t?? p???e?? t?' d???); and all will remember Ben Jonson's verses . .
. " on Shakespeare's "true-filed lines" -


"In each of which he seems to shake a lance,
As brandished at the eyes of ignorance."


There is more about Pallas in book-titles (to which additions can
easily be made), and about "Jonson's Cri-spinus or Cri-spinas," but
perhaps we have now the gist of Mr. Greenwood's remarks on the
"excellent nom de plume" (cf. pp. 31-37. On the whole of this, cf.
The Shakespeare Problem Restated, pp. 293-295; a nom de plume called
a "pseudonym," pp. 307, 312; Shakespeare "a mask name," p. 328; a
"pseudonym," p. 330; "nom de plume," p. 335).

Now why was the "nom de plume" or "pseudonym" "William Shakespeare"
"an excellent nom de plume" for a concealed author, courtier, lawyer,
scholar, and so forth? If "Shakespeare" suggested Pallas Athene,
goddess of wisdom and of many other things, and so was appropriate,
why add "William"?

In 1593, when the "pseudonym" first appears in Venus and Adonis, a
country actor whose name, in legal documents--presumably drawn up by
or for his friend, Francis Collyns at Stratford--is written "William
Shakespeare," was before the town as an actor in the leading company,
that of the Lord Chamberlain. This company produced the plays some
of which, by 1598, bear "W. Shakespere," or "William Shakespeare" on
their title-pages. Thus, even if the actor habitually spelled his
name "Shakspere," "William Shakespeare" was, practically (on the