THE OXFORDIAN Volume V 2002 Book Review Who Killed Kit Marlowe? out the book to a respectable size: the by M.J. Trow and Talieson Trow Queen’s Armada speech at Tilbury; Anthony London: Sutton, 2001 Babington’s letter to Robert Poley on the eve of his destruction with its hint of homo- H O S E who have found themselves sexual love (shudder! shudder!); the anec- questioning the mystery that sur- dote about the maid of honor, who, while roundsT the death of the brilliant poet and being seduced by Raleigh, cried out, “Sweet dramatist, Christopher Marlowe, will find Sir Walter, Swisserwasser”! (pant! pant!) this book of interest, as they will any book There are some really sorry mistakes. that takes the question seriously. Unfor- We are informed that the Latin motto on the tunately, despite the promise of the jacket portrait thought by many to be of Marlowe, blurb of a “wholly new and surprising conclu- “Quod me nutruit me destruit” (“That which sion,” in reality what is new is trivial, nourishes me destroys me”), refers to hardly worth the required plunge spying. The author neither knows through a mishmash of facts, nor bothers to find out that this mixed with myths and guesswork popular motto invariably refer- presented as facts, much of it enced some private passion. Or poorly sorted at best and, most do they suggest that Marlowe had annoyingly, backed by few real cita- a private passion for spying? tions. Descriptions are trite and repeti- The first statement in government tive: every mention of Elizabeth is followed agent Baines’s report on Marlowe’s atheism, by the same pejoratives: “black teeth,” “thin that Marlowe held that “the Indians and hair” and “scrawny chest,” as though that many authors of antiquity have assuredly were all there was to be said about the great written above 16 thousand years ago, where- Queen. Every mention of Elizabeth’s Prin- as Adam is proved to have lived within 6 cipal Secretary Francis Walsingham (1572- thousand years. .” is interpreted by Trow to 90) is followed by “the Spymaster,” as though refer to Native Americans, sending him off that were the whole of his occupation. Then on a pointless tangent about the possibility there’s Nicholas Faunt, similarly tagged “the that Raleigh and Harriott saw native rituals homosexual,” as though it were some sort of on their trip to Virginia. Had he been less title, one furthermore with no relevance to focused on “Marlowe the Spy,” it might have his role in the story. Really cheap stuff. occurred to him that, in his Faustian thirst There are the same old quotations, for knowledge, Marlowe had read, or heard repeated, not for any relevance to the thesis, tell, that the wisdom of the ancient Greeks but purely for their allure, or perhaps to flesh came to Greece by way of India, something 174 THE OXFORDIAN Volume V 2002 that, however it may have surprised Baines scenario, that Marlowe was killed in a brawl (and Trow), would hardly surprise antiquari- over the bill for the day at Eleanor Bull’s inn, ans, then or now. as a cover-up. All agree that some powerful higher-up “set up” Marlowe, though they dif- till, we are glad to see that they have fer on who and why. Saddressed to some extent the major prob- Since the Trows haven’t given the mat- lem with Charles Nicholl’s 1992 The Reck- ter enough study to do more than raise the oning, by far the most important book on the question, their book does little more for Marlowe mystery since Leslie Hotson came Marlowe than point the finger where Nicholl up with the actual coroner’s report in 1925. fell short, at Robert Cecil, a solution, how- For some reason, Nicholl was unable to grasp ever, that had already occurred to Curtis the obvious implications of his own Breight (see his Surveillance, Militarism research, offering what is perhaps and Drama of the Elizabethan Era, the weakest of all solutions: that from 1996). It was Robert Cecil it was Essex who had Marlowe who, upon taking over the office murdered. Another and even of Principle Secretary from the less likely solution, that Raleigh recently deceased “Spy-master” had Marlowe murdered to pre- Walsingham, had the motivation, vent him from “telling all” about both personal and official, to get rid the School of Night, is also dismissed by of Marlowe. Marlowe’s plays, with their the Trows, with good reason. bold, underclass heroes, were attracting far Unfortunately they also dismiss out of too much enthusiastic attention from the hand the most interesting scenario yet, that young and the restless of London, a situation proposed originally by Calvin Hoffman in that would have concerned the Cecils and 1955 in The Murder of the Man Who Was other establishment figures whose priorities S h a k e s p e a r e, which holds that Marlowe’s leaned more towards security and stability death was faked. Though it can offer no real than fostering the arts. evidence, Hoffman’s version does account for Unfortunately the Trows diminish their more of the peculiar elements in the story identification of Cecil by including in their than most theories. (It may be that his sce- accusations both the Lord Admiral, Charles nario is disregarded less on its own account Howard, and the Lord Chamberlain, Henry than because its primary purpose is to support Hunsdon. (This must be the “wholly new his theory that Marlowe lived on to create and surprising conclusion” since nothing else the Shakespeare canon while in exile.) is either new or surprising.) All of these writers see the official They are also off-base with the reasons 175 THE OXFORDIAN Volume V 2002 Book Review they give for Marlowe’s elimination. Trow the book that dispells the myth of “Marlowe (senior, I suppose) waxes eloquent––or as the Spy,” an image so ingrained in the psyche close to it as his native limitations allow of the reading public by now that nobody ––over the dangers of free-thought in even bothers to offer proof? In point of fact, Elizabethan England and the consequences “Marlowe the Spy” is an imaginary being of being charged with atheism. True enough. based on an arbitrary interpretation of three That some members of the highly educated incidents, none of them offering any real evi- nobility were themselves guilty of free-think- dence that Marlowe was ever actually hired ing, also true no doubt. But that Marlowe or paid by the government to spy on his “knew too much” about the atheistical free- countrymen, either at home or abroad. thinking of Howard and Hunsdon, things The incident that launched this omni- they feared he might reveal under examina- present spy version of Marlowe’s biography tion by the rest of the Council, won’t hold has been misinterpreted from the very start. water on the face of it, and even if it did, There can be no argument over the fact that, Trow, with his slipshod approach, isn’t up to in the mid-1580s, when he was in his early making the case. Whether or not we come twenties, Marlowe was engaged in some away persuaded of their complicity in activity that occasioned several long Marlowe’s murder, some background on these absences from his studies at Cambridge two important officials, both members of the University; or that when the dons, hearing Privy Council, both relatives of the Queen, rumors that he had gone to Rheims to turn both patrons of important acting companies, Catholic (or to pretend he had) refused to would be a darn sight more interesting than give him his degree, that they were ordered another recitiation of the Queen’s Tilbury to do so by the Privy Council. The problem speech. If anything, it would seem that lies with the interpretation of the Privy Howard, patron of the brilliant actor Edward Council’s order: Alleyn, who brought Marlowe’s heroes to life on the stage, would have been more con- Whereas it was reported that Chris- cerned to protect his author than to destroy topher Morley was determined to have him. If this question ever occurred to Trow gone beyond the seas to Rheims and he shows no sign of it. there to remain, their lordships Although Trow never gets quite as thought good to verify that he had no Gothic as does Charles Nicholl whenever such intent, but that in all his actions the subject of undercover operations arises he had behaved himself orderly and (there should be some limit set on the use of discreetly whereby he had done her the word “seamy” in books like this), there’s Majesty good service & deserved to be still way too much negative mystique here. rewarded for his faithful dealing. Their When (oh, when) will someone give us lordships’ request was that the rumor 176 Who Killed Kit Marlowe? THE OXFORDIAN Volume V 2002 thereof should be allayed by all possi- Even less likely is the accompanying charge ble means, and that he should be fur- that he was a closet Catholic. If Marlowe thered in the degree he was to take this was a Catholic activist, then somebody else next Commencement; because it was penned Dr. Faustus and The Massacre at not her Majesty’s pleasure that anyone Paris. employed as he had been in matters Spook hunters ignore the importance of touching the benefit of his country the final sentence of the Privy Council mes- should be defamed by those that are sage: “it was not her Majesty’s pleasure that ignorant in th’offices he went about.