description is worded loosely: "John Shakespeare
yeoman and Mary his wife ... all that theire moietye, parte and partes,
be yt more or lesse, of and in twoo messuages," etc. The indenture is
long[103], and written in English, and would seem to have been signed at
Wilmcote[104].

A bond was drawn up on the 25th of the same month, carrying a penalty of
twenty marks against the Shakespeares if they infringed the above
conditions, also signed in the presence of Nicholas Knolles, the Vicar
of Auston or Alveston[105]. Another deed, the final concord,[106] is
drawn up in Latin: "in curia domine Regine apud Westmonasterium a die
Pasche in quindecim dies anno regnorum Elizabethe ... vicesimo secundo
... inter Robertum Webbe querentem et Johannem Shackspere et Mariam
uxorem ejus, deforciantes _de sexta parte duarum partium duorum
messuagiorum_ ... idem Robertus dedit predictis Johannis et Marie
quadraginta libras sterlingorum." On this sale Robert Webbe paid a fine
of 6s. 8d. for licence of entry to the Sheriff of the County.[107]

Now, this apparently second sale has puzzled many Shakespeareans, as
well as the "fraction." Even Halliwell-Phillipps[108] supposes that
"John Shakespeare had some small interest in Snitterfield of his own,"
which he parted with for L4, and that "Mary Shakespeare was entitled
to a share through an earlier settlement." Others have thought, however,
that the first was but a draught deed of the indenture, the L4 the
earnest money, and the "final concord" for L40 the conclusion of the
whole. This is supported by the absolute indefiniteness of the first as
to part or parts in two messuages, and by the apparent definiteness of
the second. But the peculiar wording has further puzzled many writers.
In referring to Robert Arden's settlements, we find that one tenement is
settled upon three daughters, and the other tenement settled upon other
three daughters, Mary's name not being mentioned. How, then, was she
empowered to sell any share? It could only be by inheritance or by gift
from some of her other sisters. The course of events showed it was not
of free gift. But Joyce and Alice had apparently vanished from the
scene. If they left no will, their shares would be divisible into equal
parts among their surviving sisters by common law, and through her
fraction of their shares Mary Shakespeare could step in as part owner of
Snitterfield. Now, it is quite possible that the first sale of 1579 was
an indefinite s