Vol.3:no.3 "Let me not to the marriage of true minds admit impediments..." Spring 2004 In Search of 8th Annual Rosencrantz and Edward de Vere Guildenstern Studies Conference By C. V. Berney surping powers start wars and plot assassinations while two he 2004 edition of the Ed- minor characters participate without affecting or even ward de Vere Studies Con- understanding the historic events taking place around Tference (April 15th to 17th, U Concordia University, Portland, them. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern thus seem to embody the OR) continued in its now well- situation of the average citizen in today’s world, and for some have established tradition of provoca- become the most poignant figures in Hamlet. They are twentieth- tive papers, interesting special century characters trapped in a sixteenth-century drama, a quality events and a full-schedule that Tom Stoppard took as the basis for his 1967 play, Rosencrantz and can leave attendees—like mara- Guildenstern Are Dead. thon runners—tired but deeply Oxfordian scholars have long recognized that most of the satisfied by the event’s conclu- characters in Hamlet can be linked to real-life historical charac- sion. ters: Polonius with Burghley, Gertrude with Elizabeth, Claudius This year the featured event with Leicester, and so forth. Eva Turner Clark provides a list of such for the weekend was a much- identifications, but omits the ill-fated Danish courtiers.1 Is it Edward de Vere Studies Conference anticipated confrontation with possible to find their real-life equivalents? There should be plenty keynote speaker Mark Anderson Prof. Alan Nelson over his 2003 Oxford biography, Monstrous of candidates, since the families Rosenkrantz and Gyldenstierne presented material from his forth- coming 2005 biography of Edward Adversary. A full afternoon was (to use the Danish spellings) were among the most powerful in set aside for the “Interrogation Denmark, and had many members in government and court de Vere, “Shakespeare” by Another Name. of Alan Nelson,” but the 3-part circles. More immediately, how did the author of Hamlet learn of session did not go as expected these real-life Danish names? Several Stratfordian scholars have (Continued on page 8) speculated about this. Their suggested scenarios are discussed News/Commentary below. Scenario 1: the Tycho Connection. In 1938 the indefati- gable orthodox scholar Leslie Hotson published a book entitled The Interrogation of I, William Shakespeare, Do Appoint Thomas Russell, Esquire. This sounds like a quote from Shakespeare’s will, but as the Prof. Alan Nelson indefatigable heterodox scholar Richard Whalen points out,2 it is he most anticipated event at the 8th Annual Edward de Vere not. Hotson identified a Thomas Russell of Strensham as one of Studies Conference unfortunately turned out to be a bit less the overseers of the will of William Shakspere of Stratford, the man Tproductive than expected. Billed as the “Interrogation of to whom the works of Shakespeare are commonly attributed. He Dr. Alan Nelson” in the program, the afternoon-long event was further determined that Russell’s stepson was Leonard Digges divided into three parts: first, a one-on-one examination of Nelson by Dr. R. Thomas Hunter (Bloomfield Hills, Michigan), to be (1588-1635), whose verse “To the Memorie of the deceased Authour followed by questions from a panel of prominent Oxfordians Maister W. Shakespeare” is in the preface to the First Folio and (Richard Whalen, Mark Anderson, Stephanie Hughes, Hank contains the phrase “thy Stratford Moniment,” one of the founda- Whittemore and Bill Farina), and finally by a Q&A session with the tion stones of the Stratfordian attribution. On the basis of this audience of conference attendees. connection, Hotson posits a close friendship between Leonard But the afternoon got off on the wrong foot with Dr. Hunter’s (Continued on page 12) (Continued on page 7) page 2 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

amateur. Thus, in The Rape of Lucrece, we ral stress? Quite obviously he conceives Letters: encounter lines such as the following, again natural stress in terms of ordinary stress squaring with Oxford’s verse: ‘This help- patterns of spoken English, i.e., indepen- To the Editor: less smoke of words doth me no right.’ By dent of poetry. Excluding contrastive and Nelson’s reasoning, this line is unnatural emphatic stress, a verb-pronoun combina- As professional linguists, we wish to in the precise sense that he claims for tion in English bears relatively stronger point you to one passage that touches on Oxford’s verse, since the iambic stress pat- stress on the verb; accordingly, one says language in Nelson’s recent Monstrous tern is ‘doth ME.’ ‘KISS me,’ not ‘kiss ME.’ By fixating on Adversary. We do so by way of emphasiz- Or turning to A Lover’s Complaint, we iambic pentameter, Nelson is thus noting ing our own profession only because meet with the following example, where a clash between ordinary stress patterns of Nelson condescendingly dismisses Oxfor- ‘made HIM’ is an instance of Nelsonian the spoken language and what results if dians as amateurs, while these passages all unnaturalness: ‘Love lacked a dwelling one strictly adheres to iambic meter. By cogently reveal that he himself exhibits a and made him her place.’ Just so, passing this reasoning, both Oxford and Shake- worse than amateurish approach to com- to Shakespeare’s Venus and Adonis, we speare adopt “unnatural” stress in their prehending the language of Oxford’s po- find the following related example: ‘He poetry and this just goes to show that the etry. Additional linguistic points will be will not manage her, although he mount poetry of Oxford and Shakespeare are en- made at a later date. her.’ By Nelson’s reasoning, the first in- tirely compatible, which is not surprising On page 159 of his recently published stance of ‘her’ is stressed and therefore if Oxford is the man behind the renowned biography of Oxford, Nelson authorita- “unnatural”, whilst the second is not, and mask. tively asserts: “Unnatural stresses occur therefore is natural. In the same vein within Nelson seems unaware of the possibil- not infrequently in Oxford’s poems,” cit- the same narrative poem, we find: ity that a poet may countenance violations ing Oxford’s iambic ‘leads ME’ as “unnatu- of strict iambic meter via trochaic feet, in ral” in contrast to ‘LEADS me,’ and Oxford’s He kisses her, and she by her which case the question of “unnatural” ‘drowns ME’ as “unnatural” versus good will stress is quite beside the point and again ‘DROWNS me.’ Will never rise, so he will kiss her Oxford and Shakespeare emerge divided Has the professional failed to read still. as one. Shakespeare’s sonnets with care? Appar- ently so, for the following lines drawn The first line of this couplet involves a Michael Brame & Galina Popova from Sonnet 133 and Sonnet 143 place Nelsonian “unnatural” stress on the pro- University of Washington Shakespeare squarely in the same league noun ‘her,’ while the second line does not. Seattle, Washington with Oxford. But just what is Nelson’s criterion for natu- 24 April 2004

Sonnet 133: Whoe’er keeps me, let my heart be his guard, Shakespeare Matters Subscriptions to Shakespeare Matters are Sonnet 143: And play the mother’s part, Published quarterly by the $40 per year ($20 for online issues only). Family or institution subscriptions are $60 per kiss me, be kind. The Shakespeare Fellowship year. Patrons of the Fellowship are $75 and up. Send subscription requests to: By Nelson’s fixation on the iambic foot, Editorial Offices P.O. Box 263 The Shakespeare Fellowship we find Shakespeare’s “unnatural” ‘keeps P.O. Box 561 Somerville, MA 02143 ME’ and ‘kiss ME’ in contrast to what Belmont MA 02478 Oxford’s critic considers natural: ‘KEEPS Editor: The purpose of the Shakespeare Fellowship is to promote public awareness and acceptance me’ and ‘KISS me.’ The same point can be William Boyle of the authorship of the Shakespeare Canon by made by altering the pronoun, as we en- Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford (1550- counter examples wherein ‘hast HER,’ ‘love Contributing Editors: 1604), and further to encourage a high level of Mark Anderson, Dr. Charles Berney, scholarly research and publication into all HER,’ and ‘lose THEE’ are “unnatural” feet Charles Boyle, Dr. Felicia Londre, aspects of Shakespeare studies, and also into the Lynne Kositsky, Alex McNeil, history and culture of the Elizabethan era. in Shakespeare’s verse. The Society was founded and incorporated Dr. Anne Pluto, Elisabeth Sears, in 2001 in the State of Massachusetts and is Sonnet 42: That thou hast her, it is Dr. Roger Stritmatter, Richard Whalen, chartered under the membership corporation Hank Whittemore, Dr. Daniel L. Wright. laws of that state. It is a recognized 501(c)(3) not all my grief, nonprofit (Fed ID 04-3578550). Sonnet 42: Thou dost love her, be Phone (Somerville, MA): (617) 628-3411 Dues, grants and contributions are tax- deductible to the extent allowed by law. cause thou know’st I love her, Fax (Somerville, MA): (617) 628-4258 All contents copyright ©2004 Sonnet 42: If I lose thee, my loss is my email: [email protected] The Shakespeare Fellowship love’s gain, Shakespeare Matters welcomes articles, essays, commentary, book reviews, letters and news items. Contributions should be reasonably concise and, when Additional examples confirm Nelson’s appropriate, validated by peer review. The views expressed carelessness, marking him as a bona fide by contributors do not necessarily reflect those of the Fellowship as a literary and educational organization.

Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 3

To the Shakespeare Fellowship: From the Editor I am both honored and pleased to have The Debating Game received second place in the 2004 Shakes- pearean Essay Competition (11th/12th In the course of preparing this issue we Burris’s work without mentioning it. Grade). I intend to use [my award] to fur- had some interesting choices to make about It was during this panel that Prof. Nelson ther my studies at Boston College. On a how to cover the “Interrogation of Alan made some authorship debate comments personal note, I wish to thank the Shake- Nelson,” and this process has been as edu- that were—in our estimation—inaccurate, speare Fellowship for holding this contest cational as anything we have encountered and which—further—ran contrary to what to allow students to demonstrate their in our involvement in the authorship de- he had intimated to this writer earlier in knowledge of the greatest English poet of bate over the years. the day he might say about Burris’s work them all. I greatly enjoyed my work on “The Two R’s: Revenge and Resolution.” In short, we found ourselves stuck be- on the Ashbourne—namely that the Thank you again for recognition of my tween the rock of straight reporting and the Ashbourne sitter most likely wasn’t Hugh humble efforts. hard place of commentary. How to cover Hamersley and the Folger should probably what happened Saturday without some com- just say so. His anti-Oxfordian comments Sincerely, mentary on what went right and what went garnered some cheering from the over- Aaron Lemmon wrong, and why. And how to deal with Prof. whelming Stratfordian audience, followed Johnstown, Pennsylvania Nelson’s book without finally stepping immediately by loud booing and hooting 5 May 2004 hard—real hard—on his toes? when a response was attempted. At first we were going to say next to So, in an event taking place on Oxford- To the Shakespeare Fellowship: nothing about this event, then just the bare ian home turf, Dr. Hunter decided not to facts—that it didn’t go as well as expected, return the favor, so to speak. But at this Thank you notifying me that I received third place in the Shakespeare Fellowship but, OK, stuff happens. Finally we moved stage of the debate, with the overwhelming essay contest. The award was a pleasant onto a more thorough report, and con- case most Oxfordians know has been made surprise, and I appreciated your highly tacted both Dr. Hunter and Prof. Nelson for against the Stratford story and for Oxford, personalized response. their thoughts and comments. And in the can we afford not to meet head on the I do plan to attend college (beginning end we felt obliged to place a header over authorship counteroffensive that is now this fall). Though I plan to major in music the article (“News/Commentary”) as a sort underway—the Folger’s stonewalling the (piano performance), literature is also an of “truth in packaging” move that acknowl- problems with their Ashbourne sitter attri- area of great interest to me. I hope to obtain edges right up front that the reporting bution, Wood’s neo-Stratfordian book, at least a minor in English, and perhaps moved directly into some opinions strongly Nelson’s anti-Oxfordian book, and now even double major in music and English. expressed. Harvard professor Stephen Greenblatt’s What we have learned in the process is new Stratfordian biography (Will in the Sincerely, Marie Erichsen that, as Dr. Hunter related to us in a phone World) due out in September? Montgomery, Alabama conversation afterwards, the critical factor Prof. Nelson should have been vigor- 28 March 2004 in how the whole afternoon went was his ously and unrelentingly interrogated all decision to refrain from making the event afternoon on the numerous errors and bi- Corrections a hostile “interrogation.” Instead, Hunter ases that permeate every page of his book. decided to create a more collegial atmo- That is what some of us had expected, and, In the article reviewing presentations sphere for the proceedings, and in his we believe, it is what is required at this at the Fellowship’s 2003 Conference in opening remarks he invoked an authorship stage of the debate. Hunter says as much in Carmel (Shakespeare Matters, Winter 2004) in the section reviewing Marty moment that had occurred in November the statement he gave us for our interroga- Hyatt’s presentation on the Sonnets (page 2002 in Toronto at the Sanders Portrait tion article: “I do believe that it is abso- 9), the reference “in the King James Bible” Symposium to explain his decision. lutely essential that the work done by should have read: “in contemporary ver- In Toronto, where the Ashbourne por- Oxfordians to expose the errors and schol- sions of the bible.” trait was to be discussed along with other arly abuses of the book be made available “putative” Shakespeare portraits, a num- to the world.” In Richard Whalen’s review of Alan ber of Oxfordians (including this writer We heartily agree. Nelson’s Monstrous Adversary (Shake- speare Matters, Fall 2003), his reference to and Dr. Hunter) had gathered to make our Our coverage of Nelson and his book Nina Green’s publication history was in presence felt and to advertise Barbara will continue in our next issue with a re- error. Whalen informs us: “Contrary to Burris’s work on the Ashbourne, published view of the recently published, prominent what I wrote in a review of Alan Nelson’s in Shakspeare Matters over the past two front-page review of Monstrous Adversary book in the Fall 2003 issue, Nina Green has years. Prof. Nelson was also present, sched- in the Stratfordian Shakespeare Newslet- published articles in Oxfordian publica- uled to appear on the same panel with the ter. Also, Dr. Hunter will be in our next tions, most recently in The Oxfordian, Folger Shakespeare Library’s Curator of Art issue with some further thoughts on the Vol. 1 (1998) and Vol. 2 (2000).” Erin Blake, who was there that day to debunk event in Portland and debating Nelson. Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 4 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004 Winners of 2003 Essay Contest

The Fellowship’s second annual stu- Worth TX; Second Place – Aaron Michael graders dent essay contest proved enormously Lemmon, Johnstown PA; Third Place – partici- popular. More than 700 papers were re- Marie Erichsen, Montgomery AL. Honor- pated in ei- ceived from secondary students living in able Mention – Cortney Breitschwerdt, ther of the 47 states and 10 countries. The number of Harwood MD; Josh Dzieza, Olympia WA; first two submissions was three times higher than Brook Erspamer, Corbett OR; Gabe Mar- contests), in 2002, when 238 entries were received. tin, Ashland OH; Koki Momose, Bloomfield and the By the time of the filing deadline in mid- Hills MI; Amy Troeger, Elkhart IN; Sijia cash awards January, some 50 or more envelopes were Wang, Beavercreek OR; Kelly Whitebread, have been arriving daily! Sugar Land TX; Aaron Yazzie, Holbrook increased Three Fellowship trustees volunteered AZ; Jenny Zhang, Athens GA. slightly. to judge this year’s essays: Steve Aucella, Junior Division (9th and 10th Grade): Second, the Alex McNeil and Sarah Smith, all of whom First Place – Jenny Mahlum, Provo UT; number of share firsthand experience with the world Second Place – Kirsten Callahan, Pearl MS; Jenny Mahlum, Junior Divi- suggested sion Winner. of writing and publishing. They were im- Third Place – Monika Grzesiak, Macomb topics has pressed with the caliber of work shown by Township MI. Honorable Mention – James been reduced, and students are specifi- many of the students. “Quite a few of them Dong, Pearland TX; Jordin Saunders- cally encouraged to explore the author- showed much keener insight into the Jensen, Puyallup WA. First, second and ship question. Third, the formal require- Shakespeare Canon than I could have at- third place winners received cash awards, ments for submission have been tightened tempted in high school, or even in col- and senior first place winner Mary Taylor’s (minimum word length, etc.). Essays will lege,” observed McNeil. Aucella noted that essay has been posted on our web site. be due by January 15, 2005. Full details he was “surprised by the volume of submis- Students could choose from eight sug- may be found on the Fellowship web site. sions this year. gested topics in the 2003 Contest. Two of It is hoped that the changes made in Teachers are obviously finding out the eight topics, however, proved by far to this year’s contest will lead more students about us. Whether they’re pushing be the most popular – the problem of evil to look into, and inform themselves about, classwork or are having their students in Macbeth or Othello, and the nature of the authorship issue. As contest judge write something original for the contest is Hamlet’s indecisiveness. Only a few stu- Aucella pointed out, “One common thread almost immaterial to the fact that students dents dealt directly with the authorship I found this year was the general lack of are enthusiastically submitting their work.” controversy in 2003. understanding Shake-speare the author. The winners were notified in late For the 2004 Contest, the Board of Virtually none of the essays even scratched March. They are: Trustees voted to modify the requirements the surface of how Shake-speare’s life en- Senior Division (11th and 12th Grade): somewhat. First, the two divisions have tered into his works, which is really what First Place – Mary Allison Taylor, Fort been eliminated (not many ninth or tenth it’s all about.” Soul of the Age — a feature film on Oxford In postings that appeared on two dif- “Emmerich vs. Shakespeare! Indepen- May 2004 - www/empireonline.co.uk) ferent film news sites within two days in dence Day meets St. Crispin’s Day” (May Roland Emmerich has committed to May, breaking news about a planned film 11, 2004 - http://filmforce.ign.com) direct an intense 16th Century drama, ScreenDaily reports that filmmaker exploring a theory about the true author- on Oxford and the Shakespeare authorship Roland Emmerich (The Day After Tomor- ship of Shakespeare’s works. No, no, it’s all from Hollywood director Roland row) will next direct The Soul of the Age, right, you’re not dreaming, nor has that Emmerich was reported. Emmerich is a a $30m to $35m “intense 16th century suspicious guy by the copier slipped big-time action/adventure/science fiction drama about the question of the author- ketamine in your coffee again. Ladies and director (Godzilla, Independence Day and ship of Shakespeare.” gentlemen Roland Emmerich is back, and The pic was scripted by John Orloff this time... he’s serious. the just-released The Day After Tomor- (HBO’s Band of Brothers). Emmerich is ... the film tells the tale of Edward De row), so this news may come as a mixed- reportedly scouting locations in the United Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford and an ac- blessing to Oxfordians—i.e., the good news Kingdom. The financing for Soul, how- claimed poet and playwright. While De Vere is “Hollywood, big-time!!!” and the bad ever, is proving to be “a risky undertaking,” was respected for his own work, recent news (maybe) is, “Action/adventure/sci- Emmerich advised ScreenDaily this past literary conspiracy theorists (yes, such weekend. “It’s very hard to make get a troubling people do exist [Oh, please! — ence fiction???!!! Oh, my!” movie like this made and I want to make it Ed.] ) have postulated that it was he, rather Anyway, quoting from the brief press in a certain way.” than Shakespeare, who truly penned the release stories we have: “Emmerich Directs Literary Drama” (12 works for which The Bard is famous.

Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 5

Terry Eagleton Attacks Oxfordian Writer Oxfordians in The Nation Publishes in The In our Winter 2004 issue (page 5)we “The only drawback to this eminently Weekly Standard reported on Terry Eagleton’s long overdue plausible case,” opines a bewildered recantation of postmodernism and quoted Professor Eagleton, “is that there is not a Washington DC researcher Peter Eagleton’s thoughtful statement that “we scrap of evidence for it.” Setting aside the Dickson scores again with a review of know as much about the historical tortured reasoning of that sentence, we’d Michael Wood’s florid BBC documentary, Shakespeare as [we know] about the Yeti.” like to remind Dr. Eagleton that the internet “In Search of Shakespeare,” in the most Alas, our optimism in supposing that does exist. Any eighth-grader with access recent issue of the The Weekly Standard. Eagleton had fully recovered from his own to a computer terminal can disprove the “As fascination with Shakespeare’s dramas political correctness was premature. second half of the sentence, merely by and poems endures,” writes Dickson, “the In the March 1 issue of The Nation visiting the Shakespeare Fellowship web desire to know more about the inner life of Eagleton launches an acerbic, convoluted, site. This site contains an abundance of the greatest literary figure in the English and uninformed attack on the Oxfordians. evidence substantiating the “eminent language intensifies—though scholars have always failed to satisfy it, because According to Eagleton, Oxfordians are plausibility” of the case for Oxford’s ‘there is no evidence, you know.’ That was “conspiratorial souls” motivated by authorship. Nor is it true, thank you, that the pithy response of Simon Schama when envious disbelief in the power of the Oxfordians are motivated by envy or he warned British historian-turned- common man’s natural genius. They snobbery. Such accusations merely testify documentary filmmaker Michael Wood imagine that “the real Shakespeare was a to the intellectual poverty of Professor about the pitfalls in trying to make the nobleman who stole the name of this Eagleton’s ex cathedra pronouncements. first-ever film that would make country bumpkin [from Stratford-upon- We’d be glad to debate Dr. Eagleton on that Shakespeare come alive.” Avon].” point, any time, any place. So perhaps we can now add Columbia historian Schama, one of the greatest cultural historians in recent memory, to New Cambridge Press Issue Supports the growing list of apostates to the Stratford myth. a “Literary” View of the Bard Recent issues of Shakespeare Matters (Summer 2003 and Winter 2004) have A new book by Lukas Erne, Shakespeare Although Roth supports Erne’s central featured commentary on the Wood as Literary Dramatist (Cambridge: thesis, his comment on the chronology of documentary. Cambridge UP, 2003), revives the once quarto publication also deserves to be well-accepted view that Shakespeare’s quoted: “Erne does not provide a satisfying plays are literature, as well as fine stagecraft. explanation for the sudden halt in Shakespeare Reviewer Stephen Roth, writing for Early registration of new Shakespeare plays Modern Literary Studies, begins his review around the time of James’ accession.” Fellowship Featured by noting the contradictory stance of most Oxfordians have argued, since 1920, that contemporary Shakespearean scholars the abrupt cessation of publication of new in Renaissance with respect to this question: “One of the Shakespearean quartos in 1604 is most The Jan.-Feb. 2004 issue of Renaissance greater ironies of Shakespeare scholarship plausibly explained by the author’s death magazine features an extensive article by over the last century is the ongoing effort on June 24, 1604. Jonathan Dixon favorable to Oxford as by Shakespeare scholars—most of whom Even with these imperfections, writes Shakespeare, including a full-page picture spend dozens of hours a week enjoining, Roth, Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist of the disputed Ashbourne portrait of cajoling, and browbeating their students effectively puts paid to a complex of largely- Oxford. Shakespeare Fellowship member into addressing Shakespeare’s plays as assumed and reactive truisms that have Barbara Burris has published extensive literature—to deny that those plays are increasingly dominated Shakespeare analysis of the Ashbourne portrait in literature. Shakespeare, these scholars say, scholarship over the last century. It’s Shakespeare Matters (Fall 2001 (I.1), thought of his plays as disposable, populist difficult to come away from this book with Winter 2002 (I.2), Spring 2002 (I.3) and ephemera, like Hollywood scripts; they any impression other than the perhaps- Fall 2002 (II.1)). were created for performance, and that’s obvious one: that Shakespeare was writing all.” Oxfordians have always insisted the for both the page and the stage. Visit the Fellowship on the Web plays are literature as well as fine theatre — “A complex of largely-assumed and News, bookstore, Discussion intended as much for posterity as for reactive truisms that have increasingly Boards and more! contemporary Elizabethan or Jacobean dominated Shakespeare scholarship over http://www.shakespearefellowship.org performance. the last century....” Hmm. Why would that be? Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 6 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004 Authorship Oxford in Westminster Abbey? Conference in Holland Two Dutch psychologists have organized the first ever Dutch conference on the authorship question, scheduled for July 8th to 10th in Utrecht, Holland. The “Who Was ‘Shakespeare’? - The Man Behind the Mask” call for papers reads in part:

“‘Shakespeare’, voted Man of the Millennium, was the greatest literary genius known to the world; yet what is known of the life of William is strangely divorced Professor Daniel Wright (left) and the Most Rev’d Dr. A. Wesley Carr, Dean from the poems and plays ...” of Westminster Abbey. “This yawning gulf between the person In February, Concordia University Pro- an Oxford memorial to Dr. Carr, who em- and the works has led many to question whether William of Stratford was in fact fessor Daniel Wright met with the Most Rev’d braced the application while pointing out the real author ... ‘Shakespeare’ was almost Dr. A. Wesley Carr, Dean of Westminster that acceptance of a proposal for certainly a pseudonym for the real writer Abbey, to discuss progress on the proposal for memorialization in the Abbey is a process of genius. We should look for the author commemorating the life and work of Edward that sometimes involves years of examina- elsewhere in the Elizabethan world.” de Vere in Poets’ Corner of Westminster tion and debate among the members of Abbey, in the Jerusalem Chamber on the spot the Abbey chapter with results usually lead- The conference aims to bring together where Henry IV died. ing to rejection or deferral of the proposal. a wide variety of professional scholars, Last year, through the Edward de Vere Still, with the Dean’s promising efforts literary and theater people, and Shake- Studies Conference at Concordia Univer- to facilitate our attempts to achieve the speare admirers in general. Among the sity, Dr. Wright raised $10,000 and solic- memorial for Oxford (although the Dean is scheduled speakers at Utrecht are Prof. ited a host of letters in support from Oxfor- not, himself, an Oxfordian), the prospects Daniel Wright and former SF President dian supporters to finance a memorial to for the commemoration of the Elizabe- Chuck Berney (“The Earl of Leicester in Edward de Vere. Last July, he presented the than era’s most acclaimed court poet-play- the plays of Shakespeare”). proposal and the offer of full payment for wright remain hopeful. For further information on the conference contact: Jan Scheffer, psychiatrist and psychoanalyst at the Fellowship Meets in Baltimore Pieter Baan Centre, Utrecht (jhs@ The Shakespeare Fellowship’s 3rd Whittemore and Dr. Stritmatter. A field worldonline.nlworldonline.nl) or Sandra Schruijer, Annual Conference will be held October trip to the Folger Shakespeare Library, professor of organizational psychology at 7th-10th, 2004, at the Doubletree Inn at the probably scheduled for Monday, October Tilburg University (schruijer@ Collonade in Baltimore, MD, near the 11th, is also in the works. yahoo.comyahoo.com) waterfront. A long list of confirmed speakers The standard conference registration, includes Dr. Daniel Wright, Dr. Ren Draya, for papers and performances from Oct. 7- Dr. Kevin Simpson, Dr. Alan Nelson, Dr. 10, Saturday’s big debate, and four meals, Tennessee Seminar Roger Stritmatter, Tim Holcomb, KC will be $195. Registrants will pay separately There will be a two-day Shakespeare Ligon, Terry Ross, Bill Boyle, Charles Boyle, for Sunday’s Awards’ Luncheon ($30). Two authorship seminar held at the University Ken Kaplan, Hank Whittemore, Stephanie discount packages are available: 1) $75 for of Tennessee Law School in Knoxville on Hughes, William Niederkorn, Ron Hess, papers, plays and debates or 2) $50 ($15 June 4th and 5th, 2004. Michael Dunn, Marty Hyatt, Dick Desper, per day) for papers only. The event, “Shakespeare and the Law,” Kevin Simpson, Andy Hannas, Barbara The conference rate (single or double) sponsored by the Law School, will bring Burris, Ron Halstead, Thomas Hunter, at the Doubletree is $134 (800-222-8733). together a number Stratfordian and anti- David Yuhas, Gordon Cyr, and Thomas Just two blocks from the Doubletree rooms Stratfordian scholars before an audience Regnier. have also been reserved at the Quality Inn, The conference will feature starting at only $85/night. of lawyers and law students. It will focus on performances by the local Baltimore Lynne Kositsky will arrange roommates issues relevant to the authorship debate Shakespeare Festival (Julius Caesar) and for those who wish to share a Doubletree within the context of Shakespeare’s legal an Australian performance troupe, Kinetic room with another Fellowship member. knowledge. Among those presenting will Energy (Shake-Speare), as well as a major Email Lynne at Lynnekositsky be Dr. Roger Stritmatter and Richard debate, co-sponsored by the Baltimore @[email protected]. The deadline for Whalen. We will report on this event in our Shakespeare Festival, with Terry Ross and registrations is Sept. 25. After Sept. 25 next issue. Dr. Nelson squaring off against Hank there will be a 15% surcharge. Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 7

Nelson interrogation (continued from page 1) met, interrogation first hour, during which Hunter showed or no interrogation. both Prof. Nelson and the audience the I do believe that it is great abundance of commentary that had absolutely essential been generated over the past six months that the work done about Nelson’s book—commentary that by Oxfordians to ex- pose the errors and had been published in Shakespeare Mat- scholarly abuses of ters, the Shakespeare Oxford Society news- the book be made letter, on the Fellowship website’s Discus- available to the sion Forum, and on the listservs managed world. by Nina Green (Phaeton), Robert Brazil (Elizaforum) and Dr. Daniel Wright (De It should be noted Vere). that the panel section of Unfortunately this preliminary over- the afternoon did afford view of the great amount of commentary, the opportunity for error corrections and basic questioning by some detailed com- others about Nelson’s methodology and mentary and question- biases wound up consuming the entire first ing of Nelson, but Hank Whittemore (left) talks with Prof. Alan Nelson during a break in hour. Nelson was never engaged in any within a restricted for- the afternoon-long event examining Nelson’s Oxford biography. dialogue at all by Dr. Hunter. mat that precluded any We learned later from Hunter that the extended give and take between each pan- charges. Nelson replied, “No, I don’t.” manner in which this first hour unfolded elist and Nelson. Each of the panelists first Bill Farina thanked Nelson for all the was the result of last- minute changes in the read a statement/commentary about Mon- new material his book makes available, but format, compounded by some misunder- strous, and then asked a specific question emphasized that all the negative material standing about how the hour should pro- based on their commentary for Nelson to about Oxford did not preclude his being ceed. Dr. Hunter, just before the session answer. Shakespeare. Farina also brought up the began, talked with Prof. Nelson and sug- Briefly, these commentaries and ques- important fact that in the 16th century gested that they not engage in an “interro- tions touched on significant issues, but the there was really no such thing as a spelling gation,” which he felt would create a hos- result—given the time constraints on the error, thus calling into question Nelson’s tile environment for the whole afternoon. five panelists—was that Oxfordians did most continual claims that Oxford’s spellings He suggested that, instead, he survey all the of the talking and Nelson just gave brief somehow showed he “misheard” words. critiques of Nelson’s work generated to answers to points raised by one panelist, Finally, Hank Whittemore emphasized date and then discuss them with Nelson. and then it was on to the next panelist. the beauty (which Nelson dismisses) of Prof. Nelson, Hunter recalls, then asked to Richard Whalen pointed out errors and Oxford’s verse and also emphasized an- use his rebuttal time at the beginning of the misstatements that begin in the book’s In- other instance of Nelson’s biases, namely hour, in order to explain corrections he troduction, which he cited as an ominous his omitting entirely from Monstrous had already posted on his web site (such as sign for the credibility of the rest of the Oxford’s Latin letter in praise of Clerke’s his misreading “white herrings” for the book. Whalen also noted what he described Latin translation of The Courtier and his proper name “Whythering”; the latest count as Nelson’s complete misreading of the four partial excerpts only of Oxford’s English from his website on errata of fact or inter- interludes in B.M. Ward’s 1928 biography of letter in praise of Bedingfield’s English pretation is 10). Nelson, in a post-confer- Oxford. Nelson says that Ward speculated translation of Cardanus Comforte. ence email to us, said that he didn’t think he about the authorship issue in the interludes, Whittemore also made an interesting was giving up rebuttal time, and was, he said, But, Whalen pointed out, Ward never specu- point when he hypothesized that what “in the dumps” when the hour proceeded lated about the issue and specifically said he Nelson had written could really be seen as without any chance for him to respond to any would refrain from commenting on it. a book called “Big, Fat Slob” that went on of the statements Dr. Hunter was reading. Stephanie Hughes took special note of and on about how awful the big, fat slob Dr. Hunter, in comments to Shakespeare Nelson’s spending only two pages in his was, but left out that the big, fat slob was Matters after the conference, said that entire book on Oxford’s education, con- Babe Ruth. This left the door open for cluding that he was not well educated. Nelson to lean into the microphone and I will certainly take responsibility Hughes cited her own work on Oxford’s say, “But Oxford was not Babe Ruth.” for the disappointing result of the Alan childhood years spent with preeminent And that exchange illustrates the real Nelson segment of the Portland con- scholar Sir Thomas Smith as his tutor, and problem here—that Oxfordians see Nelson ference. Instead of trying to survey the said Nelson’s failure to mention these years as fearing that Oxford might be Babe Ruth impressive Oxfordian response to Mon- struck her as clear evidence of the book’s and so trashes him at every turn, but when strous Adversary, it would have been biased agenda. more helpful and interesting to focus pressed on the issue, he simply shrugs and on specific but representative issues Mark Anderson pointed out that Nelson says, “No, I’m just writing about an interest- with Alan. But, after much discussion appeared to be entirely too ready to take at ing but little known earl named Oxford.” with others, I don’t know if the expec- face value anything said about Oxford in the An example of how this disconnect be- tation—that this program would fi- Howard-Arundel documents and asked him tween “Oxford the earl” vs. “Oxford as Shake- nally put Monstrous Adversary to rest whether he thought he had been too credu- speare” plays out point by point in Mon- for what it is—could have ever been lous in accepting the Howard-Arundel (Continued on page 8) Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 8 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

De Vere Conference (cont’d from page 1) hometowns. Comedy is probably the best (see related story, page one), and many felt way to engage people on controversial that Nelson got off too easy in this encoun- issues, and The Shakespeare Mystery suc- ter in the ongoing debate. ceeds admirably at that. Call 310-230-2929 Nonetheless, the full schedule of 20 or email [email protected] for fur- papers, a performance by the Pacific Uni- ther information. versity Chamber Singers as part of the Eric As is the custom each year, the Dean of Altschuler/William Jansen presentation on Concordia, Dr. Charles Kunert, opened the “Watson and Shakespeare: What’s the Con- proceedings Friday morning with his wel- nection?” (a continuation of work they have coming address. Dr. Kunert noted his plea- presented at previous conferences), the sure in how the conference has grown, and screening of a new authorship film (The that Concordia University is proud to be Shakespeare Enigma), and actor Michael hosting it each year. Dunn’s one-man show The Shakespeare Mystery filled out a busy, satisfying week- Keynote Speaker end. The Shakespeare Enigma was intro- Chicago Oxford Society President Bill Farina. Shakespeare Matters columnist Mark duced by Concordia University student and Anderson was this year’s keynote speaker, Sigma Tau Delta President Kiersten Brady. Actor Michael Dunn of Los Angeles de- and he treated the audience to excerpts It featured views of the Marolvian, Baconian lighted everyone with his one-man show, from his forthcoming book on Oxford’s life and Oxfordian theories of authorship, with The Shakespeare Mystery, in which he as revealed through his writing (“Shake- the Oxfordian view presented by Daphne performs as Sherlock Holmes investigat- speare” By Another Name, due out in April Pearson of England. Pearson has presented ing the authorship mystery, taking his au- 2005). in Portland in the past, and is a past editor dience through a carefully thought-out One significant example of new revela- of the De Vere Society Newsletter. She overview of the debate—from doubts about tions in his talk (“Between Hagiography earned a doctorate from Sheffield Univer- Stratford, to theories about Marlowe, Ba- and Demonology: Writing the Literary Life sity for her study of Oxford’s financial deal- con, etc., and finally to the inevitably cor- of Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford”) was the ings. The film offered nothing that veteran rect answer of Oxford. The show is available story of the months leading up to the Oxfordians had not seen or heard before, but for booking for any local groups who’d like famous defeat of the Spanish Armada in the real news here was, “Hey, another film!” to promote the authorship debate in their the summer of 1588. Anderson, citing re-

Nelson interrogation (continued from page 7) verse, and they too make comparisons to “faults” are that he thinks like a poet. strous can be seen in an interesting point Shakespeare’s sonnets to debunk the claim. In our recent email contacts with Prof. Hank Whittemore has made—but didn’t It is this sort of narrow focus on Nelson’s Nelson we also asked him directly about use during the panel—about arguments arguments and reasoning that many ob- why he wrote this book at all, if not for the in Monstrous involving Nelson’s denigra- servers thought should have occurred “Shakespeare” factor, and he responded tion of Oxford’s mastery of the English throughout the afternoon in examining that it was not just because Oxford was a language. him, but didn’t. Further, there is a broader “Shakespeare” candidate. He said he was On page 159, Nelson writes: “Other point embedded within these seemingly first attracted to the unexamined material faults in Oxford’s verse include inverted small points that illustrates the larger prob- in the Howard-Arundel libels (which he word order....” and he then goes on to give lem all Oxfordians have with Nelson’s book. says “Ward dismissed as mere lies”) and four examples from Oxford, such as “With As Richard Whalen commented to us had, in fact, originally started Monstrous due desert reward will never be.” But, as after the conference, Nelson is “transpar- as a book on just the libels and what they Whittemore points out, how is this example ent” when he tries to contend that he is not said about Oxford. of “inverted word order” any different from, writing about Oxford as Shakespeare—the Finally, in response to an email ques- “And by addition me of thee defeated / By book is a veritable Mt. Everest of charges tion from us asking whether “facts” [i.e. adding one thing to my purpose nothing’ about all that Oxford did wrong, with spe- documents] can “speak for themselves,” [Sonnet 20, lines 11-12, ]?” We later con- cial emphasis on his education (next to Nelson replied: tacted Prof. Nelson about this point, and he none), his writing ability (inferior), and his replied that, “Of course inverted word or- character (a monster). Yet, when one or two If facts could speak for themselves, der is found in Shakespeare. So inverted simple little “faults” about his “inferior” I could have stopped with my website. word order itself is not evidence that Ox- writing are closely examined, it turns out Obviously, interpretation is an inevitable, unavoidable part of writing history, or ford did not write Shakespeare.” Shakespeare is “guilty” of the same faults! biography. Nevertheless, a biographer can By coincidence, University of Washing- So, then, Oxfordians may ask, what is stick more or less closely to the docu- ton linguists Michael Brame and Galina the point in listing all these “faults” if not ments: I chose to stick very closely, and Popova have written a Letter to the Editor to state implicitly that a man with so many have been criticized even by highly positive (see page 2) about Nelson’s arguments faults can’t—or shouldn’t—be Shake- reviewers for citing documents without against Oxford’s mastery of English in which speare? And how credible are these attacks fully digesting them. they too draw examples from page 159 of on Oxford’s writing when his “faults” turn Monstrous, where Nelson claims that “un- out to be the same as Shakespeare’s? One can Well, yes. natural stress patterns” occur in Oxford’s only conclude that, in Nelson’s eyes, Oxford’s —W. Boyle Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 9 cent works such as Harry Kelsey’s Sir Francis Drake, The Queen’s Pirate (1998) and M.J. Rodriguez-Salgado’s Armada 1588-1598 (1988), noted that pre- Armada defensive mis- sions in May-June 1588 could well have in- cluded Oxford. Such a circumstance would in turn explain his ab- sence from Anne Cecil’s funeral in June 1588, one of the enduring mysteries of the over- all Oxford story. Ander- son also drew some in- teresting parallels be- tween this mission and Antony and Cleopatra, and noted that Shake- speare seems to be re- ferring to these mis- sions in the play. Anderson noted that this new material he is finding for his book is the product of Among the presenters at the 8th Annual Edward de Vere Studies Conference were: Prof. Ren Draya (top left), Ramon existing mainstream Jiménez (top right), Dr. Roger Stritmatter (bottom left) and Dr. Frank Davis (bottom right). research (both in his- tory and literary studies) that open the door Winter’s Tale as Tudor Allegory”). And, of ford himself. They asked the audience to to Shakespeare, but only for those willing course, the well-known word play of the recall that the whole play pivots around to entertain the possibility that the Earl of title itself (i.e. The Winter’s Tale in French marriage and that Bottom receives the Oxford was Shakespeare. = Le Conte d’Hiver = [sounds like] “Count coronet from Titania (by Oberon’s recount- de Vere”) was not overlooked. ing), symbolizing, well, who knows what? Plays and poems Ramon Jiménez gave another of his Further, Bottom is also a figuration of well-researched, masterful looks into the Oxford’s comedic persona (with Oberon- Papers presented this year covered a links between established Shakespeare Theseus being another side (or sides), as wide variety of topics, from the works them- plays and their possible earlier versions— the authors set forth in their book selves to the debate itself, thoughts on the ground untilled by Stratfordians who are Shakespeare’s Fingerprints. In consider- history of Shakespeare biography, thoughts locked into the 1590s plus timeframe. ing the comedic side of the equation they on what the true role of the Stratford man Jiménez, ably assisted by actor Michael delved into the more scatological mean- was in all this—plus several interesting Dunn, spoke on The True Tragedy of Rich- ings of Bottom, and made comparisons excursions into the politics of the Elizabe- ard the Third, and made a compelling case between the language of the play and the than era, the true value of a pound 400 years that this was probably an earlier version of language found in The Adventures of Free- ago, and even the notion of nobility down the Shakespeare play. man Jones, a work they consider to be by an through the ages in both England and While Jiménez emphasized that much anonymous Oxford. America. of the text from True Tragedy was “not too Prof. Sam Saunders presented an un- Among the papers touching on the good,” the selections performed by Dunn usual but quite engaging look at a little works themselves were back-to-back pre- had most in the audience thinking, yes, this thought about topic: “Did Shakespeare sentations on The Winter’s Tale from Dr. is the same voice, the same Richard. This Know the Odds in Hamlet’s Duel?” As it Ren Draya and Dr. Michael Delahoyde. was especially true of the passage in which turns out, other scholars have looked at this Draya presented perspectives on the me- Richard both contemplates and relishes his problem (is there anything about Hamlet chanics of the play itself (“Paulina and the revenge. that hasn’t been studied and written about Dynamics of Control: The Winter’s Tale in Dr. Michael Brame and Dr. Galina somewhere, sometime?). The text in ques- the Cruelest Month”), while Delahoyde Popova asked “Who’s Bottom?” in A Mid- tion is spoken by Osric in Act V, scene ii— spoke about the Tudor allegories that Ox- summer’s Night Dream, and made a case “The king, sir, hath laid, that in a dozen ford wove into his story-telling (“The for the character being a caricature of Ox- (Continued on page 10) Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 10 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

Conference (continued from page 9) was anti-Puritan and pro-theater. Farina passes between yourself and him, he shall also emphasized the fact that just two de- not exceed you three hits: he hath laid on cades after the Folio project came the Civil twelve for nine; and it would come to im- War, Cromwell and an era of suppression of mediate trial, if your lordship would vouch- the theater that lasted for several decades. safe the answer.”) In both instances (Catholic politics or Saunders explored the meaning of these Puritan politics) the Oxfordian paradigm odds in straight, numeric betting terms, makes better sense of the fit between the but of special interest for Oxfordians was author Shakespeare and the world he lived his observation that the “twelve for nine” in than any paleo- or neo-Stratfordian views. odds can also be found in earlier sources Stephanie Hughes’s paper gave a broad that Oxford may well have had access to. overview of the politics of secrecy that prevailed during this era and which most Politics, history, biography certainly played a role in the use of pseud- onyms by many writers, culminating in the Other papers over the weekend exam- incredible circumstance of the pseudonym ined various aspects of Elizabethan soci- Concordia University graduate Andrew Werth “Shakespeare” becoming associated with ety, culture and politics as they related to has spoken at seven consecutive EDVSCs. Shaksper of Stratford. the theatre and/or to the authorship debate. Ian Haste provided all Oxfordians with Dr. Frank Davis (“Lyly-Oxford-Shake- Michael Wood’s neo-Stratfordian biogra- some very useful information about the speare Connection”), William Farina (“Pu- phy. Dr. Wright explored the Catholic is- true value of £1000 during this era. He used ritan Politics and the First Folio”), Dr. Daniel sues as used by Wood in both his book and this amount to show us how much buying Wright (“Knocking on Wood: Why Michael documentary In Search of Shakespeare power Oxford would have had with his Wood’s Recent Biography of the Stratford (see his article “Knocking on Wood” in £1000 annuity. The answer was that he Man Undermines Shakespearean Ortho- Shakespeare Matters, Fall 2003, p. 10ff). would have had considerable buying power, doxy”), Stephanie Hughes (“Say, Who Was Meanwhile, William Farina looked at and could have easily maintained a house- that Masked Man? Secrecy in Politics and the other key political-religious story of hold with dozens of servants, plus acting History, Then and Now”), and Ian Haste the era—the role of the Puritans in Elizabe- troupes with dozens of actors and related (“Oxford’s Annuity from the Crown: The than and Jacobean society—and explored expenses. value of £1000 between 1586 and 1604”) how this may have affected the publication Several other papers shed some light all explored aspects of Elizabethan history of the First Folio in 1623. on the history of the times and the tradi- that help clarify issues that Oxfordians In his talk on “Puritan Politics and the tional Stratford story. Richard Whalen cov- deal with regularly in their “new-histori- First Folio,” Farina reviewed the political ered a topic that’s been covered before, but cist” efforts to establish the truth about the circumstances surrounding the First Folio can probably never be covered too much. In Shakespeare authorship. publication; he emphasized that the poli- “The Stratford Bust: A Monumental Fraud,” Dr. Frank Davis, in taking a close look tics of the Puritans, who were virulently Whalen spoke about all the holes in the at the connections between Lyly and Ox- anti-theatre (plays = the work of the devil, traditional Stratford story of the bust, and ford reminded us that there clearly was actresses = whores) must have been a key delved into the dubious history of the one—which in itself should remind us consideration in suppressing Oxford’s au- monument in the 18th century, when avail- that this is the sort of connection between thorship, even though King James himself able evidence seems to indicate that the Shakespeare and his acknowledged source material that Stratfordian scholars can only dream of. Their boy was just 16 years old The 3rd Annual Institute of when Lyly went to work for Oxford at the Oxfordian Studies Summer Seminar original Blackfriars, and within five years— Oxfordian Studies Summer Seminar as many traditional scholars attest—mod- The Institute of Oxfordian Studies con- vice, all breakfasts and lunches, instruc- ern drama was born as the meeting of the venes its 3rd annual week-long seminar tional costs, books, classroom supplies and public and court theatres took place at the from the 8th to the 13th of August 2004 on the cost of all day trips (former trips have Blackfriars. the Concordia University campus. included visits to Portland’s Japanese Gar- But of course—in traditional lore— This year the principal topic for 2004 dens and Chinese Gardens, attendance at Oxford’s involvement was minimal or co- will be “Prince Tudor: Truth or Delusion?” an outdoor performance of a Shakespeare incidental—just a patron. And to even con- Equal time will be given to advocates for play, a Saturday picnic lunch, and a lun- sider that it might have been a young Shake- and against the Prince Tudor thesis. Lead- cheon cruise on the Willamette River aboard speare (i.e., Oxford) who launched the birth ing the advocacy for Prince Tudor will be the yacht, The Portland Spirit). of modern drama, with Lyly taking from him author and actor Hank Whittemore; lead- To register, send a check payable to the rather than a Stratfordian Shakespeare later ing the opposition to the Prince Tudor Edward de Vere Studies Conference, taking from Lyly—well, perish the thought. thesis will be retired statistician Dr. John Concordia University, 2811 NE Holman, Readers of Shakespeare Matters are Varady. Portland, OR 97211-6099. Please include a already familiar with the ongoing debate The cost of $995 per registrant for the return address, a telephone number and an over Shakespeare’s religion (i.e. was he a six-day seminar includes housing (double- email address. Prof. Wright will contact you Catholic?) and how this debate entered into occupancy) on the CU campus, linen ser- to supply you with more details. Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 11 bust underwent more than a refur- Banquet bishment—it could well be that the bust we have today was created The Awards Banquet on Friday then to replace the “holding a sack” evening also had its share of enter- rendition sketched by Dugdale in tainment and a delightful time for the mid-17th century. all. Regular attendees at the con- Also speaking of Stratford and ference thought it was probably the traditional story, doctoral stu- the best banquet to date at the dent Daniel MacKay (University of EDVSC. Oregon) gave an interesting pre- Humorist Dee Hartman was sentation on the history of Shake- the featured speaker and spoke of speare biography in his “Fashion- her experiences in bringing the ing a Mask: An Attempt to Account debate to her classes, especially a for a Century of Silence About the prison-outreach program she Author...” MacKay noted that it once taught. “Can bringing was Malone’s interest in the Son- Oxfordianism to prisoners be le- nets in the late 18th century that gal?” she wondered. And further- really gave birth to modern Shake- more, “Is it dangerous?” speare biography. There were three achievement Until then there had been little awards and one scholarship sti- interest demonstrated by anyone, pend presented, and each of the but once Malone wrote of the Son- recipients gave engaging and nets as being autobiographical— heartfelt observations about their and then, of course, became the role in the great debate. 2004 first of many trying to grapple Achievement in the Arts co-recipi- with the Fair Youth problem— ents Michael Dunn and Stephen interest in Shakespeare biogra- Moorer—both theater profession- phy picked up. It wasn’t long after als—were hilarious in their re- that the authorship debate began marks and observations about the in earnest, seeking to reconcile debate. Pictured above with Dr. Daniel Wright is Michael Dunn (right), co- the author’s life with his writing. winner with Stephen Moorer of the 2004 Artistic Achievement Award. Distinguished Scholarship And the Sonnets continue today to Below Stephanie Hughes accepts a $6,000 scholarship check, the award winner Dr. Paul Altrocchi be the talisman of Shakespeare EDVSC’s first award of a scholarship stipend to an Oxfordian researcher. was magnanimous in his com- biography and theories about his ments on Prof. Alan Nelson, and life (i.e. homosexual, royal, etc.). corresponding to a Pythagorean triangu- Nelson then came to the podium to praise lar number with sides of 77. Stritmatter’s Altrocchi (the two are working together on Other research analysis showed that the numbers 6, 7, an article about the “Roscius” annotation and 11—and by extension their multiples discovered by Altrocchi last year and pre- Several other papers offered some in- and derivatives—66, 77, and 3003—are sented at the 2003 EDVSC conference). teresting insights into research. Dr. Paul fundamental to the structure of MB. Al- Stephanie Hughes, recipient of the first Altrocchi, who has been conducting much though primarily remembered as a writer conference scholarship stipend of $6,000, original research in recent years, gave a of emblem books and verses, Peacham was was delighted, and promised to make the paper on the importance of research, and a renaissance polymath with special inter- most of her six-week, stipend-financed re- challenged all Oxfordians to engage in new est in astronomy and mathematics. search trip to England later this spring. research. His paper focused on “Searching Andrew Werth, a graduate of Concordia And finally, there were moments of si- for a Smoking Gun in Oxford’s Personal who has spoken at the last seven De Vere lence for Oxfordians who have left us this past Letters,” but his message was that the more Studies Conferences, gave a unique presen- year. Dr. Merilee Karr spoke about her father Oxfordian eyes that are out there looking, tation. For those Oxfordians who would like Sam and his influence on her life and their the more likely that obscure—but impor- to look ahead to the days when Shakespeare mutual interest in the authorship issue. tant—references that traditional scholars will be taught as “Oxford was Shakespeare” Fran Gidley of Texas spoke about her might overlook will come to light. Werth’s paper was a wonderful preview. friend, Edith Duffy of Durham (NC), who Dr. Roger Stritmatter revisited Minerva Briefly, he explored the notion of nobil- passed away in February at the age of 91. Britanna, the enigmatic 1612 emblem book ity as expressed by Shakespeare/Oxford, and Local papers led their obituaries with ref- by Henry Peacham which has been exten- compared it with the notion of nobility as erence to her passionate Oxfordian beliefs, sively analyzed for its possible connections expressed by Walt Whitman two centuries a remembrance of her life that surely would to de Vere. Stritmatter presented for the later. Since Whitman was a well-known anti- have made her proud, and makes all of us first time a theory that MB is structured Stratfordian who had speculated that only who knew her proud. around a simple but elegant numerical one of the wolfish earls could have authored Next year’s 9th Annual Conference will formula derived from Pythagorean num- these amazing works, the comparison was be held the second weekend in April, from ber theory. He noted that the total number both illuminating and ironic (we hope to the 7th to the 10th, 2005. of verses contained in the book is 3003, publish this paper in the coming year). —W.Boyle Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 12 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

Rosencrantz-Guildenstern (continued from page 1) Digges and Shakspere, although (as Whalen points out) there is no documentary evidence that they were acquainted, and Digges was 24 years younger than the Stratford man. Leonard Digges’ father was Thomas Digges (c. 1546-1595). As Peter Usher has emphasized,3 the elder Digges was a mathemati- cian and astronomer of enormous stature in the scientific world of the 16th century. Digges published works advocating the revolutionary Copernican theory of the cosmos, and was the first to envision an infinitely large universe filled with stars. Hotson cites a letter (December 1590) from the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe to the English scholar and antiquary Thomas Savile in which Tycho desires to be remembered to the astrologer Dr. John Dee and to “the most noble and most learned mathematician Thomas Digges,” whom he heartily wishes well. In a postscript Tycho writes “I included four copies of my portrait recently engraved in copper at Amsterdam.”4 This portrait is presumably similar to the one included as the frontispiece to Tycho’s collected letters, Epistolæ, published in 1596 (Fig. 1).5 It shows Tycho framed by an arch supported by columns. It bears the names and arms of his ancestors (paternal on the left, maternal on the right). The portrait shows the name ROSENKRANS on the left side of the arch and GVLDENSTEREN on the bottom of the left column. Hotson concludes “There is little doubt that from 1590 Digges had a copy of his learned friend’s portrait, bearing the names Rosenkrans and Guldensteren, at his house in Heminges’s parish. Perhaps Shakespeare saw them there.” Hotson’s scenario was accepted by A. J. Meadows in The High Firmament (1969), a lucid history of astronomical thought. Meadows writes: (Fig. 1) Frontispiece from Tycho’s Epistolæ of 1596

Thomas Digges was the leading English mathematician of his and Guildenstern in the play is so striking that we may be reasonably time. His father, Leonard Digges, was a friend of John Dee (both had sure that Tycho’s portrait was one of the sources for Hamlet’s cast a equal interest in astronomy and astrology) and he, himself, had of characters. been Dee’s pupil. Thomas’ younger son, also called Leonard, was a friend of Shakespeare, and wrote one of the prefatory verses to the first folio. When Shakespeare was in London he lived close to the Hotson’s hypothesized chain of transmission for the Tycho Digges’ house and may have been acquainted with Thomas Digges. portrait is quite extended: [Tycho —> Savile —> T. Digges —> L. Certainly this would explain a reference in Hamlet where the names, Digges —> Shakespeare]. By claiming that the elder Digges was Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, happen to be the names of two Tycho’s leading English correspondent, Meadows eliminates Savile ancestors of the Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe. Shakespeare from the chain, and by ignoring Leonard he shortens the chain could have learnt of this from Digges, who was the leading English correspondent of Tycho Brahe, and would therefore probably have further to [Tycho —> T. Digges —> Shakespeare], but loses been acquainted with his ancestry (of which Tycho was proud). specificity in that he no longer identifies the source of the portrait. Gingerich speaks of “Digges’ copy of the Epistolae”: unfortunately There are several statements here that could be challenged, but Digges died in 1595 and publication of the Epistolæ didn’t take the most interesting development is that Hotson’s conjectured place until 1596. So unless new documents come to light, Savile friendship between Leonard Digges and Shakspere (which Whalen’s must be included in the chain, and Shakespeare must have seen observations render highly improbable) has now been elevated to Tycho’s portrait between 1590 (when it was printed) and 1593 established fact. Meadows is still relatively cautious when it comes (when Savile died) if this scenario is to be historically accurate. to drawing the final link (“Shakespeare could have learnt of this These three authors are all Stratfordians—that is, they believe from Digges . . .”), but the caution has given way to virtual certainty that Shakespeare, the author of Hamlet, was in fact Will Shakspere by May 1981, when astronomer Owen Gingerich (in the periodical of Stratford. An alternative view is that ‘Shakespeare’ was the pen Sky and Telescope) writes: name of Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford (1550-1604).6 The above scenarios can easily be adapted to the Oxfordian view by Tycho, from his Uraniborg palace on Hven, could easily look assuming that Digges knew de Vere. This is less far-fetched than northward across the strait to the Elsinore castle, the setting of Hamlet. Shakespeare may well have seen Digges’ copy of the Hotson’s hypothesized friendship between Shakspere and Leonard Epistolae. In any event, the coincidence with the names Rosencrantz Digges. Thomas Digges and de Vere were within four years of being Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 13 the same age, rather than separated by a 24-year interval. Digges drinking “one mug after the other, filled to the brim” and exclaimed was well-connected at the Elizabethan court, and de Vere was one that such drinking “to the very dregs” was a learned art in itself. . . “We dedicate these toasts to you to the sound of trumpets, recorders of its foremost courtiers. Moreover, there was a close connection and lutes . . .” he told Schultz.8 between Digges and William Cecil, Lord Burghley. Digges’ book on the “new star” of 1572 It is impossible for me to read this description without thinking (now known as Tycho’s of Act 1, scene 3 in Hamlet: supernova) was dedicated “. . . the most interest- to Burghley, and found an [A flourish of trumpets . . . ] honored place in his ing development is extensive library. De Vere Horatio: What does this mean, my lord? grew up in the Burghley that Hotson’s conjec- Hamlet: The King doth wake tonight, and takes his rouse, household and eventually Keeps wassail, and the swagg’ring up-spring reels; married Burghley’s tured friendship And as he drains his drafts of Rhenish down, daughter Anne. He had The kettle-drum and the trumpet thus bray out The triumph of his pledge. unrestricted access to between Leonard Burghley’s library. Scenario 2: the Willoughby Connection. Peregrine Bertie Authorship aside, there Digges and Shakspere is an unsatisfying facet to (1555-1601), later known as Lord Willoughby d’Eresby, married Oxford’s sister, Mary Vere, in 1578. In 1582 he was sent on a the theory that the Danish (which Whalen’s courtiers’ names were diplomatic mission to Denmark to award Frederik II the Order of the Garter and to negotiate for British shipping rights in the Baltic. chosen from Tycho’s observations render portrait. It seems arbitrary. While in Denmark he visited Tycho Brahe’s astronomical castle, Uraniborg, on the island of Hven.9 Did the author look at the highly improbable) portrait and exclaim The British Library possesses a collection of Willoughby’s correspondence (Cotton MS Titus C VII). Some refer to his travels ‘Rosencrantz and Guilden- has now been elevated stern! The very names I in Denmark, and among these is a roster of names entitled need for the characters in Noblissimi ad Generosi, Regni Daniae Inclÿti Cosiliarÿ et to established fact.” 10 my new play!’ There are 14 Senatores. It is a list of 24 guests at a state dinner given for him distinct names on the during his mission. Three of the names are structure surrounding Tycho. Why ‘Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’? Why not ‘Markeman Petrius Guildenstern de Thim and Rosenspar’? Why not ‘Axellsøn and Stormvase’? A defender of Georgius Rosenkrantz de Rosenholm Axellius Guildenstern de Lingbÿ the Tycho connection would say ‘Shakespeare had his own reasons. He liked the imagery—”Rosy Wreath” and “Golden Star”—and if (Note that the Latinized spelling of Gyldenstierne as it appears he had chosen “Axellsøn and Stormvase” we’d be wondering why here is the spelling adopted in the final version of Hamlet.) Here he hadn’t chosen “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern”.’ Maybe so. But are brief biographies (using the Danish spelling) of the three men: it still seems arbitrary. Another difficulty with the above scenarios is that the author Jørgen Rosenkrantz (1523 – 1596) was a member of the of Hamlet displays a deeper and more detailed knowledge of state council (rigsraad), a member of the regency council that Danish customs than can be accounted for by supposing he lifted ruled Denmark during the minority of Christian IV, one of the his Danish names from a portrait of Tycho. One example of this is most powerful men in the Danish government, and a patron the very fact that he names Wittenberg as the university which and ally of Tycho Brahe. He finished his education at the Hamlet and his two friends attend. Wittenberg was the nearly University of Wittenberg, as did most of the Danish nobility. universal choice among Danish nobility. Thoren writes His ties to the family of Tycho Brahe were unusually close: after the death of his parents he was raised by an aunt who was [Anders] Vedel was already in Wittenberg . . . Many other Danish married to the elder Axel Brahe (also a rigsraad). Jørgen’s son, students were there too. They habitually came in such numbers, in fact, that Danish kings paid regular pensions to Wittenberg professors known as “Holger the Learned,” married a daughter of the to ensure that their subjects would be well received. One modern younger Axel Brahe, Tycho’s brother. Holger Rosenkrantz and scholar described the university as the postgraduate school of the Tycho were close friends, and their correspondence is an University of Copenhagen in that era.7 important source for Tycho’s biographers. Peder and Axel Gyldenstierne (both rigsraads) were sons of Another example is the author’s awareness of Danish drinking the elder Knud Gyldenstierne (also a rigsraad). Peder (1533 – habits. Ferguson quotes an example from Tycho himself. 1594) was raised in the warrior tradition and served eighteen years as Marshal of the Realm. Axel (1542 – 1603) served for A letter from Tycho to Bartholomew Schultz—evidently written some years as viceroy of Norway. Again, there are blood ties to at the dining table—reported that he and his companions were (Continued on page 14) Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 14 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

Rosencrantz-Guildenstern (continued from page 13) Tycho: Axel was a son of Tycho’s mother’s aunt. The two men were close friends and political allies, and one of Tycho’s leading assistants, Flemløse, later served as Gyldenstierne’s personal physician.

Lord Willoughby’s negotiations over shipping rights would have involved the most powerful members of the Danish court, probably including the men described above. Did he go back to London and regale his brother-in-law with amusing stories of the foibles of the Danes? In any event, Oxford would have had access to the guest list mentioned above. There is no known connection between Willoughby and Shakspere of Stratford. There are two objections to identifying Jørgen Rosenkrantz and Peder or Axel Gyldenstierne with the Danish courtiers in Hamlet. One is the objection raised above—the nagging sense of arbitrariness. There were two dozen names on the guest list—why choose Rosencrantz and Guildenstern? The other objection, Photo courtesy of Questors Theatre (Fig. 2) Lounging backstage, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern wait for perhaps more fundamental, is the lack of correspondence between their next entrance in a drama they don’t understand, unaware of their the high positions held by these formidable men (rigsraads all) and cosmological significance. Photo from the Questors Theatre 1974 the relatively lowly status of Hamlet’s two friends in the play. production of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Jørgen, Peder and Axel were haughty nobles who held great power in the Danish court—hardly the type to be summoned hastily to renew a friendship and spy on a moody prince. and Gyldenstierne 17. Rosenkrantz had just finished his tour of Two More Candidates. If the above candidates possess Italy and had not yet entered service in the Danish court. characteristics that render them unlikely as models for the courtiers Gyldenstierne had been studying and traveling in Germany with in Hamlet, what characteristics would we find in more acceptable his tutor, Bacmeister. Unless documents turn up with information candidates? From reading the play, we know that the two are to the contrary, it seems likely that the kinsmen’s visit to England friends, that they travel together, and that they both attended was simply the last leg of the Grand Tour. school in Wittenberg. As we noted above, there is already a set of Timelines. When was Hamlet written? The answer depends associations linking characters in the play with figures in on one’s authorial orientation. The play was entered in the Elizabeth’s court, so ideal candidates for Hamlet’s friends should Stationer’s Register in 1602.12 Stratfordians assume it was written be of approximately Hamlet’s age—that is, a generation younger about 1600. If Frederik and Knud are assumed to be the original than Claudius (Leicester) or Gertrude (Elizabeth). sources for the Danish names in Hamlet, the timing works out well In 1941 the Danish writer Palle Rosenkrantz published a two- for Stratfordians—Shakspere meets them during their 1592 visit volume novel entitled Rosenkrantz og Gyldenstjerne: Roman fra (possibly in the Mermaid Tavern), the names are filed in his Renœssancetiden (“Rosenkrantz and Gyldenstierne: A Novel from capacious memory, and when he starts writing Hamlet in 1600, the Renaissance Era”). Although it was a work of fiction, the book they bubble up ready to hand. featured two real-life figures as its protagonists: Frederik However, there are indications of Hamlet’s existence well Rosenkrantz (1571 – 1602) and Knud Gyldenstierne (1575 – before 1600. In particular, Thomas Nashe’s preface to Robert 1627). They are of the appropriate generation, both attended Greene’s Menaphon (1589) speaks of “whole Hamlets, I should Wittenberg, and they traveled together to England in 1592, though say handfuls of tragical speeches.”13 Since Shakspere was manifestly apparently they were not beheaded on their arrival at the English still in Stratford in 1589 (he’s named in legal proceedings) court. Recent biographers of Tycho Brahe have mentioned them Stratfordians have decided that the play Nashe is referring to is as the prototypes of the courtiers in Hamlet.11 somebody else’s Hamlet, though there is no documentary evidence The distinguished historian John Robert Christianson has to this effect. Oxfordians, of course—embracing an older kindly allowed us to include as appendices his biographical playwright, one who lived in London—have no difficulty in sketches of these two historical figures. The level of detail provided accepting a version of the Hamlet we know and love in 1589, or in these sketches is useful in enabling us to avoid misconceptions. even earlier. Clark14 has suggested that initial work on Hamlet For example, Ferguson states “ . . . the two kinsmen were in England was inspired by two events: the diplomatic mission to Denmark in on a diplomatic mission in 1592 . . .”11 The phrase “diplomatic 1582 carried out by Lord Willoughby (Oxford’s brother-in-law), mission” leads one to imagine an enterprise of great pith and and the death in June 1583 of Thomas Radcliffe, Earl of Sussex. moment, such as dealing with Lord Burghley about Baltic trade Sussex had been a father figure to the young Oxford and had routes, or reporting to Robert Cecil about Catholic activities in overseen his introduction to military action, putting down the Scandinavia. Referring to the information provided by Northern Rebellion of 1569. It was widely suspected that he had Christianson, however, we find that in 1592 Rosenkrantz was 21 been poisoned at the behest of his political antagonist, Robert Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 15

Dudley, the Earl of Leicester, who had a reputation as a poisoner were more noble than others. Four families were the most noble rivaling the Borgias.15 The Gertrude-Claudius parallel is suggested of all—the Brahes, the Billes, the Rosenkrantzes, and the by the close relationship between Elizabeth and Leicester, which Gyldenstiernes—and their lines had so intertwined that they were lasted until his death in 1588. essentially one big family. Tycho’s father was a Brahe and his If Hamlet was started in 1583, Frederik and Knud are effectively mother was a Bille; the names Rosenkrantz and Gyldenstierne eliminated as the sources of the Danish names (Frederik was simply complete the quartet. The effect is similar to writing a twelve, Knud eight). Also eliminated is the 1596 portrait of Tycho roman à clef about America in the 1960s and naming a presidential Brahe. We are left with the guest list brought back from Denmark candidate ‘Fitzgerald.’ Everybody (in America at least) would by Lord Willoughby, in spite of the objections of arbitrariness and know whom you meant. Now the previously-voiced objections— inappropriateness raised above. Apparently the playwright did arbitrariness and inappropriateness—fall away. Now it is clear like the imagery of ‘Rosy Wreath’ and ‘Golden Star.’ I still harbor there is nothing arbitrary the fantasy that sometime in 1592 Frederik and Knud met Oxford. about the choice of Perhaps they dropped in on Willoughby to reminisce about when names—the battle of he negotiated with Uncle Jørgen and Papa Henrik, and Oxford, “Now it is clear there is cosmologies is part of the hearing of the presence in England of the bearers of the names he warp and woof of the play, appropriated for his play, invited them to dinner. nothing arbitrary about and the names of the The Cosmological Connection. In 2001 Peter Usher opened Danish courtiers are as up a completely new dimension in this inexhaustible play by the choice of names—the close as the author could pointing out the existence of a cosmic allegory in Hamlet.3 come to saying ‘Tycho’ According to Usher, Claudius (and Elsinore) represent the battle of cosmologies is without giving up the Ptolemaic cosmology, in which the stationary Earth is orbited by claim that he was writing the seven ancient planets (the Sun, the Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, part of the warp and woof fiction. The fact that Jørgen Jupiter and Saturn). Hamlet (and Wittenberg) represent the Rosencrantz and Peder and heliocentric Copernican system, which forms the basis of our of the play, and the names Axel Gyldenstierne were present beliefs. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are identified with powerful individuals no the short-lived Tychonic cosmology (a compromise proposed by of the Danish courtiers are longer bothers us, since the Tycho in 1577), in which a stationary Earth is orbited by the Sun reference is not to them, and Moon, while the other planets revolve around the Sun. Usher as close as the author but to a cosmological presents a number of arguments in support of his thesis, including system. Shakespeare’s use of technical terms associated with astronomy could come to saying There is just a bit more (‘opposition’ and ‘retrograde,’ etc) and the name of the usurping to be said. Earlier I king (‘Claudius’ appears nowhere in the source materials,16 but is ‘Tycho’ without giving up facetiously quoted a in fact Ptolemy’s first name). Wittenberg had been a hotbed of hypothetical defender of heliocentrism since 1541, when the mathematician Georg Joachim the claim that he was ‘the Tycho connection’ as von Lauchen (‘Rheticus’) visited Copernicus in Poland and returned saying that Shakespeare to Wittenberg to teach his views. Just as the Tychonic system had writing fiction.” chose the names little support among 16th-century astronomers, so Rosencrantz Rosencrantz and and Guildenstern are relatively minor characters in the play— Guildenstern from Tycho’s their deaths occur offstage and do not lead to any confrontations— portrait because he liked while the battle between the Ptolemaic and Copernican systems the imagery—‘Rosy Wreath’ and ‘Golden Star.’ But Shakespeare, results in the climactic bloodbath of the final act, followed by the the master weaver, has indeed woven these names into the fabric arrival of Fortinbras from Poland (the home of Copernicus). It of the play. The first act opens with a description of the appearance is then that Hamlet passes the cosmological baton ( “ . . . the election of the Ghost (“When yond same star that’s westward from the pole lights on Fortinbras, he has my dying voice.”). had made his course t’illume that part of heaven where now it burns The Tychonic cosmology was a hybrid system, combining . . .”). There’s our Golden Star. And it has been identified18 as elements of the Ptolemaic and the Copernican. In the play, Tycho’s supernova, which was first observed 6 November 1572. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are ambiguous figures, currying Where? In Wittenberg. The image of a Rosy Wreath suggests favor with both Claudius and Hamlet. Historically, England was Ophelia, “larded all with sweet flowers.” When Gertrude describes the home of an active group of Copernicans (including Thomas her drowning (4.7) she talks of Ophelia’s “fantastic garlands” and Digges, his father, and others) who advanced and elaborated “crownet weeds,” both phrases suggesting wreaths. The reference Copernican astronomy, administering the coup de grâce to the is even more specific at Ophelia’s burial (5.1), where the Doctor Tychonic system. In the play, Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern are of Divinity protests “Yet here she is allowed her virgin crants . . .” sent to England and beheaded. The rare English word ‘crants’ does not appear in desk dictionaries, Once the Tycho<—>R&G association is made, the penny but the Oxford English Dictionary defines it as “a garland, chaplet, drops and the light comes on. Thoren17 has pointed out that while wreath.”19 there were over 100 noble families in 16th-century Denmark, some (Continued on page 16) Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 16 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

Rosencrantz-Guildenstern (continued from page 15) courtiers in Hamlet, I think that these and other correspondences The Oxford Scenario. From the age of four until he was mentioned above should qualify them as honorary, or ex post facto twelve, Edward de Vere lived with and was tutored by the renowned members of the play’s dramatis personæ, along with Burghley, scholar Sir Thomas Smith (1513-77).20 Smith was known to be an Elizabeth, Leicester, and, of course, Oxford. Long live Rosenkrantz enthusiastic student of astrology and astronomy (Hughes writes and Gyldenstierne! that he had “a professional’s knowledge” of these subjects). When his father died, de Vere ACKNOWLEDGMENT: I am extremely grateful to Professor John became the ward of William Robert Christianson of Luther College, Decorah, Iowa, for invaluable help during the preparation of this work, and for permission to use his “Those with a Cecil, Lord Burghley. We have already noted that de biographical sketches. Vere had unrestricted access knowledge of to Cecil’s extensive library, Notes: which not only contained Oxford’s life will, Thomas Digges’s book on 1. Eva Turner Clark, Hidden Allusions in Shakespeare’s Plays, Kennikat Tycho’s supernova, but also Press, New York, 1974, p. 637. on reading the Copernicus’s seminal 2. Richard Whalen, “Cross-Examining Leonard Digges on his Stratford volume, De revolutionibus.21 Connections,” Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter 37.1, Spring 2001. biographical Thus, throughout his 3. Peter Usher, “Advances in the Hamlet Cosmic Allegory,” The Oxford- childhood, de Vere had the ian IV, 2001, pp 25-49. 4. Letter printed in Tychonis Brahe Dani opera omnia, J. L. E. Dreyer, ed., sketch of Frederik encouragement and oppor- tunity to develop an active Gyldendal, Copenhagen, 1913-29, 7: 283-5. 5. Engraved by Jacques de Gheyn II (see J. R. Christianson, On Tycho’s Rosenkrantz, have interest in astronomy and cosmology. His brother-in- Island (2000), pp. 117, 286) law, Lord Willoughby, was 6. Charlton Ogburn, The Mysterious William Shakespeare, EPM Publica- a strong sense interested enough in these tions, McLean VA, 1984. topics to visit Tycho’s 7. Victor Thoren, The Lord of Uraniborg, Cambridge, London, 1990, of déjà vu.” observatory Uraniborg p. 22. during his 1582 mission. 8. Kitty Ferguson, Tycho and Kepler, Walker, New York, 2002, p. 112. From Tycho’s letter to Savile 9. John Robert Christianson, private communication. (cited above) we know that Tycho was not shy about describing his 10. Shakespeare Oxford Society Newsletter 29.1A, Winter 1993, p. 18. work and seeking credit for it, and he probably would have been 11. Thoren, 429; Ferguson, 265n. eager to explain his hybrid cosmology to the distinguished English 12. Frank Kermode in The Riverside Shakespeare, Houghton Mifflin, visitor. It is easy to imagine that Willoughby’s tales of his encounter Boston, 1974, 1136. with Tycho (together with a report on Danish customs, such as the 13. E. K. Chambers, The Elizabethan Stage, Oxford, 1923, Vol. IV, 234. ritualized drinking at banquets, the preference for sending young 14. Clark, p. 634 et seq. nobles to Wittenberg, and the political ascendancy of the four 15. Leicester’s Commonwealth, Dwight C. Peck, ed., Ohio University foremost families) started working in Oxford’s imagination, and Press, 1985. coalesced the next year when his mentor Sussex died, perhaps by 15a. Usher, op. cit. poison. In mystery-novel terms, Oxford had the means, the motive, 16. The generally acknowledged sources for Hamlet are Historica Danica and the opportunity to write a Hamlet with a cosmological subtext by Saxo Grammaticus, printed in Latin in 1514 and translated into well before Nashe mentioned the play in 1589. Some Oxfordian Danish by Anders Vedel in 1575, and a free adaptation of Saxo’s mate- scholars believe he continued working on Hamlet throughout the rial by François de Belleforest, Histoires tragiques, published in Paris rest of his life. in 1576. The name of the Claudius character in the first source is Epilogue. Those with a knowledge of Oxford’s life will, on ‘Feng’; in the second it is ‘Fengon.’ reading the biographical sketch of Frederik Rosenkrantz, have a 17. Thoren, 341. strong sense of déjà vu. Both lost their fathers at an early age and 18. D. W. Olson, M. S. Olson and R. L. Doescher, “The Stars of Hamlet,” then were raised by a powerful politician. Both received exemplary Sky and Telescope, November 1998, 68-73. educations and then toured Europe, especially Italy. Both got into 19. Alternate spellings: cranse, crance, craunce, corance. The OED offers trouble from an affair with a lady of the court—Oxford with Anne a quote from 1890: “The ‘crants’ were garlands which it was usual to Vavasor, Rosenkrantz with Rigborg Brockenhuus—resulting in make of white paper, and to hang up in the church on the occasion of a the birth of a son. Both sons, when they reached manhood, saw young girl’s funeral.” In a post-Freudian era, the symbolism seems military service. Both Oxford and Rosenkrantz were wounded in almost embarrassingly explicit. a duel in their early thirties: Oxford was lamed by Thomas Knyvet 20. Stephanie Hopkins Hughes, “’Shakespeare’s’ Tutor: Sir Thomas Smith in 1582; Rosenkrantz died in 1602 from injuries received when he (1513-1577),” The Oxfordian III, 2000, 19–44. tried to separate two duelists. Although I have rejected the notion 21. Eddi Jolly, “’Shakespeare’ and Burghley’s Library: Bibliotheca Illustris: that Frederik and Knud were the original models for the Danish Sive Catalogus Variorum Librorum,” The Oxfordian III, 2000, 3–18. Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 17

Appendix A 2. Resen was Bishop of Roskilde 1615-38, and later a Gnesio-Lutheran foe of Tycho Brahe’s circle. Frederik Rosenkrantz 3. These years of study abroad are described in detail in Bjørn Kornerup, by J. R. Christianson1 Biskop Hans Poulsen Resen, (Copenhagen: G. E. C. Gad, 1928-68), 1: 60-132. 4. Dansk biografisk leksikon 1982, 12: 335. Frederik Rosenkrantz of Rosenvold and Stjernholm was 5. The kings of Denmark also ruled Norway, Iceland, and Schleswig-Hol- baptized 2 September 1571 in Skanderborg Castle chapel, died 18 stein. August 1602 in Wessely, Moravia, and was buried in Týn Church in Prague, where Tycho Brahe was also buried. He was a son of state Appendix B councilor Holger Rosenkrantz (1517 – 75) and Karen Gyldenstierne Appendix B (1544 – 1613). His father died when he was a child, and his uncle, Knud Gyldenstierne state councilor Jørgen Rosenkrantz (1523 – 96), was appointed his by J. R. Christianson1 ward. Rosenkrantz received an excellent education, first in Ribe Knud Henriksen Gyldenstierne of Aagaard was born on the School, where he lived in the household of Tycho Brahe’s friend, ancestral estate of Aagaard in Jutland on 31 July 1575 and died in Peder Hegelund (Bishop of Ribe 1595 – 1614), and then abroad Bergen, Norway, in 1627. His father, Admiral Henrik Gyldenstierne with Hans Poulsen Resen as his preceptor.2 They studied in (1540 – 92), had first been married to Tycho Brahe’s eldest sister, Rostock 1584-86 and Wittenberg 1586-89. During a short trip and after her death to Mette Rud, who was the mother of Knud. home to Denmark in 1589, they sailed out to the island of Hven and In 1584, Knud Gyldenstierne entered the noble academy at spent two days as guests of Tycho Brahe at Uraniborg, where Anders Sorø, where he studied until he and his cousin, Corfitz Rud, (1573 Sørensen Vedel was also visiting at the time. During 1589-91, – 1630), traveled abroad in 1589 with Johan Bacmeister as their Rosenkrantz and Resen studied in Padua and Siena and also visited preceptor. They studied in Zürich in 1589, Strasbourg 1590-91, other parts of Italy, including Rome, Sicily, and even Malta.3 Rostock 1591, and Wittenberg at some time during these years. Rosenkrantz was in England in 1592, but not with Resen. The Then the two cousins parted. Knud Gyldenstierne visited Scotland Danish biographical dictionary simply noted that he traveled with and England in 1592, while Corfitz Rud continued his studies Knud Gyldenstierne.4 abroad from 1592-97 in Padua, Bologna, Siena, Malta, Spain, and After completing his education abroad, Rosenkrantz entered France, visiting England and Holland on his way home to Denmark.2 the service of the Danish court in 1593. In the years 1595-99, he Upon returning to Denmark, Knud Gyldenstierne served at the held the fief of Giske in Norway.5 In the spring of 1599, Rosenkrantz Danish court until 1598, when he assumed the management of his advanced to the fief of Lundenæs in Denmark. He was brilliant, inherited estates. He married a noblewoman, Sophie Lindenow, charming, learned, and polished, and had prospects of a splendid in 1608, and served with distinction as standard bearer in the career as a courtier when he threw it all overboard in 1598 by Kalmar War with Sweden (1611-13). seducing Rigborg Brockenhuus (1579 – 1641), a maiden-in- He was named governor of the fief of Vestervig Cloister in waiting in the court of Queen Anna Catherine. Rigborg bore him Jutland in 1612-18. He accompanied King Christian IV on a a son in 1599. Because this took place in court between two journey to Germany during these years, together with his own courtiers, it was a grave offence to the laws governing conduct at squires in the royal livery. He and another nobleman, Otto Skeel, court. Rigborg Brockenhuus lost all rights of inheritance and was were sent on a mission to Muscovy as royal Danish couriers, where walled into a room in her father’s castle at Egeskov until after his they were held hostage for a time.3 death in 1604. From 1618 until his death in 1627, Knud Gyldenstierne held Frederik Rosenkrantz fled to Hamburg but was brought back the important command of Bergenhus Castle in Norway. He ruled to Denmark and sentenced by a court of his peers to the loss of Bergen, the largest city in Norway, and an immense surrounding honor and two fingers, which would have deprived him of his fief, and had frequent opportunity to deal with the Scottish name, property, and all future prospects. However, the sentence merchants who were numerous in the thriving port city. His was commuted to exile when he agreed to travel to Hungary and widow, Sophie Lindenow, governed Bergenhus fief during the fight against the Ottoman Turks. On the way, he visited Tycho year of grace after his death.4 Brahe in Prague. He regained his honor on the field of battle, but his petition to return to Denmark was denied by King Christian IV. 1. © 2003 by J. R. Christianson. All rights reserved. Rosenkrantz died from wounds suffered while attempting to 2. Vello Helk, Dansk-norske studierejser fra reformationen til break up a duel. enevœlden 1536-1660 (Odense: Odense Universitetsforlag, 1987), 229, His son with Rigborg Brockenhuus was eventually granted the 336. name and arms of Rosenkrantz and fought in the battle of Lutter 3. H. A. Riis-Olesen, “De kongelige lensmænd på Vestervig Kloster,” am Barenberg in 1626, where he was taken prisoner by the Historisk årbog for Thy og Mors 1971:28-43, at http:// imperials but later released. He died in 1634. www.thistedmuseum.dkwww.thistedmuseum.dk. 4. Kr. Erlsev, Danmark-Norges Len og Lensmænd 1596-1660 1. © 2003 by J. R. Christianson. All rights reserved. (Copenhagen: Hoffensberg & Trap, 1885), 42, 43, 79.

Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 18 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004 “Lillies that Fester” A Tale of Two Queens By Virginia J. Renner

mong the myriad volumes of literary beth, Lord Burghley, Oxford and his peers Anyone fortunate enough to have seen criticism on the Shakespeare canon, at the time. Melchiori’s analysis, precedent a production of Edward III7will remember A some works stand out as worthwhile to my reading, is summarized in the fol- Act II, scene 1, when the King tricks Warwick reading for Oxfordians despite their Strat- into pleading with his own daughter, the fordian assumptions. Giorgio Melchiori’s Countess of Salisbury, to become the King’s Shakespeare’s Dramatic Meditations: An mistress. Warwick, having vowed his oath Experiment in Criticism (Oxford, 1976) “Sonnet 94 is the of allegiance, is bound to keep his word to stands in this category. As I read this book his royal master in order to maintain his and substituted my Oxfordian viewing lens first sonnet Melchiori worth as steward of himself and remain for the author’s traditional Stratfordian honorable, though he loathes his task. one, I came to the interpretation of Sonnet Melchiori’s paraphrase relative to the Son- 94 discussed below. Since my explication examines at length. net and the play reads: is based on Melchiori’s work, I will sum- marize his premise and briefly review his The mighty, only apparently just, have analysis of Sonnet 94. The author sees absolute control over outer forms; the Melchiori’s insightful study analyzes others their stewards, may be honest like Warwick, and masters of their honour, but four sonnets, 94, 121, 129, and 146, son- this poem as a are in honour bound to serve the “excel- nets unique among all 154 in being what lence,” that is to say the superior state, of the author terms the only non-You and their lords and masters, whatever form non-Love sonnets. That is, they do not, as is silent debate on this superiority may take.8 the norm, use the second person to set up an I-Thou dialogue, nor do they use Love as the use and misuse Reading the lines from that scene is to a subject.1 He contends these four sonnets find a longer version of the Sonnet’s thought “...are explorations of the contradictions— and imagery, including this line, “Lilies in themselves dramatic—existing in the of political power.” that fester smell far worse then weeds.”9 various views on the exercise of power, In Melchiori’s more recent, extended social behaviour, sex, and religion.”2 This commentary on King Edward III in his summary is reflected in the chapter titles, 1998 edition for The New Cambridge for example: “Lilies that fester: the Strategy lowing section. Shakespeare series, he surveys all the plays of Sonnet 94 and the Ethics of Power.” Melchiori states that we are not now in for cases of power warranting loyalty and Sonnet 94 is the first sonnet Melchiori “the world of I and Thou, but the world of for power misused, thereby provoking cen- examines at length. The author sees this It, They, and Others,” declaring “...Sonnet sure or rebellion. His final stance is that poem as a silent debate on the use and 94 seems to be the one political sonnet of “ambiguity” and “ambivalence” come near- misuse of political power. He insists that it Shakespeare,”4 dealing with people in est the mark in describing the author’s should not be considered as part of a group power. He gives a lexical analysis and dia- apparent attitude. Edward III, he declares, of sonnets and that it has nothing to do with grams the structural schema of the sonnet is “a play whose central theme is exactly the a personal relationship with a beloved or before plunging into a discussion of Ed- ambivalence of power.”10 a youth. On this we agree. Melchiori con- ward III, which he thinks Shakespeare There are few references to Measure cludes, however, that it was not created “remembered” or in the case of some scenes for Measure in his earlier work, from any personal experience, but as theo- “wrote himself or revised.” Melchiori also Shakespeare’s Dramatic Meditations, the retical musings on ethical principles.3 I opines that Sonnet 94 was “...written after relevance of which he leaves, he admits, to disagree with this statement and believe as and not before Edward III.”5 Since the other commentators, only noting that King Oxfordians we can view Sonnet 94 in both publication of Eric Sams’ edition of Edward III is like Angelo in an “extremely ways. It is a dramatic interior soliloquy on Shakespeare’s Edward III,6 the play has ambiguous moral position.”11 Certainly the ethics of political power, but it grew, I gradually been accepted as part of the many Oxfordians, Stratfordian literary argue, from de Vere’s personal experience. canon by many, though Melchiori regards critics, theater directors and drama re- I think the specific situation rendered into Shakespeare only as a contributor, not sole viewers have brought the cogency of this Sonnet 94 was the threat that Mary, Queen author. Regardless of the date one accepts “problem play” to the Sonnet. The ambigu- of Scots posed to England, her trial and for the play, the Sonnet could have been ous aspects, not only of Angelo, but the execution, and the actions of Queen Eliza- written after it. Duke, Claudio, and the variously staged Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 19 unspoken response of Isabella at the end, such as the poet’s non-aristocratic back- rary onlookers. It is unlikely de Vere wit- have often been seen to lead to Sonnet 94. ground and the traditional Stratfordian nessed her beheading, but that scene, and Edward III is not the only text brought time frame, I asked—What special events his part in bringing it about, might have to bear on the author’s reading of the in Edward de Vere’s life might have led him provided a traumatic crux, repeatedly draw- Sonnet. One section is headed “Sidney to meditate on the ethics of power? Though ing his mind to meditate upon it. The versus Edward III (lines 1-4).” Melchiori his life near the center of the court as speech by Richard II against regicide, cited cites actions in Hamlet, Macbeth, King Burghley’s son-in-law often brought him above, immediately comes to mind. Alter- Lear, All’s Well and the Bible. Calling on face to face with problems that inevitably natively, when a play’s action spotlights the text of Matthew 5:5, he contrasts the involved ethical choices, would there have powerful persons committing heinous meek who “inherit the earth” with acts, leaders are subverted into ty- the mighty who “rightly do inherit rants and warrant rebellion or over- heavens graces” in line five at the Sonnet 94 throw. beginning of the second quatrain. (as published in the 1609 Quarto) Several circumstances may have “The equation can only be sardonic,” They that haue powre to hurt, and will led the 17th Earl to have divided he points out, “since ‘rightly’ does doe none, loyalties and conflicted feelings as not mean morally or legally right, That doe not do the thing, they most do he participated in these events. but ‘in the right form’ or even Whether the origin of the de Vere ‘according to the accepted norm.’”12 showe, family was Dutch or Danish, there is The qualities befitting those with Who mouing others, are themselues as no doubt that Oxford’s ancestors (royal) power he finds in Macbeth, stone, crossed the English Channel with when Malcolm wants to test the Vnmooued, could, and to temptation slow: William the Conqueror and re- loyalty of Macduff in what the au- They rightly do inherrit heauens graces, garded themselves as Norman.17 thor calls “perhaps Shakespeare’s And husband natures ritches from Oxford had visited the French court, most extensive ‘political’ statement expence, perhaps more than once, and spoke in any of the plays.”13 and wrote French well. Mary Stuart, They are the Lords and owners of their crowned Queen of Scotland when ... The king-becoming graces faces, six days old, reigned briefly as Queen As justice, verity, temp’rance, Others, but stewards of their excel- of France when her husband, stableness, lence: Francis, Catherine de Medici’s old- Bounty, perseverance, mercy, low liness, The sommers flowre is to the sommer est son, became king in 1559. At that Devotion, patience, courage, forti- sweet, time she used not only the royal 14 coats of arms of France and Scot- tude,... Though to it selfe, it onely liue and die, land, but was persuaded to add those He goes on to distinguish the But if that flowre with base infection of England as well. She was, in the garden flower from the wild flower meete, eyes of the Catholics, the rightful and recalls the Garden State images The basest weed out-braues his dignity: ruler of England, rather than Queen of Richard II.15 This distinction The sweetest things turne sowrest by Elizabeth, who had been crowned turned my images of the “lilies of their deedes, the previous year. the field” into lilies on a field—a Lillies that fester, smell far worse then The lily figured at that point in blue field—and I was ready to ac- both English and French royal coats cept Melchiori’s view of the sestet weeds. of arms. The golden lily or fleur de or the Garden as a metaphor for the lis (lys) had been used in French octave, the State. He does not cite been one circumstance he relived, some arms since the twelfth century and was on Richard’s familiar lines against regicide, powerful situation he might revisit and the royal seal of Louis VIII early in the which remind us of traditional attitudes concentrate into these 14 lines? The trial eleventh century. During the reign of Ed- toward a crowned sovereign and which I and execution of Mary, Queen of Scots, a ward III, the English royal arms quartered find especially relevant. momentous event for England, for Eliza- three lions rampant with fleur de lis in the beth and Oxford, seems a fitting answer. first and fourth quarters to reflect the claim Not all the water in the rough sea As the second ranking peer assigned to to the French throne. From Henry IV’s time Can wash the balm off from an anointed sit in judgment in the case of treason alleg- forward the three golden “lilies” on a blue king; The breath of worldly men cannot depose edly committed by Mary, Queen of Scots, ground were on the royal coat and re- The deputy elected by the Lord.16 against Queen Elizabeth, de Vere had a mained there throughout Elizabeth’s reign painful duty to perform. He was present at into that of James 1. Though many royal Ethics vs. loyalties the spirited speeches Mary gave in her and noble houses of the period in England, defense at the trial. The most routine re- France, and Germany used the fleur de lis, Convinced that Sonnet 94 is indeed a ports of her demeanor and words still it was associated especially with French meditation on political ethics, but disre- evoke a sympathetic response from read- royalty and the Roman Catholic Church. In garding some of the author’s assumptions, ers, as they evidently did from contempo- (Continued on page 20) Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 20 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

Two Queens (continued from page 19) 1546, the year Luther died, the Order of the Lily was established by Pope Paul III in the Roman states and “its members were pledged to defend the patrimony of St. Peter’s against the enemies of the church.”18 For Oxford, a peer acutely aware of heraldic symbols, there were two queens bearing lilies on their arms during this trial. Both believed in their right to rule England, but with the difference that at the time made all the difference, their reli- gion. He knew where he must stand in relation to both, but in this matter Queen Elizabeth could not be seen as the pure Queen Elizabeth (left) and Queen Mary (right) came to represent the two directions— white lily. Protestant or Catholic—that the evolving nation of Great Britain could take. Shake- speare/Oxford was on the jury that condemned Mary to death and would undoubtedly The power to hurt have had strong views about killing a “deputy elected by the Lord.”

For years Queen Elizabeth had held the Queen’s command, issued in the middle summoned Sir William Davison, who pre- “power to hurt” her cousin and, according of the night since Elizabeth had been sented her with the death warrant, which to her counselors, should have moved unable to sleep, that the court be ad- she signed. Afterward, Davison’s and against her. As long as Mary lived to head journed to London to reconvene in ten Elizabeth’s accounts varied as to exactly the Catholic faction, Elizabeth and the days’ time.” The commissioners traveled what her instructions to him had been. As Protestants were in danger. But Elizabeth back to London. The judges and the Court Weir and others have surmised, it was created many delays even after the trial and of Star Chamber pronounced Mary guilty, more likely Davison’s account that was before signing the warrant sentencing Mary but Parliament had to ratify the verdict truthful. She claimed he was instructed not to death. This story is repeated by many of and assembled on October 29. They de- to have the Lord Chancellor, Christopher her biographers and the detail of events manded her execution and a “a delegation Hatton, append the Great Seal to the war- must have been known by Edward de Vere of twenty peers and forty MPs” delivered a rant without first checking back with her. soon after they happened, or more likely, petition to Elizabeth on November 12th He said the Queen had indicated he was to were followed by him as they unfolded. at Richmond. obtain the Seal and give the document to With the Sonnet text in mind, let us briefly Mary had not confessed her guilt and Walsingham, which he had done before reconstruct the events.19 this made it harder on the Queen, who had she asked for the document again. Davison, After the disclosure of Anthony secretly written her “promising that, if probably chosen for the role by Burghley, Babington’s plot to murder Elizabeth and Mary confessed all, she would cover her became the scapegoat of the affair. place Mary on the throne, Elizabeth finally shame and save her from reproach.” In Finally, the Queen, unaware of had to summon Parliament to put those other words, she would save Mary from Burghley’s next actions at this point, in- involved on trial. With the trial and subse- death. Elizabeth asked Parliament to find sisted Davison contact Sir Amyas Paulet, quent executions the public’s panic and another way to deal with the situation, but the guardian of Mary during her close demand for Mary’s death had increased, on November 24th another deputation arrest, asking him to arrange to “quietly do whereas Elizabeth had hoped it would came to Richmond, urging Mary’s death. away with Mary” so it could appear she subside. She felt Mary “was not only a Elizabeth adjourned Parliament for an- “had died of natural causes.” Clearly, Eliza- foreigner who was not subject to English other week. On December 4th, a royal beth pressured Paulet to murder Mary, to law, but an anointed sovereign, answer- proclamation of the sentence, rewritten effect a private execution, as she did not able to God alone for her actions.” jointly by Burghley and the Queen, was want to be “held responsible for her death.” Mary’s trial began on October 14th, published. The order for execution was in Burghley was after a public execution, 1586, before 36 commissioners, includ- her hands at once, but she “prorogued while Elizabeth saw assassination as pref- ing Burghley, Walsingham, Hatton and Parliament until 15 February in order to erable. The Queen festered. Davison wrote Oxford at Fotheringhay, “a medieval castle give herself ten weeks in which to steel to Paulet. Paulet refused. Meanwhile, after in Northamptonshire.” The Earl of Oxford herself to do it.” a secret meeting, Burghley had drafted the found himself in the unsavory position of The description of the Queen’s agoniz- order for the sentence and on February 4th doing his duty, very probably feeling some ing over the final order to execute her had it sent with the warrant to Fotheringhay of the same scruples against regicide ex- kinswoman as recounted in detail in the without informing Elizabeth. It arrived on pressed so persuasively in the plays. Mary Weir biography is strikingly vivid. Was she February 7th when the Queen was still pleaded her own case, was found guilty of “to temptation slow?” hoping Paulet would arrange to do the treason and was about to be pronounced Christmas came and went, as did Janu- deed for her, though he had already sent guilty “when a messenger arrived with the ary. On February 1st, 1587, the Queen one letter in reply saying no.

Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 21

When the news of the February 8th events at the time or shortly after they and actions of contemporary courtly soci- execution arrived on the 9th, the Queen occurred? He was in a position to learn the ety, his own position and his role in events became “almost hysterical” and hoped to details of the actions of both Queens and surrounding Mary’s trial are, I have ar- convince the world she was not to blame his father-in-law eventually, if not at the gued, distilled in this poem. In fact, Sonnet for Mary’s death. She wanted Davison moment. How much did he know of their 94 very well may be as close as we’ll come hanged, but Burghley talked her out of it. inner motivations? I imagine the author of to his final word on these events. I cannot The 10 Councilors who had secretly signed the plays, understanding human nature as imagine any more perfect. and agreed with Burghley to shoulder any he did, knew or guessed as much as we can blame were humiliatingly questioned by now discover. Notes: the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice I think in Oxford’s eyes either Queen and Archbishop Whitgift. All 10 were in might have refrained from using her power 1. Shakespeare’s Dramatic Meditations: An disgrace. Burghley was not allowed to come Experiment in Criticism. By Giorgio Melchiori. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1976, back to Court until May. Only Paulet came 31-32. The “You” in 146 is “not the Loved out of it unscathed, by receiving the Order “According to Professor one or Love itself, but the subject’s Soul.” of the Garter. In this century it looks like Citations to Shakespeare’s Dramatic the equivalent of hush money. John Guy [in major Meditations will be referred to as Melchiori. For citations from his 1998 The true power? edition of the play I will use the title, King revisionist arguments Edward III. 2. Ibid., 32. Was Elizabeth’s wrath at Mary’s execu- against the usual view 3. Ibid., 68. “It is not a case of personal tion genuine? It appears it was. experience projected on to a universal In an article in The London Times, level, but of a reconsideration of basic November 11th, 2001, and in speeches of power held by Queen principles in order to clear away the given recently in the United States, John deformations in thought brought about Guy, Professor of History, Clare College, Elizabeth], William by private passions.” Cambridge, has made major revisionist 4. Ibid., 35. Cecil was clearly 5. Ibid., 45. arguments against the usual view of power 6. Shakespeare’s Edward III. Edited by Eric held by Queen Elizabeth, particularly in Sams. New Haven and London, Yale the matter of Mary’s execution. According responsible for the University Press, 1996. to Professor Guy, William Cecil was clearly 7. Stephen Moorer directed a production in responsible for the death of Mary, Queen of death of Mary, Carmel, California, in 2001. Scots, not Queen Elizabeth. This goal had 8. Melchiori, 46. 9. King Edward III. Ed. by Giorgio Melchiori. been determined by Burghley before Mary Queen of Scots, not Cambridge, C.U.P. [cl998, 2001] 11, 1, returned to Scotland from France, some 435-453. two dozen years before he finally accom- Queen Elizabeth.” 10. Ibid., Introduction, 41. plished it. Elizabeth’s priority was to he- 11. Melchiori, 45. reditary descent before the matter of reli- 12. Ibid., 49. gion, but Burghley felt he had a mission— to plot the death of the other. Might not 13. Ibid., 51. a call, if you will—as a Protestant of power these lily-bearing leaders have resisted 14. Macbeth, IV, iii, 91-94. Citations from plays other than Edward III are to The to see that a Protestant ruler succeeded the the infection of regicide? I contend that Riverside Shakespeare, 2d edition, 20 Queen, who was “not Protestant enough.” de Vere would have preferred Queen Boston, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1997. Elizabeth and Mary, in Guy’s presentation, Elizabeth’s view of the sanctity of monar- 15. Melchiori, 64-65. were together in a “monarchist trade chy to that of Lord Burghley’s, of assuring 16. Richard II, III, ii. 54-57. Other possibili- union,” both understanding that Mary’s the Protestant succession at all costs. It is ties: Richard II, V, i. 72-73. “A twofold death would set a precedent for Elizabeth’s my opinion that if any Englishman outside marriage twixt my crown and me, And possible overthrow, or the public execu- the Elizabethan court had seen the poem then betwixt me and my married wife.” 17. The De Veres of Castle Hedingham by tion of any English ruler thereafter, which and connected its language to current Verily Anderson. Lavenham, Suffolk, 21 indeed it did in the case of Charles I. Even events, the lily image might have been Terence Dalton Ltd., 1993. 4-5. if Professor Guy’s research places the blame associated with Mary, but probably not 18. Encyclopedia Britannica, 12th ed. 1922. for Queen Mary’s death squarely on Lord with Elizabeth. Bearing in mind the scenes v. 10. Fleur-De-Lis. Burghley, many questions remain. from Edward III explored by Melchiori 19. The following summary of details and We wonder about the inner feelings and other relevant passages about politi- quotations are found in Alison Weir’s Elizabeth the Queen, 1998, 367-383. and attitudes of the major players in the cal power and monarchial status cited 20. John Guy. Lecture given April 22, 2003, drama. Was Queen Elizabeth pushed or above, I am not persuaded Edward de Vere Huntington Library, San Marino, maneuvered into taking action? Today it is was only thinking of Mary. The Earl’s sen- California. not her signing of the warrant, but her sitivity to heraldic symbols, his back- 21. See John Guy’s forthcoming biography of letters to Paulet advocating assassination ground in and knowledge of English and Mary, Queen of Scots, to be published that give us pause. Did Oxford know all the French culture, his insight into motives early in 2004. © 2003 By Virginia J. Renner Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 22 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004 “My Turk” Why the nickname?

By Paul H. Altrocchi, MD

I cannot tell what the dickens his name is. because of the bronze tint of his skin. of the type already granted to Venice and (The Merry Wives of Windsor) Poets like Edward de Vere used many France? alternative names for the Queen in their In a letter to Burghley written in Paris ueen Elizabeth loved nicknames— poetry and plays, e.g., Diana, Aphrodite, on March 17, 1575, de Vere says, “the king not Ed for Edward, but names which Venus, Sun, Moon, Fortune, Cynthia, and hath given me his letters of recommenda- Qconnoted some personal attribute, Sylvia. tion to his ambassador in the Turk’s court quirk, hobby, or idiosyncrasy. But why “My Turk” for Edward de Vere? ... perhaps I will bestow two or three months Such specially chosen names imply It is a curious nickname for the Queen’s to see Constantinople and some part of greater familiarity and sense of camarade- favorite courtier, her genius-playwright Greece.”3 rie, as was meant by the Middle English who, under her own stimulation, brought Only three letters survive from de word ekename from which our word nick- lasting glory to her realm. Four possible Vere’s 16-month European trip. Between name is derived. But nicknames in a royal explanations will be analyzed. his letter from Venice on Sept. 24th, 1575, court also may serve to maintain a supe- and his letter from Padua on Nov. 27th, a rior-inferior hierarchy and to denigrate A. Derived from “Torc” ? total of 64 days, his whereabouts are un- the passive receiver by “assuming the right known. He had finally recovered from a to boil down someone’s persona to a sole The Senior Ogburns suggest an origin debilitating febrile illness but it left him characteristic and then legitimizing it from the Gaelic word, torc, meaning “boar”, discouraged with Italy. He wrote Burghley through repeated use.”1 the family rebus of de Vere.2 Against such from Venice: “For my liking of Italy, my The Elizabethans relished nicknames an interpretation: Lord, I am glad to have seen it, and I care as much as the Mafia, the boxing world, and not ever to see it any more, unless it be to President George W. Bush do today. Queen 1. The Queen and De Vere spoke many serve my prince or country.” Elizabeth devised special names for many languages, but not Gaelic. It was not a In 1553, Suleyman the First allowed court personnel and politicians with whom language heard at Court. individual Englishmen to trade with Tur- she interacted the most, e.g. : 2. The Irish were looked down upon as key4 but only a few did.5 In later years, de an inferior peasant society by English no- Vere did carry out several personal diplo- 1. Based upon esteem—“Spirit” or “Le- bility. It would hardly be appropriate to matic tasks to France at the Queen’s re- viathan” for her chief counselor, William use an Irish nickname for a premier earl of quest,6 but there is no English archival Cecil, and “Sweet Robin” for her lover, the realm. evidence of any mission by him to Turkey. Robert Dudley. 3. If derived from torc, why “ My Turk” 2. Based upon physical characteristics and not “My Torc”? D. Did de Vere take a personal trip to —“Pygmy” for hunchbacked, small- Turkey? statured Robert Cecil. B. A tribute to his poetic bent? 3. Based upon Walter Raleigh’s pro- We know that de Vere intended to visit nunciation of his first name with a Devon Since all literate Turks in the Ottoman Turkey, as documented by his letter from accent—“Water.” Empire were encouraged to write poetry, Paris. Also, one of his retinue, William 4. Based upon flocks of sheep around was Elizabeth paying homage to his ex- Lewyn, who may have been fired for spying his family home in Holdenby, traordinary poetic skills? This seems doubt- on de Vere for Burghley, wrote to Burghley Northamptonshire—“Sheep” or “Mutton” ful since the word “Turk” also carried an in July 1575 that he didn’t know whether for Christopher Hatton. implication of duplicity, brutality, and de Vere had already started for Greece or being an “infidel.” was still in Italy.7 September 24 to Novem- Were courtiers helpless victims of nick- ber 27 was certainly time enough to visit naming? Yes, when chosen by their abso- C. Diplomatic Assignment to Turkey? Greece and Istanbul. lute monarch. But they often created their Along with many Oxfordians, includ- own nicknames for politicians and other During de Vere’s 16-month trip abroad ing Ruth Loyd Miller and Richard Roe,8 the courtiers, usually not spoken directly to in 1575-1576, did he travel to Turkey on a senior Ogburns thought de Vere had vis- the recipient, e.g., “Pondus” for William diplomatic mission for the Queen to ini- ited Turkey. In a letter to Julia Cooley Cecil because of his slow ponderous tiate the groundwork for establishing trade Altrocchi dated Oct. 27, 1959, Dorothy speech, and “Gypsy” for Robert Dudley agreements between England and Turkey Ogburn wrote: “E.O. may well have gone to Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 23

Turkey. Ben Jonson speaks of Puntarvolo There are no specific personal-knowl- The results of these searches were that ‘at the Turk’s court ...’” edge allusions anywhere in the Shake- no evidence was found to confirm a diplo- Malim not only agrees with others that speare canon which verify a trip to Turkey matic mission by Edward de Vere in 1575- Puntarvolo, from Ben Jonson’s 1599 play by de Vere. Such proof must come from 1576. Every Man Out of His Humour, is a carica- another source. ture of Edward de Vere but suggests that Comments the name Puntarvolo derives from Latin Research in Turkey’s Archives and Greek words meaning Spear-Shake- Does this research rule out any kind of Will.9 Seeking evidence of a diplomatic as- official mission to Turkey by Edward de According to the Oxfordian chronol- signment for Edward de Vere to Turkey, Vere? The answer is “no,” according to ogy of Eva Turner Clark,10 the first plays the official archives of the Ottoman State these Turkish scholars. While Murad III’s which de Vere wrote and/or polished upon primary interests were in the harem, a returning from his foreign trip were: highly intelligent, skilled and powerful Grand Vizier, Sokullu Mehmed Pasha, had 1. Timon of Athens, set in Greece (1576). “Only three letters almost total control over domestic and 2. Comedy of Errors, set in Ephesus, foreign policy. He could have discussed Turkey (1576). trade relations with de Vere in private, “off 3. Titus Andronicus, set in Rome (1576). survive from the record.” 4. Pericles, Prince of Tyre, set in Antioch, These modern scholars also confirm Tarsus, Tyre and other cities of Turkey that, even though the Turks had a highly (1577). de Vere’s 16-month developed “secret service,” a private trip to Turkey by de Vere might have been well Before he left for Europe, the only play known to them but not recorded. we know about by Edward de Vere is The European trip ... [For] Queen Elizabeth was fascinated by Famous Victories of Henry V, written in things Islamic. In 1575, with her approval, 1574. Is it mere coincidence that two of de Edward Osborne and Richard Staper sent Vere’s first four plays after his continental a total of 64 days, two agents overland to Istanbul to obtain travels were set in Turkey? safe conduct for William Harborne to be- 13 Does the following passage from gin discussing trade relations. This was Othello hint a specific personal knowl- his whereabouts not accomplished until September 1579, edge of the constant direction of currents when the first official Turkish envoy ar- from the Black Sea to the Aegean Sea, not rived from Sultan Murad III offering unre- gleanable from books or general knowl- are unknown.” stricted commerce between Turkey and 14 edge? England. Perhaps it is only coincidence, but an Like to the Pontic Sea, intriguing one, that after centuries with- Whose icy current and compulsive course were comprehensively examined by two out significant commerce between En- Ne’er knows retiring ebb, but keeps due on research associates of the author: (a) Prof. gland and Turkey, there began a flurry of To the Propontic and the Hellespont, Fikret Saricaoglu, History Department, trade-related activities with Turkey by Even so my bloody thoughts with violent Istanbul University, and (b) Gultekin Yildiz, Englishmen in 1575, the only year de Vere pace Masters’ Degree candidate, History De- could have visited Istanbul. Shall ne’er look back, ne’er ebb to humble partment, Marmara University. love...11 In the 1500s, the Turks had a very Summary of conclusions about efficient civil service and were meticulous the origin of “My Turk” Most likely this was available informa- record keepers. All relevant archives, some tion without specific import. quite difficult of access to outsiders, were 1. Was “My Turk” derived from the Gaelic There is reference in King Henry IV, searched including: word “Torc”? Unlikely. Part II to the Turkish Sultan’s habit of 2. Was “My Turk” derived from Queen fratricide to forestall conspiracies, but these 1. The Prime Ministerial Ottoman Elizabeth’s awareness that poetry was were also accessible historical facts: Archives. held in high esteem in Turkey? 2. The Archives of Topkapi Palace. Unlikely. Brothers, you mix your sadness with some 3. Three catalogs which register other fear: state documents. 3. Was “My Turk” applied to de Vere This is the English, not the Turkish Court; 4. Three contemporary Turkish Court because he succeeded on an official Not Amurath an Amurath succeeds, chronicles reporting events of impor- diplomatic assignment from Queen 12 But Harry, Harry. tance day by day. (Continued on page 24) Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 24 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004 Book Reviews A Biography of Margaret Douglas, William Cecil, Lord Burghley, at a country New Book on the Countess of Lennox (1515-1578): house party in 1574 that included figures Niece of Henry VIII and Mother-in- prominent in Scottish-English politics. The assassination of her son, Henry, Lord Holocaust from Law of Mary Queen of Scots. By Darnley, consort of Mary Queen of Scots, is Kimberly Schutte (Lewiston NY: The Edwin thought by some Stratfordians and Oxfor- Fellowship VP Mellen Press, 2002). dians to have inspired Shakespeare’s Shakespeare Fellowship founder and Macbeth. The parallels are striking. She Vice-President for Communication Lynne By Richard F. Whalen had a keen interest in history, and scholars Kositsky, the award-winning Canadian have also suggested that she probably had novelist whose 2000 novel, A Question of trong-willed, outspoken, loving wife in her possession the rare manuscript his- Will (Roussan), brought de Vere’s and mother, ambitious for her fam- tory of Scotland that seems to have in- authorship of the Shakespearean canon to ily, the Countess of Lennox was a spired passages in Macbeth. (See this S many young readers for the first time, has powerful force in Elizabethan power poli- reviewer’s article, “Shakespeare in Scot- tics. She and her relatives had strong claims land,” in the 2003 issue of The Oxfordian.) scored again with her most recent young to the thrones of both Scotland and En- And, like Oxford, she spent the last adult novel, The Thought of High Windows. gland. Her grandson was James VI of Scot- decade of her life at Hackney, outside Lon- The novel, about a group of young land who would become James I of En- don, where she died in 1578. Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi death gland. She was not a favorite of Queen Schutte’s straightforward biography camps who take shelter in a deserted castle Elizabeth, but she held her own in the describes the complex relations among in France, has earned highest marks from dangerous swirl of Elizabethan politics. the powerful aristocrats of the time, their Kirkus Review: In this first book-length biography of shifting loyalties and the countess’s role in the Countess of Lennox, Kimberly Schutte, it all. She cites primary sources exten- Superb, wrenching Holocaust fiction. adjunct professor at Missouri Western State sively, and her 12-page bibliography might Esther is a Jewish teen snatched out of College, describes a woman not easy to well prove useful for Oxfordians who want Germany at the beginning of WWII by the like but impossible to ignore. Despite her to do further research into the life of this Swiss Red Cross to live briefly in Belgium overweening ambition for her family and extraordinary woman and her connections and later in a castle in France, under the propensity for marital scheming, she com- with the earl of Oxford. nose of the Vichy government.... Swirling manded respect by her powerful personal- The 324-page biography is one of through the story is her tumultuous, ever- ity as well as by her position in the nobility. Mellen’s 67 volumes in its “Studies in changing relationship with mercurial peer She lived most of her life in England, British History.” Another volume that might Walter. Esther is plagued with guilt and and it intersected that of Edward de Vere, interest Oxfordians is The Anonymous Life self-hatred as well as terror of dying in the 17th Earl of Oxford, at least twice. (Both of William Cecil, Lord Burghley, edited by looming Holocaust. Kositsky deftly were such prominent aristocrats that as yet Alan G.R. Smith. But candor requires that describes the twisted pains of war, genocide, undiscovered records may well disclose potential buyers be forewarned. Mellen and cruelty. Kositsky’s poetic and piercing more connections.) books are expensive; Schutte’s is $120. language honors Esther’s severe loneliness She and Oxford were both guests of and the horrors she witnesses.

My Turk (continued from page 23) References: 6. Ogburn, op. cit. Elizabeth to Turkey? Ruled out by 7. Ibid. Ottoman archival research described in 1. Garry Trudeau. Time Magazine, Feb. 12, 8. Personal communications with Ruth Loyd this article. 2001, page 96. Miller and Richard Roe. 4. Did “My Turk” derive because de Vere 2. Charlton Ogburn & Dorothy Ogburn. This 9. R.C.W. Malim. “Shakespeare: Man and went to Turkey in 1575 on an unofficial Star of England, Coward McCann, Inc., Pseudonym.” The De Vere Society diplomacy-trading mission for the New York, 1952. Newsletter, April/May 2001. Queen? Still possible but no proof. 3. William Fowler. Shakespeare Revealed in 10. Eva Turner Clark. Hidden Allusions In 5. Did “My Turk” derive because de Vere Oxford’s Letters. Peter E. Randall, Shakespeare’s Plays. William Farquhar went to Turkey for personal reasons in Publisher, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Payson, NY, 1931. 1986. 1575, arousing the Queen’s admira- 11. Othello. Act III, scene 3, line 456. 4. Halil Inalcik. The Ottoman Empire: The tion? Possible, but no proof. 12. King Henry IV, Part II. Act V, scene 2, line Classical Age, 1300-1600, translated by 47. Norman Itzkowitz and Colin Imber. 13. Alfred C. Wood. A History of the Levant In sum, the source for Queen Elizabeth’s Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, 1973. Company. Frank Cass & Co., Ltd., 1964; favorite nickname for Edward de Vere, “My 5. Nabil Matar. Turks, Moors, and English- also, Matar, op. cit. Turk,” remains an enigma. men in the Age of Discovery. Columbia 14. Matar, op. cit. Univ. Press, New York, 1999. Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 25

Column A year in the life By Hank Whittemore 1604: Part II — The rest of the story

he reported death of Edward de Vere son, amid celebrations of the marriage of the court, as well as offensive to private on June 24, 1604, at age 54 is Susan Vere and Philip Herbert – two of the persons. Shakespeare, from his abilities, accompanied this year by publica- “grand possessors” of the great stage works station, and experience, must have pos- T sessed great influence with the body at tion of the second quarto of Hamlet. This yet to be published. Even as Edward de large, and due deference, we may readily version, containing nearly 4,000 lines, is believe, was shown to his knowledge and twice the size of the first quarto published judgment in the selection and acceptance the previous year, in 1603, and even a bit of plays sent in for approbation by authors longer than the text to appear 19 years “‘We suppose Shakespeare of the time. The contrast between the hence in the First Folio of 1623. The conduct of the association immediately current edition is entitled: before, and immediately after, his retire- to have ceased to act ment, would lead us to conclude, not only that he was a man of prudence and discre- The Tragicall Historie of Hamlet, tion, but that the exercise of these quali- Prince of Denmarke. By William Shake- in the summer of ties had in many instances kept his fel- speare. Newly imprinted and enlarged to lows from incurring the displeasure of almost as much again as it was, according 3 to the true and perfect Coppie. At London, persons in power...” Printed by I. R. (James Roberts) for N. L. 1604,’ reports the (Nicholas Ling) and are to be sold at his The above description of “Shake- shoppe under Saint Dunstons Church in speare” as the guiding hand behind the 1 ‘Life of Shakespeare’ Fleet-street. 1604. Lord Chamberlain’s Men (now the King’s Men) can be applied far more logically to Issuance of authentic editions of hith- section in the 1913 Oxford, upon whose apparent death the erto-unpublished plays as by “Shake- company begins encountering friction at speare” had begun in 1598, only to cease Court for the first time since its formation after the Essex Rebellion in February 1601, Irving edition of the in 1594. when Henry Wriothesley, Third Earl of July 7: Southampton in House of Lords Southampton was imprisoned in the Tower poems and plays...” Southampton is present at the proro- of London. With Southampton’s libera- gation of Parliament.4 tion by King James in April 1603, and now July 11: Pembroke is Married upon Oxford’s apparent death, the appear- William Herbert, Third Earl of Pem- ance of Hamlet Q2 represents a remark- Vere’s name is buried along with his body, broke, who had been promoted as a hus- able exception to this shutdown until a band for Oxford’s daughter Bridget Vere in 2 the words he left behind are reverberating flurry of new titles in 1608 and 1609, in ghostly, glorious resurrection, surely 1597, has married Lady Mary Talbot, daugh- followed by another dozen years of si- the result of a conscious effort to pay trib- ter of the Earl of Shrewsbury.5 lence. ute to him with a proper memorial. July 25: Southampton Favored From an Oxfordian perspective, the An extraordinary aspect of traditional King James grants Southampton three timing of Hamlet is no accident. Publica- biographies of William of Stratford is the manors (Romsey in Hampshire, Compton tion of this quintessential autobiographi- presumption that, just at this moment, his Magna in Somerset and Dunmow in Essex) cal play in 1604 would seem a deliberate acting career has ended. “We suppose plus the grange of Basilden in Gloucester.6 announcement that the dramatist had died Shakespeare to have ceased to act in the August: “Sejanus” at the Globe or disappeared from England. It also ap- summer of 1604,” reports the “Life of Shake- Apparently the King’s Men, who pre- pears to contain his final statement that speare” section in the 1913 Irving edition sented Sejanus his Fall in the autumn or “things standing thus unknown shall live of the poems and plays, with this notable winter of 1603 at the Court of James, now behind me,” along with his dying request observation about the consequences of (or earlier this year) perform Ben Jonson’s to “report me and my cause aright to the his retirement: tragedy at the Globe, with the actors being unsatisfied” and to “tell my story.” booed and hissed off the stage! 7 The silence surrounding Oxford’s death “No sooner had our great dramatist Thomas Thorpe will publish Sejanus is hereby counterbalanced by the blazing ceased to take part in public performances in 1605 with Jonson telling readers in his triumph of Hamlet as well as by the un- of the King’s players, than the company appears to have thrown off the restraint by preface that a “second Pen” had been in- precedented number of Shakespeare plays which it had been unusually controlled volved in creating the original version, but (seven) to be performed at Court during ever since its formation, and to have pro- that he had taken it upon himself to rewrite the upcoming Christmas-New Year sea- duced plays which were objectionable to (Continued on page 26) Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 26 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

Year in the Life (continued from page 25) now he is working on Masque of Black- this day the actors, wearing red doublets the play to its detriment: ness for performance in January by a cast and hose, assist in welcoming the Spanish including Susan Vere, Oxford’s daughter Ambassador upon his arrival at Somerset “I would inform you, that this book, in and Cecil’s niece. The masque is to be part House after a triumphal progress up the all numbers, is not the same with that of the ongoing celebrations of her mar- Thames.11 The account of their payment of which was acted on the public stage, riage to Sir Philip Herbert, brother of 21 pounds, 12 shillings (each actor receiv- wherein a second Pen had good share: in William Herbert, Third Earl of Pembroke; ing 2s per day) is to be found among the place of which I have rather chosen to put and Jonson will be working with this “in- other expenses listed by the Treasurer of weaker and no doubt less pleasing (lines) of mine own, than to defraud so happy a comparable pair of brethren” on the First the Chamber: Genius [sic] of his right, by my loathed Folio of Shakespeare to be dedicated to usurpation.”8 them in 1623. “To Augustine Phillipps and John Hemyngs for th’allowance of themselves In his 1616 folio Jonson will list “Wil- and tenne of their fellows his Majesties liam Shake-speare” as having headed the Groomes of the Chamber and Players, for “It appears that Jonson has waytinge and attending on his Majesties cast of Sejanus as presented at Court in Service, by commandmente, upon the Span- 1603. A few years later he will tell been receiving access to ish ambassador at Somerset House for the Drummond that the play provoked consid- space of 18 dayes viz. from the 9th day of erable displeasure in the Privy Council, Auguste 1604 until the 27th day of the same where he was called to answer charges “of some of Edward de Vere’s as appeareth by a bill thereof signed by the Popery and of Treason.” Meanwhile it has Lord Chamberlain…”12 been widely assumed that the original unpublished manuscripts “Genius” behind the play must have been Although the name “Shakespeare” is George Chapman, while other traditional [and] ... after reworking nowhere mentioned in this or any other scholars have suspected the hand of “Shake- account, most orthodox biographers of speare” himself. If the latter are correct, them ... issuing them the poet-dramatist have assumed, with little Oxfordians may well consider that Jonson or no question, that William of Stratford is testifying in 1605 that he took a play under his own name.” must have been among the King’s Men in originally written by Edward de Vere and residence at Somerset House during these reworked it (poorly so) with his own lan- 18 days. guage for publication under his own name. August 10: Southampton & Queen Anne (Fritz Levy in 1995 makes a fascinating Ben Jonson, the rapidly rising star of Southampton is appointed Councillor case that Sejanus appears to be an earlier poets, is already closely allied with the to Queen Anne.13 work reflecting the attitude of the Essex “grand possessors” of the Shakespeare August 10: Southampton to Court faction toward Queen Elizabeth and Sec- works, that is, with those who hold the texts The Constable of Castile comes to greet retary Robert Cecil. The play is a “portrait of most of Oxford’s unpublished plays. King James at the Court at Whitehall Pal- of a society torn by faction, ruled by a More to the point, it would seem that he ace, attended by Southampton and Lord prince of great power, but a power exer- himself, to one degree or another, is al- Effingham, son of Charles Howard, the cised erratically and whimsically … ready a possessor. Lord Admiral. Elizabeth’s dilatoriness, her reluctance to August 9: Spanish Delegation August 19: State Dinner heed the advice of her Council, could look Arriving in London from the Court of An extraordinary State dinner is held, very like the actions of the imperial Tiberius; Spain is Don John de Velasco, Constable of with unusual pomp and splendor, in the and the factions of the last decade of the old Castile and Great Chamberlain to King Banqueting House that Queen Elizabeth queen’s reign bore more than a passing Phillip III, who has empowered this Am- had erected on the southwest side of resemblance to their Roman counter- bassador Extraordinary to negotiate a peace Whitehall Palace. The earls of Pembroke parts…”).9 treaty with the new English sovereign.10 and Southampton officiate as gentlemen- It appears that Jonson has been receiv- Accompanying the Constable (and a spe- ushers for this celebration of the Anglo- ing access to some of Edward de Vere’s cial emissary from Archduke Albert of Spanish peace, signed today, consisting of unpublished manuscripts and that, after Austria) is a party of “Marquesses, Earles, a three-hour banquet followed by a grand reworking them either partially or wholly, Barons, Knights, and Gentlemen to the ball with more than fifty ladies-of-honor has been issuing them under his own name number of one hundred persons.” The Span- on hand. along with torrents of scholarly notes dis- ish delegation is to be lodged in Somerset Ten-year-old Prince Henry (apparently playing his classical knowledge. To what House, one of the royal residences and the a boy-companion of Henry de Vere) is degree these dramatic works are based on most splendid London palace other than commanded by his parents to dance a Oxford’s previous writings is a matter for Whitehall. galliard. They point to a lady who is to be further research and debate; what’s clear is A dozen members of the King’s Men are his partner and the Prince dances “with that Jonson has been tied politically to ordered to “wait and attend” on the Span- much sprightliness and modesty, cutting Robert Cecil ever since his imprisonment ish guests as Grooms of the Chamber, several capers,” according to a Spanish for the Isle of Dogs fiasco of 1597; and even performing no plays for the visitors. On eyewitness account, which adds: Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 27

“The Earl of Southampton then led Russia, but could stream in safety down August 27: The Constable Departs out the Queen, and three other gentlemen past southern France, on through the Ambassador Don John de Velasco, Con- their several partners, who all joined in Mediterranean to the Near East, or round stable of Castile, having suffered an attack dancing a brando … In another the Queen a new continent, that of Africa. After 20 of lumbago following the State dinner at 15 danced with the Duke of Lennox … The August 1604 the sea roads were free.” the Banqueting House, has been in bed Prince stood up to dance a correnta which recovering. Today, at last, King James bids he did very gracefully … The Earl of August 20: The Oxford Annuity Southampton was now again the Queen’s him a formal farewell as he departs for By this date, Alan Nelson reports, the Spain. partner and they went through the Dowager Countess of Oxford writes in her Correnta likewise…” September 24: Oxford Post Mortem own hand appealing to Cecil for continu- The first Inquisition post mortem to ation of Oxford’s £1,000 annuity at £500 Afterward they gather at the windows record the remains of Oxford’s estate, filed rather than at the £200-per-year the King overlooking a platform set up on a square for Essex, reports that the Dowager Count- had offered “for my own, and my Child’s ess, while still remaining at Hackney for a where a “vast crowd” has assembled; and maintenance.”16 with great amusement the royal party time, is also residing in Essex at Elizabeth Trentham’s son Henry de watches bear baiting, i.e., the King’s bears Hornchurch. Nelson observes this is “evi- Vere, Eighteenth Earl of Oxford, is now 11. fighting with greyhounds. dently a second home near the forest es- It would seem pathetically ironic that the tates”17 that the King granted to Edward de Dowager Countess refers in her letter to “Presently a bull, tied to the end of a Vere before his death. the “consideration” in this matter shown rope, was fiercely baited by dogs. After this October 16: Wedding Plans certain tumblers came, who danced upon by her late husband’s Catholic cousin Henry William Herbert Lord Pembroke in- a rope, and performed various feats of Howard, Lord Northampton, whom Ox- forms his father-in-law the Earl of agility and skill on horseback…”14 ford had accused of treason in 1581 and Shrewsbury that his brother Philip Herbert who is now enjoying royal favor in the new will marry Susan Vere: August 20: Cecil is a Lord reign. The contents of her letter seem Robert Cecil, having engineered the pathetic as well: “I rather chose to write by post than peaceful succession of James and retained leave you understand of that which is as all and more of his former governmental “I was very glad that the relief of this joyful unto me as anything that ever fell out power, is created Viscount Cranborne. Cecil ruined estate, best known to your Lord- since my birth … The matter in brief is has been the prime mover behind the suc- ships, rested in the favor of such persons, that, after long love, and many changes, my cessfully completed Proclamation of Peace as both in honor, nature, and affection brother on Friday last was privately con- would regard the desolate estate of my poor tracted (engaged) to my Lady Susan, with- with Spain; next year he will become the out the knowledge of any of his or her First Earl of Salisbury. Child and myself. But now hearing from your Lordship that the rate was set down friends. On Saturday she acquainted her The treaty with Spain has been carried by his Majesty’s own determination, and uncle (Cecil) with it, and he me. My Lord out amid elaborate festivities that were not left to your discretion, I earnestly of Cranborne (Cecil) seemed to be much troubled at it at first, but yesterday the “dumbly watched by the general public,” entreat your Lordship that you would King, taking the whole matter on himself, writes Cecil biographer P. M. Handover, present my humble petition to his gra- made peace on all sides…”18 referring to the tough time the English cious Majesty to enlarge his gift to five people will have in reconciling themselves hundred pounds rent yearly. Your Lord- October 26: The Oxford Annuity to a changed relationship with the nation ship may truly inform his Highness that Despite the pleadings of Oxford’s that bred the Inquisition, the Jesuits and the Pension of a thousand pounds was not widow, King James issues a royal grant the Armada. From the Tower, where he has given by the late Queen to my Lord for his from Westminster stipulating that she re- been imprisoned for the Main Plot since life and then to determine (cease or stop), ceive an annuity of £200 rather than £500, last November, Sir Walter Raleigh will but to continue until she might raise his decay by some better provision.” to be drawn from the Exchequer in quar- continue to voice his defiance of Spain— terly payments: and therefore, his defiance of Cecil, who Queen Elizabeth had left it open as to will go through the rest of his life until whether she might make some “better pro- “Know ye that we of our special grace 1612 with the weight of public opinion vision” for Oxford’s finances, but she had … do give and grant unto our right trusty against him. never done so; instead, the annual grant and right well-beloved cousin Henry Earl To give the hunchbacked son of Lord of Oxon a certain annuity or pension of two had simply continued in both reigns until Burghley the credit he is due, however, hundred pounds of lawful money of En- his death in June. 19 Handover writes that the peace with Spain gland by the year…” “opened a new world to English trade, and “And as I hear, his Majesty is most November 1: “Othello” assured that ‘vent’ for English cloth which respective (respectful?) in performing of had been the object of search for more than the late Queen’s intentions, which makes The special attendants assigned to the half a century… me the more hopeful, in my great dis- Royal apartments will send in their bill to tress, of his Majesty’s favor. It hath been the Treasurer of the Chamber for making “The hunt for new markets was no enjoyed but one year by his Majesty’s gift preparations for an unprecedented Shake- longer compelled to bay outside the ice- (1603-1604), and it is all the relief I ever speare festival at the English Court, pre- locked ports of the Baltic and northern look for to sustain my miserable estate.” (Continued on page 28) Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 28 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

Year in the Life (continued from page 27) hence, but will fail to recall precisely what ally between two performances of plays sented by the King’s Men: sum of money Mountjoy had promised his (Measure for Measure on the 26th and son-in-law. For Schoenbaum, this lapse Comedy of Errors on the 28th) that had “The greate Chamber at Whitehall for will “reveal the poet-dramatist of superhu- been written by the bride’s father, whose 2 days in November 1604, for the King’s man powers as a somewhat baffled mortal” name seems to be never mentioned in Majestie to see the plaies … For making after all. 22 public. ready the Bangqueting House at Whitehall against the plaie, November 1604 … For December 11: Gunpowder Plotters According to John Chamberlain, writ- making ready the great Hall for Sir Philip Seven conspirators of the Gunpowder ing to Dudley Carleton, the King has con- Herbert’s wedding the same month De- Plot, to be discovered about a year from tributed to the marriage with 500 pounds cember 1604. For making ready the Ban- now in November 1605, assemble in Lon- in land (in the Isle of Sheppey) plus gifts queting House at Whitehall for the mask don and begin to work in earnest.23 amounting to £2,000. The wedding was …”20 “performed with as much ceremony and grace as could be done a favorite,” he The Revels Office reports: “Hallowmas reports, noting that Prince Henry and the Day, being the first of November a play in “Love’s Labour’s Lost, which Duke of Holstein led the bride to church the Banqueting House at Whitehall called while Queen Anne followed and King The Moor of Venice”.21 for wit and mirth, he says, James himself gave her away. November 4: “Merry Wives” The King’s Men perform The Merry will please her exceedingly “And she brided and bridled it so hand- Wives of Windsor in the Great Hall of the somely and indeed became herself so well Palace. ...[and] is appointed that the King said if he were not married he November 19: Silver Street Wedding would not give her but keep her himself … William Shakspere of Stratford may or They were married in the chapel, feasted in to be played tomorrow the great chamber, and lodged in the coun- may not be still residing in the home of cil chamber, where the King gave them in Christopher Mountjoy, a French Huguenot night at my Lord of the morning before they were up a reveille- tire-maker (manufacturer of ladies’ orna- matin in his shirt and nightgown and mental headgear) in the ward of Southampton’s…” spent a good hour with them in the bed or Cripplegate. Whatever the case, Mountjoy’s upon, choose which you will believe best daughter Mary is married today to Stephen ...”26 Bellot, a former apprentice and now an The groom will become Earl of Mont- employee, as a result of his help. December 18: The Gossip Mill gomery on May 4th next year. Bellot left London earlier this year “to John Chamberlain writes to Sir Ralph December 28: “Comedy of Errors” see the world,” but he soon returned to Winwood: December 28: “Comedy of Errors” Silver Street on a fixed salary. During his The King’s Men perform The Comedy recent courtship of Mary Mountjoy, ac- “Sir Philip Herbert and Lady Susan of Errors for the royal audience in the cording to later court records, her father Vere are to be married on St. John’s Day at Great Hall. not only gave his blessing but also “did Whitehall. Three thousand pounds are Festivities surrounding the Herbert- send and persuade one Mr. Shakespeare already delivered for the expenses of the Vere marriage will continue in early Janu- that lay in the house to persuade the plain- great Masque to be performed on Twelfth ary with Love’s Labour’s Lost performed Night (Masque of Blackness by Jonson) for Queen Anne, apparently with tiff (Bellot) to the same marriage.” That is, …” the Stratford man was enlisted as a match- Southampton hosting the occasion. (The maker, because the groom was holding play was one of the earl’s favorites in his Chamberlain also cites an example of younger days, circa 1592.) Sir William out for a more advantageous marriage how the King’s Men are suddenly making settlement; and soon the two lovers “were Cope, charged with furnishing Her Maj- choices that are not quite politically cor- esty with a suitable performance, will write made sure by Mr. Shakespeare by giving rect: their consent, and agreed to marry.” to Cecil: The wedding took place today in the “The tragedy of Gowry has been twice “Sir, I have sent and been all this parish church of St. Olave in Silver Street; performed by the King’s Players to crowded but the records, Samuel Schoenbaum audiences, but the King is displeased and morning hunting for players, jugglers, notes, “do not show whether Shakespeare it will be forbidden. Princes should not be and such kind of creatures, but find them attended.” set on the Stage during their lifetime.”24 hard to find; wherefore, leaving notes for This episode of traditional Shakespear- them to seek me, Burbage is come, and says ean biography will be revealed by court December 26: “Measure” there is no new play that the Queen hath documents of 1612, when attempts will be The King’s Men perform Measure for not seen, but they have revived an old one made to determine exactly what financial Measure in the Great Hall. called Love’s Labour’s Lost, which for wit settlement for the marriage had been December 27: Vere-Herbert Wedding and mirth, he says, will please her exceed- agreed upon. Mr. Shakspere will make an Susan Vere and Philip Herbert are ingly. And this is appointed to be played appearance at these hearings eight years married.25 The wedding takes place liter- tomorrow night at my Lord of

Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 29

Southampton’s…”27 nature of their relationship remains (suggested by William Niederkorn entirely unclear. They appear to be two of The New York Times, with further With the wedding celebrations con- sides of the same coin, that is, part of work being done by Robert Detobel). I tinuing, Masque of Blackness by Ben the same overall effort (directed by believe that Oxford may have Jonson will be performed for Queen Anne Robert Cecil) to obscure Oxford’s voluntarily disappeared—perhaps into at the Old Banqueting House on January authorship of the Shakespeare works. his beloved Forest of Waltham, i.e., the 6th, with the bride Susan Vere as a dancer in Forest of Essex, of which he was granted the cast; Henry Fifth will be played on • Jonson’s services had been thrust custody in 1603, or to a remote place January 7th; Every Man Out of His Humour upon both Edward de Vere and the Lord such as the Isle of Man, owned by his on January 8 th; Every Man In His Humour Chamberlain’s Men by Cecil, who had son-in-law the Earl of Derby—and that on February 2nd; and The Merchant of Venice orchestrated the demise of Oxford’s the 1609 dedication of Shake-Speares will be performed twice, on February 10th previous circle of writers while gaining Sonnets may have served to announce and 12th, presumably because King James unprecedented governmental control that “our ever-living poet” had finally and/or Queen Anne so thoroughly enjoy over play companies and public departed from this world. If such were that stage work. In all the Court festival theaters, not to mention stricter the case, his contributions to the King will have included seven plays attributed censorship. Ben was to be the new James Version of the Bible (given an to William Shakespeare and two others, popular dramatist, taking attention additional five years of life) might have the Every Man works, attributed to Ben away from Shakespeare, and Will was been much greater than supposed. Jonson, who will tell readers of his own to receive the eventual (posthumous) Folio in 1616 that Shakespeare had headed recognition as the author. • To dismiss the arrest of Southampton the cast of the original performance of on June 24, 1604, within hours before Every Man In His Humour in 1598. • Regardless of the similarity of his or after Oxford’s reported death on that Late 1604: “Great Oxford” title as Lord Great Chamberlain to that date, would seem dangerously rash. My “My little beagle,” King James begins a of the Lord Chamberlain, Oxford had strong opinion is that Edward de Vere final letter to Cecil this year, presenting been the guiding force of the great had worked behind the scenes with him with an account of how Lord Sheffield, acting troupe to continue as the King’s Cecil, his brother-in-law, during 1601- President of the Council of the North, has Men. By whatever practical means, 1603, to ensure Southampton’s been demanding a bigger share of the Shakespeare’s company had been eventual release by James with royal largesse: Edward de Vere’s most important restoration of his earldom and a royal company. pardon. (Nina Green, host of the “And yet, that he might have a taste of Internet discussion group Phaeton, has my favour for his further enabling in my • William of Stratford may have been suggested that Oxford was the service, I was contented to give him a a member of the Chamberlain’s-King’s unidentified “40” who appears briefly pension for his lifetime of as great value as Men on the business side and a in the secret correspondence with ever either the late Queen or I gave to any shareholder of the Globe, but whether James led by Cecil.) If so, Oxford would subject, to wit 1,000 pounds. To this he he ever walked on the stage as an actor have given his personal assurance of answered that this would do him no good, he was already ten thousand pounds in cannot yet be determined. It would Southampton’s loyalty (i.e., that he debt… seem, however, that over time such would attempt no sequel to the Essex became the fairly common perception. Rebellion); but once Edward de Vere “I had already told him, never greater was gone, the Crown would have needed gift of that nature was given in England. • Oxford must have taken great interest to assess the younger earl’s Great Oxford when his state was whole in the decision to produce a new commitment for itself. ruined got no more of the late Queen. I translation of the Bible, to eventually James was paranoid and needed myself bestows (sic) no more upon Arbella become the King James Version of such assurances; and Cecil would have my only near cousin. Nay, a foreign prince 1611. That decision had been made at admitted (grudgingly) that the popular of Germany that was here the last year got the Hampton Court Conference early Earl of Southampton’s continued not so much…”28 this year (January 1604), when Oxford presence in the Tower could constitute Lingering questions about 1604 was still very much alive, and he could a potential rallying point for those have contributed (in various ways) over dissatisfied with the new reign. It was At the end of the previous column, the next five months until his death in far safer for the King to free which dealt with events during the first June. Southampton and heap honors upon half of 1604, we listed some unanswered him, while giving him no genuine questions. Here are some brief, and no • Whether Edward de Vere actually political power and dispatching him to doubt unsatisfactory, answers based on my died this year is unclear. (The reader is the Isle of Wight. The new monarch had personal opinions: directed to the fascinating work on this swiftly favored both Southampton and subject by researcher/writer Chris- Oxford during the first year of the reign; • Ben Jonson and William of Stratford topher Paul.) Some students of Oxford and in that respect, despite his financial must have known each other, but the now lean to his possible suicide (Continued on page 32) Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 30 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004 An Interview with Beard of Avon author Amy Freed By James Sherwood my Freed lights up a room when she Freed: The intellect of Shakespeare attracts NL: You really sounded expert on the speaks like the messenger of good and confounds and the relationship of subject of research, reading the old plays A news in a renaissance painting, and nascent talent to learning and the degree to from pre-Shakespearean times, with the she is just the slightest bit impish to boot. which each contribute to the making of a vaudevillian mouse-man boasting how he Married to a newspaperman, living in San writer of his caliber is the driving beats his wife, until she comes on stage. I Francisco and lecturing in drama at certainly see where you began “The Beard.” Stanford, she is 45, has been a playwright Freed: I love the silliness of the early since 1990, with six completed works to English comedies. They remind me of date, most recently, The Beard of Avon “The Honeymooners” and “The Three which opened in New York last December Stooges” which are among my most with rave reviews from The New York Times, important artistic influences. making it one of the season’s hits. NL: How about giving us a “Saturday In 1998 Ms. Freed was a Pulitzer Prize Night Live” with Dumb Will Shax, Nimble Finalist for her play, “Freedomland.” Ned Ox, Miss Prissy Queen Liz and that Earlier works also reveal a focus on beautiful, glamorous Anne? Are you willing characters who make literature and art - to go on adding more scenes, more “The Psychic Life of Savages”, playwrights, a third act? “Claustophilia”, “The Ghoul of Amherst” Freed: It would be fun, but I have to get out and “Still Warm.” Their characters include of the 16th century for a while. Edgar Allan Poe, Emily Dickinson, Sylvia NL: Can you see “The Beard” as a musical? Plath, journalist Jessica Savitch and a family “Hellzapoppin” for history buffs? of artists. Freed: Yes. In recent interviews she has said, “My Amy Freed NL: Doubtless I am not paying adequate play is not a vote for de Vere; it’s a mystery,” respect to your years of study of Elizabethan and “I began to write a comedy about investigation of “Beard of Avon.” speech patterns. people who are obsessed by conspiracies NL: Which leads to a second question Freed: No, you are. and I became obsessed with this concerning experiential writing, given that NL: From the New School in New York conspiracy.” She noted that in her writing, there are probably no other writers in where you started, and the St. John’s College “I have the release of comedy. I can sleep western literature who did not write from Great Books program, to SMU in Dallas with the uncertainty” that the authorship what they know. Are we not looking at the and a Master’s from the American of Shakespeare is in doubt. written experience of the Earl of Oxford in Conservatory Theater, you not only Amy James Freed, in this short interview, Shakespeare even though we do not have learned, you shaped a literary vision. How shows how to end some serious thoughts on the author’s signature? does that “literary” thing, the urge to “write a Neil Simon note of laughter. To wit: Freed: We are looking at the written well” grab you? As an actress first, and experience of the author, certainly, a man studying with Kirsten Linklater, clearly Newsletter: Isn’t it inevitable that the Earl of considerable development, mature you found the fun in writing. of Oxford will become the designated insight, philosophical preoccupation, and Freed: Writing well, for a playwright, “interpretive instrument” if not the proven a highly sophisticated understanding of means you are writing well for the dramatic author, the lens through which power, human nature and behavior. moment - that your words serve actions, be Shakespearean studies inevitably must pass NL: Which leads me to note that I believe they violent, ugly, broken, exalted, to be seen clearly, and so, eventually, you appeared in “The Beard of Avon” ridiculous. I think to write well for theater because he appears to be Hamlet, the model through the character of Anne Hathaway. you have to let go of the idea of writing as for Hamlet, perhaps the only person who She made some mighty modern and a precious artifact. But I do like moments lived Hamlet, probably generally relevant comments and seemed to of beauty, when they are organic to a scene occupying a significant place in any study transcend herself. A thoroughly modern or a world... and you get to create a world, of Hamlet? In other words, the de facto and delightful woman! as a playwright, where someone can say “author”? Freed: Anne H. is conveniently unknown something stunning. Might be short or Freed: This question contains its own to history, and so is available to the modern simple, but in some way perfect in its truth. answer—I’ll pass until I finish my “Oxford” imagination. But she’s not me. Better than hemming and hawing one’s studies. NL: Is Anne Hathaway the spokeslady of way through real life, never thinking of the NL: I believe you said that “The intellect of your life view? right thing until the scene is long over, and Oxford attracts” while Shakespeare Freed: No, Edward de Vere is. Especially the moment gone! remains dull, meaning that finally the when he longs for the depraved banquets NL: Hasn’t the “sound” and the physical winner will be Oxford. of his youth. shape of your writing for stage always been

Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2004 Shakespeare Matters page 31 stronger than stuffy old rules? I mean, what writing and rhyming are tossed out? I dealt with Shakespeare, years later, at would you do if it sounded good and didn’t seem to be mixing my questions up, falling home in Stratford. There was also, in an play well? all over myself in contemplation of “a real earlier draft, a scene that accounted for Freed: Cut it. thinker” and a “great entertainer” and a the loss of Shakespeare’s manuscripts and NL: Would you tell me again about your “truly funny lady” all in one. Did Elaine answered the question, “Whatever teachers who drilled the essentials of the May influence you? happened to ‘Love’s Labour Won’?” They iambic line into you, and how you learned Freed: I’m not really all that familiar with were good scenes, too. Just not right for what you described as “the power” of the Elaine May’s work, to be honest. But there the final form of the play. breaks in formal rhythm and structure, are others: Shaw, Chekhov, Mel Brooks, NL: Assuming the agnostic position especially as our Shakespeare moved into Goldsmith, Sheridan, Mamet, Buster allowed you to avoid preaching from a what you so beautifully said “was ‘King Keaton, Jackie Chan, Aristophanes, BBC soapbox and simply to find the humor in Lear’ like Beethoven”? Comedy Channel, Edna St. Vincent Millay, all the positions but: Would you consider Freed: When I was an acting student at ACT Edith Sitwell, Edith Bunker, and on and doing a comedy about that terrible sense of my teachers, especially William Ball and on. loneliness and loss, that personal isolation, Debora Sussel, taught us to look to NL: I can’t believe you never realized your which is (or is not?) the central character of Shakespeare’s text as a guide to the actor. own name was in “Freedomland” (play Oxford’s dilemma? To be sensitive to the psychological effects nominated for Pulitzer Prize in 1998) but Freed: Maybe. I consider all kinds of ideas. of his metrics - from the forward gallop of then I can believe it. Yes, you have a purity. Whether I can pull them off is another the iamb, to the hammer-stroke of a Does the innocent heart, the trusting and matter. spondee - to the odd, unnatural sound of maybe almost naive person still interest NL: Or do you see Oxford as something the trochees that the witches in ‘Macbeth’ you, have your sympathy? other than a man tormented? use when they incant. Freed: As a hypothetical, I suppose. I’m Freed: The Oxford character that I created NL: It seems to me you were quite moved depressed by how rare those qualities are for “Beard of Avon” has taken on such by Ted Hughes “writing well about poets” anymore. My students seem so over- reality for me that it supersedes anything and “Shakespeare primarily and supremely sophisticated in a sort of surface way. My else - and probably all facts. That Oxford as a poet.” Then you noted the “intersection students from other countries seem more has an irrepressible amusement and of poetry and theater.” What do you think intact, sometimes, than American kids. bemusement with all things human - he’s about mostly when you write? Is it to tell NL: I’m told by others that you said that sort of an Olympian, who is fascinated, but your story, your feelings, to love the “The Beard” has been through three stages can’t quite ultimately take seriously the geniuses, to rehabilitate all these of revision. Between the South Coast heartbreaks of lesser mortals. misunderstood great minds like Poe and Repertory, Salt Lake and Seattle, San NL: Or do you believe that maybe Will Shax Plath? Francisco, Chicago and now New York. did it the way craftsmen put in eight hours Freed: Mostly I’m looking for an imagined What has been the most painful cut of all? a day at the studio and go home to forget voice of power and singularity, that gives Or most difficult development? it all like any other job holder? Or was he me a character that has its own life. From Freed: Losing two final scenes, one that a genius at playing like he wasn’t a genius that point on, it tells me what to do. dealt with Queen Elizabeth as a frailer, - the way a lot of louts seem? NL: Isn’t that where all the beautiful older and wiser lady, and another that (Continued on page 32) Subscribe to Shakespeare Matters

Regular member: Name:______e-member ($20/year) ______(Website; online newsletter) Address:______One year ($40/$55 overseas) ______Two year ($75/$105 overseas) ______Three year ($110/$155 overseas) ______City:______State:______ZIP:______Family/Institution: Phone:______email:______One year ($60/$75 overseas) ______Two year ($115/$145 overseas) ______Three years ($170/$215 os) ______Check enclosed____ Or... Credit card____ MC____ Visa____ Patron ($75/year or over): ______Name on card:______Special offer for new subscribers: Card number:______Exp. date:______Bible dissertation ($69) ______P&H for Bible ($5) ______

Signature:______Total: ______Checks payable to: The Shakespeare Fellowship, PO Box 561, Belmont, MA 02478 Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) page 32 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2004

Freed interview (continued from page 31) Year in the Life (continued from page 29) 11 Rye, W. B., England as Seen by Foreigners Freed: I don’t know. ruin, Edward de Vere departed from in the Days of Elizabeth and James the NL: You mentioned that not a lot has the scene this year in quite the opposite First (London, 1865), 118; a Spanish pamphlet of 1604 is reprinted. changed in the theater from 16th Century of disgrace. 12 Stopes, op. cit., 284, citing “Dec. Acc. slapstick comedy to 1950s “The Honey- Treas. Ch., Audit Off. 388, 41; Pipe Off. mooners.” Are you looking forward to Endnotes: 543.” writing a tragedy? 13 Stopes, op. cit. 285, citing Nichols’ Freed: No!! 1 Campbell, O. J., The Reader’s Encyclopedia Progresses, 268. of Shakespeare, (New York: MJF Books, 14 Rye, op. cit., 123. NL: You mentioned that now you’ve broken 15 the mold (of writing about genius and 1966), 284. Handover, P. M., The Second Cecil (Great 2 Unauthorized editions of plays under the Britain: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1959), 313- literary icons - Poe, Plath, etc.). I hope Shakespeare name between now and the 315. you’re not abandoning the obvious fun and Folio will include King Lear of 1608, 16 Nelson, op. cit., 427 (I have modernized his joy and sympathy you have in portraying Trolius and Cressida and Pericles of 1609, transcript). brilliant misfits. Is “The Cotton Mather and Othello of 1622. 17 Nelson, op. cit., 431. Story” going to make us laugh? 3 The Irving Shakespeare, “The Life of 18 Nelson, op. cit., 428 (I have modernized the Freed: Yes. William Shakespeare” (New York: Books, English here, too). Inc, 1913), Introduction, xxx (Italics added 19 Nelson, op. cit., 428 (modernized English). NL: 20 NL: I think you said that the supreme for emphasis). Stopes, op. cit., 287, citing Cecil Papers, moments in Shakespearean writing “come 4 Stopes, Charlotte Carmichael, The Life of cix, 40. like flights” unconnected to the events Henry, Third Earl of Southampton (New 21 Public Record Office, Audit Office, then in play, suggesting that the author York: AMS Press, 1922), 283. Accounts Various, A.O.3/908/13; this and began as a constructor of stories and skits, 5 Nelson, Alan, Monstrous Adversary the other citations of plays performed by but ended alone at his desk writing (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, the King’s Men, from an account prepared under supervision of Edmund Tilney, the literature for the printer. Are you going to 2003), 428. 6 Akrigg, G. P. V., Shakespeare and the Earl of longtime Master of the Revels. continue revising your plays as time passes, Southampton (Cambridge, MA: Harvard 22 Schoenbaum, Samuel, William Shakespeare: shaping them and adding as you change? University Press, 1968), 142. A Compact Documentary Life (New York: Freed: Future plays, yes. But what I’ve 7 Jonson’s account is in his Folio of 1616. Oxford University Press, 1987), 260-264. written to date is on its own. Although Sejanus was performed at Court 23 Bowen, Catherine Drinker, The Lion and the NL: What’s your favorite question? in 1603, exactly when it was first acted in Throne (Boston: Little-Brown, 1956), 239. 24 Stopes, op. cit., from Windwood’s memoirs, Freed: How would you like your public is not known for sure, but 1604 is usually cited. I., 41. honorarium? 8 Procter, Johanna, ed., The Selected Plays of 25 Miller, Ruth Loyd, “Oxfordian Vistas” (in Ben Jonson, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge Shakespeare Identified. Jennings, LA: —James Sherwood (interview conducted University Press, 1989), 9. Minos Publishing Company, 1975, vol. 2), during January 2004). James Sherwood has 9 Levy, Fritz, “The Theatre and the Court in 4. 26 done author interviews for The Paris Review, the 1590s” in The Reign of Elizabeth I: Nelson, op. cit., 429-430 (modern English). 27 Adams, 370-371. Writers At Work, Playboy, Esquire, the Village Court and Culture in the Last Decade, edited by John Guy (Cambridge: Cam- 28 Akrigg, G. P. V., editor, Letters of King Voice, Ladies Home Journal, of L-F Celine, bridge University Press, 1995), 274-300. James VI & I (Berkeley: University of Mason Hoffenberg, Clifford Irving, James 10 Adams, J. Q., A Life of William Shakespeare, California Press, 1984), 242-245, emphasis Cagney and many more over 50 years. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1923), 365. by italics added.

Inside this issue: Shakespeare Matters The Voice of the Shakespeare Fellowship In Search of Rosencrantz In Search of Rosencrantz P. O. Box 263 and Guildenstern - page 1 and Guildenstern - page 1 Somerville MA 02143 Address correction requested 8th Annual Edward de Vere Studies Conference - page 1

Interrogation of Prof. Alan Nelson - page 1

“Lillies that Fester” - page 18

“My Turk” - page 22

Year in the Life: 1604 (Part II) - page 25 Internet Ed. (©2004, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent)