Here the spiteful fling at Shakespeare is unmistakable, and nobody questions that he is the “Shake-scene” of the passage.  The terms of the allusion yield conclusive evidence as to how the Poet stood in 1592.  Though sneered at as a player, it is plain that he was already throwing the other playwriters into the shade, and making their labours cheap.  Blank-verse was Marlowe’s special forte, and some of his dramas show no little skill in the use of it, though the best part of that skill was doubtless caught from Shakespeare; but here was “an upstart” from the country who was able to rival him in his own line.  Moreover, this Shake-scene was a Do-all, a Johannes Fac-totum, who could turn his hand to any thing; and his readiness to undertake what none others could do so well naturally drew upon him the imputation of conceit from those who envied his rising, and whose lustre was growing dim in his light.

It appears that both Shakespeare and Marlowe were offended at the liberties thus taken with them.  For, before the end of that same year, Chettle published a tract entitled Kind Heart’s Dream, wherein we have the following:  “With neither of them that take offence was I acquainted; and with one of them [Marlowe] I care not if I never be:  the other I did not so much spare as since I wish I had; because myself have seen his demeanour no less civil than he excellent in the quality he professes:  besides, divers of worship have reported his uprightness of dealing, which argues his honesty, and his facetious grace in writing, that approves his art.”

On the whole, we can readily pardon the malice of Greene’s assault for the sake of this tribute, which it was the means of drawing forth, to Shakespeare’s character as a man and his cunning as a poet.  The words “excellent in the quality he professes,” refer most likely to the Poet’s acting; while the term facetious is used, apparently, not in the sense it now bears, but in that of felicitous or happy, as was common at that time.  So it seems that Shakespeare already had friends in London, some of them “worshipful,” too, who were strongly commending him as a poet, and who were prompt to remonstrate with Chettle against the mean slur cast upon him.

This naturally starts the inquiry, what dramas the Poet had then written, to earn such praise.  Greene speaks of him as “beautified with our feathers.”  Probably there was at least some plausible colour of truth in this charge.  The charge, I have no doubt, refers mainly to the Second and Third Parts of King Henry the Sixth.  The two plays on which these were founded were published, respectively, in 1594 and 1595, their titles being, The First Part of the Contention betwixt the two famous Houses of York and Lancaster, and The True Tragedy of Richard, Duke of York.  In the form there given, the plays have, as Mr. White has clearly shown, along with much of Shakespeare’s work, many unquestionable