Digges’s Folio Summary

In the first sentence of his Introduction of Works, Alexander had this to say about the study of Shakespeare: “the dispersion of error is the first step in the discovery of truth.”[1] The Project will, humbly, add a slight tweak: the dispersion of error and correct interpretation of things writ of Shakespeare are the first steps in the discovery of truth. After 400 years, the Project has – finally – put forth the correction interpretation of Digges’s Folio elegy. This correct interpretation will, inevitably, assist in the discovery of truth.

To The Memory Of The Deceased Author
MAISTER W. S H A K E S P E A R E.

Shake-speare, at length thy pious fellowes give
The world thy Workes : thy Workes, by which, out-live
Thy Tombe, thy name must when that stone is rent,
And Time dissolves thy Stratford Moniment,
Here we alive shall view thee still. This Booke,
When Brasse and Marble fade, shall make thee looke
Fresh to all Ages: when Posteritie
Shall loath what’s new, thinke all is prodegie
That is not Shake-speares; ev’ry Line, each Verse
Here shall revive, redeeme thee from thy Herse.
Nor Fire, nor cankring Age, as Naso said,
Of his, thy wit-fraught Booke shall once invade.

Nor shall I e’re beleeve, or thinke thee dead
(Though mist) untill our bankrout Stage be sped
(Imposible) with some new straine t’out-do
Passions of Juliet, and her Romeo ;
Or till I heare a Scene more nobly take,Then when thy half-Sword parlying Romans spake.

Till these, till any of thy Volumes rest
Shall with more fire, more feeling be exprest,
Be sure, our Shake-speare, thou canst never dye,
But crown’d with Lawrell, live eternally.

L. Digges

So, what exactly is the true meaning of Digges’s elegy? It’s not hard to decipher if the words are deconstructed properly and are read in their entirety as trying to convey one overarching, dignified theme. There are three important groupings – bolded and separated above.

First, Digges says:

ev’ry Line, each Verse

Here shall revive, redeeme thee from thy Herse.

Why would Shakespeare need redeeming from his Herse? Why would his soul need redemption? Shakespeare would need redeeming for any sins or faults he might have committed that were bad enough his soul would require redemption; Shakespeare’s lines and verses – contained in the Folio – will provide that redemption.

Second, Digges’s next group of lines provide two answers for modernity: 1) the hint as to what sins required redemption and 2) how Digges himself viewed those alleged 17^th century sins:

It’s clear – based on the characters and allusions Digges uses in these lines coupled with 17^th century beliefs – it is suicide that requires redemption. But, then, Digges does something interesting. He switches from alluding to the commonly held 17^th century belief that suicide was a sin requiring redemption to writing about his own beliefs, how he sees things, in this second grouping.

Here, it is obvious, Digges doesn’t see the four suicides of Juliet and her Romeo and the half-sword parlying Romans – Brutus and Cassius – as a 17^th century sin. He holds the suicides of Juliet and Romeo as so admirable that no other scene on a future stage would be able to out do them; impossible. And, he views the Roman suicides as so noble that he won’t believe or think Shakespeare dead until he hears a future scene that is more nobly undertaken than the suicides of Brutus and Cassius.

Third, what does all that mean? Digges is explicit:

Till these, till any of thy Volumes rest
Shall with more fire, more feeling be exprest,
Be sure, our Shake-speare, thou canst never dye,
But crown’d with Lawrell, live eternally.

Till these – Juliet, Romeo and his half sword parlying Romans – till these suicide scenes, till any of thy Volumes rest be sure, our Shakespeare, thou canst never dye, But crown’d with Lawrell, live eternally. Digges wept.

Ben Jonson’s longer, better known and studied, passive-aggressive, self-serving, highly overrated elegy – reproduced on The Folio subpage above – is the only Folio elegy that seems to have garnered much attention over the last 400 years.[2] Which is a shame because it is the Project’s opinion Digges’s elegy is more dignified, contains no ulterior motives, no personal agenda, is incredibly respectful of Shakespeare and says more – much more – than Jonson’s. Scholars and academics and Jonson apologists will shout blasphemy at this; c’est la vie. The Project is ok with that; confidence in one’s body of research begets confidence. But back to Digges.

Once history – in this case a Folio elegy – is properly deconstructed, dissected and researched thus permitting accurate interpretation – thereby casting aside custom and words that at first blush were just flattering lamentations – it is possible to, paraphrasing Alexander, disperse error and discover the truth.

After all, this is why Digges wrote what he did – for truth. Not to tell modernity – or his contemporaries – how Shakespeare died;[3] rather, he wrote what he did to tell everyone – his contemporaries and posterity – how he felt about his friend and how he felt about any alleged sin his friend might have committed. A friend, Digges predicted, who would never die, be crowned with lawrell and live eternally. So far, 400 years into eternity, Digges is spot-on; so far, 400 years on, Shakespeare is alive and well. Digges was right.

SDRP

[1] Works, ix.

[2] Obviously, this is no more than the Project’s opinion: no more, no less; others have their opinions. Because this website is dedicated to Shakespeare’s death and not Jonson’s elegy, the large body of research informing the Project’s opinion of Jonson’s elegy will not be reproduced here. Perhaps in the future the Project – in the proper manner and forum – will have an opportunity to release/discuss its research into Jonson’s elegy; research that provided the foundation for its opinion.

[3] They knew.