephew William, born in Stratford in 1598, went to Russia to
serve the Czar.
- George Cawdrey was born in 1565, a year after Shakespeare, and
his father Ralph was a butcher and an alderman. In his teens George left
to study in France, and at the age of 18 he entered the English seminary
at Rheims and received orders from the Cardinal of Guise.
- Richard Quiney was several years older than Shakespeare,
having been born some time before 1557; his father Adrian was a mercer,
alderman, and longtime friend of John Shakespeare. Richard was the author
of the only surviving letter written to Shakespeare (addressed to "my
loving good friend and countryman Wm. Shakespeare"), and his son Thomas
married Shakespeare's daughter Judith, so we know the families were close.
Richard's eleven-year-old son Richard Jr. wrote a letter to his father in
1598 which happens to have survived; the letter is written in Latin, and
casually quotes Cicero's Epistolae ad Familiares. The fact that the
younger Quiney could write such a letter speaks well of the education he
was receiving, and the fact that the elder Quiney could read it (along
with the numerous Latin letters he received from fellow townsman Abraham
Sturley) means that he must have learned quite a bit of Latin somewhere.
- Finally, consider Richard Field. He was two and a half years
older than Shakespeare, and his father Henry was a tanner. The Fields
lived on Bridge Street, not far from the Shakespeares, and the families
knew each other over a period of nearly forty years: John Shakespeare
sued Henry Field over a debt in 1556 and appraised his goods when Henry
died in 1592. Richard was apprenticed at the age of 17 to Henry Bishop,
stationer of London, and eventually became one of the leading publishers
in the city. Field is best known today for printing Shakespeare's first
published works, Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece, but he also
printed or published Puttenham's Arte of English Poesie, Harington's
Orlando Furioso, Spenser's Faerie Queene, and works in French,
Italian, Spanish, and Welsh. Being a printer and publisher required
excellent reading ability and attention to detail as well as literary
judgment, and Field was demonstrably one of the most careful stationers
in Elizabethan London, consistently putting out very high quality books.
In addition to Field, at least a couple more of Shakespeare's Stratford
contemporaries were apprenticed to London stationers: Roger Lock (son of
a glover) in 1577, and Allen Orians (son of a tailor) in 1582/3.
Presumably they were able to read.
These contemporaries of Shakespeare were all born in Stratford within a
few years of him, to fathers of very similar social standing and
educational background. They all got a good education somehow, and surely
we are justified in assuming that they got it at the Stratford grammar
school -- somebody was being educated there, or else the schoolmaster's
salary was going to waste. If these boys got such a good education, why
wouldn't Shakespeare, whose father was one of the most prominent citizens
of the town? Even if we ignore the plays later published under his name,
and the local tradition (first recorded over a century later by Nicholas
Rowe) that Shakespeare had been "bred at a free school," there is every
reason in the world to believe that he attended the Stratford grammar
school and got a good education there.
Ben Jonson supposedly went to Westminster school, though he is nowhere to
be found in the student lists which survive; our only reason for thinking
he went there is an oblique reference to "his master Camden" in his
conversations with William Drummond in 1619, combined with the fact that
William Camden was headmaster at Westminster at the time Jonson would have
been there. But even these conversations with Drummond should be highly
suspicious according to the standards Oxfordians apply to Shakespeare,
since the original manuscript has mysteriously disappeared (except for a
cover sheet) from among Drummond's papers, and all we have is a transcript
made around 1700, some 60+ years after Jonson's death. Around the same
time (1709) appears the first written indication that Shakespeare went to
grammar school in Stratford. Readers familiar with Oxfordian double
standards will perhaps be prepared to learn that Charlton Ogburn
unhesitatingly accepts the fact that Jonson attended Westminster and even
tries to use it in his arguments, even while insisting that Shakespeare
could not have possibly attended the Stratford grammar school.
To other essays in "Critically Examining Oxfordian Claims":
Back to Shakespeare Authorship Home Page