Indeed, you did not need to be a noble in Shakespeare's time to get books. You may have had to have some money, which Shakespeare definitely did--he was quite successful as an impresario, actor, and later made good property investments.

However, sorry Robo, Lincoln doesn't help your case. According to David Herbert Donald, by the time Lincoln was 28 he had been:

1) militia captain
2) postmaster
3) surveyor
4) Illinois state legislator

And he was an attorney.

It's a reasonable conclusion that Lincoln's success was partly due to his mastery of the language, which was in turn due at least in part to his constant reading.

There is no evidence to support any literary accomplishment of Shakespeare until about age 28. If evidence surfaces of "Shakespeare's lost years" (birth to age 28), this may change.

Even after age 28, when the "paper trail" becomes more substantial, there are still gnawing questions about Shakespeare.

1) Although he had several admirable, articulate and independent women in his plays, he did not have his own daughters educated. Why?

2) Why did he not bequeath anything to the school he supposedly attended--in his home town, Stratford?

3) Yet again, why no plays or even any books in the will? (especially since, as McGrath says, you did not have to be a noble to have books).