Shakespeare's Books: A Dictionary of Shakespeare Sources (Athlone Shakespeare Dictionary Series)

Shakespeare’s Books: A Dictionary of Shakespeare Sources

STUART GILLESPIE

THE ATHLONE PRESS

ATHLONE SHAKESPEAR E DICTIONAR Y SERIE S

Shakespeare's Books A Dictionary of Shakespeare Sources STUART GILLESPI E

THE ATHLONE PRES S LONDON & NEW BRUNSWICK, NJ

First published in 2001 by THE ATHLONE PRESS 1 Park Drive, London NW11 7SG and New Brunswick, New Jersey © Stuart Gillespie 2001 Stuart Gillespi e has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 , to be identified a s the author of this work British Library Cataloguing in Publication Dat a A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 0485 115603H B Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog recordfor this book is available from the Library of Congress Distributed in The Unite d States, Canada and South America by Transaction Publishers 390 Campus Drive Somerset, New Jersey 08873 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form o r by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without prior permission in writing from th e publisher. Typeset by RefineCatch Limited, Bungay, Suffol k Printed and bound in Great Britain by Cambridge University Press

Contents List of Illustrations v

i

Series Editor's Prefaceeevi

i

Acknowledgements vii

i

Abbreviations k Introduction 1

A-Z 9 General Bibliography 51

0

Index 52

1

Illustrations 1 Willia m Caxton, The History and Fables of Aesop (London , 1484), sig. i3r 1 2 Orlando Furioso in English Heroical Verse (London, 1591) , p. [31 ] 2 3 Job' s Comforters, from th e first edition of the Bishops' Bible (London, 1568 ; STC 2099) , sig. X8V 4 4 Titl e page of Daniel's Delia. . . with the complaynt of Rosamond (London, 1592 ) 12 5 Claud e Paradin, Les Devices Heroiques (Anvers, 1562) , fo. 100 V 14 6 Joh n ¥ox.e, Actes and Monuments (London , 1583) , p. 194 4 17 7 Raphae l Holinshed , The Third Volume of Chronicles (London, 1587) , p. 555 24 8 La Metamorphose d'Ovidefiguree (Lyons , 1557), sig. C5V 39 9 M. Accius Plautus. . . Dionys. Lambinii Monstroliensis emendatus: ab eodemque commentariis explicatus (Leyden , 1577) , p. 415 41 i 0 Terence , Comodiae VI. cum commentariis Aelii Donati, Guidonis Juvenalis, et Badii Ascensii (Venice , 1499), fo. v v 48

2 8 4 3 4 3 3 2 6 3

Series Editor's Preface The Athlon e Shakespear e Dictionarie s ai m t o provid e th e studen t of Shakespeare wit h a serie s o f authoritativ e guide s t o th e principa l subject-areas covere d by the play s and poems . The y ar e produce d b y scholars who are expert s both o n Shakespear e an d o n the topi c o f the individual dictionary , based o n the mos t recen t scholarship, succinctl y written an d accessibl y presented. The y offe r reader s a self-containe d body of information on th e topi c under discussion , its occurrence an d significance i n Shakespeare's works, and it s contemporary meanings . The topic s are all vital ones for understanding th e plays and poems ; they have been selected for their importance i n illuminating aspect s of Shakespeare's writings where an informe d understanding o f the rang e of Shakespeare' s usage , an d o f th e contemporar y literary , historica l and cultura l issue s involved , wil l ad d t o th e reader' s appreciatio n o f his work . Because o f the diversit y o f the topic s covere d i n th e series , individual dictionaries may vary in emphasis and approach, but the aim and basi c forma t o f th e entrie s remai n th e sam e fro m volum e t o volume. Sandra Clar k Birkbeck College University of London

Ack Brian Southa m and Gordo n William s invited me to write this volume and helpe d la y th e foundation s fo r m y work . Advic e an d practica l assistance, includin g th e loa n o f book s an d othe r material , ha s come, sometimes even before I thought to ask, from John Durkan, John Gardner, Ernst Honigmann, David Hopkins, Willy Maley, Rob Maslen, David Pasco e an d Pete r Walsh . Other s hav e bee n patien t enoug h t o read an d commen t closel y on a rang e o f draft entries , i n som e cases kindly allowing me t o make use of ideas and suggestion s without specific acknowledgement : Alastai r Fowler , Pete r France , John Jowett, Donald Mackenzie and David Newell. Elisabeth Leedham-Green scrutinized a penultimate draft o f the complete book. My greatest debt is to Bob Cummings , whos e othe r kindnesse s grea t an d smal l hav e bee n surpassed b y his reading an d discussio n of the whol e volume as it ha s taken shape , resulting in many important suggestions , corrections an d redirections. I am of course solely responsible for remaining shortcomings. M y thank s t o al l o f these , an d t o m y family , whic h ha s bee n growing alongside this book, for a full range of diversions. Acknowledgement is also made to the Librarian, Glasgo w University Library, for permission to reproduce th e illustrations (actual size except where stated) , al l o f whic h ar e draw n fro m th e Glasgo w Universit y collections. SFG University of Glasgow March 2000

Abbreviations Periodicals ANQ, CahiersE CompD CompLit EinC ELH ELM ELR ES HLQ JEGP JMRS MLN MLQ MLR MP N&Q, PMLA PQ RenD RenQ RES SEL ShJ ShQ^ ShSt ShSu SP TSLL TES

American Notes and Queries Cahiers Elisabethains Comparative Drama Comparative Literature Essays in Criticism ELH: A Journal of English Literary History English Language Notes English Literary Renaissance English Studies Huntingdon Library Quarterly Journal of English and Germanic Philology Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies Modern Language Notes Modern Language Quarterly Modern Language Review Modern Philology Notes and Queries Publications of the Modern Languages Association of America Philological Quarterly Renaissance Drama Renaissance Quarterly Review of English Studies Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 Shakespeare Jahrbuch (previousl y Jahrbuch der Deutsche Shakespeare-Gesellschqft an d -Gesellschajt West} Shakespeare Quarterly Shakespeare Studies Shakespeare Survey Studies in Philology Texas Studies in Language and Literature Yearbook of English Studies

Abbreviations Frequently Cited Works Baldwin (1944 ) T. W . Baldwin , William Shakspere's Small Latine and Lesse Greeke, 2 vols. Urbana, IL. Baldwin (1950 ) T. W . Baldwin , On the Literary Genetics of Shakspere's Poems and Sonnets. Urbana, IL . Bullough Geoffrey Bullough , Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare, 8 vols. London, 1957-75 . Jones (1977) Emrys Jones, The Origins of Shakespeare. Oxford . Martindale(1990) Charles an d Michell e Martindale , Shakespeare and the Uses of Antiquity: An Introductory Essay. London. Muir(1977) Kenneth Muir , The Sources of Shakespeare's Plays. London. Joseph Satin, ed. , Shakespeare and his Sources. Boston. Satin (1966 ) E. M . W . Tillyard , Shakespeare's History Plays. Tillyard(1944) London.

X

Introduction A number o f excellent books o n thi s topic alread y exist : why compil e another? Al l students of Shakespeare mus t be eternall y gratefu l for , in particular, T . W. Baldwin's Shakspere's Small Latine and Lesse Greeke (1944) and Geoffre y Bullough' s Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare (1957-75), but the y and thei r companion s o n th e librar y shel f (such as Kenneth Muir' s The Sources of Shakespeare's Plays, 1957—77 , an d Emry s Jones' The Origins of Shakespeare, 1977 ) do not mee t all needs . The scholarly work these volumes reflect appeared a generation o r more ago, and there has been no shortage of new contributions i n recent decades; moreover, all are selectiv e in some way or ways. Baldwin's monumental study is confined to the influenc e o f the classics , and Jones specializes in the earl y plays . Muir' s attentio n i s more evenl y spread, thoug h mor e glancing, bu t stil l he offer s n o mor e tha n thirt y pages o n al l the Lat e Plays and non e on the poems. Bullough's eight-volume set, because it is essentially a collection o f documents, deals with certain kinds of sources and analogues only, and often , a s it happens, those with limited intrinsic interest - nothin g by so important a figure fo r Shakespeare a s Virgil, for example , i s included. 1 Finally , thes e existin g works simply d o no t allow eas y referenc e t o informatio n o n man y o f th e writer s wh o affected Shakespear e an d ho w they did so , because the y arrange thei r information no t by source-author but by individual Shakespeare text; a plethora o f index entrie s must be consulte d before a n overvie w can b e formed. However unfashionable the notion of the author may be today, Chaucer or Seneca or Marlowe wer e a s Shakespear e conceive d them rea l individual s responsibl e for a range o f different works , and i t follows that on e wa y of understanding th e natur e o f his conceptions is to consider each of these ranges of textual entities as a group, instead of pondering Shakespeare' s use of them on e instance at a time. This boo k i s no t intende d t o replace , o r rehash , th e invaluabl e volumes of Bullough or Baldwin or Jones, then, but supplie s somethin g different. I n 196 4 Kennet h Mui r wrot e a shor t articl e 'Th e Futur e of Shakespeare Source-Hunting' for the Shakespeare Newsletter. He suggested 1

Introduction that onc e Bullough's eight volumes were complete, littl e would remai n to b e discovere d abou t Shakespeare' s plo t sources , bu t tha t scholar s ought methodicall y t o investigat e th e are a o f Shakespeare' s reading , about whic h knowledg e i s onl y fragmentary . Bot h area s are , in fact , fruitful fo r scholarship . Sinc e Muir' s essay , larg e number s o f studie s have appeared o n new aspects of previously recognized Shakespearea n sources, and , partly becaus e understandin g o f the natur e o f a sourc e has been changin g t o embrac e intertextualit y more loosel y conceived , fresh texts have been brought into conjunction with Shakespeare's. Th e present compilation , throug h attendin g t o bot h acknowledge d plo t sources and othe r kinds of material h e was acquainted with , aims to be a digest of information on Shakespeare's literar y knowledge in general . This knowledg e wil l usually , bu t no t always , hav e bee n acquire d through readin g (h e saw plays o n stage , for example) . Henc e thi s i s a guide not only to what we customarily think of as Shakespeare's imme diate 'sources' ; many writer s (suc h a s Cicero, Daniel or Marlowe) who hav e o r see m t o hav e mor e diffus e effect s o n Shakespeare' s work tha n wha t thi s ter m usuall y tend s t o sugges t (suc h a s Arthu r Brooke, Ginthio or Lodge) can nevertheless be of great interest and importance i n understanding tha t work. Or w e may think of 'creative and imaginative' sources as opposed t o 'narrative and dramatic ones' , as Hal Jensen has recently distinguishe d them: Look into any volume of Geoffrey Bullough' s invaluable Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare an d yo u will find few works that have a n eminent plac e o f thei r ow n o n th e literatur e shelves . These plays , poems and histories interest us largely to the extent to which they fail to be Shakespeare . .. It is different fo r those which belong in that as yet unwritten compendium , Shakespeare's Creative and Imaginative Sources, whic h woul d presen t thos e work s - b y Marlowe, say , an d Ovid - t o which Shakespeare owe d a profound artistic debt. 2 But th e tw o categories d o no t hav e t o b e separate d thu s (indeed they cannot be , and Bulloug h does in fact includ e severa l texts from Ovid) . Scholarly idea s of how one work may leave its mark on another, of the range o f possible thing s a 'source' may be, are changing. Wha t Rober t S. Miol a call s 'ou r recentl y expande d understandin g o f sources ' involves th e assumption , generall y mad e now , that a tex t ma y deriv e

2

Introduction from a source quite obliquely, when it is part of a 'tradition' or 'context' for a work; and the understanding, now common enough, that evidence about a sourc e can b e derive d fro m 'sceni c form, themati c figuration , rhetorical strategy , structural parallelism, ideationa l o r imagisti c con catenation' as well as more straightforward kind s of 'verbal iteration'. 3 These change s i n ou r presupposition s d o no t invalidat e earlie r work , but the y do lead - hav e alread y le d - t o a different rang e o f possible effects o n Shakespeare being identified in acknowledged sources, and t o new source s being proposed. Thi s compendium take s account o f such developments - necessaril y so, since its basis throughout i s the recent findings of other scholars. In other words, it is based on a broader sense of how literar y texts can relat e t o on e anothe r tha n i s reflected i n th e standard earlie r studies. While i t seems that commentators will always overplay their hands , and mor e works will always be claime d as Shakespearean source s than will b e widel y credited , i t i s th e cas e tha t th e presen t generatio n o f scholars has tended to accept a greater number of these claims than has ever bee n acknowledge d before. Bu t ther e ar e stil l limits on wha t ca n usefully b e included in this volume, which is not conceive d a s a general guide t o wha t th e Englis h rea d i n th e secon d hal f o f th e sixteent h century, an d i s i n fac t no t intende d t o stra y very fa r fro m wha t th e Elizabethans woul d hav e though t o f a s literary , 'letters' , a categor y which includes , i n particular , history , but tend s no t t o exten d to , fo r example, most popular songs, chapbooks, pamphlets and tracts. It deals primarily wit h work s o f thi s kin d tha t w e kno w o r ca n o n curren t evidence suppos e Shakespear e rea d i n whol e o r i n part , an d whic h affected hi s ow n writin g i n som e way . 'Negative' influences , when a work is read an d reacte d against., are sometime s said t o b e intrinsicall y less susceptible to investigation than 'positive ' ones, but strongis h reac tions at least are ofte n traceable , an d ar e discusse d under a number of headings here . Analogues , on th e othe r hand , howeve r interestin g i n their own right, are not covered. Discrimination betwee n hard-to-distinguis h phenomena , suc h a s 'affinity' an d 'echo' , is of course crucial in determining, s o far a s it ca n be done, whether we should believe a given work affected Shakespeare . Discrimination betwee n other phenomena, suc h as 'allusion' and 'imi tation', is crucial in determining, s o far a s it can b e done, what kind of effect i t was . I n bot h cases , informe d interpretatio n depend s greatl y on appropriat e historica l contextualization . At th e simples t level , th e 3

Introduction

likelihood o f Shakespeare's havin g knowledge of a work available onl y in a Polish-languag e editio n i s mor e remot e tha n i n th e cas e o f a French-language one . One sectio n of each main entr y in this dictionary is devoted t o th e availability , presentation, reputatio n an d us e o f each writer or text in Shakespeare's time. Like Geoffre y Bullough' s compendium , this boo k aim s i n th e mai n 'not t o discove r new sources but t o make thos e alread y know n accessible' - o r rather, to make information about them, including samples of them, accessible . Quantities o f fresh discoverie s are not t o be expecte d in a compilation o f this kind, though some ideas are aired . Needles s to say, though , n o boo k o f thi s kin d ca n b e neutra l o r impersonal : th e compiler's ow n judgemen t abou t wha t t o includ e i n eac h entr y is engage d a t ever y step . Constructin g entrie s regularl y involve s assembling th e availabl e informatio n i n ne w ways , o r sometime s supplying ne w pieces of information; and i n selectin g and prioritizin g material, thi s volume deliberately differs fro m mos t bibliographies . Scope and Arrangement of Entries

Some difficul t choice s hav e presente d themselve s wher e i t seeme d that two or more alternativ e entrie s could be constructed . A full entr y on The Bible seem s obviousl y preferabl e t o a serie s o f entrie s o n Tyndale, Coverdale , an d s o on , wherea s separat e entrie s o n Livy, Pliny and Camden ar e neede d rathe r tha n on e o n Philemo n Holland, th e translato r o f all three. Th e choic e i s less straightforward where a single translator and a single work are concerned. Shoul d there be an entry for Thomas North, or for Plutarch? At the risk of neglecting the translator, the entry is usually on the source: an entry on Plutarch is supplied , but no t on e o n North . There ar e severa l justifications. I n many case s (not as it happen s includin g this one) ther e i s uncertainty about whic h translatio n Shakespear e used ; Shakespear e wil l i n prob ably mos t case s have know n mor e abou t th e source-autho r tha n th e translator; th e reade r i s more likel y to loo k u p th e sourc e first. In al l cases cross-references are supplied, and in many cases a specimen of the translator's work is quoted in the entry under the source-author. For similar reasons , sections of one writer's work later incorporate d into another' s (fo r example i n th e chroniclers ' constan t recyclin g o f material) are generally treated under the original writer where there is a likelihood Shakespear e kne w h e wa s readin g him , even i f h e woul d have done so as part of a later compilation. Hence More has an entry 4

Introduction on accoun t o f hi s History of King Richard III, a s wel l a s ther e bein g a separate entr y fo r Hall, throug h whos e Chronicl e Shakespear e mus t have know n More' s work . Adapter s an d imitator s whos e wor k ha d largely broke n fre e o f connections wit h thei r origina l autho r ar e als o discussed separatel y - fo r example, Arthu r Brooke, whos e versio n of th e Rome o an d Juliet stor y i s a loos e adaptatio n o f a Frenc h tex t definitely no t know n t o Shakespeare , an d th e ver y differen t version s by Caxton and Lydgate o f Guido dell e Colonne's Historia Troiana. I n considering the writing to which this volume is a guide, one is of course dealing al l th e tim e wit h somewha t arbitraril y selecte d point s i n a continuum o f literar y reworkings . Bu t cross-reference s ar e provide d in abundanc e i n suc h cases , a s well a s i n thos e o f writers an d work s subsumed under headings (suc h as Chronicle History Plays) which collect a rang e o f differen t mino r figure s o r text s together . Cross references are intended to help locate writers and texts discussed as part of Shakespeare's reading, an d do not lead to mentions of them in other contexts. For these, and for occasional references to writers Shakespeare is not believed to have read, see the Index . Within eac h main entry , the format for the serie s in which this compilation appear s is followed, with necessary adjustments, and with flexibility in length an d leve l of detail t o allow for the variet y of the writers treated an d th e way s in which Shakespear e use d them. Sectio n A is a brief, factual , biographical/historica l descriptio n o f the write r and/o r work(s). Section B supplies information on the reputation, presentation , availability and us e of the writer or work in Shakespeare's time, usually with an excerpt giving either a representative sample, particular Shake spearean source-material , o r both a t once. Th e ai m is to indicate ho w the writer or work would have appeared t o Shakespeare's eyes , and th e dominant way s i n whic h i t wa s bein g represented . Sectio n C i s a detailed, though not exhaustive, discussion of the relationship to Shakespeare's plays and poems, with some reference to the scholarly literature and, where immediate comparison s see m illuminating, quotatio n o f the Shakespeare work(s ) i n question . Finally , Sectio n D contain s a bibli ography, prefaced by a headnote fo r quick guidance i f there ar e mor e than a few items involved. These bibliographies g o with Section C, that is, the y ar e bibliographie s o n Shakespeare' s us e o f the write r o r text , though they also include any item cited in Section A or B. They are not intended t o b e full y comprehensive , particularl y fo r much-discusse d sources and on older publications. 4 The bibliographie s wil l locate much 5

Introduction

of th e mos t significan t materia l o f recen t decades , i n whic h furthe r references wil l b e found , an d giv e chapte r an d vers e fo r item s cite d and/or quoted . Purel y comparativ e studie s an d work s which merel y summarize previous ones are no t include d here . Som e hel p is given to those who use smaller libraries by indications of more than one possible source, includin g fo r example reprints, o f the sam e text . Unlik e othe r volumes i n thi s series , thi s on e doe s no t contai n a comprehensiv e bibliography a t th e end , becaus e i t i s i n th e cas e o f thi s extremel y extensively-researched fiel d muc h mor e convenien t fo r th e reade r t o consult the Section D bibliographies unde r the individual headings. It will be understood tha t absolutel y complete coverag e o f the terri tory o n whic h thi s volume give s guidance i s not possible . I n an y case , entries supplying full information (biography, contemporary reputation , and s o on ) o n th e writer s o f work s whic h figur e i n onl y brie f an d superficial way s in Shakespeare woul d be largely redundant. A shorter form o f entry is therefore employed for many subjects with a slighter or more doubtfu l importanc e fo r Shakespeare . Thi s consist s solel y of a sentence-long summary and a maximum of three bibliographical items , together wit h cross-reference s to any other relevan t entry/ies , indicat ing where mor e informatio n ca n b e foun d o n th e subject . Som e suc h entries ar e o n writer s an d text s whose pertinence t o Shakespear e ha s been disproved, information to which effect is assumed to be potentially useful. Ther e are o f course many cases in which it is a matter o f opinion whethe r a give n wor k i s of sligh t importanc e fo r Shakespear e o r not; but there are limits to how large such a compilation a s this can be allowed t o become . Henc e th e existenc e of , say , a singl e speculativ e article proposing a given writer as an influence on Shakespeare may not result in an entr y for that writer, particularly where such a speculatio n has been made public some years ago and gone unsupported since then. Quotations

Since work s Shakespear e kne w ar e usuall y quote d i n orde r t o sho w what h e may have read, a version (text , translation, edition) , or where possible the version, availabl e t o him is often draw n o n - thoug h th e quotation o f lon g stretche s o f foreign-languag e text s i s avoided . Fo r similar reasons, and also because evidence about Shakespeare's readin g turns not seldo m on small details of phrasing, an d eve n on occasion of spelling, excerpt s fro m suc h texts , whethe r take n directl y fro m earl y editions or quoted from moder n ones, involve minimal modernization.

6

Introduction (Very few special cases include Mystery Plays, which in their origina l form ar e rebarbativel y difficul t fo r som e reader s today , and whic h i n any case Shakespeare is much more likely to have seen performed than to hav e read. ) However , i n al l quotations, contractions , typographica l /w w ligatures and ampersand s ar e expanded, J i s replaced by V and W/ by W/w, usage of u/v an d i/j i s regularized, and black letter, decorative or multiple initial capitals and superscrip t are ignored. Sligh t and obvi ous printing errors are corrected, silently where they make no differenc e to issues of borrowing an d influence . N o collatio n o f press variants ha s been attempted; th e cop y used is from th e Glasgo w University Library collections where on e i s available, otherwis e almost alway s the Britis h Library or Cambridge Universit y Library. There seemed no corresponding necessity to quote Shakespeare himself from th e (to most readers less than familiar) old-spellin g texts, and I use instea d Pete r Alexander' s modernize d on e i n th e for m o f Complete Works of William Shakespeare (reprin t Glasgow , 1994) , supplemented fo r the apocryph a b y Stanle y Wells and Gar y Taylor , eds , William Shakespeare: The Complete Works, compact edition (Oxford, 1994), and b y other texts individuall y referenced . Obviou s misprint s ar e als o silentl y corrected in these texts. Layout of all play quotations is standardized for speakers' names, stage directions, etc. Conventions Used Tides of frequently cite d works and standard journals ar e abbreviate d as show n in th e Lis t o f Abbreviations. T o sav e space , frequentl y cited works ar e groupe d togethe r o n a singl e line a t th e star t o f the biblio graphical listin g (Section D) in eac h entr y if more tha n on e figures in that list . Wher e a write r o r topi c whic h ha s a n independen t entr y is referred t o within anothe r entry, attention is drawn t o the existenc e of the independen t entr y by printing in bold th e headin g unde r whic h it appears o n th e firs t occasio n i t i s mentione d i n a n entry , a s i n thi s introduction. Notes 1 Bol d print signals the heading of an entry in the body of this dictionary. 2 TLS, 5 February 1999, p. 19 . 3 Rober t S. Miola, 'Shakespeare and his Sources: Observations on the Critical History of'Julius Caesar'", ShSu 40 (1987), 69-76 (p. 71). See the ful l article. 4 Fo r earlier publication s se e especially th e bibliographie s b y John W . Velz, 7

Introduction Shakespeare and the Classical Tradition: A Critical Guide to Commentary, 1660-1960 (Minneapolis, 1968 , currentl y bein g updated ) an d Selm a Guttmann , The Foreign Sources of Shakespeare's Works: An Annotated Bibliography (Ne w York , 1947).

8

A Accolti,

Bernardo

(1458-1535),

Italian Dramatist

Accolti's Virginia (firs t printe d 1513 ) i s based o n th e Boccaccio stor y used for All's Well; it s few parallels i n Shakespear e d o no t outweig h th e unlikelihood o f his direct acquaintanc e with the play , but i t forms par t of the traditio n of the All's Well story . Cole, Howard C . (1981) . The 'All's Well' Story from Boccaccio to Shakespeare, pp. 114-37 . Urbana, IL .

Achilles Tatius See Greek Romance. Aeschylus (525—456 BC), Greek Tragedian Schleiner' s notio n that th e graveyar d scene s of the Choephoroe affected Hamlet prompts th e further questio n o f how Shakespear e would hav e know n them: a t on e remove i n Latin translation , o r at several removes? Schleiner, Louis e (1990) . 'Latinize d Gree k Dram a i n Shakespeare' s Writing of Hamlet: ShQ*\\ 29-48.

Aesop (?6th Century BC), Greek Fabulist

(A) Traditional accounts , deriving largely fro m Aristotl e and hi s circle, 9

Aesop represent Aeso p a s a slav e in sixth-centur y Samos . Ther e i s no contemporary evidenc e o n th e authorshi p o f the larg e collectio n of fables ascribed t o hi m (bu t certainly th e wor k of several different writers) , a series o f anecdota l storie s usin g anima l and , i n perhap s th e mos t authentic ones , mythological character s t o illustrat e moral o r satirica l points. The y were popularized i n th e for m o f verse renderings by th e Roman poe t Phaedrus about AD 40. This and a Greek version made by Babrius soo n afterward s ar e th e principa l manuscrip t sources . Abou t AD 400 the Roman Arianus used Babrius as the main basis of his fortytwo fables i n Latin verse ; the Aesopic material wa s particularly widely diffused i n thi s badl y dilute d for m ove r man y centuries. Th e fables , numbering abou t eight y i n typica l Renaissanc e edition s bu t throug h various kinds of accretion no w reaching ove r 35 0 in the larges t collections, have for long been most familiar as texts for the young, but this at least partly reflects the priorities of modern selection . (B) Aeso p wa s firs t printe d i n Lati n i n c. 1470 , i n Gree k c. 1480 . At least thirty-five mor e edition s followed befor e 1500 , and th e explosio n of interes t wa s quickl y reflecte d i n suc h lat e medieva l writer s a s Henryson. Easily Henryson's longest poetic work is his Morall Fabillis of Esope the Phrygian (1490s?) , a collectio n o f thirtee n fairl y elaborat e retellings o f stories, hal f of which deriv e from th e Latin Aesop an d half of which come fro m a separate tradition . The y are made al l the mor e attractive by their 'hamelie language' and 'termis rude', and the narra tive is developed strongl y with the 'moralitas ' separate d int o a discrete section at the end. Henryson, like Lydgate an d other medieval writers, thought o f Aeso p a s a poet, an d Aeso p descende d t o the m eithe r through th e twelfth-centur y Latin elegiac s o f Gualterus Anglicus (the most popula r medieva l collection ) o r th e Ol d Frenc h vers e o f Marie de France' s Ysopets Fabulae. Bu t fro m 1484 , when Gaxton' s versio n included a translation o f the spuriou s life o f Aesop to which Maximu s Planudes, a fourteenth-century Byzantine monk, had given currency by attaching it to his collection of fables, writer s tended t o imagine Aesop in a ver y differen t role , an d th e fable s wer e approache d a s works of prose. The figur e no w (and until Bentley exploded th e fiction in 1697) imagined a s Aesop wa s a gargoyle , deforme d an d o f dubiou s mora l character; give n wit by a goddess for an ac t of kindness, he was said to have become a gadfly to discomfort the powerful. This Aesop figure for a time assumed an independent literary life, pointing a moral in person 10

Aesop in a wid e rang e o f writer s includin g i n th e Elizabetha n er a Franci s Bacon, Si r Edwar d Dyer , Gabrie l Harvey and Nashe (se e Smit h 1931). But this popular myth had little effect o n those disposed to regard Aesop a s th e mora l teache r h e ha d alread y becom e fo r Henryson , and mos t of the earl y English versions of Aesop are intended fo r pedagogical purposes . As well a s rindin g favou r fo r it s ethicall y improvin g effects, i t ha s bee n proposed , Aesop' s moralize d vie w o f natur e ma y have been responsibl e for this tendency in much early modern natura l history - indee d Baldwi n claims , somewha t rashly, that 'ther e was no other literary view' (1944: i, 638). What earl y moder n reader s wer e actuall y readin g wa s a t severa l removes from th e Gree k o r early Latin forms of Aesop's tales . There is so muc h rearrangemen t o f the texts , with additions , subtraction s an d modifications to the original fables, that 'the "Aesop" of the late middle ages . . . i s indeed n o classica l work , bu t a creatio n o f th e medieva l period itself , though resting on a solid ancient basis' (Lathrop 1933 : 1819). Caxton's 'Aesop ' was translated from Machault's Frenc h version of a German rendering of a Latin recension. Caxton's was the best-known English version, going through man y editions, an d apparentl y th e only one available in Shakespeare's youth - thoug h several others were made during Shakespeare' s lifetim e (for which se e Baldwin 1944 : i , 607-40). Caxton's accoun t of the well-known fable o f the fo x and th e grape s (or here raisins ; Chambr y no . 32 ) i s th e kin d o f tex t sixteenth-centur y readers woul d hav e foun d i f the y ha d wante d Aeso p i n Englis h (a s Shakespeare apparently di d not - se e (C), below). Fig. 1 shows the text as it appeared wit h Caxton's woodcut illustration. He is not wyse / tha t desyret h to havre a thynge whiche he may not have / A s reciteth this fable o f a foxe / which e loked and beheld the raysyns tha t grew e upo n a n hygh e vyn e / th e which e raysyn s h e moche desyred for to ete them ^[ An d whann e h e saw e tha t non e h e mygh t get e / h e torne d hi s sorowe in to Joye / an d sayd these raysyns ben sowre / an d yf I had some I wold not ete them / An d therfore thi s fable shewet h that he is wyse / whic h faynet h no t t o desyre tha t thyng e th e whiche he may not have / (Aesop 1976 : sig. i3r) (C) Th e onl y direc t mentio n o f Aesop i n th e Shakespearea n corpu s 11

Aesop

Figure 1 Willia m Caxton, The History and Fables of Aesop (London, 1484) , sig. i3r.

12

Aesop gives th e defeate d Princ e Edwar d i n 3 Henry VI a dismissiv e attitude towards his fables: QUEEN MARGARE T Ah , that thy father ha d bee n so resolv'd! GLOUCESTER Tha t you might still have worn the petticoa t And ne'er have stol'n the breech from Lancaster . PRINCE Le t Aesop fable in a winter's night; His currish riddles sort s not with this place.

(5.5.25-6)

(where 'currish ' = 'base', 'ignoble' , probably wit h a pun o n 'dog-like' , i.e. concerned wit h animals). Whether o r not Shakespear e wrot e these lines, i t i s doubtful whethe r h e share d th e attitude , for , if the Shake speare apocryph a i s included , som e twent y o r mor e o f th e Aesopi c fables ar e fairl y definitel y referre d t o i n th e corpus , som e mor e tha n once (Baldwin 1944:1, 617-37 gives a complete catalogue) . On th e othe r hand , Shakespear e woul d no t hav e associate d all , or perhaps eve n many , of these twenty fables wit h Aesop . S o heavily diffused wer e th e fable s i n differen t kind s o f compilation , includin g fo r example collection s of Emblems and Erasmus' Adagia, tha t Shake speare would probably have thought of'Aesop' a s a type of story rather than a fixed corpus o f tales. Som e o f the tale s ha d evidentl y becom e proverbial. Fo r the sam e reasons it is probably a n unreliable procedur e to identify fro m variant s of the tale s used by him a single text of Aesop which Shakespear e coul d hav e relie d upo n (thoug h Baldwi n 1944 : i , 615ff., think s i t mus t hav e bee n a n edition , perhap s 1573 , o f th e popular Lati n compilatio n Fabellae Aesopicae made fo r us e i n school s by Camerarius, an d points to some apparent verba l echoes of it). Aesopic material i s spread i n no obviou s pattern ove r Shakespeare' s plays. Although his use of Aesop is sometimes said to constitute one of Shakespeare's way s o f expressin g similaritie s betwee n huma n being s and animals , man y instance s support thi s vaguel y a t best . A typicall y Shakespearean us e migh t b e th e stor y o f the fo x and th e grape s ((B), above) as mentioned b y Lafeu i n All's Well: O, will you eat No grapes, m y royal fox? Yes, but you will My noble grapes, an if my royal fox Could reach them .

(2.1.68-71) 13

Aesop Other fable s use d by Shakespear e ar e no t i n fac t concerne d wit h th e animal world, but with natural features such as plants and rivers. What is clear, however, is that Shakespeare alludes again and again to two or three Aesopic fables whic h can be use d to express an ide a par ticularly effectivel y o r economically , and/o r whic h strik e hi s imagin ation especiall y strongly. Their effectivenes s ha d le d to their becomin g proverbial. On e i s the story of the hawk and th e dove, used to illustrate reversal o f natura l hierarch y in , fo r instance , A Midsummer Might's Dream 2.1.232 , Antony and Cleopatra 3.13.195-7 , an d Coriolanus 5.6.115. Another i s the stor y of the countryma n an d th e snak e he warms in his bosom only to have it bite him (Chambr y no. 82), used still more ofte n and 'regularl y give n . .. its proper mora l application ' by Shakespear e (Baldwin 1944 : i, 618): I fear me you but warm the starved snake, Who, cherish'd in your breasts, will sting your hearts. (2 Henry VI, 3.1.343-4 ) O villains, vipers, damn'd without redemption ! Dogs, easily won to fawn o n any man! Snakes, in my heart-blood warm'd , tha t sting my heart! (Richard 77,3.2.129-31 ) I tore it from th e traitor's bosom, King ; Fear, and no t love, begets his penitence. Forget to pity him, lest thy pity prove A serpent that will sting thee to the heart . (Richard II, 5.3.55-8) help me; do thy best To pluck this crawling serpent from m y breast! . . . Methought a serpent eat my heart away , And you sat smiling at his cruel prey. (A Midsummer Night's Dream, 2.2.145-50)

(D)

Aesop, translate d b y Willia m Caxto n (1976) . The History and Fables of Aesop, Translated and Printed by William Caxton, 1484. Reproduced 14

Aesop in facsimile from the copy in the Royal Library, Windsor Castle, with an introduction by Edward Hodnett. London . Baldwin (1944). Chambry, Emile, ed . (1927) . Esope Fables, Texte Etabli par Emile Chambry. Paris. Crundell, H . W . (1935). 'Shakespeare , Lyly , an d "Aesop". ' JV: 69-79. Simonds, Pegg y Munoz (1992) . Myth, Emblem and Music in Shakespeare's 'Cymbeline': An Iconographic Reconstruction. Newark, DE . Starnes, D. T. (1945). 'Shakespeare and Apuleius.' PMLA 60 : 1021-50 . Tobin, J. J. M . (1984) . Shakespeare's Favorite Novel: A Study of The Golden Asse as Prime Source. Lanham (supersede s several previous short articles by Tobin i n various journals). Wilson, J. Dove r (1962). Shakespeare's Happy Comedies. Evanston , IL. Wyrick, Deborah Bake r (1982) . 'Th e Ass Motif i n The Comedy of Errors and A Midsummer Night's Dream.' ShQ33: 432-48.

Aretino, Pietro (1492-1557), Italian Poet and Playwright Cairn s (1991 ) find s 'threads ' fro m Aretino' s comedie s i n Love's Labour's Lost, Twelfth Night and The Comedy of Errors.

23

Aretino, Pietro Cairns, Christophe r (1991) . 'Aretino' s Comedie s an d th e Italia n "Erasmian" Connection i n Shakespeare andjonson', pp . 113-3 7 in J. R . Mulryn e an d Margare t Shewring , eds, Theatre of the English and Italian Renaissance. Basingstoke. Ariosto, Ludovico (1474-1533) , Italian Poet and Playwright (Excludin g / Suppositi: se e Gascoigne, George) (A) Ariosto was born in Reggio Emilia, but hi s family quickl y moved to the duca l capita l o f Ferrara, th e fathe r advancin g a s an office r i n th e service o f Duk e Ercol e I . Havin g firs t attempte d th e stud y o f law, Ludovico devoted himself to letters; but a lifetime's service as a courtier was to be imposed on him by financial pressures. In 150 3 he was introduced to the Ferrarese court and employed as a diplomat by the Duke's son, Cardina l Ippolit o d'Este , wh o rewarde d hi m meanly . I n abou t 1505, Ariosto began hi s capacious poe m th e Orlando Furioso, an epi c o r 'romance epic' on the adventures of the French hero Roland, a knight pursuing a ludicrous, distorte d passion . Thre e versions of it appeare d over th e year s 1516-32 . Whe n th e Cardina l lef t Ital y i n 1518 , hi s brother, Duke Alfonso, took the poet into his service, making him in the 1520s regional governo r o f the wil d mountain distric t o f Garfagnana . Following his return t o Ferrara , Ariost o wrote five dramatic comedie s including / Suppositi, work s which were of some significance in the evolution o f European comed y a s vernacular imitation s o f Latin models , and complete d the final version of his epic. He wa s also the autho r of sonnets, satires and Latin poems. (B) The firs t Englis h version of any substanc e from th e Orlando was of the episode (an unusually self-contained one for the poem) which was to be mos t significan t fo r Shakespeare , bu t th e rud e disguis e i n whic h i t appeared make s Ariosto's origina l barel y recognizable . Thi s wa s th e Historie of Ariodanto and Jenevra, Daughter to the King of Scottes., pu t int o rugged Englis h vers e no t dissimila r i n characte r fro m tha t o f Arthu r Brooke's Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Juliet b y Pete r Beverley , an d printed about 156 6 (see Prouty 1950) . The respons e to Ariosto evinced here i s ver y largel y t o a storyteller , an d th e firs t complet e Englis h version o f 1591 , b y Si r John Harington , a courtie r an d sometim e favourite o f Quee n Elizabeth , i s no t wholl y differen t i n thi s regard . This well-known Elizabethan translatio n i s a work of great energ y an d

24

Ariosto, Ludovico

occasional inspiration whic h is, however, a cruder product tha n it s original. It freel y omit s an d adapt s its material i n ways inspired largel y by the high-minded attitud e to epic that poets had acquired since Ariosto's time, prioritizing gravity and decorum . Som e of Ariosto's minor works were als o imitate d o r translate d soo n afte r thi s date , th e satire s b y Joseph Hal l (i n Virgidemiae, 1598 ) an d Gervas e Markha m (Ariosto's Satyres, 1608) , an d th e sonnet s earlie r an d mor e widely , b y suc h a s Wyatt, Surrey, Spenser and Lodge. Harington's well-receive d Englis h versio n ma y hav e stimulate d Robert Greene t o writ e hi s romanti c comed y Orlando Furioso (1594) , though this has a limited connection with the Italian work. In any event, Ariosto's epi c wa s alread y wel l known i n Britai n befor e Harington' s translation appeared . Georg e Gascoigne ha d Englishe d part s o f Canto xxxin in 1572 , followed i n the next decade by John Stewart of Baldynnis' curiou s Abregement of Roland Furious, usin g Desportes' Imitations de I'Arioste. Haringto n himsel f speaks of an apparentl y los t version of the same Ginevra story that Beverley had translated, an d a play on it is recorded a t court in 1582/ 3 (Prout y 1950 : 13 ) - thi s was evidently a familiar episode . I n fact , th e Orlando Furioso quickl y became on e o f th e most popular literar y works of the sixteent h and seventeent h centuries. Several ne w term s i t gav e th e Englis h language , suc h a s 'rodomont ' and 'paladin' , ar e documente d aroun d 1600 . A s with lov e lyric s an d the novella , Italia n epic s la y behin d th e Englis h attemp t t o establis h native production , and , togethe r wit h Tasso' s Gerusalemme Liberata, Ariosto's was one o f the tw o works often see n as central, as in the case of Spenser . Harington , conceivin g o f th e Furioso a s a mora l an d religious wor k wit h 'infini t place s ful l o f Christia n exortation' , ha d offered hi s readers a n Ariosto who was as didactic a s he was entertain ing - thi s is partly a matter o f the allegorical interpretatio n supplie d in his note s - an d such was the Ariosto adopte d an d acknowledged a s a model for The Faerie Queene. But hi s effect o n Spenser's poem remain s in the en d fairl y superficial , even i f 'conspicuou s an d fascinating ' (Pra z 1958: 300). Though no t on e o f the ver y popula r Englis h Renaissanc e transla tions, an d indee d a t time s thoroughly disliked , Harington' s Ariost o has bee n reprinte d consistentl y up t o th e present . Th e followin g not otherwise remarkabl e passag e give s the centra l part o f the Don John/ Borachio/Hero plo t in Much Ado] for the contex t see (C), below. 25

Ariosto, Ludovico When Polynesso (so the duk e we call) This tale unpleasant oftentim e ha d hard , Finding himselfe his likel'hood verie small, When with my words her deeds he had compard , Greev'd wit h repulse, and greeved therewithall, To see this stranger thus to be prefard, The lov e that late his heart so sore had burned , Was cooled al l and into hatred turned. Entending by some vile and subtil l traine, To part Gemma from he r faithful l lover, And plant s o great mislike betweene them twaine Yet with so cunning show the same to cover, That her goo d name he will so foule distaine , Dead no r alive she never shall recover. But lest he might in this attempt be thwarted, To none at all his secret he imparted . Now thus resolv'd (Dalinda faire ) quoth he, (So am I cald) you know though trees be topt, And shrowde d low, yet sprout yong shoots we see, And issu e of the head so lately lopt, So in my love it fareth now with me. Though b y repulse cut short and shrewdly cropt, The pare d top s such buds of love do render, That still I proove new passions do engender. Ne do I deeme so deare the great delight , As I disdain I should be so reject, And lest this griefe should overcome me quight , Because I faile t o bring it to effect , To please my fond conceipt this verie night, Pray thee my deare to do as I direct. When fair Genevra to her be d i s gone, Take thou th e cloths she ware and put them on:

26

Ariosto, Ludovico As she is wont her golden haire to dresse, In stately sort to wynd it on her wyre, So you her person lively to expresse, May dresse your owne, and weare her head attire : Her gorgets and her jewels rich no lesse, You may put o n t'accomplish m y desire, And when unto the window I ascend, I will my comming there you do attend. Thus I may passe my fancies foolish fit, And thus (quoth he) my selfe I would deceave. And I that had no reason, nor no wit, His shamefull drif t (thoug h open) to perceave: Wearing my Mistresse robes, that serv'd me fit, Stood at the window, there him to receave. And of the fraud I was no whit aware, Till that fell out that caused all my care. (Harington 1591 : 33-4; v.21-6) (C) Shakespeare may have known the Orlando Furioso in both th e Italia n form an d i n Harington' s Englis h translatio n (th e assumptio n tha t h e could not read Italian has been weakening in recent years). If he did not need to read Harington's English rendering, that is, however, no indication that he failed to do so - bu t verbal echoes from it seem not to be in evidence. A se t o f print s use d i n on e o f th e handsom e earl y Italia n editions wa s late r recycle d i n edition s o f Harington ; Fig . 2 thu s shows a n illustratio n t o Cant o v whic h Shakespear e migh t hav e seen whichever language h e read Ariosto in. The Cant o v stor y o f Ariodante an d Ginevr a i s recognize d a s a direct o r indirec t sourc e fo r th e plo t involvin g Margaret' s imperson ation of Hero, an d perhaps a few associated elements, in Much Ado about Nothing. Th e episod e i s set i n Scotland , s o had a t leas t a measur e o f particular interes t for British readers. Rinaldo travels to St Andrews to champion th e Princes s Ginevr a i n th e fac e o f a n accusatio n o f unchastity whic h woul d otherwis e resul t i n he r bein g condemne d t o death. O n th e wa y he rescue s Dalinda, Ginevra' s maid , wh o reveals that Polynesso, a suitor o f Ginevra's with whom the maid wa s in love, treacherously persuaded her t o dress as her mistress, inviting Ginevra's true love Ariodante to witness Polynesso's entry to Ginevra's window by 27

Ariosto, Ludovico

Figure 2 Orlando Furioso in English Heroical Verse (London, 1591) , p. [31 ] (actual siz e 202 X 136mm).

28

Ariosto, Ludovico night. Polyness o the n planned th e murde r o f Dalinda , fro m whic h Rinaldo ha s save d her . Rinaldo i s anticipate d a t S t Andrew s b y Ariodante, wh o afte r a numbe r o f complications i n th e list s kills th e villain i n single combat. Th e centra l figures in Ariosto's version of the story ar e Polyness o an d Dalinda . Othe r versions , involvin g variou s other emphases , includ e Bandello's, Belleforest's an d Spenser' s (some fiftee n furthe r treatment s dow n t o 1601 , including transla tions, plays, etc, are listed in Bullough, n, 533-4; Prouty 195 0 seek s to explain th e reason s fo r th e story' s popularity) . O f these , Bandello' s i s particularly important fo r Shakespeare. The mai n similaritie s t o Shakespeare' s plot , then , ar e th e villain' s jealousy, his (or his agent's) affai r wit h th e maid, her impersonatio n of the mistress , and he r ignoranc e o f its likely effects, includin g th e witnessing o f it b y th e lover . Rinaldo' s challeng e an d th e due l wit h th e villain ar e apparentl y lef t asid e b y Shakespeare a s unsuitable fo r comedy. Though Beatric e enjoins Benedick to 'Kill Claudio', an d Claudio is also challenge d b y Leonato an d Antonio , n o comba t take s place; an d this ha s been thought , i n a way, Shakespeare's point : 'romanc e ha s a vocation fo r cruelt y bu t comed y ca n cur e it ' (Traugot t 1982 : 163) . Shakespeare's presentation o f domestic love and everyda y affection, i n distinction fro m romanti c o r chivalri c devotion , ha s bee n th e centra l concern o f most discussions of Much Ado's Ariosta n source, whether o r not involvin g consideration s o f generi c contras t an d contamination . Prouty see s in Beatrice an d Benedic k the 'realistic ' rejection o f 'dreary conventions' (1950 : 62) , though unlik e som e othe r commentator s h e also stresse s Shakespeare' s developmen t o f Her o an d Claudi o awa y from th e impossibl e romanc e figures of Ariosto. Other s not e th e combination o f 'narrative' an d 'theatre ' in the element s freshly introduce d by Shakespeare -Dogberry, the Friar, Leonato - an d suggest his principal interes t in the source s lay in 'thei r representation o f the dangerou s powers o f dramati c play-stagin g scenes , actin g roles , an d creatin g spectacle' (Osborne 1990 : 168) . Three othe r Shakespeare plays are insecurely related to Ariosto. Perhaps the romantic lead in As Ton Like It bears the name of Ariosto's hero because it calls up association s with the lush enchantment o f the poe m - o r perhaps ther e i s no connection. Mor e concretely , several verba l echoes fro m th e sam e are a (Canto s iv-vi) o f th e Orlando Furioso tha t affected Much Ado are claime d i n Othello, together wit h on e mor e convincing instance , th e expressio n 'propheti c fury ' (3.4.72 ) i n Othello' s 29

Ariosto, Ludovico account o f th e manufactur e o f hi s mother' s handkerchief , perhap s from Ariosto' s descriptio n o f Cassandra's 'furo r profetico ' i n hi s fina l Canto (XLVI , 80) . The expressio n is not th e sol e significan t item : this 'might have come from anothe r source , and the handkerchief is already in Cinthio ; bu t th e siby l an d th e magi c com e fro m Ariost o alone ' (Cairncross 1976 : 181) . Finally , a genera l relationshi p ha s bee n remarked betwee n th e Furioso an d A Midsummer Night's Dream, fo r example b y Croce, wh o observed that th e play' s changing vicissitudes of lov e an d hat e recal l th e complication s arisin g 'i n Italia n chivalri c romances thank s t o th e tw o famou s neighbourin g fountains , on e o f which filled the hear t wit h amorou s desir e an d th e othe r turne d th e original ardou r int o iciness' (quote d Praz 1958 : 304) . Resemblances in specific detail s are weak, however, and eve n if it is agreed that 'withou t speaking of an actual source, one cannot help noticing a deeper affinit y than with any other work of the same period in English literature' (Praz 1958: 305) , th e likelihoo d woul d b e tha t th e affinit y arise s fro m th e interposition o f intermediary Italia n pastora l playwright s (Delia Valle, Pasqualigo, Guazzoni , an d others ) t o who m Ariosta n atmosphere s came naturally, even if they were not read at first hand by Shakespeare. (D) Pra z (1958 ) i s interesting, i f sometime s over-opinionated , o n th e early Englis h respons e t o Ariost o dow n t o th e tim e o f Shakespeare , whereas Gibaldi (1974) begins in this era and continue s to the present. Cairncross (1976 ) provides th e basi c fact s o n th e Shakespearea n rela tionships in short compass (together with a speculation about Lear which has gone unfollowed). Humphreys (1981) does so at slightly more length for Much Ado alone. The fulles t treatmen t o f this play's Ariostan links is Prouty (1950) ; Traugott (1982) , Osborn e (1990 ) an d Rh u (1993 ) tr y a variety of new angles. Cairncross, Andrew S. (1976). 'Shakespeare and Ariosto: Much Ado about Nothing, King Lear, and Othello: RmQJZV: 178-82 . Gibaldi, Joseph (1974). 'The Fortunes of Ariosto in England and America', pp. 136-5 8 in Aldo Scaglione, ed., Ariosto in 1974 in America: Atti del Congresso Ariostesco -Dicembre 1974, Columbia University. Ravenna . Harington, Si r Joh n (1591) . Orlando Furioso in English Heroical Verse. London. Humphreys, A . R. , ed . (1981) . Much Ado about Nothing (Arde n Shake speare). London. 30

Ariosto, Ludovico Osborne, Lauri e E . (1990) . 'Dramati c Pla y i n Much Ado about Nothing: Wedding the Italian Novella and English Comedy.' PQ69: 167-88 . Praz, Mari o (1958) . 'Ariosto i n England' , pp . 287-30 7 i n Praz , The Flaming Heart: Essays on Crashaw, Machiavelli, and other Studies in the Relations between Italian and English Literature from Chaucer to T. S. Eliot. New York. Prouty, C. T . (1950). The Sources of Much Ado about Nothing: A Critical Study, Together with the Text of Peter Beverley's 'Ariodanto and leneura'. Ne w Haven. Rhu, Lawrenc e (1993) . 'Agon s o f Interpretation: Ariosta n Sourc e an d Elizabethan Meanin g i n Spenser , Harington , an d Shakespeare. ' RenD24: 171-88 . Traugott, John (1982) . 'Creatin g a Rationa l Rinaldo : A Stud y i n th e Mixture o f the Genre s o f Comedy an d Romanc e i n Much Ado about Nothing.' Genre 15 : 157-81 .

Augustine, of Hippo (Aurelius Augustinus) (354-430)

Claudius' 'limed soul' (Hamlet 3.3.68 ) an d lago' s imagery i n discussin g the freedo m of the wil l (Othello 1.3.3 2 Iff.) ca n bot h b e parallele d i n S t Augustine's writings. Battenhouse, Roy W . (1969). Shakespearean Tragedy: Its Art and its Christian Premises, esp. Appendix I. Bloomington.

Averell, William (fl. 1578-1590), Prose Writer Averell' s Marvailous Combat of Contrarieties (1588) use d th e fabl e o f th e Body' s Members whic h appear s i n Coriolanus as a warning agains t seditio n a t the time of the Spanis h Armada; but likelier sources include Plutarch and Livy. Muir (1977) , 238.

31

B Bade (Radius), Josse Se Spagnuoli).

e Mantuan (Giovann i Baptist a

Baldwin, William (ft. 1547) , editor of A Mirror fo r Magistrates Se e Mirror for Magistrates, A. Bale, John (1495-1563), Bishop and Playwright Bale' s King John (befor e 1560 ) offer s a close r dramati c paralle l t o Shakespeare' s death o f King John than other known sources. Morey, James H. (1994) . 'The Death o f King John in Shakespeare an d Bale.' ,$Q,45: 327-31. Bandello, Matteo (1485-1561), Italian Novelist Se e also Belleforest, Fraiu^ois de; Brooke, Arthur; Gl'lngannati. (A) Born int o a n aristocrati c Lombardia n family , Bandell o joined th e Dominican orde r a s a youth an d travelle d t o monasterie s throughou t Europe. H e lef t th e Churc h t o follo w a career a s a courtier an d cour t poet, initiall y a t Mantua . H e settle d i n Milan , bu t politica l intrigue s forced hi m to flee the city in 152 6 leaving his manuscript work behind. After a period o f wandering in the service of various courtly patrons he 32

Bandello, Matteo became a n advise r t o a pro-Frenc h Venetia n general . Followin g th e battle o f Pavi a i n 154 2 he fle d t o France , wher e h e wa s grante d a bishop's income , an d wher e h e wa s finall y abl e t o assembl e th e collection of novellas he had bee n writing for nearly fifty years. His 214 Novelle were published in three volumes in 1554 , to immedi ate acclai m throughou t Europ e ( a fourth par t followe d posthumousl y in 1573) . Th e stories , Bandell o tell s hi s readers , 'd o no t constitut e a connected histor y bu t ar e a miscellan y o f divers e events' ; the y hav e no Boccaccia n cornice or framework , though the y are accompanie d b y epistles in which Bandello explains how he came acros s them, insisting on thei r authenticit y even in som e of the mos t far-fetche d cases . Most are romantic , nearl y a hundred of them being tales of illicit love. They are told in a racy, emphatically simple style meant to appeal to a courtly rather tha n popula r readership . Bandello' s mora l stanc e i s muc h less definit e tha n i n th e cas e o f Ginthio, indee d a cultivate d ethica l ambiguity is characteristic. (B) Th e influenc e o f Bandello' s Novelle wa s widesprea d throug h Italy , Spain, Franc e an d England . Arthu r Brooke, Willia m Painter an d especially Geoffre y Fenton (i n hi s Certain Tragicall Discourses of Bandello., 1567) betwee n the m adapte d int o Englis h a fairl y larg e par t o f th e collection fro m th e 1560 s onward s (bibliographica l detail s i n Scot t 1916), though no complete Elizabethan English translation o f Bandello is known . A s wit h translator s o f othe r novellieri, on e characteristi c o f these English writers is that 'while tending to concentrate on tragic tales from the Italian, they also maintain a moral and didactic purpose which dissipates the tragic complexities of the original text' (Kirkpatrick 1995 : 239). Sometimes , especially with Fenton, Bandello's undecorated pros e turns int o a rhetorica l display , largel y becaus e th e translator s wer e attracted by the pseudo-classical overla y imposed in the French version s of the storie s in Belleforest's Histoires Tragiques (1559-82), which they often worke d from. Englis h dramatist s regularl y used th e translations : Painter's version of the histor y of the Duches s of Malfi (i n part a t least a true story), from Bandello via Belleforest, lies behind Webster's play of 1612; other Bandello-inspired playwrights include Beaumont, Fletcher and Massinger. (C) Bandello was once considered one o f the likel y sources for The Rape ofLucrece, bu t thi s possibility is no longe r accepted (see Baldwin 1950 : 33

Bandello, Matteo 106, 150-1) . There is a slight resemblance to his novella m.21, offerin g a Moor wit h an Aaron-like character, in the plot of Titus Andronicus, but even i f Shakespear e kne w th e stor y i t ma y hav e bee n i n a n Englis h ballad versio n instea d (se e Maxwel l 1968 : xxxi) . Otherwise , apar t from hi s indirec t influenc e o n Shakespear e vi a Belleforest/Fento n (uncertain), Brooke, and Riche (see Gl'Ingannati), Bandell o may have been useful for the murder scen e in Othello, and, with Ariosto, is one of the tw o earliest and mos t important source s for the Her o plot of Much Ado. Bandello's versio n o f the Othell o stor y was reworked by Bellefores t and furthe r debase d b y Fenton , an d Shakespear e ha s bee n though t likelier t o have used these French an d Englis h treatment s tha n the ori ginal. But, leaving aside preconceptions abou t his knowledge of Italian, the us e o f one doe s no t rul e ou t us e o f another, an d i t i s possible h e went back to the Bandello volume he had take n up at the time of Much Ado. The murde r scene in Othello (5.2) is, in fact, 'th e strongest evidence that Shakespeare read Bandello in the original Italian': 'the sensational device o f havin g Desdemon a momentaril y reviv e an d exonerat e Othello afte r havin g been apparentl y kille d by him . .. is to be foun d only in Bandello ' among know n versions of this stor y (Shaheen 1994 : 165), as are th e maid' s cr y for help an d th e neighbour s breaking i n to find the dead husband lying prone on top of his expiring wife. Nor does Cinthio's account , whic h Shakespear e follow s u p to the murde r scene , include a reviva l afte r apparen t death . (Bullough , vn, 253-62 , give s Fenton and hi s own literal English version of Bandello for comparison.) There is, however, a quite different Englis h work of these years, the play A Warning for Fair Women (c. 1598-9), performed by Shakespeare' s ow n company, which affords tw o scenes in which murder-victims are lef t fo r dead bu t regain consciousness and speec h before they die. With the Hero plot of Much Ado the cas e is more substantial. It seems that Bandell o wa s indebte d i n hi s twenty-secon d novell a t o Ariosto' s tale o f Polynesso and Ariodant e for one o r tw o aspects of his story, bu t it is otherwise a separate entit y (summarized by Prouty 1950 : 27-9 an d Bullough, n, 64-5). It tell s how the knightl y Sir Timbreo d i Cardon a falls i n lov e with Fenicia , daughte r o f 'a poo r gentlema n an d no t hi s equal'. A rival informs him via an agent that he will see Fenicia betraying him if he hides in the garden. He r consequentia l 'death' eventually allows fo r he r marriag e t o a repentan t Si r Timbre o year s later , unrecognized b y him , an d divers e joyfu l reunions . I t i s on e o f 34

Bandello, Matteo Bandello's most successful tales , replete with varied passions and clever twists in the plot. Shakespeare's combinatio n o f Ariosto' s an d Bandello' s storie s i s remarkable: it 'shows a mind ranging over elements loosely similar bu t so markedl y variant i n ton e an d incident s tha t onl y the shrewdes t of judgements coul d co-ordinat e the m int o a them e o f such tragi-comi c force' (Humphrey s 1981 : 13) . The overal l significanc e of Bandello' s story for Much Ado is that it takes place 'in the region where tragedy an d comedy ar e cu t ou t o f the sam e cloth ' (Dora n 1954 : 137) : the rival' s malicious plot for the heroine's affections lead s only to mishap, so that a happy outcom e i s not precluded . Bu t th e releas e o f potentially tragi c energies i s managed i n differen t ways : in Bandello , Fenicia' s famil y is sure Go d wil l reveal the truth , whereas in Shakespear e th e Watc h discovers it in advance. Shakespeare makes significant changes to heighten the dramati c effec t i n othe r direction s too . Th e evidenc e o f Hero' s infidelity i s mad e t o see m muc h clearer ; Claudio' s conduc t i s mor e disturbing tha n Si r Timbreo' s becaus e mor e self-assured ; th e churc h scene i s hence far mor e powerful ; an d th e equalizin g of rank between the familie s finall y 'result s i n socia l cordiality al l round an d eliminate s any intrusiv e considerations of status' (Humphrey s 1981 : 11) . Overall , of course , the Her o plo t i s subordinated i n a large r context , s o Hero 'cannot sho w the fightin g qualitie s o f her modest y a s doe s Fenici a i n Bandello', becaus e 'Shakespear e deliberatel y play s he r dow n a s compared with Beatrice' (Bullough, n, 77). A modern Englis h translation of Bandello's twenty-second novella is given by Bullough (n, 112-34) . The sententiou s and rhetorica l version by Belleforest , thoug h sometime s propose d a s Shakespeare' s source , is o n balanc e les s likel y t o hav e bee n use d tha n it s origina l (se e Humphreys 1981 : 14). (D) Kirkpatrick' s (1995 ) readin g o f Bandello' s wor k contain s som e factual inaccuracies . Fo r som e Englis h an d Frenc h translator s an d adapters, se e Levenso n (1984) ; fo r bibliographica l detail s o f Englis h translators, see Scott (1916). Prouty's (1950) is the fulles t accoun t o f the origins of Much Ado; Humphrey s (1981 ) an d Bulloug h summarize th e matter wit h admirabl e precision . Osborn e (1990 ) propose s 'spectacle ' as th e ke y t o th e play' s treatmen t o f it s sources . Bulloug h (vn ) an d Shaheen (1994 ) together provide a good cas e for Bandello's impact o n Othello 5.2. 35

Belleforest, Francois de These 10 1 translations o r 'retellings ' did begin wit h Bandello's work, but a s the volumes went on their scop e extende d t o stories from othe r classical and medieval writers, notably chroniclers. Belleforest's versions add t o th e origina l narrativ e material s moralisti c diatribe s an d discourses, anticlerical animadversions , letters , and poems, and the y effec t alterations in emphasis and sometimes in plot which tend to sensationalize, sentimentalize , and reflect the translator's attachmen t t o the notions of courtly love. (B) Th e complicate d publicatio n histor y o f the Histoires tragiques shows that eve n afte r a collecte d editio n o f 1580 , each o f the seve n volumes was being reprinted separately , with some issued as many as eight times before th e en d o f the sixteent h century. The Britis h Library hold s five separate edition s o f the fifth volume (th e earliest of them date d 1576) , containing th e Hamle t story . There was no complet e Englis h transla tion, bu t Geoffre y Fenton (c. 1540-1608 ) worke d extensivel y fro m Belleforest when translating thirteen Bandello tales for his Certaine Tragical! Discourses, publishe d i n 1566 , before Belleforest' s ful l collectio n became available in French. Similarly , William Painter dre w on Belleforest fo r th e Bandell o storie s in hi s influentia l Palace of Pleasure (156675). Amon g Englis h version s o f single Bellefores t stories, th e anonym ous Historic of Hamblet (1608 ) i s a n unacknowledge d an d sometime s (designedly) inaccurate translatio n whic h appear s a t one o r two points to dra w o n Shakespeare' s play , an d wa s presumabl y publishe d t o capitalize on its popularity. Belleforest's ow n work nudges the storie s in the directio n o f drama . He adapt s 'loosel y an d i n poor proportio n perhaps , bu t wit h a bustle that points toward the stage. He als o adds these techniques and stylistic qualities of his own: moral an d psychologica l observations , . . . inflated dialogue, . . . an d action-stoppin g asides , whic h poin t towar d solilo quies' (Sati n 1966 : 382). Most o f thes e feature s ar e displaye d i n thi s excerpt fro m th e close t scene in th e Englis h Historie of Hamblet o f 160 8 (this passage of the translation involve s no departures from Belleforest' s text affectin g th e compariso n wit h Shakespear e a t thi s point ; a fe w touches also seem to recall other passages in Hamlet}. To conclude, weepe not (madame) to see my folly, but rather sigh and lament your owne offence , tormentin g your conscience in regard o f the infami e that hat h s o defiled th e ancien t renown e an d glori e tha t 37

Belleforest, Francois de (in times past) honoured queen e Geruth ; for wee are no t t o sorrowe and griev e a t othe r men s vices , but fo r ou r own e misdeedes , an d great folloyes. Desiring you, for the surplus of my proceedings, abov e all things (as you love your owne life and welfare) that neither the king nor an y othe r ma y b y an y meane s kno w mine intent ; an d le t m e alone wit h th e rest , for I hop e i n th e end e t o brin g m y purpose t o effect. Although the queen e perceived herself e neerl y touched, an d tha t Hamlet mooved her t o the quicke, where she felt herself e interested , neverthelesse she e forgot al l disdaine an d wrath , whic h thereb y sh e might a s the n hav e had , hearin g he r self e s o sharpl y chide n an d reprooved, for the joy she then conceaved, to behold the gallant spirit of he r sonne , an d t o think e wha t sh e migh t hope , an d th e easie r expect o f his so great policie an d wisdome . But on th e on e sid e she durst not lif t u p he r eye s to beholde him , rememberin g he r offence , and o n th e othe r sid e sh e would gladl y hav e imbrace d he r son , i n regard o f the wise admonitions by him given unto her, which as then quenched th e flame s o f unbridled desir e that befor e ha d move d he r to affec t K[ing ] Fengon , to ingrafTi n he r hear t th e vertuous actions of her lawful l spouse , whom inwardly she much lamented, when she beheld th e lively image an d portraitur e o f his vertue and grea t wisedome i n he r childe , representin g hi s father s haughti e an d valian t heart: and so, overcome and vanquished with this honest passion, and weeping most bitterly, having long time fixed her eye s upon Hamlet, as beeing ravished into some great and deepe contemplation, and as it were wholy amazed, at the last imbracing him in her armes (with the like love that a vertuous mother may or can use to kisse and entertaine her owne childe), shee spake unto him in this manner. I kno w wel l (m y sonne) tha t I hav e don e the e grea t wron g i n marrying with Fengon, the cruell tyrant and murtherer of thy father, and my loyall spouse: but when thou shalt consider the small meanes of resistance, and th e treaso n o f the palace , wit h th e littl e caus e of confidence we are to expect or hope for of the courtiers , all wrought to his will, as also the power hee made ready, if I should have refuse d to like of him, thou wouldest rather excus e then accuse me of lasciviousnes or inconstancy, much lesse offer m e that wrong to suspect that ever th y mother Geruth e onc e consented to the death an d murthe r of her husband. (1608 text , ed. GoUancz 1926 : 217-21) 38

Belleforest, Francois de (C) Belleforest' s Histoires Tragiques wer e th e rout e b y whic h th e sag a of Arnlet h o r Hamle t entere d Elizabetha n drama , draw n b y th e Frenchman fro m th e Danis h chronicle r Sax o Grammaticus ' Lati n Historia Danica. Numerou s parallel s betwee n Shakespeare' s pla y an d Belleforest's versio n whic h ar e no t duplicate d i n Sax o mea n tha t i t must be eithe r a direct sourc e for the play , or a n indirec t on e throug h the Ur-Hamlet, th e los t pre-Shakespearea n pla y sometime s suppose d to have been writte n b y Kyd. (Th e Ur-Hamlet mus t have been know n to Shakespeare , a s a pla y acte d a t hi s ow n theatre ; but , a s Stable r 1964 shows , ther e i s n o goo d evidenc e tha t h e kne w Saxo. ) Som e apparent verba l echoes of the Frenc h in Shakespear e note d b y Jenkins (1982: 94—5 ) d o no t settl e th e questio n becaus e the y ma y hav e bee n present i n th e Ur-Hamlet, whic h a s Jenkins point s ou t coul d hardl y have avoided drawing on Belleforest. The unusua l Q\ an d Q2 description of Hamlet as a 'Tragicall Historic' (recalling Belleforest's title ) could also be explaine d away . But if Shakespeare di d use Belleforest, h e must have ha d th e Frenc h text : th e Englis h translatio n cam e to o lat e fo r Hamlet. Whether directl y o r not , Bellefores t is , so far a s we can tell , responsible for some crucial elements of Hamlet. Hi s mai n overal l emphasis is on th e 'grea t an d gallan t occurrences ' involve d i n Amleth' s carefull y planned revenge , i n particula r th e originalit y an d clevernes s o f th e method. This is not reflected in Shakespeare, where Hamlet's reveng e is improvised and opportunistic, though Shakespeare ma y have picked up something of Belleforest's moralisti c stres s on the anti-Christian natur e of reveng e an d regicide . However , Belleforest' s loca l elaboration s o f plot, usually in the servic e of his attempts to sensationalize the stor y or add circumstantial detail , sometime s hav e far-reachin g consequence s for Shakespeare . H e add s t o Sax o th e detai l tha t th e Claudius-figur e had incestuously seduced his sister-in-law - 'incestueusemen t souille la couche fraternelle' - befor e resortin g to parricide, an d comments tha t her subsequen t remarriage ma y have led many to feel th e murde r was carried ou t partl y t o allo w thi s relationshi p t o continue . Belleforest' s Queen beg s Amleth o n hi s mentioning thi s suspicio n never t o believe she consented to th e murde r (se e (B)). The Frenc h tale als o introduces an agreement tha t the loser of the combat betwee n the old Hamlet and the Kin g of Norway mus t pay a forfeiture , whic h ma y hav e suggested the recover y of Norway's lands by the young Fortinbras, wh o does not figure i n Sax o o r Bellefores t himself . Sinc e h e seem s to originat e th e 39

Belleforest, Francois de episode o f the Prince' s sweethear t actin g a s th e king' s stalking-horse , Belleforest ma y eve n hav e hinte d a t th e 'equivoca l role a s both temp tress an d lover ' playe d b y Opheli a (Jenkin s 1982 : 93-4 ; Belleforest's account i s generally mor e misogynisti c tha n Saxo's) . Finally , wherea s Saxo had referre d to Hamlet's 'stoliditas ' ('dulness' ) and 'inertia ' ('lethargy'), Belleforest mentions 'la vehemence de la melancholic' in Amleth as a reaso n fo r hi s sensitivit y to externa l impressions , includin g thos e from th e spiri t world. As outlined b y Stabler (1966) , this is possibly the germ o f Hamlet's melanchol y temper , sinc e Shakespear e make s hi m say: The spiri t that I have seen May be a devil; and the devil hath powe r T' assum e a pleasing shape; yea, and perhap s Out o f my weakness and m y melancholy, As he is very potent wit h such spirits, Abuses me to damn me.

(2.2.594-9)

Belleforest's version o f the stor y seems, then, t o have been decisiv e for at least some important feature s of Hamlet., whether or not Shakespear e knew i t directly . (I t ha s man y othe r element s o f th e mai n plo t i n common wit h Saxo , o f course , bu t th e \3r-Hamlet nee d no t hav e derived these from the French version.) The eviden t differences betwee n Belleforest's an d Shakespeare' s handling s ar e explore d i n th e servic e of a case about Ky d and the Ur-Hamletby La w (1948), and summarized byHibbard(1987: 11-12) . Among othe r Shakespear e plays , Twelfth Might ma y deriv e th e occa sional detail of phrasing from Belleforest' s version of the Gl'Ingannati story tha t form s on e o f it s sources , bu t eve n i f th e dramatis t kne w Belleforest's treatmen t it s effect o n hi s work was marginal. Belleforest's relationship t o Shakespeare elsewher e is probably onl y indirect a t most: for Much Ado about Nothing se e Bandello; fo r Romeo and Juliet se e Brooke. (D) Bot h Frenc h an d Englis h text s o f Belleforest' s Hamle t stor y ar e widely supplie d b y Shakespear e authorities ; the y ar e give n en face b y Gollancz (1926) . All the English texts are based on the sole known copy of The Historie of Hamblet, 1608 , i n Trinit y College , Cambridge . 40

Belleforest, Francois de Small bu t numerou s an d ofte n significan t differences betwee n variou s revisions of Belleforest ove r time make som e early texts more authenti c than others , bu t thi s doe s no t mea n th e mor e authenti c ar e th e one s Shakespeare use d (se e the summar y i n Gollanc z 1926 : 318-19). A thorough compariso n o f Belleforest, Saxo an d Shakespear e i s carried out by Bullough. Bullough, vn; Satin (1966) . Gollancz, Si r Israel , ed . (1926) . The Sources of'Hamlet': With Essay on the Legend. London . Hibbard, G . R., ed . (1987) . Hamlet (OxfordShakespeare). Oxford . Jenkins, Harold , ed . (1982) . Hamlet (Arden Shakespeare). London . Law, Rober t Adge r (1948) . 'Belleforest , Shakespeare , an d Kyd' , pp. 279-94 i n James G . McManawa y et al., eds , Joseph Quincy Adams Memorial Studies. Washington. Ormsby-Lennon, Theres a Surian o (1977) . ' "Piccolo, m a con gran vagghezza": A Ne w Sourc e fo r Hamlet.' Library Chronicle (Philadelphia ) 41: 119-48 . Stabler, A. P. (1964). 'The Sources of Hamlet: Som e Correction s o f the Record.' Research Studies 33: 207-16. (1966). 'Melancholy , Ambition , an d Reveng e i n Belleforest' s Hamlet.'PMZ.4 81: 207-13 .

Bellenden (Ballantyne)See Boece (Boethius), Hector. Bermuda Pamphlets (Jourdain, Strachey, Th e True Declaration^ etc. ) Thes e contemporar y narrative s o f New World voyaging offe r verba l parallel s t o certai n point s i n The Tempest i n th e course o f thei r presentatio n o f storie s o f shipwrec k an d providentia l deliverance. Cawley, Rober t Ralsto n (1926) . 'Shakespeare' s Us e o f the Voyager s in The Tempest: PMLA 41 : 688-726. Kermode, Frank , ed . (1964) . The Tempest (Arde n Shakespeare) , pp . xxvi-xxx and Appendix A. London (first published 1954) . Vaughan, Virgini a Mason , an d Alde n T . Vaughan , ed s (1999) . The Tempest (Arde n Shakespeare). London . 41

Berners, John Bourchier

Berners, John Bourchier, Lord (1467-1533), English Statesman and Author Se e Chaucer, Geoffrey: Froissart, Jean; Huon of Bur deux. Bible, The Se e also Book of Common Prayer; Homilies. (A) Th e wid e availabilit y o f the Bibl e in Englis h wa s i n th e late r sixteenth centur y a recen t innovation . Althoug h printe d Bible s in othe r European vernacular s ha d appeare d previously , no complet e Englis h one existe d until 1535 . Th e lat e fourteenth-centur y 'Lollard' versions from th e Vulgat e (S t Jerome's Lati n Bible) , associate d wit h Joh n Wycliffe, wen t unprinted, an d ha d littl e or no influenc e o n subsequent English renderings . A fresh star t was made i n th e earl y sixteenth century, when zealous Protestants set out to put th e Bible into the hands of a lait y which increasingl y demande d direc t acces s t o th e text , i n th e teeth o f ofte n fierc e oppositio n fro m th e churc h an d sometime s fro m the state - institution s which sought to control interpretation and use of the Bible. The process was complete by the time Shakespeare was born, though th e reig n o f the Catholi c Mar y I (1553-8 ) temporaril y sa w a sudden reversal of the tide, with the burning of large numbers both of 'heretics' (see Foxe) an d o f English Bibles. In 152 5 the Lutheran William Tyndale, the first and greates t of the sixteenth-century Bible translators, published his New Testament, copies of which were smuggled into England fro m th e European continent . Tyndale too k hi s tex t largel y fro m Erasmus' Gree k Testament , translating i t int o richl y expressiv e English . H e late r publishe d hi s Pentateuch an d othe r segment s of the Ol d Testamen t fro m th e exil e in Antwer p whic h hi s radicalis m an d Lutheranis m ha d mad e neces sary. Th e firs t complet e Englis h printe d Bible , however , wa s Mile s Coverdale's o f 1535 . Coverdale wa s a n associat e o f Tyndale' s an d drew heavil y o n hi s work ; hi s Bibl e to o wa s importe d fro m abroad . Coverdale's rendering s o f th e Psalm s prove d particularl y influential , but hi s Bible is throughout full of melody, essentially a text to be spoken. Material fro m Tyndal e an d Coverdale' s version s remaine d a t th e core o f the Englis h Bibl e throug h th e late r revision s of lesser figures . Such attempts at amalgamation and revision, thoug h no t fresh translation, include d the pseudonymous Thomas Matthew's o f 153 7 and th e Great Bibl e o f 1539-41 , th e firs t officiall y authorize d Englis h Bible , ordered to be placed in all churches. But their influence was also strong 42

Bible, The on the Geneva Bible of 1560, corporately retranslated from th e origina l languages by Protestant exiles from th e Marian regime in Calvin's Gen eva. Any version of the Bibl e could b e printe d an d owne d fro m 155 8 under Elizabet h (thoug h possession of the Catholi c Rheim s Bible was seen as suspicious in later decades), and the Geneva version, though no t singled ou t fo r officia l approval , soo n becam e standard , an d readil y available to relatively ordinary people (i t was also the first English Bible to be published i n Scotland). The Genev a was printed i n small quartos in Roma n type , not th e heav y black letter o f previous, an d som e subsequent, Bibles . Textua l an d exegetica l point s wer e extensivel y dis cussed in its often fiercely polemical marginal note s which did not fail to stir up the controversy they often aime d at . The Genev a was incontrovertibly better tha n previou s Englis h editions , an d wa s preferred ove r the authorized translations not only by Puritans but by many Anglicans. The Genev a hel d it s own afte r 156 8 agains t th e Bishops ' Bible , an official revisio n o f the Grea t Bibl e issued in tha t year, with th e ai m of diluting the Geneva' s radica l Calvinism . Th e Bishops ' work , as a revision uneven and sometimes superficial, aspired to a dignity appropriate to public worship, but tende d toward s over-elaboration an d solemnity. One o f the sophisticated woodcuts from th e first edition is shown in Fig. 3. It was by no means as popular a s Lawrence Tomson's revisio n of the Geneva Ne w Testamen t o f a fe w year s later , i n 157 6 (particularl y valued fo r it s notes) ; it wa s no t reissue d i n les s bulk y quarto edition s after 1584 ; and i t was finally eclipsed by the 161 1 Authorized Version. One mor e English translation i s relevant here: the Rheims Ne w Testament o f 158 2 wa s part o f a Catholi c equivalen t t o th e Genev a Bibl e completed in 161 0 by members of the English Catholic colleg e founded at Douai; it s publication wa s part of a systematic plan t o win back the English to Rome. (B) Biblical material was prescribed in later sixteenth-century gramma r school curricula (see Baldwin 1944: i, 682ff.; Shaheen 1988) , though less was taugh t i n th e decade s o f Shakespeare's childhoo d tha n migh t b e assumed. Most religious instruction was carried ou t through text s such as catechisms, which, though based on Scripture, contained fe w quotations fro m i t o f an y length . Th e Primer , taugh t a t pett y school , con tained n o extensiv e biblical excerpt s othe r tha n th e Seve n Penitentia l Psalms. Bu t th e Bibl e whic h ha d no w becom e availabl e i n th e vernacular was , needless to say , the commones t boo k i n th e Englan d 43

Bible, The

Figure 3 Job's Comforters, fro m the first edition o f the Bishops' Bibl e (London , 1568; STG 2099) , sig. X8V.

44

Bible, The

of Shakespeare's time, as in all eras since then; it is estimated that in the second hal f of the sixteent h century half a million Englis h Bibles were purchased b y a n Englis h populatio n o f si x million . 'Th e Bible , th e Word, wa s now central, no t th e dram a o f the mas s in a language no t understood'; an d i t wa s 'know n wit h a thoroughnes s tha t is , simply , astonishing' (Daniel l 1999 : 169-70) . I t wa s also , fo r eve n th e secula r literature o f this era, o f seminal importance a s a framework o f shared knowledge, a potent influenc e o n ways of thinking and perceiving, an d for writer s an d artist s o f al l kinds a sourc e o f themes, subject-matter, imagery, typology and stylisti c example. One ver y clear biblical allusion in Shakespeare is Bottom's burlesque of St Pau l in 1 Corinthians 2 : 9, i n hi s recusatio on recoverin g fro m hi s dream - 'th e ey e of man hat h no t hear d . . . wha t m y dream was ' (4.1.208-12). The Paulin e text, linked as it is to other loci classici in texts both sacre d and secula r on th e natur e o f true wisdom and folly , i s one which evidently made a strong impression on Shakespeare. It is impossible to say exactly which version of the Bible was uppermost in his mind for Bottom's parodic treatment of this passage. But there is an intriguing link to Bottom's not otherwise easily explained name in the immediately following verse s of the Tyndal e translatio n whic h was the basi s at this point for the Great Bible and the Matthew Bible texts (see Stroup 1978 ; Peters 1988 ; an d per contra Willson 1979) , the latte r o f which i s quoted here primarily to display the distance between the directly Tyndale-based Bibles of the mid-sixteenth century and more familiar later revisions: That w e speak o f / i s wysdome among e the m tha t ar e perfecte : not th e wysdo m o f thys worlde / nethe r o f the rular s o f thys world (which go to nought) but we speke the wysdome of God / whic h is in secret and lyeth hyd / whic h God ordeyned before th e world / unt o our glory : which wysdoom non e o f ye rulars of this worlde knewe . For had the y knowen it / the y wolde not have crucified th e Lord of glory. But as it is written: The ey e hath not sene / an d the eare hat h not hearde / nethe r have entred int o the heart of man / th e thinges which God hath prepared for them that love him. But Go d hat h opened them unt o us by hys sprete. For the spret e searcheth al l thynges / y e the botom e o f Goddes secrets . For what man knoweth the thynges of a man: save the sprete of a men which is with in hym. (1 Cor. 2:6-11) 45

Bible, The (C) There i s no evidenc e Shakespear e kne w the Vulgat e (Noble 1935 : 87), o r th e Wycliffit e translatio n o f th e Vulgat e (1380-1400) , o r Gaxton's Golden Legend, containing portions of scriptural narrative. H e once copie s out a passage fro m a Frenc h Bible , the Oliveta n (Henry V 3.7.63-4), but thi s is clearly a special case. Indications o f acquaintance with th e Rheirn s ar e neve r clear (Shahee n 1999 : 35—6) , an d th e Kin g James ('Authorized') version issued in 1611 , five years before hi s death, leaves n o discernibl e traces . Shakespeare' s Bibl e i s primaril y th e Geneva an d Bishops ' Bible ; h e als o use s arrangements o f biblica l material i n the Book of Common Prayer and the Psalter (th e texts for th e Psalter printed a t the back of many Bibles were drawn from th e Great Bible ; Shakespear e als o draw s o n th e version s i n th e Praye r Book). Ther e ar e echoe s specificall y o f th e Bishops ' Bibl e (printe d until the late sixteenth century) in the earlier plays and i n references t o biblical material in which he might have been drilled at school, whereas in late r years , fro m th e tim e o f 2 Henry IV, h e seem s t o tur n t o th e Geneva (Nobl e 1935 : 75-6 ; Baldwin 1944 : i, 687) . There i s evidence that fo r th e Genev a h e routinel y use d a n editio n wit h th e standar d contents of a Genevan Ol d Testament an d Apocrypha bound together with th e Tomso n revisio n o f the Geneva n Ne w Testamen t (se e Noble 1935: 58ff. ; Shahee n 1995) . Ther e i s n o doub t h e i s influence d by Geneva glosses (see for example Burnet 1979 , 1980, 1981) . In the grea t majority o f individua l case s i t i s impossibl e t o associat e hi s biblica l references wit h a specifi c tex t because th e man y Tudor Bible s are to o similar t o eac h other , and Shakespeare' s verbal echoe s to o slight , bu t Shaheen (1999 : 39—40) claims to identify som e thirty passages in which he 'clearl y refer s t o th e Geneva' . A Genev a Bibl e with Tomso n Ne w Testament (STC 2175 ) is quoted below except where stated. Shakespeare's biblical knowledge is usually thought if anything more extensive tha n averag e fo r a write r o f hi s era , and h e make s fewe r mistakes in hi s biblical allusion s than, say , Bacon. I t probabl y derive d from a mixtur e o f school , home , privat e stud y an d attendanc e a t church - whic h wa s compulsory, and where th e Psalter , the Boo k of Common Praye r an d th e thirty-thre e Homilies, se t texts created for delivery by the man y preachers unlicense d to compos e their ow n sermons, and interlaced with biblical quotations, were important additiona l vehicles fo r biblica l material . Shahee n (1988 ) rejects Baldwin' s (1944 ) claims for the effec t o f school work, considers home influences improbable o n the ground s o f Shakespeare's parents' presumed illiteracy , and 46

Bible, The stresses th e alternativ e o f privat e study . Bu t i t i s no t reasonabl e t o discount any of these sources entirely. The sol e mention o f the Bibl e as such in Shakespeare i s in The Merry Wives of Windsor, wher e th e comicall y murderou s Caiu s conclude s that Hugh Evans in failing to keep his assignation 'ha s pray his Pible well dat he i s no come ' (2.3.7) . And Shakespeare' s explici t allusion s to biblica l material, thoug h the y range widel y in the Bible , are no t especiall y frequent. Perhap s i t is true that 'ther e i s hardly a book o f the Ol d o r th e New Testament which is not represented at least by some chance wor d or phrase in one or other of his plays' (Milward 1973 : 87), but i t is often a moo t poin t ho w directl y biblica l (a s opposed t o proverbial , o r vi a other writers an d texts ) these words an d phrase s are . Fo r example, the habit Shakespeare' s characters hav e of referring to lif e a s a pilgrimag e has probabl y bee n acquire d fro m Lyly' s Euphues, an d som e o f th e memorable Psalm-related phrases in Macbeth's las t soliloquy must have been commo n currenc y - 'dust y death' , ' a walkin g shadow' . O n the other hand , becaus e Shakespeare' s wa s onl y th e secon d o r thir d generation t o whic h a n Englis h Bibl e wa s readil y available , everyda y language ha d fa r fewe r se t phrase s derivin g fro m i t tha n did , say , nineteenth-century English . Th e subjec t o f biblica l influenc e o n Shakespeare's languag e itself , a t th e leve l of vocabulary, lexis , syntax , and s o on, is not treated here . All th e indication s ar e tha t Shakespear e kne w bes t th e biblica l material h e migh t b e expecte d t o hav e know n best : Genesis , Job , Psalms, th e Gospels , Acts , Romans , an d Ecclesiasticu s fro m th e Apocrypha. O f these, he seems to draw on Job an d Ecclesiasticu s 'in a much mor e direc t wa y tha n i s usua l wit h hi s biblica l echoes' . Th e interest i n Job an d perhap s th e Psalm s to o 'coul d b e explaine d a s a poet's gravitation towar d some of the finest poetry available t o him . . . But th e familiarit y with th e wisdo m literature doe s see m to indicat e a natural affinit y fo r th e solidl y secular , mora l sanit y o f thes e works ' rather tha n wit h mor e theologicall y engage d materia l (Sander s 1980 : 330). Example s of his most frequently use d texts are S t Paul's warnin g against Sata n i n th e for m o f a n ange l o f ligh t ( 2 Cor . 11 : 14) ; S t Matthew's 'Love thine enemies' (Matt. 5: 44); and the Burial service text 'In th e swea t o f thy fac e tho u shal t ea t brea d til l tho u return e t o th e earth: for out o f it wast thou taken , because thou ar t dust , and t o dust shalt tho u returne ' (Gen . 3 : 19 ) (see Appendix A in Shahee n 199 9 for play references for these texts). 47

Bible, The The clai m that Shakespear e derives from th e Bible 'the central ideas and image s tha t ru n throug h al l hi s plays ' (Milwar d 1973 : 87 ) ca n hardly b e prove d o r disproved . Th e presenc e o f decidedly mor e tha n occasional o r local borrowings must be conceded, however, since it can often b e inferre d fro m suc h loca l echoe s i n phraseolog y tha t Shake speare ha s biblica l material s i n min d a t a mor e fundamenta l level . There is , fo r instance , th e momen t i n Macbeth a t whic h th e wide r significance o f Duncan's murde r i s driven hom e b y MacdufP s 'Mos t sacrilegious murde r hat h brok e op e / Th e Lord' s anointe d temple ' (2.3.65-6). Thi s summon s u p bot h th e reference s to th e kin g a s th e Lord's anointe d i n 1 Samuel, particularl y David' s repeate d refusa l t o harm Saul despite having opportunity and justification (24 : 6, 26: 9, 27: 23), an d S t Paul' s conceptio n o f the sacrednes s o f God's people, 'th e Temple o f the living God' ( 1 Cor. 3 : 16) - relevantl y in this context, a conception sprea d acros s the New Testament, usually with a corporat e rather than individual reference. In a more diffused way , the parable of the Prodiga l So n evidently lies behind the Lear story, though with Lea r cast as the chil d an d Cordeli a a s the parent. T o this use of the Bibl e as paradigm i n Lear may b e adde d othe r kind s of reference. The apoca lyptic biblical text s drawn upo n elsewher e in the pla y (Revelation , the eschatological discourse of Christ, some apostolic writings) do not supply narrative material , bu t ar e no t draw n upo n merel y for the adorn ment of an unconnected story or theme (see Wittreich 1984) . The sam e can b e sai d o f the undertone s o f the wisdo m Books, of Job's patienc e (see especiall y Mar x 2000 : 59-78) , o r th e enduranc e enjoine d i n Ecclesiastes an d th e Psalms . Verba l echoe s i n thes e area s see m onl y signs of a fundamental empathy - 'th e point o f King Lear', say s Rosalie Colie (1974 : 136) , is 'surely , that , a s th e Psalmis t proclaims , ma n i s inexorably an d inextricabl y bound i n with other men, brought t o trial whether or not h e deserves it. Man ha s no choice but t o endure his life with such strengths as he can muster, and in his endurance lies his value as a man.' Colie also notes Lear's importan t us e of the Paulin e view of wisdom and foll y (as in (B)), played offby Shakespear e against the play's condemnation o f th e foll y proscribe d i n Proverb s (fo r Lear se e als o Milward 1975) . As wel l a s dee p an d diffuse d imaginativ e us e o f biblica l material , dense loca l combination s o f i t als o occur . Man y soliloquie s ca n b e described i n thi s way, such as Portia's 'Th e qualit y of mercy' (Merchant of Venice 4.1.180-200) , Claudius' 'Oh , my offenc e i s rank' (Hamlet 3.3 . 48

Bible, The 35-72), and Macbeth's 'If it were done' (1.7.1-28). A less familiar cas e in point i s this speech of Helena's t o the king she hopes to cure: He tha t o f greatest works is finisher Oft doe s them b y the weakest minister. So holy writ in babes hath judgement shown , When judges have been babes. Grea t floods have flown From simple sources, and grea t sea s have drie d When miracles have by the greatest been denied . (All's Well 2.1.135-41) Here ar e mor e o r less explicit reference s to thre e Ol d Testamen t episodes: th e righteou s judgement o f young Daniel whic h save s Susann a when condemne d b y all the elder s (Susann a 45-50, thoug h th e wor d 'babes' i s probably inflecte d b y Matt. 21 : 1 6 on righ t judgement proceeding fro m 'th e mout h o f babes an d sucklings') ; Moses strikin g th e rock at Horeb (Exod . 17 : 6); and th e crossin g of the Red Se a (Exod. 14 ; 'the greatest ' i s Pharaoh, wh o in Exod . 14 : 4 has had hi s heart 'hard ened' to pursue the Israelites) . Beyond this, there ar e als o overtones of Mary's canticle, the Magnificat (Luke 1 : 46-55), in the notion of a weak vessel chosen for divine purpose, which coalesce with associations elsewhere i n All's Well betwee n Helen a an d th e Virgin . An d th e whol e passage i s fully i n tune with the general principl e o f St Paul o n wisdom and foll y (i n (B)) . A dua l proces s seem s t o b e a t work , then : Shake speare's presentatio n o f Helen a i s vivifie d b y hi s deliberat e us e o f biblical material , whil e a t th e sam e tim e hi s ver y conceptio n o f th e character i s affecte d b y memorie s o f th e sam e — and probabl y additional - biblica l texts. The rang e o f ways in which Shakespeare use s the Bibl e is wide: only a few examples can b e given here by way of conclusion. At the leve l of individual allusion , a notabl y bol d compariso n betwee n Joan o f Arc and th e invincibl e prophetes s Debora h o f Judges 4—5 , fo r whom eve n the stars in their courses fought, an d to whom all Israel rallied to defea t the Canaanites, figures in 1 Henry F/(1.2.104—5). An important elemen t in th e presentatio n o f Richard II I - wit h Henr y V I on e of the two Shakespeare character s wh o most frequentl y quot e th e Bible - i s his way o f 'positivel y impersonating , wit h mischievou s exhilaration , th e unscrupulous Apostle [Paul ] o f the Gentiles' , a feature develope d fro m a singl e episod e i n More' s History of King Richard III (Carnal l 1963:

49

Bible, The 188). Measure for Measure i s tided, an d i n some sense conceived, through Matthew 7:2 , 'with what measure ye mete, it shalbe measured unto you againe' (thoug h the phrase was proverbial, its biblical origins are mad e clearly relevant to the play, including the Old Testament ideas it echoes, of just retributio n an d th e virtu e o f moderation) . Th e traditio n o f drama o n the Prodiga l So n theme which underlies the relationshi p of Hal and Falstaffwas alread y old by the 1590s , and it might therefore be thought unnecessary to invoke the Bible direcdy to explain what Shakespeare i s doin g there ; bu t th e terminolog y o f 'reformation ' an d 'redeeming' i n Hal' s soliloqu y at th e en d o f 1. 2 (with his 'Redeemin g time' compar e especiall y Eph . 5 : 1 6 an d Col . 4 : 5 , 'Redeeming / redeeme th e season ' i n Tomson , 'tyme ' i n som e othe r Tudo r Bibles ) clearly plays its part in Hal's adoption o f this scriptural role. So it is that 'Hal's succes s i n persuadin g hi s subject s o f hi s transformatio n . . . depends upon th e consciou s manipulation o f the religiou s convictions of his age' (Scragg 1996: 23). Finally at the leve l of the complet e play, The Merchant of Venice is in th e Shakespeare canon the most thoroughgoing use of the Bible - a work in which Shakespear e 'ver y evidentl y taxe d hi s Scriptura l knowledge ' (Noble 1935 : 96) . No t onl y doe s th e mai n plo t revolv e aroun d th e confrontation o f the Old Law and the New - wit h som e vexed inter pretative issue s carefull y explore d i n Antonio' s debat e wit h Shyloc k over the episode, obscure for most modern readers but evidendy not for Shakespeare's audience , 'whe n Jacob grazed hi s uncle Laban' s sheep ' in Genesi s 3 0 (1.3.63-86) ; th e narrativ e proceed s throug h biblica l allusions of many other kind s which can onl y be glancingl y illustrated here. Th e mai n plo t itsel f can b e sai d t o generat e opposition s i n th e play a t wha t medieva l theologian s woul d hav e calle d a n allegorica l level, 'symboliz[ing ] th e confrontatio n of Judaism an d Christianit y a s theological system s . . . an d als o a s historic societies ' (Lewalsk i 1962 : 331) - thoug h i t is debatable ho w much o f this would have been per ceptible to Shakespeare's audience . The Launcelot-Gobbo exchange in 2.2 see s Launcelo t unwittingl y re-enacting tw o popula r Bibl e stories, Jacob's deception o f his blind fathe r Isaac , an d the deception practise d by Joseph's brother s (Gen . 27 , 37) . And th e biblica l connotation s o f Portia a s both Shyloc k and Gratian o imagin e her , 'a Daniel' (4.1.218) , 'a second Daniel' (4.1.329), are several. A Daniel was a wise and uprigh t person i n referenc e to th e Apocrypha l Boo k o f Susanna . Bu t i n th e Book of the Prophe t Daniel , th e nam e wa s glossed in Tudor Bible s as 50

Bible, The 'the Judgement o f God', and , accordin g to both th e Genev a an d th e Bishops' Bible, Daniel's praye r (Daniel 9: 18 ) shows how 'the godly flee unto god s mercie s . . . when the y seek e for remissio n o f their sinnes' . Even Portia' s disguis e a s 'Balthasar ' i s probably owin g t o th e nam e 'Baltassar' unde r whic h Danie l goe s i n th e sam e Boo k (se e Lewalski 1962: 340-1) . (D) Ther e ar e man y account s o f th e Englis h Bible' s developmen t to Shakespeare' s time , includin g Hammon d (1982) , Daniel l (1999) , and th e shor t treatment s in Nobl e (1935) , Shahee n (1999 ) and , wit h diversely literar y emphases , Norto n (1993) . O n Shakespear e himself , Noble (1935 ) raise s a variet y o f important genera l issue s i n hi s earl y chapters, then assemble s an admirabl y restraine d listin g of echoes play by play and scen e by scene. Milward (1987 ) covers the fou r Bradleya n tragedies i n simila r fashion , bu t addin g summarie s fo r eac h pla y an d consistently claimin g mor e biblica l influenc e tha n Noble . Shahee n (1999) i s at botto m a n expansio n o f Noble a t a lengt h o f nearly 90 0 pages, it s bul k a comprehensiv e play-by-pla y treatmen t (involvin g some 1,04 0 biblica l references) , distinguishe d b y effort s t o tak e int o account othe r possibl e sources of what appear s to be biblica l materia l in eac h play , an d b y wha t fo r a t leas t som e purpose s i s a n over generous interpretation o f 'biblical' - t o include, for example, phrase ology based ultimately on a biblical passage. Both Noble an d Shahee n provide a n inde x o f biblica l text s an d a discussio n o f Shakespeare' s use o f differen t version s of th e Bible . Fry e (1963 ) i s no t strictl y con cerned with the Bible, but with commonplace theologica l theme s such as Atonement , Death , th e Devil , an d th e Parliamen t o f Heave n a t which ma n i s judged, which , however , ar e ofte n expresse d mos t not ably for Shakespeare in biblical passages. Marx (2000), on a selection of five major plays , develops new, often highl y speculative suggestion s on matters o f patterning, a t man y differen t level s (for example wit h The Tempest, Prosper o a s th e Joseph o f Genesis , th e masqu e a s revelator y vision, the play' s Firs t Foli o positioning paralleling th e stor m wit h th e Creation). Many more short articles and notes tracing echoes of biblical phraseology, etc., can be found i n journals such as N&Q. Anderson, Dougla s (1985) . 'Th e Ol d Testamen t Presenc e i n The Merchant of Venice: ELH 52 : 119-32 . Baldwin (1944). 51

Bible, The Boose, Lynda E. (1981). 'Othello's "Chrysolite" and the Son g of Songs Tradition.' P£60: 427-37. Burnet, R . A . L . (1979) . 'Shakespear e an d th e Marginali a o f th e Geneva Bible.' N&QJ2.W: 113-14 . (1980). 'Som e Echoe s o f the Geneva n Bibl e in Shakespear e an d Milton.' N&QJ2.25: 179-81 . (1981). 'Tw o Furthe r Echoe s o f th e Geneva n Margi n i n Shakespeare and Milton. ' JVic», « -venuemperfonnages, fe faut frendre garde a la JllcndcHr de leurt enures, fans s'arrefteran babil,

Sit

Figure 5 Claud e Paradin, Les Devices Heroiques (Anvers, 1562) , fo. 100 V

144

Emblems model. A considerable body of theoretical discussion of the subjec t also emerged in the later sixteenth century, and emblems began to figure, in Europe generally , i n decorativ e scheme s i n othe r media , includin g plaster, tapestr y an d paintings . Dram a i s sometimes said t o b e intrin sically allie d t o th e emble m becaus e i t combine s th e verba l an d th e visual. Regular context s for the us e of emblems in England i n the later sixteenth centur y an d beyon d als o includ e civi c pageantry , roya l entrances, masques and chivalric ceremonial. The las t was the home of a specia l type of emblem, the imprese which were presented t o th e presiding lord or monarch by each knight participatin g in a tournament. As i n th e fictiona l example s i n Sidney's Arcadia o r Spenser's Faerie Queene, a knight's impresa consiste d of a personal motto an d emblemati c representation o f hi s hope s an d intention s o n th e occasion , painte d onto a pasteboar d shiel d (fo r a ful l stud y se e Youn g 1987) . I n 161 3 Shakespeare was paid t o compose a n impresa fo r the Earl of Rutland. (B) Geoffre y Whitney' s A Choice of Emblemes, and Other Devises, 1586 , i s often describe d a s the first printed emble m book in England. Thi s is in some sens e an anthology : Gree n (1870: 252 ) showed tha t o f the 24 8 woodcuts, 20 2 ar e printe d fro m block s previously used b y the printe r Plantin fo r book s b y Alciati , Hadria n Junius , Claud e Paradi n an d Joannes Sambucus . Th e culture d English-speakin g reade r als o ha d direct access to the work of such writers as these through the enormously larger outpu t o f emble m materia l fro m continenta l presses ; ther e i s ample evidence of the diffusio n i n Britain of French, Italian an d Dutc h emblem books , a s wel l a s man y Lati n examples . Th e firs t printe d emblem boo k o f wholly English origi n wa s Andrew Willet's Century of Sacred Emblems of 1598 . Within three years of Whitney's 158 6 volume, Puttenham's Arte of English Poesie devotes a whole chapter t o emblems : the growt h i n thei r popularity in England is rapid. Whitney was also used by William Byrd, who se t five of his emblem s as madrigals i n hi s Psalms, Songs and Sonnets (1586), and elsewhere in the 1580 s and 1590 s in decorative application s in silverwar e an d paintin g (see Bath 1994 : 86-9). T o th e late r Eliza bethans, 'emble m writin g wa s a gentlemanl y accomplishmen t o f th e same type as the abilit y to play the lut e or t o dance th e lavolta ' (Freeman 1967 : 3). For the poet or playwright, their presence in everyday life made it impossible to ignore them. Sometime s this means a playwright alludes t o individua l emblem s h e knows : Marston's The Malcontent 145

Emblems

(1603) make s referenc e t o a devic e o f a bea r lickin g he r youn g int o shape foun d i n Horapollo' s Hieroglyphica an d elsewhere , to a n emble m of th e eagl e an d th e tortois e (perhap s derive d fro m Sidney' s Arcadia)., and t o the ivy destroying the tree which has helped i t to mount (foun d emblematically i n several sources; references for all three item s in Praz 1964: 216-17). At other times it means a playwright draws more or less directly o n th e emble m convention : Chapman's tragedies , fo r example, us e it directly fo r elaborate emblematica l description s whic h include 'speakin g picture' , interpretatio n an d mora l lesson . Earlie r plays ha d anticipate d hi s manner i n cruder form s - th e anonymou s Locrine (1590s) , fo r instance , provide d a n emblem , wit h motto , t o precede eac h Act. Less direct appropriation s o f the conventio n shad e off int o th e us e o f 'emblematic' form s suc h a s dumb show s (see Mehl 1969), and various kinds of what is sometimes unsatisfactorily called a n 'emblematic style' . Imprese device s als o foun d thei r wa y int o plays : Middleton uses some elaborately in Your Five Gallants. Jonson was happy to refe r t o emblem motto s in his plays as well as masques, but h e parodies th e conventio n i n Cynthia's Revels, in the burlesque episode in which prizes are awarded for courtly compliments: For the bar e Accost, tw o Wall-eyes, i n a face forced : For the bette r Reguard, a Fac e favorabl y simpring, wit h a Fann e waving : Fo r the solemne Addresse, two Lips wagging, and never a wise word: For the perfect Close , a Wring by the hand, with a Banquet in a corner. (5.3.106-10; ed. Herford and Simpso n 1925-51 : iv, 138) Marston's madca p characte r Balurd o i n Antonio and Mellida (159 9 o r 1600) also pokes fun a t the vogu e for imprese. Emblems in general ofte n cultivate esotericism ; imprese an d th e book s which depicte d the m were intended to summon up a world of feudal patronage, and their exclusivity is reflected i n literature : onl y th e princes s understands Musidorus ' jewel 'mad e i n th e figur e o f crab-fish ' i n Sidney' s Arcadia, an d onl y Maecenas, no t th e foolis h Lupus , understand s Horace' s impresa i n Jonson's Poetaster. (C) It is often claime d tha t Shakespeare' s work is influenced formally o r structurally b y emblem writers : elements of his imagery, iconography, stage presentatio n an d stag e properties hav e been approache d i n thi s way. Suc h influence is perfectly possible, though there is little consensus 146

Emblems about it . Bu t thes e phenomen a d o no t lea d bac k t o an y particular emblem boo k o r author , eve n o n som e occasion s whe n Shakespear e makes referenc e t o a particula r (bu t widel y known ) emble m (on e example is the weeping stag which the melancholy Jacques watched, As You Like It 2.1.33ff.: se e Bath 1986) . Thus they may be attributable mor e to the effect o f widespread ways of thinking and writing - describe d by such terms as 'Renaissance iconography' - tha n to the direct reading of emblem literatur e o n Shakespeare' s part . Th e presen t discussio n i s therefore oriente d in other directions . A direct, light-hearted referenc e to the emblem convention generall y occurs in The Two Noble Kinsmen: Emilia contend s that a rose is the very emblem o f a maid For when the west wind courts her gently, How modestly she blows, and paints the sun With her chaste blushes! When the north come s near her, Rude and impatient, then , like chastity, She locks her beauties in her bud again , And leaves him to base briers. , good madam, WOMAN Yet Sometimes her modest y will blow so far She falls for't - a maid, If she have any honor, would be loath To take example by her.

(2.2.137-47)

Surprisingly, thi s is the onl y metaphorical use of the word 'emblem ' in the Shakespear e cano n (th e only tw o othe r example s refe r t o actual , physical emblems). As often i n other writers, the term is applied her e to the pictoria l elemen t alone , excep t tha t Emili a i s also thinkin g o f th e type o f fable whic h th e picture s illustrated. Ther e i s no cal l t o see k a particular emblematic source for Emilia's suggestion. As has almos t alway s been recognized , Shakespear e rarel y borrow s directly fro m emble m writers , bu t a passag e i n whic h multipl e borrowings of impresa mottos occur is the tournamen t scen e in Pericles: SIMONIDES 'Ti s no w your honour, daughter , t o entertain The labou r of each knight in his device. THAIS A Which , t o preserve mine honour, I'll perform. 147

Emblems Enter a Knight; he passes over, and his Squire presents his shield to the Princess. SIMONIDES Wh o i s the first that doth prefer himself ? Knight o f Sparta, my renowned father ; THAIS A A And the device he bears upon his shield Is a black Ethiope reaching at the Sun; The word, 'Lux tua vita mihi'. SIMONIDES H e love s you well that holds his life o f you. The Second Knight passes by. THAISA A

Who i s the second that presents himself? Prince of Macedon, m y royal father; And the device he bears upon his shield Is an arm'd knight that's conquer'd b y a lady; The mott o thus, in Spanish, 'Piu por dulzura que por fuerza' .

The Third Knight passes by. SIMONIDES An d what's the third? THAISA Th e thir d of Antioch; And his device a wreath of chivalry; The word, 'Me pompae provexit apex'. The Fourth Knight passes by. SIMONIDES Wha t is the fourth ? THAISA A burning torch that's turned up-side down; The word, 'Quod me alit, me extinguit'. SIMONIDES Whic h shows that beauty hath his power and will, Which can a s well inflame as it can kill. The Fifth Knight passes by. THAISA Th

e fifth, an hand environed with clouds, Holding out gold that's by the touchstone tried; The motto thus, 'Sic spectanda fides'.

PERICLES as Sixth Knight passes by. 148

Emblems

SIMONIDES An d what's the sixth and last, the which the knight himsel f With such a graceful courtes y deliver'd? THAIS A H e seeme s to be a stranger; but hi s present is A withered branch, that' s only green at top; The motto , 'In hac spe vivo'.

(2.2.14-44)

Real-life source s for thes e imprese have bee n found . Th e firs t knight' s motto was that o f the Bloun t family o f Worcestershire, and woul d have been accompanie d b y a visua l devic e (o f unknow n form ) i n som e contexts; Pericles ' impresa ha s bee n identifie d wit h on e compose d b y Sir Philip Sidney, and so on. This leads Young (1985) to conclude that Shakespeare was familiar with at least one printed collectio n of imprese, perhaps The Heroicall Devices ofM. Claudius Paradin Englished i n 159 2 b y 'P. S.' . Fig . 5 shows the versio n of the Fift h Knight' s emble m foun d i n the 156 2 French versio n o f Paradin's Devises Heroiques (for the rang e of possible Shakespearean sources here see Young 1985: 455). On man y occasion s o f possible referenc e t o emblems , however , i t is much less clear how far Shakespeare is alluding to particular examples . When, fo r instance, Hamlet' s comparison o f Rosencrantz an d courtier s in genera l t o a spong e (4.2.12-16 ) i s relate d t o Alciat i o r Whitney' s emblem o f a king squeezin g out a spong e an d th e courtier s wh o suck their sustenance from him , the similarit y is too limited to give evidence of Shakespeare' s readin g - the analog y wa s commonplace, an d not original wit h Alciat i o r Whitney . The fac t tha t Hamle t himsel f spells out his meaning in using it also makes the passage work independently of an y emble m th e audienc e migh t o r migh t no t cal l t o mind . Wit h Othello's word s o n enterin g the roo m t o murde r Desdemona , ligh t in hand - 'Put out the light, and then put out the light' (5.2.7) - th e case is slightly different. Horapollo' s Hieroglyphica had include d an emblem of a lighted lam p a s symbolizing life, bu t mor e specificall y relevant ar e th e many emblemati c instance s o f th e moti f o f a torc h brin g quenched , and th e frequen t association , a s in the Fourt h Knight' s emblem i n th e Pericles scene, above, with the power of love and beaut y to induce either joy or despair. Thu s in Shakespeare's scen e 'w e are presented no t onl y with an emble m o f the fragilit y o f the transienc e of human lif e bu t als o with a n emble m o f the paradoxica l power s o f love' (Youn g 1976 : 6). Yet, whil e this may b e take n as an indicatio n o f the association s some members o f an early seventeenth-century audienc e might have brought 149

Emblems

to this moment i n the play, once again this information does not necessarily revea l tha t Shakespear e wa s acquainte d wit h thi s particula r emblem tradition. Attempts to discover instances of Shakespeare working from particu lar emblem s are almos t alway s dogged b y uncertainty. An image i n a n emblem boo k reminds a commentato r o f a scen e in Shakespeare ; th e commentator the n does his or her best to discover reasons why Shakespeare migh t hav e know n th e emble m - thi s i s no t a promisin g procedure, thoug h som e suc h argument s (e.g . Butler 1984 ) are bette r than others . Elsewhere , th e likel y availabilit y o f a n emble m boo k t o Shakespeare prompt s th e revers e process; neither Richard s (1980 ) no r Waddington (1976 ) is convincing as to th e effec t o f individual Whitne y emblems on th e Sonnets and The Merchant of Venice. With Shakespeare a s with other writers, then, 'excep t in rare instance s the attempt t o estab lish specific literary or iconographical indebtednes s [t o an emblem] ca n be misleading . I n mos t case s th e parallel s ar e valuabl e chiefl y a s parallels an d nothin g more; the commonplaces a s commonplaces, an d precisely because they are such' (Steadman 1979 : 32). (D) Praz (1964 ) provides a broad stud y of emblem writing as such (with full primar y bibliography) , an d o f emblemati c imager y a s foun d i n early moder n Europea n an d Englis h literature . Bat h (1994 ) i s a ful l recent study of the Englis h emblem tradition . O n Shakespeare , Gree n (1870) was pioneering, bu t hi s over-enthusiasm leads to arbitrariness in claiming emble m influence , an d t o th e play s being treate d merel y as arenas fo r source-hunting . Som e problem s an d pitfall s o f identifyin g emblematic materia l i n Shakespear e ar e usefull y discusse d b y Pete r Daly i n Fabiny 1984 : 156-75 . The bibliograph y belo w includes a few examples o f critica l literatur e o n th e forma l o r structura l us e o f emblems in Shakespeare, not related to any particular emblem book he may hav e know n (suc h a s Mannin g 1994) , an d o n emblem s a s analogues fo r Shakespear e (Simond s 199 2 is unusual among the m i n dealing wit h emblemati c an d relate d aspect s o f a singl e pla y a t boo k length). A mor e comprehensiv e bibliograph y ca n b e foun d i n Dal y 1993, in five sections: Bibliographies; General Articles on the Emblem ; The Emble m a s Genr e an d Form ; Shakespeare , Imager y an d th e Visual Arts; Specialized Studies of Shakespeare. Andresen, Martha (1974) . '"Ripeness is all": Sententia e an d Common 150

Emblems places in King Lear, pp. 145-6 8 in Rosalie L . Colie and F . T. Flahiff , eds, Some Facets of King Lear: Essays in Prismatic Criticism. London. Bath, Michae l (1986) . 'Weepin g Stag s an d Melanchol y Lovers : Th e Iconography of As You Like It II. i' Emblematica 1 : 13-52 . (1994). Speaking Pictures: English Emblem Books and Renaissance Culture. London. Butler, Gu y (1984) . 'Shakespeare' s Clif f a t Dove r an d a n Emble m Illustration.' HLQj^l: 226-31 . Daly, Peter M. (1993) . Teaching Shakespeare and the Emblem: A Lecture and a Bibliography. Acadia . Dundas, Judit h (1983) . 'Shakespeare' s Imagery : Emble m an d th e Imitation o f Nature.' ShSt 16 : 45-56. Fabiny, Tibor, ed . (1984) . Shakespeare and the Emblem: Studies in Renaissance Iconography and Iconology. Szeged , Hungary. Freeman, Rosemar y (1967) . English Emblem Books. Londo n (firs t published 1948) . Green, Henr y (1870) . Shakespeare and the Emblem Writers. London. Herford, C. H., Percy and Evelyn Simpson, eds (1925-51). Benjonson, 8 vols. Oxford. Hoyle, James (1971) . 'Som e Emblems in Shakespeare's Henry /FPlays. ' ££7/38:512-27. Iwasaki, Soj i (1973) . 'Veritas filia temporis an d Shakespeare. ' ELR 3 : 249-63. Manning, John (1994) . 'Symbola an d Emblemata in Hamlet\ pp . 11-1 8 in Mark Thornto n Burnet t an d Joh n Manning , eds , New Essays on 'Hamlet'. Ne w York . Mehl, Dieter (1969). 'Emblems in English Renaissance Drama.' RenD 2: 39-57. Pellegrini, G. (1964). 'Symbols and Significances : "All such emblems".' ShSu 17 : 180-7 . Praz, Mari o (1964) . Studies in Seventeenth-Century Imagery. Londo n (firs t published 1939 , expanded 1947) . Richards, Bernar d (1980). 'Whitney' s Influenc e o n Shakespeare' s Sonnets 11 1 an d 112 , an d o n Donne' s Thir d Satire. ' JV U K bobies laie ffarkc nabca tnttll tocDiicfoaic. iDn ifrfcon&t faitebtbecarteflo f ^arteanb/aaeonbjiBge.anotbe th e tiUtrb tune omerfc o f ttje noble men tor n con * lo»Boftourait,aj«of£lnnc,U)ilt)th:punB?«imcn ucie o into tbeir countries, ana the remnant lucre b? of acmrs, bio bat aU (tat Bait kepttogdbcr, but {ibiliprarlc<Ebarolo(s;fo:e!am e ntingt&ecbanrc,ano note Qatncano beaten Dotoneoot of bano. ifeome ma>uebtmr&pttte)ntbuuhingbellraK » *r«u(H t^t Bm 9 lreinameo from tlj e campe at agincour t toantlitretcnc o from bisenlnriw ifofaningbislife , SSr« !T( lCal"'' B|"«ft^c»|l»nencamctothefielD caufcBb:i n tob e eonueiebont of n*figtrt,int o a te?{pbS ^toasainc^oeaBboBiMiimBftepo^o f plac e of mojcfafttie. f EhebbolecuBcrofftwcon . Ab,.w . oar« 4nrt>u. *M^«cJpolleD«ecarcaae«ofallfti4)aB»arc U B(ttt*utcottmanicamansliTc,anOpjocorcBgrea t ^«"^Rc, lftcrof anBotbertbingflutb e Gnglifbmen ha o left: dti o MOOTEDiKfoettnjaaenBcB,isUuelicBefcribeoi n bf*"*1 '• «««.. t»Uenonjingbutgol«ai«Qlarr,ieVwl5,rUbfl|parct t ^W^4< ;tib««airo,bcaD« tbe manner of o(> fpOiTrtg

Figure 7 Raphae l Holinshed, The Third Volume of Chronicles (London , 1587) , p. 555 (actua l siz e 350 X 228 mm).

Holinshed, Raphael

caried awai e caskets , an d slu e suc h servant s a s they foun d t o mak e anie resistance. Fo r which treaso n and haskardie in thus leaving their campe a t the verie point o f fight, for winning o f spoil where none t o defend it , verie manie wer e afte r committe d t o prison, an d ha d los t their lives, if the Dolphin ha d longe r lived. But when the outcrie of the lackies and boies, which ran awai e for feare o f the Frenchme n thu s spoiling th e campe , cam e t o th e king s eares, h e doubtin g leas t hi s enimie s shoul d gathe r togithe r againe , and begi n a ne w field ; an d mistrustin g furthe r tha t th e prisoner s would be an aid to his enimies, or the verie enimies to their taker s in deed i f they wer e suffere d t o live , contrari e t o hi s accustome d gen tlenes, commande d b y soun d o f trumpet , tha t everi e ma n (upo n paine o f death ) shoul d incontinentli e slai e hi s prisoner . Whe n thi s dolorous decree , an d pitiful l proclamatio n wa s pronounced, piti e i t was to see how some Frenchmen were suddenlie sticked with daggers , some were brained wit h pollaxes, som e slain e with malls , othe r ha d their throat s cut , an d som e thei r bellie s panched, s o that i n effect , having respect to the great number, few prisoners were saved. When thi s lamentabl e slaughte r wa s ended, th e Englishme n dis posed themselve s in order o f battell, readie t o abide a new field, and also to invade, an d newli e set on thei r enimies , with great forc e the y assailed th e carle s o f Mari e an d Fauconbridge , an d th e lord s o f Lauraie, an d o f Thine, with si x hundred me n o f armes, who had al l that daie kept togither, but now slaine and beaten down e out of hand. ^jSome write , tha t th e kin g perceiving hi s enimies i n on e par t t o assemble togither , a s thoug h the y mean t t o giv e a ne w battel l fo r preservation o f the prisoners , sen t to the m a n herald , commandin g them eithe r t o depar t ou t o f hi s sight , o r els e t o com e forwar d a t once, an d giv e battell : promisin g herewith , tha t i f they di d offe r t o fight againe, no t onelie those prisoners which his people alreadi e ha d taken; bu t als o s o manie o f them a s in this new conflict , whic h the y thus attempte d shoul d fal l int o hi s hands , shoul d di e th e deat h without redemption . The Frenchme n fearin g the sentenc e of so terrible a decree, with out furthe r delai e parte d ou t o f the field. And s o about four e o f the clocke i n th e afte r noone , th e kin g whe n h e sa w no apperanc e o f enimies, cause d th e retrei t t o b e blowen ; an d gatherin g hi s armi e togither, gav e thank s t o almighti e Go d fo r s o happi e a victorie , causing hi s prelats an d chaplein s t o sin g this psalme: In esitu Israel de 244

Holinshed, Raphael Aegypto, an d commande d everi e man t o kneele downe on the ground at thi s verse: Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo daglonam. Which doone, he caused Te Deum, with certeine anthems t o be soong , giving laud an d prais e t o God , without boasting o f his owne forc e o r ani e humane power. (Holinshed 1587 : in, 554) (C) Shakespear e use d th e 158 7 editio n o f Holinshed, an d use d i t a s a source for over a third o f his plays: all ten earlie r Histories , thos e later plays drawing on English historical material King Lear, Macbeth and Cymbeline, the likel y collaborations Edward III and Henry VIII (but se e Stow), perhaps also in revising Sir Thomas More. Th e swee p of the vas t Chron icle ca n b e exciting , an d Shakespear e evidentl y took it up no t onl y or even perhaps primarily a s a reference tool, but for wide and enthusiastic browsing a t leas t afte r Henry VI, wher e th e us e o f Holinshe d i s restricted. Thi s readin g migh t even , b y linking the War s o f the Rose s with the arriva l o f Elizabeth's age of'concord' an d 'unity' , have 'given Shakespeare hi s cu e fo r hi s civi l wa r plays ' (Jone s 1977 : 122). Once embarked o n a play , an d wit h othe r source-material s t o hand , i t may well be tha t Shakespear e dipped an d skimme d in Holinshed, allowin g himself to be guide d b y the margina l note s and b y what happene d t o fall unde r hi s ey e (Blac k 1948 : 212-1 3 perform s som e calculation s regarding suc h matter s a s ho w muc h tim e wa s require d t o rea d th e sections involved). In an y case, it is obvious that a playwright can onl y make successful us e of it by rigorous exclusion. Richard I I ascended th e throne in the Chronicle in 1377 , but Shakespeare's pla y begins in 1398, two years before th e en d o f his reign. I n Henry IV, Holinshed's accoun t of events during Bolingbroke' s kingship i s virtually narrowed dow n t o the rebellions , an d thre e o f thes e ar e telescope d int o one . On othe r occasions Shakespeare' s suppression o f what Holinshed says has a more specific dramati c purpose . Where th e Chronicl e clearl y identified the envy o f th e Percie s an d th e King' s fea r o f Mortimer' s righ t t o th e throne a s th e reason s fo r th e behaviou r o f thes e individuals , Shake speare cloud s these matters i n the opening scenes of 1 Henry /Fs o as to allow a fuller treatmen t of the ethics of rebellion and usurpation. Corresponding to the omissions and contractions, there are of course many idea s i n th e Shakespear e play s no t foun d i n Holinshed . Shake speare virtually invents the Bastard in King John (see Braunmuller 1988) , and i n Richard //John o f Gaunt. I n Henry /FHa l and Hotspu r (owing, 245

Holinshed, Raphael

it seems , to th e influenc e o f Daniel) becom e contemporarie s an d s o parallel figures , wherea s i n th e Chronicl e Hotspu r wa s a generatio n older. Suc h change s ar e importan t 'i n tracin g source s an d analyzin g dramatic technique'; but a s Lily B. Campbell wrote (1947: 229), making Henry, the rebel, to be plagued by rebellion; showin g Henry, the regicide, as hoping vainly to placate an avenging King of kings by a pilgrimag e t o th e Hol y Land ; picturin g Henry , th e usurper , a s sorrowing ove r hi s disobedien t so n an d fearfu l tha t h e ma y tr y t o supplant him : these change s indicat e th e mora l univers e in whic h Shakespeare set his characters and giv e meaning to the plot. This observatio n i s a reminde r tha t th e meaning s o f Shakespeare' s historical plots do not come primarily from hi s historical sources. The relevan t later Shakespeare plays use Holinshed i n various ways. Law (1952 ) give s a tabulatio n o f th e Holinshe d correspondence s i n Macbeth (thoug h sometimes the sourc e may wel l be on e o f the Chron icle's own sources, used directly; see Buchanan), as well as thirty-fiv e incidents i n th e pla y whic h ar e no t foun d i n Holinshed . Ther e ar e indeed many telling changes to the narrative: Muir (1990 : xxxvii) even suggests that the Chronicle's marginalia, whic h 'read almost like a running commentary on the play', may have been more decisive for Shakespeare tha n th e narrativ e itself . I n Holinshe d Dunca n i s younger an d weaker, while Macbeth, thoug h cruel, is assertive enough both to assist Duncan befor e hi s murder an d t o rule satisfactoril y for ten year s afte r it. Macbeth' s possibl y justifiable grievance s agains t Dunca n an d hi s collusion with Banquo in the murder are, of course, omitted altogether, while Lady Macbeth's par t is worked out from a single sentence to the effect tha t sh e 'lay sore upon him t o attempt th e thing , as she that was very ambitious'. A number o f the play's incidents seem to derive fro m sections of the Chronicle unconnected with the Macbeth story . In bot h Lear an d Cymbeline Shakespear e work s a t a considerabl y greater distanc e fro m Holinshed . Perhap s h e distinguishe d sharpl y between the Tudor an d th e much earlier material he found there , and did not fee l obliged t o treat the latter with the respect due to history as opposed t o legend . H e doubtles s rea d Holinshed' s accoun t o f Lear' s reign, but its overall narrative outline overlaps with other accounts he is known t o have used, and the details it lends to Lear are few - thoug h some, such as Cordeilla's description of Lear as 'my naturall father' an d 246

Holinshed, Raphael

the chronicler' s o f 'th e unnaturalness e whic h h e foun d i n hi s tw o daughters', see m important . Holinshed' s narrative o f Brute, grandso n of Aeneas , whic h form s th e openin g sectio n o f hi s Englis h history , contains al l the historica l o r pseudo-historica l matte r tha t appear s i n Cymbeline, a n 'accoun t o f a reig n s o uneventfu l tha t i t ha d defeate d the inventiv e powers o f generation s o f quit e imaginativ e chroniclers ' (Nosworthy 1969 : xviii). But again, apar t from supplyin g the name s of most o f the character s (an d incidentally o f lago in addition : Woodso n 1978), ther e i s littl e specifi c i n thi s us e o f Holinshed . Muc h o f 3.1 , depicting th e defianc e o f Caesar' s ambassado r b y 'Kymbeline' , an d some o f th e repor t o f th e battl e i n 5.3 , reflec t th e Chronicl e text , though the latter scene is transposed by Shakespeare fro m a completely different par t o f Holinshed's boo k dealin g wit h th e Scottis h defea t of the Dane s i n AD 976. (This, an d th e fac t tha t th e name s borrowed fo r Cymbeline ar e widely distributed in the Chronicle , suggest s the browsing habits o f Shakespear e a s a reade r o f Holinshed. ) Les s direct , but , i f accepted, mor e important link s are als o suggested for Cymbeline: Shake speare's story is 'not owed to, but consonant with the strange adventures of Brute' (Brockbank 1958: 43); he 'echoes' the attitudes towards Rome which he discovere d in the Chronicl e an d ma y have 'foun d withi n his historical material the suggestion s of a romance' (Rossi 1978: 111) . Henry VIII i s ofte n sai d t o sho w a dependenc e unusua l fo r Shake speare o n th e actua l words of the 158 7 Chronicle, fro m appropriatio n of single expressions in marginal comment s (suc h a s the unusua l word 'arrogancy' whic h is imported int o a speech of Katherine's a t 2.4.110 ) to clos e following of whole speeches. Anderson (1984 : 131 ) argues this away, wherea s fo r othe r commentator s i t give s rise to 'th e frightening specter o f creativity i n abeyance', exorcised b y 'claiming that the play condenses th e disordere d largess e of Holinshed int o a tightl y focusse d and causall y satisfyin g drama ' (Patterso n 1996 : 148) . Bu t Henry VIII uses more procedures than one in refashioning the Holinshed material . For example, a s well as following the absolut e necessit y of condensin g and unifying , th e play transposes incidents from on e historical episod e to anothe r t o sui t the dramatist' s purpose . Wolsey' s downfall throug h mistakenly sending the king an inventory of his goods is in fact reported by Holinshe d o f Thoma s Ruthall , Bisho p o f Durham , whos e deat h Wolsey brough t about . Th e pla y als o combine s Holinshed' s materia l with the work of other historians (definitely Foxe, arguably Hall, Speed, and Stow) . Even th e speeche s which are littl e more tha n versifications 247

Holinshed., Raphael

of Holinshed 'sho w characteristi c emphase s o r addition s tha t mak e a dramatic poin t or give shape to the material' (Foakes 1968 : xxxvii, with examples; Foakes ' Appendi x n contain s al l main Holinshe d passage s used for the play) . And amon g othe r shift s o f tone an d interpretation , the sympatheti c light in which Wolsey and Buckingha m are presented in their falls seems to be entirely Shakespeare's own. Many account s of Shakespeare's us e of Holinshed's Chronicl e urg e his overall 'freedom ' or , alternatively, his 'indebtedness'. Both descrip tions ar e correc t i n differin g respects . Given th e drasti c selectio n o f a small segmen t of Holinshed's narrative , Shakespear e ofte n follow s th e sequence of events with great scrupulousness, but this is not remarkabl e - 'Fo r the most part [i n Richard II\ h e does what anyone attempting t o dramatize historica l narrativ e woul d b e force d t o do : h e select s th e scenes b y mean s o f which th e stor y migh t b e acted ; i n term s o f th e narrative itself , he both compresses and expands ' (Trousdale 1982 : 66). The litera l us e o f Holinshe d i s no t seldo m responsible , i n fact , fo r anomalies i n th e pla y texts , a s Trousdal e goe s on t o illustrate . A s for offering ne w perspective s an d interpretation s (a s oppose d t o ne w material), Shakespeare' s 'varying ' o f his theme s will normally lea d t o the discovery of new topics in the story , but this does not mean tha t the plays dramatiz e variou s views of history where th e Chronicl e offere d only one , fo r th e Chronicl e wa s alread y multivoca l — Holinshed's preface gav e notic e tha t h e ha d 'chose n t o she w th e diversitie ' o f opinion amon g hi s predecessor s (Holinshe d 1587 : in , sig . AS") , an d his collaborator s di d likewise . Hence i n usin g the 158 7 volum e 'wha t Shakespeare had befor e hi m as he wrote was a lively representation of how historian s diverg e o n th e issu e of evaluation, an d ho w strenuous is th e pul l o f ideologica l bias ' (Patterso n 1996 : 150) . I n thi s sense , some a t leas t of the freedo m o f interpretation an d emphasi s found i n Shakespeare's use of Holinshed was already exemplified there. (D) Boswell-Ston e (1907 ) an d Nicol l (1927 ) arrang e selection s fro m Holinshed i n the chronological orde r o f Shakespeare's plays, making it easy to find a passage from th e corresponding lines in a play, the former with runnin g quotatio n fro m an d commentar y o n the relevan t Shake speare histor y play s an d a n especiall y usefu l inde x t o personage s and events. Hosley (1968) uses Holinshed's chronological order instead, giving mor e o f the sequence , flavou r an d forma t o f Holinshed's ow n work. Boot h (1968 ) an d Patterso n (1994 ) ar e ver y differen t full-lengt h 248

Holinshed, Raphael treatments of Holinshed's volume , seen in recent years as a more self conscious an d sophisticate d wor k in it s own right. Col e (1973 : 36-55 ) asks simpl e bu t importan t question s abou t wha t typ e o f insight s th e study of Holinshed ca n giv e rise to. For individual plays and group s of plays, see below. BuUough; Jones (1977); Tillyar d (1944) . Anderson, Judit h H . (1984) . Biographical Truth: The Representation of Historical Persons in Tudor-Stuart Writing. Ne w Haven . Beer, Jurgen (1992) . 'Th e Imag e o f a King : Henr y VII I i n the Tudo r Chronicles of Edward Hal l an d Raphae l Holinshed' , pp. 129-4 9 in Uwe Baumann , ed. , Henry VIII in History, Historiography and Literature. Frankfurt. Black, Matthe w W . (1948) . 'Th e Source s o f Shakespeare' s Richard IF, pp. 199-21 6 in James G. McManaway et al., eds, Joseph Quincy Adams Memorial Studies. Washington. Booth, Stephe n (1968) . The Book Called Holinshed's Chronicles: An Account of its Inception, Purpose, &c. San Francisco . Boswell-Stone, W. G . (1907) . Shakespeare's Holinshed: The Chronicle and the Plays Compared. London. Boyd, Bria n (1995) . 'King John an d The Troublesome Raigne: Sources , Structure, Sequence.' PQ^74: 37-56. Braunmuller, A . R . (1988) . 'King John an d Historiography. ' ELH 55 : 309-32. Brockbank, J. P . (1958). 'Histor y and Histrionic s i n Cymbeline.' ShSu 11 : 42-9. Campbell, Lil y B . (1947) . Shakespeare's "Histories": Mirrors of Elizabethan Policy. San Marino, CA . Champion, Larr y S . (1990) . 'The Noise of Threatening Drum': Dramatic Strategy and Political Ideology in Shakespeare and the English Chronicle Plays. Newark, DE. Cole, Howar d C . (1973) . A Quest of Inquirie: Some Contexts of Tudor Literature. Indianapolis . Donno, Elizabet h Stor y (1987) . 'Som e Aspect s o f Shakespeare' s Holinshed.' HLQ5Q: 229-48 . Foakes, R. A., ed. (1968). King Henry F///(Arde n Shakespeare). London (first publishe d 1957) . Goldberg, Jonathan (1987) . 'Speculations: Macbeth an d Source', pp. 38 58 in Christophe r Norri s and Richar d Machin , eds , Post-Structuralist 249

Holinshed, Raphael Readings of English Poetry. Cambridg e (als o a s pp . 242-6 4 i n Jean E . Howard, ed. , Shakespeare Reproduced: The Text in History and Ideology., New York, 1987) . Hardin, Richar d E (1989) . 'Chronicle s an d Mythmakin g i n Shake speare's Joan of Arc.' ShSu 42: 25-35. Holinshed, Raphae l (1587) . The First and Second Volumes of Chronicles . . . The Third Volume, 3 vols. London . (1807-8). Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland, 6 vols. London. Hosley, Richard , ed . (1968) . Shakespeare's Holinshed: An Edition of Holinshed's Chronicles (1587), Source of Shakespeare's History Plays, King Lear, Cymbeline, and Macbeth. Ne w York . Hunter, G . K . (1989) . 'Trut h an d Ar t i n Histor y Plays. ' ShSu 42 : 15-24. Kim, Yun-Cheo l (1989) . 'Shakespeare' s Unhistorica l Invention s an d Deviations from Holinshed, and Their Dramatic Functions in Richard II.' Journal of English Language and Literature (Seoul), 35 : 747-58 . Law, Rober t A. (1934). 'Holinshed as a Source of Henry Fan d King Lear.' University of Texas Bulletin 14 : 38-44. (1950). 'Deviations from Holinshe d in Richard II.' University of Texas Studies in English 29 : 91-101. (1952). 'Th e Compositio n of Macbeth wit h Referenc e t o Holin shed.' University of Texas Studies in English 31 : 35—41 . (1954). 'Th e Chronicle s an d th e "Thre e Parts " of Henry VI.' University of Texas Studies in English 33 : 13-32 . (1957). 'Holinshed and Henry the Eighth.' University of Texas Studies in English 36:3-11. Maley, Will y (1997) . 'Shakespeare , Holinshe d an d Ireland : Resources and Con-Texts', pp . 27-46 in Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramon a Wray, eds, Shakespeare and Ireland: History, Politics, Culture. Basingstoke. Mapstone, Sall y (1998) . 'Shakespear e an d Scottis h Kingship : A Cas e History', pp. 158-8 9 in Sall y Mapstone an d Juliette Wood , eds, The Rose and the Thistle: Essays on the Culture of Late Medieval and Renaissance Scotland. East Linton. Matheson, Liste r M . (1995) . 'Englis h Chronicl e Context s fo r Shakespeare's Deat h o f Richard II' , pp . 195-21 9 i n John A . Alford, ed. , From Page to Performance: Essays in Early English Drama. East Lansing. Muir, Kenneth , ed . (1990) . Macbeth (Arde n Shakespeare) . Walton-onThames (firs t publishe d 1951) . ed. (1972). King Lear (Arden Shakespeare). London. 250

Holinshed, Raphael Nicoll, Allardyce , an d Josephine Nicoll, ed . (1927) . Holinshed's Chronicle as used in Shakespeare's Plays. London . Norbrook, Davi d (1987) . 'Macbeth an d th e Politic s of Historiography', pp. 78-11 6 i n Kevi n Sharp e an d Steve n N. Zwicker , eds, Politics of Discourse: The Literature and History of Seventeenth-Century England. Berkeley. NosworthyJ. M., ed . (1969). Cymbeline (Arde n Shakespeare). London. Patterson, Annabel (1994). Reading Holinshed's 'Chronicles'. Chicago . (1996). '"Al l I s True" : Negotiatin g th e Pas t i n Henry Vllf, pp . 147-66 i n R . B . Parke r an d S . P . Zitner , eds , Elizabethan Theater: Essays in Honor ofS. Schoenbaum. Newark, DE . Rackin, Phylli s (1990) . Stages of History: Shakespeare's English Chronicles. London. Rossi, Joan Warchol (1978). ' Cymbeline's Deb t t o Holinshed: Th e Rich ness o f Ill.i', pp . 104—1 2 i n Caro l McGinni s Ka y an d Henr y E . Jacobs, eds, Shakespeare's Romances Reconsidered. Lincoln, NE . Tomlinson, Michae l (1984) . 'Shakespear e an d th e Chronicle s Reassessed.' Literature and History 10 : 46-58. Trousdale, Marion (1982) . Shakespeare and the Rhetoricians. London . Woodson, William C . (1978) . 'lago's Name i n Holinshed an d th e Lost English Source of Othello: JV<S?Q,223: 146-7 .

Holland, Philemon See Camden, William; Livy (Titus Livius); Pliny (Gaius Plinius Secundus); Plutarch; Suetonius (Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus). Homer (probably 8th Century BC), Greek Epic Poet (A) Homer is the shadowy figure traditionally regarded a s the author of the Iliad and Odyssey an d s o the founde r of Western epic. The Iliad deals with th e stor y o f th e Sieg e o f Tro y (Ilium) , an d th e disastrou s con sequences of the wrat h o f Achilles, champion o f the besiegin g Greeks. The Odyssey (probabl y no t know n t o Shakespear e i n an y form ; se e Baldwin 1944 : n , 660 ) narrate s Odysseus ' journe y hom e afte r th e Trojan War . Aristotle's is the classi c description o f Homer's character istics a s a poet : h e attribute s to hi m distinctio n i n al l the art s o f epic, namely hig h seriousnes s and nobility , unity o f actio n combine d wit h variety o f incident, dramati c vividnes s an d authoria l self-effacement . 251

Homer

But the Iliad ca n als o be describe d genericall y a s 'heroic tragedy': 'the Homeric-Sophoclean imag e o f th e tragi c her o [is ] th e concep t . . . usually implie d when w e spea k o f "tragedy " i n wester n literature ' (Brower 1971:80) . (B) Home r i s a relativel y late acquisitio n fo r th e Englis h Renaissance . Though hi s importance wa s recognized i n th e Middl e Ages , his work was known only at second hand throug h Latin imitations and summar ies, fo r which there was still a demand wel l into the Renaissance. Som e of thes e hav e thei r merit s - Ezr a Pound , fo r instance, use d Andrea s Divus' Odyssey (1538 ) as the basi s for his Canto I. Praise o f Homer fro m humanists such as Erasmus and Sir Thomas Elyot contributed to his establishment a s a schoo l text. It wa s usually the Iliad rathe r tha n th e Odyssey tha t wa s read i n Elizabetha n gramma r schools , often i n Lati n translation (Baldwi n 1944: n, 653-4). Homer's Iliad an d Odyssey wer e first Englished during Shakespeare' s lifetime. Variou s unpublished , small-scale , indirec t o r unsuccessfu l translations of the Iliad in the secon d half of the sixteent h century were all superseded by George Chapman's version published 1598-1611 ; his Odyssey followe d i n 1614—15 . Th e onl y par t o f Chapman' s wor k which coul d b e relevan t fo r Shakespear e i s the firs t sectio n published, the Seaven Bookes of The Iliades (i.e. Books i-n an d vn-xi ) o f 1598 ; th e rest of the translation almost certainly appeared to o late to have been a significant source , and i s largely ignored in what follows below. Chapman's metre i s the fourteener , an d hi s style is not a n eas y one. The idiosyncrati c detai l i s ap t t o obscur e syntacti c connection s an d impede narrativ e flow. His fidelity to Homer ha s been muc h debated . Chapman's Home r possesses poetic energy in abundance, but though a distinctive write r Chapma n i s here a decidedl y uneve n one . Ther e is also a clear moralizing impetus - hi s 1598 volume is dedicated 'T o the most honoure d no w living instanc e o f the Achillea n virtue s eternized by divine Homer, the Earl of Essex' - t o turn Homer into a 'mirror for princes'. Al l thes e feature s ca n b e see n i n Achilles ' fina l rebuk e t o Agamemnon i n Book i: Thou mightst esteeme me base And cowardlie to let thee use thy will in my disgrace; To beare such burthens never were my strength and spirite s combinde, But to reforme their insolence, and that th y soule should finde 252

Homer Were it not hurt of common goo d more than mine owne delight. But I, not soothing Nestor's sute, for right's sake reverence right, Which tho u dost servilely commend but violate it quite. And this even in thy intrayles print - Fi e not prophane m y hand With battell in my lust's defence: a gyrle cannot comman d My honour an d my force like thine, who yet commandes ou r hoast. Slave live he to the world that lives slave to his lusts engrost. But feed it , come, and tak e the dame; saf e g o thy violent feete , But whatsoever else thou findst aborde my sable fleete Dare no t t o touch without my leave, for feele my life mischanc e If then thy blacke and lust-burnt bloud flow not upon my Lance. (1598 text, 302-16; ed. Nicoll 1957 : i, 517-18; roman for italic) (C) Despit e commentators ' assertions , Shakespeare' s knowledg e o f Homer remain s unproven. Though there ar e in the corpus, unsurprisingly, som e reference s t o Homeri c episodes , non e ca n b e show n t o depend o n direct knowledg e o f Homer either in Greek o r in translated form. T o Brower, Chapman's Home r i s significant no t becaus e Shakespeare rea d i t bu t a s a hel p 'i n placin g an d definin g certai n attitude s and mode s of expression in the major tragedies. If Chapman's readin g of Home r i s no t Shakespeare's , i t i s a versio n b y on e o f hi s con temporaries, an d much nearer t o his reading tha n an y translation since the reig n o f James F (1971 : 78-9) . What i s meant her e is such matter s as th e penchan t fo r meditativ e analysi s share d b y Shakespeare' s an d Chapman's heroe s - 'a Renaissanc e Achille s or Hector . . . would be, for example , th e Anton y of Antony and Cleopatra' (Browe r 1971 : 80—1) . But suc h connection s ar e tenuou s i n th e extreme . Claime d verba l echoes o f Chapman's Seaven Bookes of the Iliades are n o mor e conclusive . Potentially th e mos t extensivel y Homeri c wor k o f Shakespeare' s i s Troilus and Cressida: fo r a listin g o f possibl e echoe s her e se e Palme r (1982: 33-7 ) an d fo r a fuller treatmen t Presso n (1953). Tantalizingly, it remains 'likel y tha t Shakespear e kne w more o f Homer tha n h e read , and possible that he read more than we know about' (Henderson 1935 : 142). (D) Fo r th e Englis h Renaissanc e Homer , includin g Chapman , se e especially Sowerby (1994). Baldwin (1944). 253

Homer Brower, R . A . (1971) . Hero and Saint: Shakespeare and the Graeco-Roman Heroic Tradition. Oxford . Henderson, W . B . Drayto n (1935) . 'Shakespeare' s Troilus and Cressida: Yet Deeper in its Tradition', pp. 127-5 6 in Hardin Craig, ed., Essays in Dramatic Literature: The Parrott Presentation Volume. Princeto n (reprinted Ne w York, 1967) . Nicoll, Allardyce, ed. (1957) . Chapman's Homer, 2 vols. London . Palmer, Kenneth , ed . (1982) . Troilus and Cressida (Arden Shakespeare) . London. Presson, Rober t K . (1953) . Shakespeare's 'Troilus and Cressida' and the Legends of Troy. Madison, WI. Root, Robert K . (1903) . Classical Mythology in Shakespeare. New York . Smith, Valeri e (1982) . 'Th e Histor y o f Cressida', pp . 61-7 9 inj . A . Jowitt an d R . K . S . Taylor, eds , Self and Society in Shakespeare's 'Troilus and Cressida' and 'Measure for Measure'. Bradford. Sowerby, Robin (1994) . The Classical Legacy in Renaissance Poetry. London .

Homilies (A) A homily is anciently a simple dilation on a scriptural text; the items which forme d th e Tudo r book s called Certain Sermons or Homilies (1547 ) and The Seconde Tome of Homilies (1563 ) are instea d expositions on topic s deemed significan t fo r churchgoers , whic h us e Scriptur e alon g wit h other authoritie s an d technique s t o develo p thei r themes . The y wer e first introduced unde r Edwar d V I a s part o f a programme t o enforc e religious conformity. Thoma s Cranme r edite d th e strongl y Protestan t first series , an d wrot e thre e o f it s twelv e discourse s (subdivide d int o thirty-one i n late r editions) . Th e firs t thre e homilie s wer e title d ' A Fruitefull Exhortacio n t o th e Readyn g o f Holy e Scripture' , 'O f th e Misery o f All Mankynde ' an d 'O f th e Salvacio n o f Al l Mankynde' . This boo k was suppressed unde r Mary , but reissue d unde r Elizabeth , in whos e reig n an y clerica l resistanc e t o it s weekl y readin g wa s no t tolerated. Th e secon d boo k o f homilies o f 1563 , agai n strongl y anti Roman, containe d twent y ne w discourse s dealing wit h doctrina l an d moral topics ; an d fro m 157 1 a long an d transparentl y propagandisti c homily 'Against Disobedience an d Wylfull Rebellion' was added to new editions o f the secon d boo k (a s well as being issue d independently) i n the wak e o f th e Norther n Rebellion , th e Queen' s excommunicatio n and th e variou s ensuin g plots . Henc e th e homilie s i n us e fro m 157 1

254

Homilies

amounted t o thirty-thre e items , man y o f them subdivide d int o part s which constitute d u p t o si x separat e readings . Al l wer e eventuall y collected into a single volume in 1623. (B) From 1547 , a homily, or a fixed part o f one o f the longe r homilies , was delivere d a t al l Sunda y an d hol y da y service s in th e majorit y of English churches instead o f a sermon, following the order an d rotatio n prescribed in the manual's Preface, meaning that on average an English adult would probably hav e heard eac h homily about onc e a year. Onl y licensed preachers (whos e learning and loyalty to the established churc h were assured ) wer e entitle d t o delive r sermon s o f thei r ow n com position, an d fe w suc h clergyme n wer e available , especiall y rurally (though the town of Stratford had on e in Henry Heycrof t from 156 9 to 1584). Th e responsibilit y o f readin g a homil y wa s bindin g upo n unlicensed clergy. Liturgical function apart , 'the book of homilies came to b e regarde d a s a benchmar k o f reformed belief in England ' (Bond 1987: 5) : th e Forty-Tw o Article s o f 155 2 referre d t o an d too k fo r granted th e authorit y o f the homilie s i n doctrina l matters , an d i t was quickly realize d tha t 'the y coul d b e use d a s a standar d fo r measurin g conformity and controlling maverick preachers o f whatever persuasion' (Bond 1987 : 5-6) . This was why Elizabeth, who 'regarde d th e enforce d reading o f the homilies a s a crucia l componen t o f ecclesiastica l polity' (Bon d 1987 : 11), an d fel t thre e o r fou r license d preachers enoug h fo r a county, was probably th e mos t enthusiasti c patro n o f th e homilie s o f he r time . But ther e wa s plent y o f opposition . Richar d Hooker, sometime s considered a n apologis t fo r th e Elizabetha n settlement , preferre d th e much mor e flexibl e sermo n form , a s encouragin g 'aptne s t o follow e particular occasion s presentli e growinge , t o pu t lif e int o worde s b y countenance voic e an d gesture , t o prevail e mighteli e i n th e suddain e affections o f men ' (ed . Hil l 1977 : 100) . Suc h view s wer e commo n among sixteenth-centur y Puritans, whos e increasingl y loud complain t that th e homilie s were a n impedimen t t o th e creatio n o f a preachin g ministry wa s acknowledged a t th e 160 4 Hampton Cour t Conferenc e - thoug h th e plan th e King announce d o n this occasio n t o promot e preaching instea d wa s t o b e onl y hal f realized . However , ove r th e seventeenth century , with better-educate d paris h clergy , and decreas ing governmenta l interferenc e i n thei r work , th e Church' s depend ence o n th e homilie s dwindled , notwithstandin g conservatives ' 255

Homilies attempts t o reviv e an d supplemen t the m int o th e earl y eighteent h century. The inclusio n in the collectio n of the last homily, 'Against Disobedi ence an d Wylful l Rebellion' , mad e i t clea r tha t th e Elizabetha n gov ernment though t o f homilies as political measures . It was divided int o six parts, each followed by a prayer for Queen an d country . The first of them engage s wit h a n issu e explore d i n severa l o f th e Histories , th e problem o f the bad ruler: But wha t i f the princ e b e undiscret e and evyl l i n deede , an d i t also evident to all mens eyes that he so is? I aske agayne, what if it be long of the wickedness e o f the subjectes , tha t th e princ e i s undiscrete o r evyll? Shall the subjecte s both by their wickednesse provoke God for their deserve d punishmen t t o gev e the m a n undiscret e o r evyl l prince, and also rebell against hym, and withall against God, who for the punishmen t o f their sinne s dyd geve them such e a prince? Wyl l you hear e th e Scripture s concerning thi s point? Go d (sa y the Hol y Scriptures) maket h a wicke d ma n t o raign e fo r th e sinne s o f th e people. Agayne, God gevet h a prince in his anger (meanin g an evyl l one) an d taket h awa y a prince i n his displeasure (meaning specially when he taket h away a good prince for the sinne s of the people): as in ou r memori e h e tok e awa y ou r goo d Josias, Kyn g Edwarde , i n his young and goo d yere s for ou r wickedness e . . . Wherefore let us turne fro m ou r sinne s unto th e Lord e wit h al l our heartes , an d h e wyll turn e th e hear t o f the princ e unt o ou r quie t an d wealth : Els for subjecte s t o deserve through thei r sinne s to have an evyl l prince , and the n t o rebel l agains t hym , wer e doubl e an d trebl e evyll , b y provoking God more to plague them. (1571 text, ed. Bond 1987 : 214-15) (C) Shakespeare' s on e referenc e to homilie s in general , suggestin g the common attitud e t o thei r readin g i n church , come s i n Rosalind' s response to Orlando's verses as declaimed b y Celia: O mos t gentle pulpiter! What tedious homily of love have you wearied your parishioners withal, an d neve r crie d 'Hav e patience, goo d people'. (As You Like It 3.2.145-8)

256

Homilies

Elsewhere, however , 'precisel y because thei r languag e an d idea s were so widel y know n a s t o b e i n th e ai r o f th e time , i t i s hardly possibl e to prov e a lin k betwee n line s i n th e play s an d simila r homileti c passages' (Rosinge r 1975 : 299 ) - a difficult y to o ofte n ignore d b y commentators wh o tak e similarit y fo r evidenc e o f direct influence . A good exampl e i s the attemp t mad e severa l times b y differen t scholar s to trac e th e notio n o f hierarchy fro m th e homil y 'Goncernyn g Goo d Ordre an d Obedienc e t o Ruler s an d Magistrates ' t o th e word s o f such character s a s Ulysses , Titani a an d Coriolanus . An d Shaheen' s (1999: 831-2 ) lis t o f almos t 20 0 Shakespear e 'parallels ' t o th e hom ilies i s to o generou s t o giv e eve n a roug h indicatio n o f th e position , failing t o distinguis h betwee n probabl y direc t echoe s an d mer e se t phrases an d term s popularize d b y th e homilie s (th e overwhelmin g majority o f his thirty-six reference s fo r th e homil y 'Agains t Swearyn g and Perjurie' , fo r instance , ar e simpl e case s o f th e us e o f tw o o r three o f the word s 'swear' , 'forswear' , 'oath ' an d 'perjury') . Neverthe less, enoug h verba l an d othe r sign s o f th e homilies ' effec t o n th e plays exis t to sugges t that the y leave some mar k ove r the rang e o f the Shakespeare canon . As Hart (1934) pointed out , ideas, and t o a lesser extent expressions, from th e 154 7 'Exhortacio n concernyn g Goo d Ordr e and Obedience ' and the long 157 1 homily 'Against Disobedience and Wylfull Rebellion' have man y parallel s i n th e Histories , notabl y o n th e topic s o f passive obedience, th e evil s o f rebellion, an d th e divin e righ t o f kings. Hart's belief tha t Shakespear e derive d som e o f thes e concept s specificall y from thes e homilies is unverifiable, eve n if their expression is sometimes similar. Th e rea l importanc e o f thes e homil y text s ma y li e rathe r i n their statu s a s knowledg e commo n t o al l member s o f th e playhous e audience, meanin g tha t Shakespear e ca n evok e a dee p penumbr a o f context an d connotatio n extremel y economically. Nor i s the relevanc e of these homilie s confine d to th e Histories . I n 'Agains t Disobedience', the rebelliou s ar e worth y of a 'horribl e an d dreadfu l damnation ' tha t 'no morta l ma n ca n expres s wit h words , no r conceiv e i n mind' ; MacdufFs exclamatio n o n finding his murdered kin g is 'O horror , hor ror, horror ! Tongu e no r heart / Canno t conceiv e nor give thee name ' (Macbeth 2.3.61-2) . Milwar d als o suggest s a loose r ech o o f this homil y in Camillo' s resolutio n t o d o hi s king' s biddin g (The Winter's Tale 1.2.357-61; Milward 1973 : 120-1) . The mor e disparate echoes of other homilies can only be exemplified, 257

Homilies not enumerated , here . Ofte n these are o f little further significance , but sometimes they sugges t the directio n th e playwright' s min d took , an d sometimes the y clarif y hi s meaning . Phrasin g fro m th e 'Homeli e o f Whoredom an d Unclennesse ' (also known as 'Against Adultery') in The Comedy of Errors is echoed by, and help s explain, Adriana's ow n speeche s on adulter y (see Baldwin 1965 : 169-71). The sam e homily contains a passage reasoning that 'I f whoredom ha d no t been syn , surely S. Jhon Baptist would never have rebuked King Herode fo r takyng his brothers wife' (Bon d 1987: 176) . Perhaps Hamlet i n his remark to the Players, 'It out-herods Herod' (3.2.13), while referring principally t o the Herod of the Mystery Plays, wa s a t som e leve l recallin g thi s associatio n (s o Rosinger 1975) . Finally, the Clown' s complaint t o the Countes s in All's MM that 'servic e is no heritage' (1.3.23) is exactly paralleled verball y in the homily 'Against Idleness'. (D) Bond (1987 ) supplie s a thoroug h discussio n of the genera l histor y and significanc e of the homilies, especially regarding thei r compilatio n and earl y use. Shaheen's (1999 ) listing of homily echoes, though recent, is flawed by its inclusion of much materia l wit h n o necessar y connection an d th e omissio n of some interesting parallels, suc h as Rosinger' s (1975) and Baldwin' s (1962, 1965). Baldwin, T . W . (1962) . 'Thre e Homilie s i n The Comedy of Errors', pp . 137-47 in Richard Hosley , ed., Essays on Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama in Honor ofHardin Craig. Columbia. (1965). On the Compositional Genetics of The Comedy of Errors. Urbana , IL. Bond, Ronal d B. , ed . (1987) . 'Certain Sermons or Homilies' (1547) and 'A Homily against Disobedience and Wilful Rebellion': A Critical Edition. Toronto. Hart, Alfred (1934) . Shakespeare and the Homilies and Other Pieces of Research into the Elizabethan Drama. Melbourne. Hill, W . Speed , ed . (1977) . Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, Book V. Cambridge. Milward, Peter (1966). 'The Homiletic Tradition in Shakespeare's Plays with Special Reference to Hamlet.' Shakespeare Studies (Japan) 5: 72-87. (1973). Shakespeare's Religious Background. London . Rosinger, Lawrenc e (1975) . 'Hamle t an d th e Homilies. ' ShQ 26 : 299-301. 258

Homilies Shaheen, Nasee b (1999) . Biblical References in Shakespeare's Plays. Newark, DE.

Hooker, Richard (1553/4-1600), Theologian Hooker' s thought o n social hierarchy, in particular, ha s been regarde d a s underlying Shakespeare's , bu t direc t us e ha s no t bee n clearl y established . Hooker is one of many antecedents cited for Ulysses' 'Degree' speech in Troilus and Cressida (1.3) . Cohen, Eileen Z. (1970). 'The Visible Solemnity : Ceremony an d Order in Shakespeare and Hooker. ' TSLL 12 : 181-95. Milward, Pete r (1973) . Shakespeare's Religious Background, pp . 134-43 . London.

Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus) (65 BC-8 BC), Roman Poet

(A) The so n of a freedman fro m Apulia, Horace wa s educated a t Rom e and late r Athens. In 44—4 2 B c h e serve d in Brutus' army, and, h e tells us, ran awa y at the battle of Philippi in 42. He obtained a pardon for his republican soldierin g but wa s stripped o f his family property, and the n obliged t o writ e i n orde r t o live . Abou t 3 8 B C he wa s introduce d t o Maecenas, the great Roman patron, who took him under his protection and provided hi m with his famous Sabin e villa. During the 30 s Horace wrote hi s seventeen meditative, ofte n ironi c Epodes, miscellaneousl y on love, politics and hi s personal enemies , and hi s two Book s of Satires o r Sermones, traditionall y see n a s th e urban e an d mockin g antithesi s i n satire t o th e scurrilou s an d persona l invectiv e of Juvenal. H e the n published the first three Books of his Odes or Carmina in 23 . This varied collection contains moods varying from Stoi c gravity to Epicurean gai ety i n poem s o n publi c themes , carpe diem poems , celebration s o f th e country life , th e joys of wine, an d poetr y itself , poem s o f moral reflec tion, of love, and o f friendship. Th e firs t Boo k of his Epistles, hexamete r poems ostensibl y written to friend s o n th e moral s o f everyday life, wa s next to appear ; a further Boo k of Epistles an d a fourth o f Odes followed, and hi s Ars Poetica (Art of Poetry) i s assigne d t o hi s las t years . Thoug h many qualitie s have been construe d in his work, and differen t part s of that wor k prioritized, ove r the centuries , Horace's unfluctuatin g status

259

Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus)

since th e Renaissanc e a s on e o f th e ver y greates t o f Roman poet s i s broadly founde d o n wha t Quintilia n describe s a s his qualit y o f bein g 'plenus . . . iucunditatis e t gratia e e t varii s figuris et verbi s felicissim e audax' ('full of delight and charm, with great variety of figures and bold but very apt use of words'), together with a supreme poetic craftsmanship manifesting itself especially in his use of metres, and an urbane wit which permits or constructs several angles at once from which to see the world. (B) Erasmus include d Horac e amon g hi s lis t o f authors suitabl e fo r school use in De Ratione Studii, and Baldwi n (1944: u, 497) found that of more tha n tw o dozen pre-1600 Englis h grammar schoo l curricula h e examined, onl y three failed t o specif y Horac e i n one for m o r another . In some schools the Epistles wer e used to assist in training with epistolary writing; other s specifie d th e Satires an d Odes; there i s evidenc e o f th e teaching o f th e Ars Poetica; an d s o on . Whil e th e Odes were evidentl y used a s stylisti c models i n education , fo r thei r matte r th e 'instructive ' Satires an d Epistles wer e given preference; by the lat e sixteent h centur y Horace had fo r long been regarded a s primarily a moralist. The us e of the lyric poetry even as a metrical model was new in England - throug h the Middl e Age s suc h a practice woul d hav e ha d littl e purpose, sinc e Latin prosod y was barely understood - and , becaus e Horace' s specia l poetic qualities had no great appeal to pre-Renaissance tastes , he was in general rated very far behind Virgil, and usually Ovid, as a Latin poe t until th e seventeent h century. Even i n satire , Juvenal wa s frequentl y preferred a s more direct and cutting . A lost translation o f the Satires by Lewis Evans in 156 5 was the firs t substantial Englis h renderin g o f Horace. Thoma s Drant, Archdeaco n of Lewes, translated th e Epistles, Satires an d Ars Poetica in cumbersom e fourteeners i n 1566-7 , bu t di d no t ventur e int o th e Odes an d Epodes. Drant's taste s square d wit h thos e o f Lambinus, th e edito r o f Horac e whose tex t o f 156 1 becam e th e mos t widel y use d on e i n th e lat e sixteenth century, whom Drant quote s in his dedicatory epistle : If w e we y bot h profytt e an d delectatio n Lambinu s wrot e truly , emongst lati n poete s Horac e hat h no t hi s felowe . Thi s i s h e whome great Augustus writte shoulde be loked to as him selfe , whom Maecenas love d a s himselfe , ripe , pythye , excellen t fo r mora l preceptes, ful l o f pretye speaches, full o f Judgement. (Drant 1567 : sig. *3V; roman fo r italic) 260

Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus)

In Renaissanc e Europ e a s a whole, th e Satires an d Epistles wer e trans lated entire three times as often a s the Odes and Epodes. Drant' s Horac e was to be the last large-scale Englis h translation for some seventy years, though less ambitious attempt s in the interim included a partial version of the Ars Poetica by Queen Elizabet h herself . Horace was an unavoidable presenc e in the education o f the literat e classes of the Englis h Renaissance, bu t ho w far was this matched b y his presence in the wor k of English writers? Before Shakespeare' s tim e h e had bee n in this respect too th e poe t o f the Satires and Epistles fo r a few pioneers, notabl y Si r Thoma s Wyatt , whos e ow n epistolar y satires , though no t translation s o f Horace's, ar e inconceivabl e withou t them . Sidney i s the first English poet t o translate a Horatian Od e (n.10 , as 'You bette r sur e shal l live' , lat e 1570s ) i n suc h a wa y a s t o creat e a n independent Englis h poem, but lesser talents were at a loss for the styl e and sophistication required . It was Ben Jonson who first, and influen tially for later generations, made use of the ful l rang e of Horace's work. His creativ e imitation s naturalize d i t in suc h poems a s 'To Penshurst', 'To Si r Robert Wroth ' an d 'Invitin g a Frien d t o Supper' . Hi s transla tions to o (severa l Odes an d Epodes, Satire 1.9 , Ars Poetica}, a s wel l a s hi s deliberate modellin g of his poetic personality on Horace's, helpe d ear n him the nam e of'th e Englis h Horace'. It was in the earl y seventeenth century tha t Horac e cam e t o b e fel t a s importan t a lyri c poe t a s a satirist, indee d th e 'princ e o f lyrics' ; bu t Jonson' s Horac e als o commanded respec t as a moralist: Such was Horace, a n Author of much Civilitie; and (i f any one among the heathen ca n be) the best master, both of vertue, and wisdome; an excellent, an d tru e judge upo n cause , an d reason ; no t becaus e h e thought so; but because he knew so, out of use and experience . (Discoveries; ed . Herford an d Simpso n 1925-51 : vin, 642) Jonson's wor k als o indicates , finally , mor e o f th e reason s fo r Shake speare's tendenc y t o avoi d th e Horatia n model : 'Jonson' s stud y o f Horace . . . led hi m t o favou r concision , strength , an d restrain t ove r exuberant verba l embroider y - significantl y h e wa s in genera l no t much intereste d in the works of Ovid - o r elaborate metapho r o f the Shakespearean type' (Martindale 1992 : 201). Drant's Horac e i s sometimes thought t o have been known to Shakespeare (as by Turner 1957) , but on no good evidence. Although some of 261

Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus)

Jonson's Horac e translation s wer e i n existenc e durin g Shakespeare' s lifetime, there are no signs he knew them either. But it is not unlikely he knew the Lati n poem , Ode iv. 1, which Jonson is translating here , eve n if it s fam e belong s mor e t o late r eras , an d eve n i f we choos e no t t o credit claims of echoes from i t in Hamkt (see C): Venus, againe tho u mov'st a warre Long intermitted, pra y thee, pray thee spare: I am not such, as in the Reigne Of the good Cynara I was: Refraine, Sower Mother of sweet Loves, forbear e To bend a man, no w at his fiftieth year e Too stubborne for Commands s o slack: Goe where Youths soft intreatie s call thee back. More timel y hie thee to the house, With thy bright Swans, of Paulus Maximus: There jest, and feast, make him thine host, If a fit livor thou dost seek to toast; For he's both noble, lovely, young, And fo r the troubled Clyent fyl's hi s tongue, Child o f a hundred Arts , and farr e Will he display the Ensigne s of thy warre. And when he smiling finds his Grace With thee 'bove all his Rivals gift s tak e place, He'll thee a Marble Statu e make Beneath a Sweet-wood Roofe, neere Alba Lake: There shall thy dainty Nostrill take In many a Gumme, an d for thy soft eare s sake Shall Verse be set to Harpe and Lute, And Phrygian Hau'boy , no t without the Flute. There twice a day in sacred Laies, The Youth s and tender Maids shall sing thy praise: And in the Salian manner mee t Thrice 'bout thy Altar with their Ivory feet . Me now, nor Wench, nor wanton Boy, Delights, nor credulous hope o f mutualljoy, Nor care I now healths to propound; Or wit h fresh flowers to girt my temple round. But why, oh why, my Ligurine, 262

Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus) Flow my thin teares, downe these pale cheeks of mine? Or why , my well-grac'd words among, With an uncomely silence failes my tongue? Hard-hearted, I dreame ever y Night I hold thee fast! but fled hence, with the Light, Whether in Mars hi s field thou bee, Or Tybers windin g streames, I follow thee. (ed. Herfor d and Simpson 1925-51 : vm, 292-3) (C) Horace ha s been one of the best-know n of classical authors durin g the rise of modern literary scholarship, leading to more opportunities for discoveries o f parallels i n Shakespear e tha n wit h mos t othe r sources . Much ingenuit y has bee n expende d o n showin g what exactl y Shake speare knew and recalled of Horace, but many echoes or claimed echoes have little or no other significance. A fairly good knowledge of the text of Horace's Odes, with more mixed levels of awareness of his other works, is evident in Shakespeare, but he is, tout court, no Horatian writer. There are some cases , however, in whic h echoe s o f Horace ca n b e sai d t o offe r additional understanding of or interpretative possibilities for a passage. When Timo n o f Athen s cite s Epistle i. 2 (a t 1.2.28 ) h e quote s a n extremely familiar work which educated member s of the audienc e ar e expected t o recogniz e instantly , but it s familiarity means th e citatio n shows nothing about Shakespeare' s direct knowledge of Horace. Whe n Demetrius reads out th e firs t tw o lines of Ode i.22 in Titus Andronicus, i n a message from Titus , Chiron' s abilit y to identif y the m display s only a rudimentary level of training, and the quotation agai n establishes nothing about Shakespeare's familiarity with Horace sinc e these verses were indeed quoted , twice , i n Willia m Lily' s Lati n grammar , th e Brevissima Institute: DEMETRIUS What' s here? A scroll, and written round about . Let's see: [Reads] 'Intege r vitae, scelerisque purus, Non eget Mauri iaculis, nee arcu.' CHIRON O , 'tis a verse in Horace, I know it well; I read it in the grammar lon g ago.

(4.2.18-23)

Even the non-explicit use of Horace's Ode m.30, 'Exegi monumentum', 263

Horace (Quintus Homtius Flaccus)

at the start of Sonnet 55 ('Not marble, no r the gilded monument s / O f princes, shal l outlive this powerful rhyme') , involves a passage s o commonplace tha t i t supplie s n o evidenc e Shakespear e kne w th e Latin , though i t i s prima facie likel y he di d (se e also o n thi s passag e Baldwi n 1950: 260-3). Shakespeare's most obviousl y Horatian lines are not th e most revealing, nor, as a rule, those where knowledge of the sourc e tells the reader anythin g new. Discounting reference s t o Horac e likel y to aris e fro m intermediat e sources o r commonplaces , ther e ar e a t leas t som e passage s i n Shake speare whic h seem to hav e been affecte d directl y by the Odes. Perhap s the mos t famou s come s i n Henr y IV's contras t betwee n himsel f an d his subjects , i n whic h th e followin g line s see m ful l o f Horatia n idea s creatively used: Why rather, sleep, liest thou in smoky cribs, Upon uneasy pallets stretching thee , And hush'd wit h buzzing night-flies to thy slumber, Than in the perfum'd chamber s o f the great , Under th e canopies of costly state, And lull'd with sound of sweetest melody? O tho u dull god, why liest thou with the vile In loathsome beds, and leav'st the kingly couch A watch-case or a common 'larum-bell ? (2 Henry IV, 3.1.9-17 ) Horace's Ode in.l famousl y deal s with th e them e tha t it is tranquillit y of min d an d no t wealt h tha t make s fo r happiness ; th e relevan t line s (17-24) are quoted here in Sir Richard Fanshawe's seventeenth-centur y rendering: Over whose head hang s a drawn sword , Him cannot please a Royal feast : Nor melody of lute or bird, Give to his eyes their wonted rest. Sleep, gentle sleep, scorns not the poor Abiding of the Plough-man: love s By sides of Rivers shades obscure: And rockt with West-windes, Tempe Groves , (ed. Carne-Ros s 1996 : 91) 264

Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus)

Another apparentl y direc t deb t t o th e Odes involve s th e famou s Tyrrha' poe m (i.5 ) an d Hastings ' lamen t ove r hi s air y hope s i n Richard III 3.4.98-10 3 (note d by Johnson: se e Baldwin 1944 : n , 500) . But i n thi s an d mos t othe r examples , th e ech o o f Horace seem s no t to mak e an y perceptible creativ e o r interpretativ e differenc e (Baldwi n exaggerates i n claimin g th e Richard HI passag e canno t b e under stood withou t Horace's ; se e als o th e over-generou s collectio n o f other example s i n hi s ful l discussion , n, 497-525) . I n som e instance s the exac t natur e o f Shakespeare' s borrowin g fro m th e Odes appear s to signa l hi s us e o f th e extensiv e glosse s an d commentar y o f Lambinus. Among Horace' s othe r works , echoes of the Ars Poetica - sometime s generically classed , an d printed, with th e Odes - ar e fairly frequen t in Shakespeare, echoe s o f th e Epistles (includin g th e direc t quotatio n i n Timon, above) and Satires considerably les s so. One obviou s explanatio n is that Shakespeare' s knowledg e was picked up no t fro m th e air, which should hav e containe d a more eve n distributio n o f material, but fro m a gramma r schoo l trainin g which , a s wa s normal , involve d som e Horace, but whic h happene d to concentrate o n the Odes. Inconclusiv e signs o f Shakespeare' s knowledg e o f th e Ars Poetica ar e scattere d widely, as in for example th e commonplace about the mountain bringing fort h a mous e a t Love's Labour's Lost 5.2.518 , bu t ther e i s mor e tangible evidenc e (becaus e o f resemblances o f detail) fo r hi s us e o f its famous passag e o n th e age s o f ma n (158-74) . Thi s lie s i n th e back ground o f mor e tha n on e o f Shakespeare' s treatment s o f th e theme : in As You Like It 2. 7 i t i s echoe d (throug h Lambinus ) togethe r wit h related passage s fro m Ovid , Palengenius an d other s (se e Baldwi n 1944: i , 652-73) , wherea s in Macbeth, fo r Macbeth' s ennui a t 5.3.22-6 , Shakespeare seems , reasonabl y enough , t o expec t som e member s o f his audience t o have a fairly clos e recollection o f the Horatian passag e alone (see Hammond 1989) . Perhaps significantly , Horatian echoes have been discerne d in almos t all th e tragedies , thoug h agai n th e evidenc e usuall y fall s shor t o f adequate proo f o f a relationship . A se t of small verba l echoe s i n King Lear 3. 4 seem s to sho w reminiscences i n Lear' s word s t o Edgar/Poo r Tom o f stray lines fro m tw o o f the Epistles an d on e o f the Odes., in on e case vi a a quotatio n i n Samue l Harsnett. Lea r see s hi s positio n i n particular throug h Horace' s Epistle n.l , especiall y th e line s (210-13 ) translated by Drant thus: 265

Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus)

That poet on a stretched rope may walke and never fall, That can stere up my passions, o r quicke my sprytes at all. Stere me, chere me, or with false feare s of bugges fill up my brest, At Athens now, and no w at Thebes, by charminge mak e me rest. (Drant 1567 : sig. G71} The collocatio n her e of several apparently disparat e idea s in the prot agonist's word s show s 'a unit y between th e scattere d eccentricitie s of Lear' (Blunden 1934: 202). In Hamlet we may choose to see an ech o of Ode iv.l' s 'M e ne e femin a ne e puer' ((C) , above; s o Mangold 1908) , adding sarcasti c poin t t o on e o f Hamlet's remark s t o Rosencrant z a t 2.2.317-23; an allusio n to Drant's versio n of Satire in.3 (Turner 1957) ; and memories o f Horace's character in Horatio (Kilpatrick 1982) . It is, however, unclear why Shakespeare might have expected detailed knowledge o f Drant fro m hi s audience, an d littl e seems to b e adde d t o th e play if the Horatio character i s thought of as Horatian . The possibility , more pleasan t tha n plausible , tha t th e bea r i n The Winter's Tale was suggested by the reference in Epistle n. 1 to the rabble a t the theatr e callin g fo r bears o r boxer s instea d o f good dram a ha s o f course been canvassed (Randall 1985) . The mos t intriguing remainin g connections ar e wit h Antony and Cleopatra, though i t seems unlikely they could be securely confirmed. Shakespeare might have arrived unassisted at his conception of the dying Cleopatra a s a paradoxical Stoic , but it is not availabl e i n Plutarch, an d h e coul d easil y hav e derive d i t fro m Horace's Ode i.37 (se e Westbrook 1947 ; Martindale 1990 : 186-9) . A surmise o f Emrys Jones' (1977 : 43-6 ) woul d mak e Horace' s Odes th e underlying model for the play's style as a whole, 'with its firmly moulded phrasing, it s small-scale figurative effects , an d it s sustained musicality', also perhaps connectin g wit h som e o f the play' s themes (empire , love and wine). Horace wa s a contemporary o f Antony and Cleopatra's . (D) Carne-Ross (1996 ) assembles Renaissance an d late r translation s o f Horace. Edde n (1973 ) survey s attitudes t o an d Englis h rendering s of Horace dow n to 1666 , and is supplemented byjiriczek (1911 ) on Drant. The wor k of the Martindales (1990, 1992 , 1993 ) covers Horace's influence on Jonson an d hi s immediate successor s in more detail. The onl y synoptic account of Shakespeare an d Horac e i s Baldwin (1944) , which also explore s bibliographica l context s fo r Shakespeare' s knowledge ; other commentator s al l operate a t th e leve l o f individual passage s o r 266

Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus) plays, thoug h i n som e cases more far-reaching effects o n Shakespear e than Baldwin claims are proposed. Th e Horatia n traditio n a s it affect s the Sonnets - bu t only marginally Horace's direc t influence on them - is extensively addressed in Leishman (1961). Baldwin (1944), n, 497-525; Martindale (1990) ; Muir (1977) . Baldwin, T . W . (1950) . On the Literary Genetics of Shakspere's Poems and Sonnets. Urbana, IL. Blunden, Edmun d (1934) . 'Shakespeare' s Significances' , pp. 195-21 5 in The Mind's Eye: Essays. London . Carne-Ross, D . S. , an d Kennet h Haynes , ed s (1996). Horace in English. Harmondsworth. Drant, Thoma s (1567) . Horace his Arte of Poetrie, Pistles, and Satyrs Englished. London . Edden, Valerie (1973). 'The Best ofLyrick Poets', pp . 135-6 0 in C . D . N. Costa, ed., Horace. London. Hammond, Pau l (1989) . 'Macbet h an d th e Age s of Man.' JV