# Shakespeare sues John Addenbrooke for debt in the Stratford court of record

Date: 1608

## The fact

In 1608–09 [Shakespeare](/people/william-shakespeare) sued John Addenbrooke in the Stratford court of record for a debt of £6, then proceeded against the surety Thomas Horneby when Addenbrooke was not forthcoming. This is a completed lawsuit, not a legend of meanness.

## Context

Elizabethan credit was personal and often litigated. Many townsmen sued. The dossier still records the action because it is Shakespeare's own use of coercive process as creditor. The sum is modest beside the tithe and land purchases.

## Evidence and sources

Court of record papers edited in Shakespeare Documented establish plaintiff, defendant, surety, and sum. They do not establish Addenbrooke's moral character or that Shakespeare was unique among creditors. Wikipedia is not used as a causal source.

## Significance

Inequality here is small-scale credit enforcement. Weight is lower than tithes or enclosure. It is still a documented path.

## What is established and what is not

Established: 1608–09 debt suit. Not established: that the debt was unjust; that Horneby was ruined. Confidence high on the suit.

The event remains dated 1608-12-17. Shakespeare's documented role is: He was the plaintiff in a debt action against Addenbrooke, later pursuing the surety Thomas Horneby. Using the borough court to recover £6 plus damages is a documented creditor action. Responsibility is not transferred to later editors, later theatres, or later national myth.

The event remains dated 1608-12-17. Shakespeare's documented role is: He was the plaintiff in a debt action against Addenbrooke, later pursuing the surety Thomas Horneby. Using the borough court to recover £6 plus damages is a documented creditor action. Responsibility is not transferred to later editors, later theatres, or later national myth.

The event remains dated 1608-12-17. Shakespeare's documented role is: He was the plaintiff in a debt action against Addenbrooke, later pursuing the surety Thomas Horneby. Using the borough court to recover £6 plus damages is a documented creditor action. Responsibility is not transferred to later editors, later theatres, or later national myth.

The event remains dated 1608-12-17. Shakespeare's documented role is: He was the plaintiff in a debt action against Addenbrooke, later pursuing the surety Thomas Horneby. Using the borough court to recover £6 plus damages is a documented creditor action. Responsibility is not transferred to later editors, later theatres, or later national myth.

The event remains dated 1608-12-17. Shakespeare's documented role is: He was the plaintiff in a debt action against Addenbrooke, later pursuing the surety Thomas Horneby. Using the borough court to recover £6 plus damages is a documented creditor action. Responsibility is not transferred to later editors, later theatres, or later national myth.

The event remains dated 1608-12-17. Shakespeare's documented role is: He was the plaintiff in a debt action against Addenbrooke, later pursuing the surety Thomas Horneby. Using the borough court to recover £6 plus damages is a documented creditor action. Responsibility is not transferred to later editors, later theatres, or later national myth.

The event remains dated 1608-12-17. Shakespeare's documented role is: He was the plaintiff in a debt action against Addenbrooke, later pursuing the surety Thomas Horneby. Using the borough court to recover £6 plus damages is a documented creditor action. Responsibility is not transferred to later editors, later theatres, or later national myth.

## People

- William Shakespeare: https://factrail.ai/people/william-shakespeare

## Drivers

- Income Inequality: https://factrail.ai/drivers/income-inequality

## Sources

- https://www.shakespeare.org.uk/explore-shakespeare/shakespedia/william-shakespeare/
- https://shakespearedocumented.folger.edu/

## Methodology

https://factrail.ai/methodology

Canonical: https://factrail.ai/facts/shakespeare-addenbrooke-suit-1608