impressions of him derived from other sources also,
that his reading reflects not so much idiosyncrasies of taste as the
prevalent literary interests of the day. Thus in Latin literature the
most conspicuous author among general readers, as distinguished from
scholars, was Ovid, whose romantic narratives appealed to a time which
reveled in tales gathered from all quarters; and this same prominence of
Ovid has been shown to exist among the classical authors known to the
dramatist. Similarly his use of chronicles like that of Holinshed merely
reflects a widespread interest in national history; and Shakespeare
shared the popular interest in the translations of _novelle_ and the
like that poured in from the Continent. The age of Elizabeth was an age
of great expansion in reading--especially in the literature of
entertainment. For the first time since the introduction of printing the
people were free to indulge in books as a recreation, and the enormous
growth of publishing in this era indicates the response to the new
demand. In all this Shakespeare took part, and the evidences appear in
his works so far as the nature of their themes permitted it. But the
drama gave no opportunity for anything but passing allusions to
scientific, philosophical, and religious matters, so that direct
evidence is lacking as to how far Shakespeare was acquainted with what
was being written in these fields. On the other hand, the profundity of
his insight into human motive and behavior, the evidences of prolonged
and severe meditation on human life and the ways of the world, and the
richness of the philosophical generalizations that lie just below the
surface of his greater plays, make it difficult to believe that in these
fields also he did not join in the intellectual activity of his day.

CHAPTER IV

CHRONOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT

The value of a knowledge of the order in which an author's works were
composed no longer needs to be argued. The development of power and
skill which such knowledge reveals is an important part of biography,
and an individual work is more surely interpreted when we know the
period and the circumstances of the author's life in which it was
written, and what other works, by himself and his fellows, lie nearest
in point of time. Without a knowledge of chronology, the indebtedness of
contemporary authors to one another and the growth of literary forms
cannot be determined.

The fact, so often to be insisted up