As to Ben Jonson, and the evidence of his avowed admiration for the
author of these plays, from the point of view here taken, it is
sufficient to say in passing, that this man, whose natural abilities
sufficed to raise him from a position hardly less mean and obscure
than that of his great rival, was so fortunate as to attract the
attention of some of the most illustrious personages of that time; men
whose observation of natures was quickened by their necessities; men
who were compelled to employ 'living instruments' in the
accomplishment of their designs; who were skilful in detecting the
qualities they had need of, and skilful in adapting means to ends.
This dramatist's connection with the stage of course belongs to this
history. His connection with the author of these Plays, and with the
player himself, are points not to be overlooked. But the literary
history of this age is not yet fully developed. It is enough to say
here, that he chanced to be honored with the patronage of _three_ of
the most illustrious personages of the age in which he lived. He had
_three_ patrons. One was Sir Walter Raleigh, in whose service he was;
one was the Lord Bacon, whose well nigh idolatrous admirer he appears
also to have been; the other was _Shakspere_, to whose favor he
appears to have owed so much. With his passionate admiration of these
last two, stopping only 'this side of idolatry' in his admiration for
them both, and being under such deep personal obligations to them
both, why could he not have mentioned some day to the author of the
Advancement of Learning, the author of Hamlet--Hamlet who also 'lacked
advancement?' What more natural than to suppose that these two
philosophers, these men of a learning so exactly equal, might have
some sympathy with each other, might like to meet each other. Till he
has answered that question, any evidence which he may have to produce
in apparent opposition to the conclusions here stated will not be of