Telescoping Translation: Hero and Leander, Lenten Stuffe, and Bartholomew Fair.
Marlowe's wonderful punning on "Venus nun," suggesting that Hero is "Venus none," epitomizes the quandary at the crux of translation. (4) Ideally, translation follows its prefix to span "across" and create unity from multiple versions. Thus, the project of translatio studii et imperii (translation of learning and empire) aims toward creating a sense of national and linguistic unity. But "translation" is also already subject to having been doubled. A translated text both is, and is not, its source--the paradox is omnipresent. (5) Belen Bistue rightly embraces this contradiction and explains that "while translation theory can be a repository for ideologies of unification (economic, political, doctrinal, and stylistic), it can also be a site of resistance to them." (6) Marlowe's, Nashe's, and Jonson's versions of Hero and Leander directly exploit this conflict. On the one hand, Nashe and Johnson reveal an urge toward the kinds of ideological unification Bistue catalogs. Both position Marlowe as a master worthy of imitation and simultaneously elevate the English language to stand, if not "above," at the very least on par with Museaus' Greek and Ovid's Latin. On the other hand, the latent satire that begins with Marlowe's Mercury digression predestinating divine and political authorities to legislative caprice, and then grows more outrageous with Nashe's and Jonson's subsequent translations, resists these ideologies. Ultimately, all of these three versions of Hero and Heander progressively expand upon Leander's cheeky arguments that Venus' nun should be "none" chaste in order to emphasize the ruptures of classically inspired ideals of amity and Neoplatonic idealism in early modern England.
Marlowe and Nashe initially exploit the fluid duality of both Venus and the hermaphrodite to mock hypocritical expressions of erotic love and political harmony in Elizabethan society. Tellingly, Jonson's conflation of his contemporaries' versions of Hero and heander in Bartholomew Fair with Damon and Pythias exploits the puppets' androgyny and extends his predecessors' satirical portrayals of love and amity in early modern England. (7) Hero's association with the hermaphrodite begins when Marlowe's speaker associates her with Ovid's Salmacis, (8) continues as Nashe transforms her from a human into an asexually reproducing fish, and culminates when Jonson portrays her as a puppet performing at Bartholomew Fair. Renaissance conceptions of the hermaphrodite epitomize both the harmony associated with Neoplatonism and the omnipresent threat of its destruction. In one sense, the hermaphrodite represents an ideal union of "not only male and female, lover and beloved, but also materiality and spirituality." (9) Hermaphrodites also convey the monstrous elision of sexual and species boundaries which Livy suggests violate the natural laws that distinguish sex from sex and species from species. (10) Such ambiguous figures threaten these "natural" laws, largely reinstituted by church and state. (11) Simultaneously, these formal elisions and disfigurations threaten the integrity of the English vernacular and invoke the notion of linguistic barbarism, or the mixing of vernacular and classical languages. (12) Although vernacular fixity is not operative at the turn of the seventeenth century, it is still very much tied to the concept of national identity. (13) These progressive translations of Hero and Leander's story satirize these intertwined notions of natural (per Livy), linguistic, and national integrity by participating in the culture of barbarism that they mock.
Because of the complexity of the conversation between Marlowe, Nashe, and Jonson, this essay proceeds in three sections. First, I offer a reading of Marlowe's Hero and Lander that has been informed by Nashe and Jonson's engagement with the poem. Marlowe is less concerned with romantic love than he is with an interrogation of the (ir)rationale for the lovers' tragedy. Specifically, Marlowe's translation highlights the hypocrisy associated with both natural and man-made laws. The second part examines Nashe's imitation of Marlowe's poem and his transposition of Hero and Leander's destiny onto English soil. Nashe translates Marlowe's images of disjunctive unity directly into his chronicle of arbitrarily allocated economic "liberties" favoring Yarmouth's fishing industry at the expense of Lowestoft's. The final section analyzes Jonson's incorporation of both Marlowe's poem and Nashe's variant of Hero and Lander with Damon and Pythias' epitome of ideal friendship. Amidst Jonson's intertextual cacophony lies his criticism of the hypocrisies and arbitrariness of political amity in Jacobean England.
Tempting as it may be to read Marlowe's association of Hero with both Venus and Ovid's hermaphrodite Salmacis as a Neoplatonically idealized androgyny unifying the (female) soul and (male) body, (14) Hero's fluid sexuality ultimately figures disjunction and informs a politically subversive subtext. Arguably, the sexual instability of all of Marlowe's main characters in Hero and Lander threaten both amity and discordia concors. For instance, Marlowe describes Leander as "a maid in man's attire," (15) and Neptune notoriously mistakes him for Jove's Ganymede (641) before chasing the boy with his mace and accidentally wounding himself. (16) Judith Haber has argued that Marlowe presents Neptune's self-inflicted wound as an image of castration, "an image (but only an image) of a man who is both intact and lacking."" Even if these hermaphroditic images are merely images, their accrual in the figure of Hero is undeniable. Marlowe's Mercury digression departs from his source and exploits Hero's association with both Venus and Salmacis in order to mock the endemic caprice of natural and manmade laws.
From his opening lines, Marlowe establishes Hero's dual nature by introducing her with a superficial blazon which exploits the pun on "nun" ("none") available in the English vernacular and foreshadows his sustained parody of idealized conceptions of Venus: "So louely faire was Hero, Venus Nun" (45). Whereas Museaus' Hero harmonizes voluptuousness and chastity as Venus' "youngest Grace" (Beauty), Marlowe's speaker gives readers a red-carpet review of Hero's outfit. (18) By describing how her "wide sleeues greene" tell the erotically charged story of Venus and Adonis (11-14), the speaker translates Hero as a wanton Venus. This association continues through the narrative describing her accessories, notably her "myrde wreath" and "her vaile [of] artificiall flowers and leaues" (17; 19). Anticipating Cupid's proto-Freudian projection of his mother upon Hero, Marlowe's heroine wears Venus' myrde wreath symbolizing the duality of chastity and sexuality, war and peace. Hero's "vaile" also suggests a medieval nun's headdress and arguably represents the discordia concors associated with Venus. But Marlowe strips this "vaile" of idealistic qualities by both recalling the "vale" where Venus overcomes Adonis, and also by emphasizing its artificiality--its ability to deceive "both man and beast." Marlowe's blazon of Hero's accoutrements emerges not as a portrait of harmony, but as one of cancellation: Hero's clothes mark her as no nun.
Marlowe continues to associate Hero with self-cancelling virtue in Leander's sophistical portrayal of her virginity. Leander argues that Hero's valuation of her virginity analogizes "idoll" worship, or a worship of false gods (269). Her virtue is fashioned in negativity; it "neither [is] essence" nor has "any place of residence" (270; 272). Calling Hero "a holy Idiot," Leander negates her "holy" status as Venus' nun by alluding to her anatomical "hole" and emphasizing the absence paradoxically representing her virtue (303). Leander exploits this idealistic paradox in order to sabotage it by arguing that, if she were to "abandon fruitess cold Virginitie ... then shall [Hero] most resemble Venus Nun" (318; 320). Deftly shifting the association of nunnery from chastity to sexual desire, Leander situates Hero's duality in a scene of rhetorically doubled negativity which, despite his sophistry, does not result in a "positive," or singular, representation. Instead, Leander's doubting of Hero as "nun/none" anticipates her gradual metamorphosis into Ovid's sexually ambiguous Salmacis, which begins when she swallows "Cupids golden hook" (333).
When Hero swallows Cupid's hook, Marlowe undermines her virtue by tacitly associating her with fish. In early modern English literature, the word "fish" frequently connotes women's leaky sexuality and female genitalia, and is a synonym for "whore." These associations prohibit idealizing Hero and Leander's courtship and recast their dalliance as "anti-erotic." (19) Hero's struggle between reason and desire escalates once she swallows the bait; she is both aware of Leander's sophistry and the rising power of her awakening sexual desire:
Thus hauing swallowed Cupids golden hooke, The more she striv'd, the deeper was she stroke. Yet euilly faining anger, stroue she still, And would be thought to graunt against her will. So hauing paus'd a while, at last shee said: Who taught thee Rhethoricke to deceiue a maid? (333-38)
Hero's concern is not about true (erotic) or false (anti-erotic) love, but instead about appearances. She "strivefs]" to resist Leander even as she plots to control how any slippage on her part may be perceived. As a temporary solution, Hero rhetorically displaces the burden of the encounter onto Leander by accusing him of rhetorical "deception." (20) The speaker "answers" Hero by transitioning into the Mercury digression. Ovid's story of Mercury in the Fasti has taught Leander how to exploit rhetorical sophistry to seduce and, failing seduction, to rape a maid. Marlowe supplements his digression with conflated translations of Ovidian narratives that emphasize the underlying hypocrisy of Neoplatonic idealism.
Marlowe's revisionary mythology in the Mercury digression depicts "alliance" more closely resembling the proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" than any kind of Pythagorean or Ciceronian ideal. At the crux of this long departure from Hero and Leander's story is a tale of desire and destruction (386-484). Mercury defies Jove while trying to seduce a maid and is thrust from Olympus. In order to regain his position, Mercury courts the "Adamantine Destinies" and forms an alliance through which they overthrow Jove and restore Saturn to reign. But as soon as he gets what he wants, Mercury "despises" the Destinies' love (460). Furious, the Fates break the alliance, restore Jove, and punish Mercury. These shifting political alliances between Mercury and the Destinies and, later, the Destinies and Jove are not determined by virtue and amity, but sexual desire and revenge. Finally, the girl who started all of this trouble disappears from the digression entirely, underscoring the irrationality informing this catastrophe of Olympian political order.
Marlowe continues to mock the arbitrary legitimization of "unnatural" laws by inventing a story about Mercury's subjection to the Midases of the world. (21) After restoring Jove to the Olympian throne, the Destinies furiously punish Mercury, ordaining
That he and Pouertie should always kis. And to this day is euerie scholler poore, Grosse gold, from them runs headlong to the boore. Likewise the angrie sisters thus deluded, To venge themselues on Hermes, haue concluded That Midas brood shall sit in Honors chaire. (469-74)
Because he "despised" the Destinies, Mercury is fated to kiss not pretty maids, but poverty; additionally, "euery scholler" must serve "Midas brood." In addition to his notorious greed, Midas also offended Apollo by preferring Pan's music and was given ass's ears for his stupidity (Metamorphoses, 11.196-201). As David Riggs observes, "what especially galls the author of Hero and Heander is the impact of wealth on the world of learning. Not only do scholars labor under a sentence of poverty," but "rich boors actually claim the places of honor that rightfully belong to the scholars." (22) By portraying the Destinies' absurd elevation of Midas and the scholars' subsequent subjection to these "rich boors," Marlowe's digression emphasizes the material injustice that can result from gods (or monarchs) behaving badly. (23)
Marlowe's concurrent shift into the present tense, to "this day," transforms pagan fiction into then-contemporary political commentary emphasizing the material consequences of arbitrary authority. Claude Summers argues that Marlowe uses this "deliciously potted history of the ancient religion to indirectly attack the supernatural order of his own day by turning it on its head." (24) Summers also asserts that Marlowe's "literal-minded" translation of Ovid "mocks his culture's dominant practice of co-opting and Christianizing classical myth and literature." (25) Ovid, of course, used the fiction of his Metamorphoses to mock Augustus Caesar and his government; he was subsequently punished and exiled from Rome. Marlowe's juxtaposition of Ovidian injustices with "this day" suggests that Elizabethan politics bear a closer resemblance to mythological antecedents than Marlowe's moralizing or typologically allegorizing contemporaries may admit. I would argue that Marlowe maintains, at least, a tenuous connection between Olympian and Elizabethan politics through his subsequent affiliation of the lovers with the Ovidian hermaphrodite.
Following this digressive account of Mercury's eternal subjection to the Mid-asses of the world, Hero faints: "By this, sad Hero, with loue vnacquainted, / Viewing Leanders face, fell downe and fainted" (485-86). Leander is obviously naked, but the phrase "by this" references the digression as much as Leander's nakedness. Indeed, Hero's faint is in lock-step with the story she has just heard about anti-erotic love, arbitrary authority, and material consequences that do not follow; the scholars' suffering for Mercury's misdeeds is plainly unjust. At Leander's kiss, Hero awakens socially and sexually sophisticated. Indicating her imminent association with Salmacis, Hero worries about being "counted light" and flees in order to maintain her chaste reputation (493). But the following flurry of epistolary correspondence implicitly evokes Ovid's more sexually aggressive heroine and turns her into a "greedie louer" (508). (26) Still, Hero's apprehension resurfaces and she continues to oscillate until Cupid "fans the fire" (525):
Now waxt she iealous, least his loue abated, Fearing, her owne thoughts made her to be hated. Therefore vnto him hastily she goes, And like light Salmacis, her body throes. (527-30)
Once Marlowe aligns Hero with Ovid's Salmacis, her attraction to Leander turns dark; she is "iealous" and "throes" herself on the object of her desire.
In Ovid's Metamorphoses, Salmacis rapes an actively resistant Hermaphroditus and the gods, "pliant to her boone," reward her by manifesting their union eternally. Hermaphroditus, horrified that he has become "but half a man," then begs his parents Venus and Mercury to decree that all who enter their pool share his fate (4.479-81). Ovid offers no rationalization for the Olympian legitimization of Salmacis' violent desires and reiterates this subtext of legislative caprice when Hermaphroditus' wish is granted. Marlowe, and subsequently Nashe and Jonson, represent the intercourse between Salmacis' desire and Hermaphroditus' distaste as resulting in the perpetual reproduction of arbitrarily adjudicated justice. Hero's metaphorical association with Salmacis following the Mercury digression not only thwarts discordia concors, but may offer an alternate bastard-child to Venus and Mars' daughter Harmony. Hero's resemblance to Venus, informed by both her attire and the juxtaposition of her story with Mercury's, results in an image of hermaphroditic union which tacitly reminds readers that Harmony is, despite her Neoplatonic gloss, as much a product of illicit union as Hermaphroditus.
The connotations of disjunction associated with Marlowe's Ovidian allusions echo the critique of amity in the Mercury digression. Again emphasizing the schismatic effect of desire on political alliances, Marlowe metaphorically associates Hero's virginity with royalty: "Ne'rc king more fought to keep his diademe; / Than Hero this inestimable gemme" (563-64). Marlowe's alignment of this "gemme" (virginity) that he then devalues as a "token" of friendship suggests a rhetorical debasement of amity (573). Because Marlowe's portrayal of the lovers is epitomized by Mercury's deceitful promises to the Destinies in exchange for divine favors, this "token" suggests what Tom MacFaul describes as the "purely transactional" nature of "the idea of amity that binds the nation together." (27) This "token"--a metonymic representation that can never be the "thing" itself--explodes amity and the power associated with Hero's "diademe."
One of the most remarkable aspects of Marlowe's poem is that it provides no sense of closure. Romantic comedy all but insists on rough spots before the course of true love can run smooth, but the narrative arc of Hero and Leander gives readers something altogether different. Rather than an ecstatic union, we find a pervasive sense of disjunction repeated in the self-cancelling images of "no things." Ironically, Edward Blount's 1598 publication of the poem concludes with the line "desunt nonnulla," or "some things are lacking." Pointing to the broader sense of what is "lacking" here, Haber observes that "the disruption of end-directive narrative is paralleled by, and indeed equivalent to, the disruption of end-directed sexuality." (28) Haber's observation resonates in the context of Marlowe's hermaphroditic imagery that suggests not only sexual, but also political and rhetorical duplicity. Additionally, Marlowe implicates his audience in the Olympian (or barely-veiled Elizabethan) political and sexual corruption that continues "to this day." Imitating Marlowe's poem in llenten Stuffe, Nashe literalizes these images of hermaphroditic metamorphoses, and incorporates his colleague's inventive representations of Mercurial and Midasian destiny directly into the political tension surrounding English fishing politics.
"The dint of destiny"
Invoking his "diuiner Muse, Kit Marlow," Nashe exploits the disjunction associated with hermaphroditic metamorphoses to criticize the arbitrariness of desire and its "unnatural" manifesttation in both the literary and fish markets of Elizabethan England. (29) Unlike Marlowe, Nashe does not limit hermaphroditic transformation to imagery or suggestive allusions, but metamorphoses Hero and Leander directly into fish. Although Lenten Stuffe masquerades as an encomium and chronicle of Yarmouth's fishing industry, Nashe's "praise" obscures a subtext of virulent invective directed against the Crown for perpetuating enmity and material inequity between Yarmouth and Lowestoft. Subsequently, Nashe localizes Hero and Leander's story on the Norfolk coast in order to recapitulate the disjunction Marlowe associates with political amity and erotic harmony in the context of sixteenth-century piscatorial politics.
Nashe's segue from his chronicle of Yarmouth into his adaptation of Hero and Leander adds texture to Marlowe's digressive account of Mercury's subjection to Midas. Although Nashe later discusses the subjugation of Learning to Midas in his narration of Hero's dream, his first mention burlesques capricious authority:
That fable of Midas eating gold had no other shadow or inclusiue pith in it, but he was of a queasie stomacke, and nothing hee coulde fancie but this newe found guilded fish.... Midas, vnexperienst of the nature of it, (for he was a foole that had asses eares,) snapt it vp at one blow, & because, in the boyling or seathing of it in his maw, he felt it commotion a little and vpbraide him, he thought that he had eaten golde in deede, and thereupon directed his Orizons to Bacchus afresh, to helpe it out of his crop again. (3.193)
Nashe's emendatory myth suggests that Midas never ate gold, but craved instead this novel "guilded fish." On one level of interpretation, "guilded" connotes "gilded," or a "golden" fish--the red herring. When Midas eats the fish, he becomes ill and begs Bacchus to help him vomit. Insofar as Bacchus authorizes Midas' gratuitous gluttony, he epitomizes the kind of arbitrary authority that Nashe repeatedly condemns in laenten Stuffe. But the sick-making properties of this "guilded" fish also cast suspicion on the fishing "guilds" of Yarmouth which regulate the herring trade. Nashe represents Yarmouth's fishing monopoly as having been arbitrarily sanctioned by Crown authorities from William the Conqueror's reign to the present. Throughout the chronicle portion of Lenten Stuffe, Nashe tacitly accuses Yarmouth of exploiting her "moath-eaten" neighbors, among them, his home town of Lowestoft (3.174).30 In the context of Norfolk coast fishing politics, Midas' greedy wastefulness of the herring analogizes Yarmouth's wealth in contrast to her poorer neighbors.
At the same time, Nashe's allusion to Midas expands Marlowe's portrayal of the lovers' subjection to the caprice of "this day" into the literary marketplace (HJL, 470). Like Midas' herring, Hero and Leander are objects of consumption even before their piscine metamorphoses. Nashe speaks to the popularity of the 1598 printing of Marlowe's poem: "Twoo faithfull louers they were, as euerie apprentice in Paules churchyard will tell you for your loue, and sel you for your mony" (195). St. Paul's churchyard was dominated by booksellers, where printers' apprentices hawked their masters' pamphlets and ballads outside the cathedral. Cynically, Nashe's phrasing elides the discourses of love and profit from the outset ("tell you for your loue, and sel you for mony"). In the same paragraph, Nashe translates the politics of the marketplace into those of the English fishing industry. Leander is from Abidos in Asia; Hero is from Sestos in Europe: "and their townes that like Yarmouth and Leystoffe were still at wrig wrag, & suckt fro[m] their mothers teates serpentine hatred one against each other" (3.195).
After establishing a setting of political conflict, Nashe introduces his heroine as having learned her Marlovian lessons about the hypocrisy of female chastity and the interdependence of desire and fate in both the mortal and immortal worlds. Playing on Marlowe's line, "what vertue is it, that is borne with us" (278), Nashe's Hero reflects: "Fate is a spaniel that you cannot beate from you; the more you thinke to crosse it, the more you blesse it.... Neither her father nor mother vowed chastitie when she was begote, therefore she thought they begat her not to live chaste, & either she must prove her self a bastard, or shew herselfe like them" (3.196). Like Marlowe, Nashe ascribes the operations of "fate" to desire itself. Hero demonstrates awareness that her fate is tied directly to her parents' carnal appetites, and she jokingly acknowledges the impossibility of extricating oneself from the ardor that initiates human reproduction. Despite the surface comedy, these connotations of desire and hypocrisy run throughout Hero and Leander's piscine transformations.
Much as Marlowe's hermaphroditic imagery hampers the lovers' progress, Nashe's association of Hero with Salmacis impedes intercourse. Nashe's description of Leander through Hero's eyes directly echoes Marlowe's Ovidian allusion: "Of Leander ... she likte well, and for all he was a naked man, and cleane despoyled to the skinne.... O, ware a naked man.... Were hee neuer so naked when he came to her" (3.196). Ovid's version reads: "When Salmacis behilde / His naked beautie, such strong pangs so ardently hir hilde, / That utterly she was astraught" (4.426-28). Although Leander's nakedness is all that is necessary for Nashe's Hero to engage in "scuffling or bopeepe in the darke," consummation is ambiguous (3.196). Perhaps because Ovid's Hervides have led readers to expect sexual intercourse, "scuffling" and "bopeepe" have traditionally been read as such, especially in the context of McKerrow's conclusion that Hero becomes pregnant. (31) But the Oxford English Dictionary has also cited Nashe's phrase as an exemplary derivative of the verb "to scuffle": "To struggle confusedly together or with another or others." (32) "Bo-peep" is a nursery game of hide and seek. (33) Together, "scuffling" and "bopeep" imply the kind of sibling play we find suggested in Marlowe's allusions to Aesop (535-36). (34) Nashe echoes Marlowe's lovers' "want" of organs and complicates the trajectory of heteronormative union. These images also augur Hero and Leander's later species transformation.
But first, Nashe digresses (within his digression) to treat the duration of Leander's fatal swim as an opportunity to revisit Marlowe's inventive portrayal of the scholars' fate. While Leander swims, Hero tries to sleep:
All that liue long night could she not sleepe, she was so troubled with the rheume ... The rheume is the students disease, and who study most, dreame most ... the blowing and blistring of our braines after our day labouring cogitations are dreames, and those dreames are reaking vapours of no impression ... Hero hoped, and therefore she dreamed (as all hope is but a dreame). (3.197)
Nashe editor Ronald B. McKerrow has not encountered the association of dreaming with scholarship elsewhere. Nashe seems to build on Marlowe's invented narrative about Midas and scholars. If scholars are destined to serve the Midases of the world, then Nashe posits their dreams as only "reaking vapours." Nashe's parenthesis, "hope is but a dream," suggests Hero's dream is, in equal parts, prophetic and fruitless; she awakens to find Leander's corpse on the beach before throwing herself in after him. Nashe presents Hero's self-sacrifice as a consequence of her predecessor's swallowing of "Cupid's golden hook"; she is transformed into a red herring (HL, 333).
Proclaiming that "the dint of destiny could not be repeald in the reuiuing of Hero & Leander," Nashe suggests that the lovers' fate has been determined not necessarily by Museaus or Marlowe, but by the enmity between Yarmouth and Lowestoft (Nashe, 3.199). At the ostensible "end" of the lovers' narrative, Nashe recalls the beginning of Marlowe's poem: "For they were either of them seaborderers and drowned in the sea, stil to the sea they must belong, and bee diuided in habitation after death, as they were in their life time" (3.199). By recalling Marlowe's opening portrayal of Hero and Leander as "Sea-borderers, disjoined by Neptune's might," Nashe returns to Marlowe's Ovidian translations of supernatural hypocrisy and capricious desire in order to project them upon English piscatorial politics (HL 3). In the context of Nashe's chronicle of the longstanding political enmity between Yarmouth and Lowestoft, the text metaphorically aligns "Neptune's might" with the Crown. According to Nashe, Crown-legislated inequity between Yarmouth and Lowestoft is not a strictly Elizabethan problem, but reaches back to the reign of William the Conqueror. Still, Nashe argues, neither Queen Mary nor Elizabeth "withered vp their hands" to offer aid to Yarmouth's neighbors (3.165). Therefore, in the current political climate, the lovers in Nashe's version cannot be united because the local factions are divided. Hero and Leander's ultimate metamorphoses into the herring and ling fish do not prevent the separation incurred by Leander's drowning, but reiterate division.
Hero and Leander's metamorphoses into fish also do not function like the transformations in George Chapman's continuation of Marlowe's poem. Instead of following Chapman and transforming the lovers into birds so they may live on in unison, Nashe's fish compound Marlowe's disjunctive portrayal of love and amity in a definitively English context. (35) In the vein of Livy, Nashe puts pressure on the violation of natural law, which the intersexed and/or interspecies hermaphrodites represent. (36) Nashe does not emphasize the lovers' physical monstrosities, but rather the injustice manifest in their piscine subjection to English Crown politics: "They footebald their heades togither, & protested to make the stem of her loynes of all fishes the flanting Fabian or Palmerin of England, which is Cadwallader Herring, and, as their meetings were but seldome ... should they meete in the heele of the weeke at the best mens tables" (3.199). (37) Nashe underscores the elusiveness of consummation in Marlowe's poem by prohibiting it entirely. As fish, Hero and Leander engage in external reproduction; the closest they may come to sexual intercourse is to "football" their heads together. Finally, when the lovers do "meete," Nashe puns on "meat" to posit Hero and Leander--yet again--as objects of consumption--as Lenten food, as Lenten "stuff."
Nashe's closing remarks about the fate of Hero and Leander suggests that the "contentions" between Yarmouth and Lowestoft are responsible for the lovers' separation. Ultimately, Hero abandons Leander, and Nashe blames the towns' political rivalry:
Louing Hero, how euer altered, had a smack of loue stil, & therefore to the coast of louing-land (to Yarmouth neere adioyning, & within her liberties of Kirtley roade) she accustomed to come in pilgrimage euery yeare, but contentions arising there, and shee remembering the euent of the contentions betwixt Sestos and Abidos, that wrought both Leanders death and hers. (3.200-1)
Nashe's mention of the Kirtley road confirms Hero and Leander's repatriation in Elizabethan England, and they are now subject to the rules of the Crown, or on a smaller scale, the (disproportionate) fishing liberties allocated each to Yarmouth and Lowestoft. Quite simply, Yarmouth and Lowestoft's political warring has become too much for Hero to bear. Further, Hero acknowledges that she and Leander were killed by precisely these "contentions." The real "highlight" here is Nashe's translation of Marlowe's anti-erotic criticism of the material consequences of sexual desire directly into his chronicle of Crown-mandated inequity that has set Yarmouth and Lowestoft at "wrig-wrag" for centuries (3.162).
Jonson's telescoping of Marlowe's and Nashe's exchange with John Edwards' dramatization of perfect friendship in Damon and Pythias colors the closing reconciliation of the fairgoers. Kenneth Gross comments that the play-within-a-play represents "at best the shreds of both of these works, since all characters in this puppet show have been converted into obscene, violent, and squeaking denizens of contemporary London." (38) But Jonson's conflation of Hero and Lander with Damon and Pythias direcdy engages with Nashe's transposition of Marlowe's lovers from Abydos and Sestos into the political tension raging between Yarmouth and Lowestoft. (39) Jonson's puppet show translates the accrual of political criticism in Lenten Stuffe into the sociopolitical fabric of Jacobean London.
Recently, Scott C. Lucas has rightly argued that Jonson protests too much when the Scrivener in the induction to Bartholomew Fair cautions us not to view the play as "a mirror of magistrates," a generic posture which writers adopt to offer advice--and criticism--to kings. Lucas also asserts that Jonson's prohibition paradoxically implies a directive to read the play as "topically allusive in form and politically interventionary in purpose." (40) I would add that Jonson's epilogue, advising the King that he is the best judge of the play, reiterates this mirror/advice trope and begs questioning what form political intervention may take in the play. For his part, Jonson exploits the intersections of arbitrary law making, gender, sex, and species we find in Marlowe's and Nashe's texts to undermine the ideal Edwards offers in Damon and Pythias. Whereas "amity" had been corrupted by Olympian and Crown politics in Marlowe's and Nashe's translations of Hero and Leander's affair, Jonson's densely intertextual puppet show explodes the concept into a cloud of vapors and direcdy implicates Jacobean authority.
As the production of Hero and Lander is about to get underway, Jonson deploys Marlowe's and Nashe's Midasian counterpart, Bartholomew Cokes, to compromise the forthcoming love story and "pretty passages of friendship" (5.3.120). Jonson juxtaposes pagan and Elizabethan authority by characterizing Cokes as Midas, licensed by Bacchus to consume indiscriminately and by the Fates to figure the disjunction between knowledge and desire. Moreover, in Ovid's Metamorphoses, Apollo transforms Midas into an ass when he fails to proclaim his preference for the god's music over Pan's. Collectively, Midas figures the greed, stupidity, boorishness, and arbitrary authority that Marlowe and Nashe also exploit. (41) In Bartholomew Lair, Cokes embodies the fluidity of these Midasian connotations. First, Jonson materially figures Cokes' buying power into the license permitting him to marry Grace Wellborn. Yet Wasp suggests Cokes is too stupid to possess this license. Wasp takes it from his master for safekeeping, explaining: "you are an ass, sir" (3.5.221). Later, possibly alluding to William Shakespeare's "translated" Nick Bottom from A Midsummer Night's Dream (3.1.113), Jonson reiterates the association of Cokes with Midas when Edgworth "tickles him in the ear with a straw twice" to distract Cokes and steal his purse (3.5.147s.d.). Finally, when Cokes appears eagerly anticipating the puppet show--if the audience has missed these asinine nods to Midas--Jonson has him punningly exclaim, "mine ears long to be at it" (5.4.103). In conversation with Nashe and Marlowe, Jonson's extension of the Midas story through the characters of Wasp and Cokes burlesques Marlowe's explanation of how the scholars' subjugation to the rich Midases is "licensed by authority." (42)
The marital alliance between Cokes and Justice Overdo also raises questions about the degree to which the licensing authorities may also be considered Midas-like. Keith M. Botelho explains that "the fair itself is a place of dangerous license for Jonson, where the attempts to impose order on this disorderly public space ... proved fruitless because the many warrants that circulate freely authorize behavior and actions that they were not intended to authorize." (41) Most often, "license" represents an exchange of commodities, of wives, pigs, prostitutes, ballads, gingerbread, and even plays. As Richard A. Burt establishes, the terms "license" and "licentiousness" are commodified as "things" undifferentiated from the wares on sale at the Fair. (42) Because Overdo's wife is Cokes's sister, Cokes (Midasian "license") and Overdo (licensed authority) are related by law. Jonson's comic genius is on full display when he exploits this association in the context of Nashe's gluttonous Midas. Cokes's sister, Mistress Overdo, gets so drunk at the fair that she publicly vomits (5.6.67s.d.). In this scene, regurgitation analogizes the derivation of "licentiousness" from "license."
Jonson embodies the commodification of "license," in all of its heteroglossic glory, in the puppets. Developing Nashe's portrayal of Hero and Leander as objects for consumption on the literary marketplace, Leatherhead surveys the "license" Littiewit has taken in modernizing the play. Leatherhead explains that the puppets do not play "according to the printed book" that Cokes has (miraculously) read (5.3.99) because, as Leatherhead explains, "that is too learned and poetical for our audience. What do they know what Hellespont is, 'Guilty of true love's blood,' Or what Abydos is? Or 'the other Sestos hight'" (5.3.102-5). Laura Levine rightly observes that these lines manifest Jonson's indebtedness to Marlowe's poem, (45) but they additionally indicate Jonson's shift into direct borrowings from Lenten Stuffe.
One of the most obvious indicators that Jonson draws from both sources appears when he suggestively puns on "fish" and geographically establishes "Fish Street" as Smithfield's prostitution row: "It is Hero.... come over into Fish Street to eat some fresh herring" (5.3.143-44). Jonson's juxtaposition of "Hero," "Fish," and "herring" recalls both Marlowe's and Nashe's hermaphroditic imagery and the sexual and species crossings that signal the underlying satires of disjunction and inequity. But Jonson literalizes these subtexts by translating Hero, Leander, Damon, Pythias, and Dionysius into puppets.
Upon seeing the puppets, Cokes exclaims: "I am in love with the actors already, and I'll be allied to them presendy" (5.3.122-27). Arguably, Cokes is already a puppet-like figure and, without his purse, is of equal stature with his new "friends." Jonson posits his Midas figure as a puppet engaged in the cyclical consumption that characterizes the Fair's economy. Yet Cokes's affiliation is at the same time painfully superficial and grounded in the arbitrariness of desire that Jonson, following Nashe, exploits to expose the hypocrisy of consumer-driven "amity" through his conflation of Hew and Hander with Richard Edwards' translation of Damon and Pythias. (46)
Jonson's synthesis of Damon and Pythias with Hero and Leander emphasizes the superficiality of alliances determined not by love, but mutual enmity. Hero's presence on "Fish Street" casts her as a whore and foreshadows her sexual interference with Damon and Pythias' friendship. Leatherhead narrates the scene that follows:
Now, gentles, to the friends, who in number are two, And lodged in that ale-house in which fair Hero does do: Damon (for some kindness done him the last week) Is come fair Hero in Fish Street this morning to seek Pythias does smell the knavery of the meeting, And now you shall see their true friendly greeting. (5.4.207-12)
Puppet Pythias' greeting of "whoremasterly slave" suggests that the "kindness" Hero performed for Damon was to be his whore (5.4.213). Unlike Edwards' version, wherein Damon and Pythias' only quarrel is who will die for whom out of devout friendly love, Jonson's "friends" fight about which of them lay with Hero. When Leatherhead tries to interrupt their quarreling, Pythias calls him a pimp and Damon rejoins his friend to fight their now-common enemy. Damon and Pythias' exchange of "gramercy" and renewal of their alliance is effected by their shared enmity for first Leatherhead, and later Hero and Leander (5.4.246-47).
The puppets' later accusations that Hero is a "whore out of door" reiterate the association of Hero with a prostitute, but Jonson rhetorically fuses the identities of the puppets by making them verbally echo one another's nonsense speech. This fusion simultaneously mocks the interchangeability of true friends and ironically figures the disjunction between love and desire, license and licentiousness. Whereas Edwards' dramatization of friendship's epitome emphasizes the reproducibility of true friendship's virtues, Jonson emphasizes the reproducibility of vapors. The most comically potent lines begin when Leander cries: "A pox on your manners, kiss my hole here and smell" (5.4.129). Later, after Hero is kissing Leander, puppet Damon calls her a whore. Hero then exposes her "haunches"; her ass-whore/hole kissing scene directly echoes Leander's and verbally conflates the two characters. (47) Despite the erotic associations easily drawn from such a scene, Hero's open sexuality is not wholly at issue--she is, after all, a puppet. Instead, the real concern appears to be that she and her (literary) comrades--like Marlowe's pamphlets and Nashe's fish--are for sale at the fair. (48)
Dionysius's ghosdy reappearance reinforces Jonson's undercutting of amity throughout the play. Leatherhead presents the reformed tyrant king arising from the grave to chastise Damon and Pythias for fighting, but Dionysius does not resolve the puppets' quarrel and restore amity. Instead, Busy interrupts and famously debates with Dionysius until Busy is "converted." Edwards's conversion of the tyrant King Dionysius follows a protreptic two-hour dramatization of the virtues of amity. In contrast, Busy's "conversion" results from a rapid-fire exchange of insults with a puppet and appears absurd by comparison. Many often credit the antitheatricalists Stephen Gosson and Philip Stubbes for Busy's Deuteronomy-inspired rant that men should not wear women's clothing. But I would insist that Jonson also echoes Marlowe's and Nashe's deployment of gender and species crossing to satirize the injustice of both gods and monarchs. The subtext of Busy's argument--what is "profane" about the puppets--is the ambiguity of their gender. Levine has argued that "in the world the puppet presents to Busy ... there is no 'thing' under the sign, no genital under the costume for the sign to refer to" (89). I would add that, as a puppet, Dionysius is already double gendered. Etymologically, "puppet" is a variant of "poppet" that has evolved from the Latin "pupa" meaning "girl" or "doll." (49) Because "puppet" is consistently gendered feminine, Jonson's use of the pronoun "he" to characterize Dionysius both pre- and post-revelation does not unilaterally negate the puppet's gender, but actively doubles it.
Dionysius' hermaphroditic puppet-genitals rebut Busy's argument by rendering it moot. At the same time, Busy's "conversion" implicates his Puritanism with all of the arbitrariness and hypocrisies associated with Marlowe's and Nashe's hermaphroditic figures. Jonson likely delighted in presenting the Puritan as a puppet vulgarizing Biblical integrity. Yet the most important component of Busy's "conversion" appears to be the restoration of not amity, but the status quo among the fairgoers.
It is tempting to read Overdo's invitation to the fairgoers to join him at supper as a sweeping resolution of amity. Despite the fact that many of the characters in the play are momentarily leveled with one another--such as when Overdo was put in the stocks, or his wife appeared to be one of the pig-woman's prostitutes--Busy's "conversion" simply restores the fairgoers to their original social positions. Some might argue that Quarlous' caution that Overdo must remember that he is "but Adam, flesh and blood," converts the Justice much as Edwards's Dionysius is converted by the show of friendship between Damon and Pythias (5.6.97). But unlike Edwards's play dramatizing the virtues of friendship grounded in socio-political equality--including a King's abdication of his throne--throughout Bartholomew Fair, Jonson dramatizes the ubiquity of vice and suggests that the fairgoers--and the audience--are only equal in their greed and hypocrisies. Amity is dependent on the reproducibility of virtue, not vapors, and it is only the latter that the audience gets in this final scene of Jonson's play.
In conclusion, when Jonson asks King James to judge his play--amidst riotously erratic acts of authority--Jonson turns this "mirror of magistrates" onto his monarch. As we have seen, Marlowe's, Nashe's, and Jonson's "Englished" versions of Hero and Heander reveal a progressive portrayal of amity ruptured by arbitrary authority and deep-seated sociopolitical hypocrisies. Jonson's addition of Damon and Pythias to the mix exposes the topical criticism that Lucas identified. King James may well have recognized himself in this mirror. Following a single performance, Bartholomew Fair was never again licensed for courtly entertainment). (50)
Nashe and Jonson translate Marlowe's satire formally and thematically in their digressive renderings of Hero and Heander, Unlike Museaus's Leander, who shyly strives to "lay shame by and speak" (115), Marlowe's sophister rhetorically and thematically barbarizes Museaus's portrayal of Neoplatonic idealism. The modesty of Museaus's protagonists, and their alliance with the idealistic paradox associated with Mars and Venus's illegitimate daughter Harmony, stands in stark contrast to Marlowe's exposure of the multivalent hypocrisy embedded in both discordia concors and amity (269). Nashe's imitation of his "dinner muse--Kit MarlonP both puts Marlowe's English version on par with its Greek and Latin predecessors, and emphasizes disjunction, injustice, and political caprice in specifically English contexts (3.195). Fishing "before the net," Nashe metaphorically hooks Marlowe's mighty line while preposterously catching his readers among the intertextual filaments (3.333). Finally, from this conversational network, Jonson telescopes the anti-erotic discord underlying Marlowe's and Nashe's versions of Hero and Heander and compounds it by parodying Damon and Pythias in the puppet show. Jonson's achievement is the vaporization of amity and with it, any virtue associated with "licensed authority." Although Kiernan Ryan has called Nashe "manic digressive," (51) Nashe's Marlovian excursion bridges what readers can now recognize as a conversational gap between Marlowe and Jonson's mutual exploitation of the omnipresent hypocrisy associated with not only with Neoplatonic harmony, but with English politics.
(1.) I have argued elsewhere that in Nashe's lenten Stuffe, "praise" emerges as a red herring diverting readers from recognizing how he telescopes his chorography of Yarmouth into a catalogue of arbitrary Crown rule from William the Conqueror's rule through the English Reformation. See Kristen Abbott Bennett, "Red Herrings and the 'Stench of Fish': Subverting 'Praise' in Thomas Nashe's Lenten Stuffe," Renaissance anti Reformation/ Renaissance et Reforme 37.1 (2014): 87-110.
(2.) C. S. Lewis, English Literature in the Sixteenth Centuty Excluding Drama (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1954), 415.
(3.) G. R. Hibbard, Thomas Nashe: A Critical Introduction (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1962), 246-247.
(4.) Christopher Marlowe, Hero and Heander: A Facsimile of the First Edition, London 1598 (Washington, DC: The Folger Shakespeare Library, 1972), 45. Hereafter references to Hero and Leander are cited from this edition by line number.
(5.) Jacques Derrida has written and spoken much of this paradox. For a succinct exposition of his view on translation, see Derrida and Lawrence Venuti, "What is 'Relevant' Translation?" Critical Inquiry 21.2 (2001): 174-200.
(6.) Belen Bistue, Collaborative Translation and Multi-Version Texts in Early Modern Europe (Farnham, UK: Ashgate: 2013), 47).
(7.) Friendship and political amity may seem like disparate concepts to modern readers, but Aristotle offers a summary of their interdependence: "City-states are held together by friendship, and lawmakers are more concerned about it than about the virtue of justice. For Concord seems something like friendship; but they see Concord above all else; and civil strife, which is enmity, they above all else expel." Aristode, Nichomachean Ethics (Oxford, Clarendon, 1998), 8.1.25.
(8.) See Ovid, The Metamorphoses, ed. John Frederick Nims, trans. Arthur Golding (Philadelphia: Paul Dry Books, 2000), 4.89-99.
(9.) Rossella Pescatori, "The Myth of the Androgyne in Leone Ebreo's Dialogues of Love," Comitatus: A Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 38 (2007), 115-28, 117.
(10.) See Livy, History of Rome, trans. Evan T. Sage, 32.12.
(11.) For an excellent discussion on the multivalent symbolism of hermaphrodites in the sixteenth- and seventeenth-centuries, see Kathleen Long, Hermaphrodites in Renaissance Europe (Surrey: Ashgate, 2006).
(12.) For the role of barbarism in rhetoric, see Ernst Robert Curtius, European Literature in the Latin Middle Ages (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1973).
(13.) By "fixity," I do not mean "fixed" or unchanging. Instead, I point out that spelling, use, and conventions are still formative and as yet unfixed.
(14.) See Carter, Ovirtian Myth (Basingstroke, Palgrave, 2011), 116.
(15.) Christopher Marlowe, "Hero and Leander," 83.
(16.) Marlowe may be alluding to Petronius' description of Giton in The Satyricon: "A boy who went into skirts instead of trousers, whose mother persuaded him never to grow up, who played the part of a woman in a slaves' prison." See Petronius, Satyricon, cd. Michael Heseltine (Ixmdon: William Hineman, 1913) 81, Perseus Project, www.perseus.tufts.edu/ hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A2007.01.0027%3Atext%3DSatyricon%3Asection %3D81, accessed 28 June 2018.
(17.) Judith Haber, Desire and Dramatic Form in Early Modern England (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009), 45.
(18.) Raphael's painting "Scipio and the Three Graces" (1504) exemplifies Museaus' portrait of Hero as beauty. This painting depicts the tripartite nature of Venus' character: Chastity and Pleasure stand on either side of Beauty, the Grace that represents balance among the three. As Edgar Wind explains, the Graces "unfold the unity of Venus" and are the key to the "mystery" they seek to explain (Edgar Wind, Pagan Mysteries in the Renaissance (New Haven: Yale UP, 1958), 80-1). Idealized representations of Venus as both chaste and voluptuous rationalize her "unlawful" affair with Mars that produced their daughter Harmony: "born from the god of strife and the goddess of love, she inherits the contrary characters of her parents: Harmonia est discordia concord' (81).
(19.) In Neoplatonic contexts, the term "anti-erotic" is not used to condemn erotic love, but to criticize "low" eroticism, or sex for pleasure's sake. Anti-erotic love contrasts with idealized versions of erotic union stemming from reason and knowledge. Ix-one Ebreo's Dialogues of Love (1535) offers an illuminating discussion of erotic and anti-erotic Neoplatonic love.
(20.) Leander is clearly well aware of rhetoric's double nature. Eloquence, in the hands of the ideal orator is "vir bonus dicendiperitus" (a good man skilled in speaking), but in "the hands of evil, there would be nothing more ruinous for public or for private life." See Quintilian, The Orator's Education (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2002), 12.1.
(21.) Excepting Nashe's imitation, the only other version of Marlowe's anecdote about the fate of Mercury and scholars that 1 have found is in Robert Burton's seventeenth-century text, The Anatomy of Melancholy (1621). Here, Burton supports a misquotation of Marsilio Ficino's Tiber de Arte Chemtca by quoting Marlowe's poem: "And to this day is every scholar poor; / Gross gold from them runs headlong to the boor" (302).
(22.) David Riggs, The World of Christopher Marlowe. New York: Henry Holt, 2004), 303
(23.) Riggs, World of Marlowe, 303.
(24.) Claude J. Summers, '"Hero and Leander': The Arbitrariness of Desire," in eds. J. A. Downie and J. T. Parnell, Constructing Christopher Marlowe (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000), 133-47.
(25.) Summers, "'Hero and Leander,'" 138.
(26.) See Ovid, Hervides, trans. and ed. Harold Isbell (London: Penguin, 1990), 191-92.
(27.) Tom MacFaul, Male Friendship in Shakespeare and His Contemporaries (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007), 116.
(28.) Judith Haber, Desire and Dramatic Form in Early Modern England (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009), 43.
(29.) Thomas Nashe, Lenten Stuffe, The Works of Thomas Nashe, ed. Ronald B. McKerrow, 5 vols. (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1966), 3.195-201. Unless otherwise noted, all subsequent references are from this edition.
(30.) See Henry S. Turner, "Nashe's Red Herring: Lipistcmologies of the Commodity in Lenten Stuffe," ELH 68:3 (2001): 529-61; and R. C. I.. Sgroi, "l'iscatorial Politics Revisited: The Language of economic Debate and the Evolution of Pishing Policy in Elizabethan England," Addon: A Quarterly journal Concerned noth British Studies 35.1 (2003):
1-24, for excellent discussions of Nashe's representation of sixteenth-century fishing politics.
(31.) Upon Hero and Zander's metamorphoses, Nashe informs us that Hero is "pagled and timpanized" (3.196). McKerrow glosses "pagled" as pregnant, and "timpanized" as swollen (4.405n31).
(32.) Oxford English Dictionary (OED), 2nd ed. (Oxford: OUP, 1989).
(33.) OED, v. 3.1 n. 1.
(34.) For brevity's sake, an analysis of Marlowe's "crosswise" allusions to Aesopian cocks has been omitted from the body of this essay. Marlowe underscores the hypocrisy of natural and manmade laws by conflating two allusions to Aesop in his description of Leander: "like Aesops cocke, this iewell he enioyed, / And as a brother with his sister toyed" (535-36). "Cocke" and "iewell" allude to Aesop's much discussed story of the "Rooster and the Pearl." Aesop's generally accepted moral posits value as determined by desire for the object at hand; the Rooster does not value the manure-covered pearl, therefore it has none. In the context of this fable, Leander would not enjoy "this jewel" because it has no value to him. This intertextual devaluation of Hero's "iewell" often leads readers to interpret the line: "like Aesop's cock ... as a brother with his sister toyed" as indicating Leander's sexual ignorance; yet the suggestion, like the situation, is ambiguous. I borrow "crosswise," a derivative of the phrase "crosswise intertextuality." See M. L. Stapleton's recent descriptions of Marlowe's simultaneous and multiple Ovidian allusions in Marlowe's Ovid: The Elegies in Marlowe's Canon (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2014), 95.
(35.) Chapman translates Marlowe's celebration of eroticism as a crime against marriage, but in his conclusion, he shows some sympathy for the doomed lovers and transforms them into "two sweet birds, surnamed th' Acanthides" (6.276). By turning Hero and J zander into goldfinches, Chapman frees these pagan lovers of the Golden Age from the demands of marriage while retaining a hint of Christian moral condemnation. See Christopher Marlowe, The Complete Poems and Translations, ed. Stephen Orgel (New York: Penguin, 2007), 29-76.
(36.) Describing "dread forms of animals," Livy discusses children of "uncertain sex" in the same passage as lambs born with pig's heads. Livy finally expostulates: "All these disgusting and monstrous creatures seemed to be signs that nature was confusing species; but beyond all else the hermaphrodites caused terror" (History of Rome, 31.12.6-7). 1 .ivy' is terrified that the breach of natural law exhibited by an intersexed or dual-species body will extend to the body politic. Lenten Stuffe's final metamorphosis of Hero and Leander speaks to this anxiety.
(37.) "Palmerin" and "Cadwallader" confirm Nashe's shift from the poem's classical setting to a decisively I English one. Fabian and Palmerin are "of England." Although McKerrow does not recognize the allusion to "Fabian," lie claims that "Palmerin" additionally refers to an English translation Luis Hurtado's Spanish romance and "Cadwallader" invokes the last British King of England who died in 689 (4.405n34; Margaret Drabble, ed., Oxford Reference Dictionary Online, "The Concise Oxford Companion to English Literature," [Oxford: OUP, 2007], 2).
(38.) Kenneth Gross, "Puppets Dallying: Thoughts on Shakespearean Theatricality," Comparative Drama 41.3 (2007): 273-96.
(39.) In the early 1970s, James Savage recognized "three fairly minute" points of contact between Nashe and Jonson's versions of Hero and Leander, but few have acknowledged his observations. Despite identifying a few minor, yet valid, verbal parallels between Marlowe's and Nashe's versions, Savage also made a number of mistakes and his claims to topicality in the context of Robert Devereux's (3rd Earl of Essex) divorce led to swift discrediting by Standish Henning (sec "Review: Ben Jonson's Basie Comic Characters and Other Essays," Modern! Philology 72.4 : 418-19).
(40.) Scott C. Lucas, A Mirror for Magistrates and the Politics of the English Reformation (Amherst: U of MA P, 2009), 3. At least one marked personal allusion in Bartholomew Fair is borrowed from Nashe's dedicatory epistle addressed to "his worthies good patron, Lustie Humfrey, according as the townsmen doo christen him, little Numps" in Lenten Stuffe (3.147). Nashe's Erasmian punning on Humphrey King's name to adumbrate his invective against the arbitrariness of Crown authority throughout Lenten Stuffe (see Kristen Abbott Bennett, "Red Herrings and the 'Stench of Fish': Subverting 'Praise' in Thomas Nashe's Lenten Stuffe," Renaissance and Reformation I Renaissance et Reforme 37.1 : 87-110, 103-5). Among Jonson's fairgoers, Wasp/Numps continues in the vein of both Marlowe and Nashe to expose the hypocrisies informing the performance of: "the ancient modern history of Hero and Leander ... with as true a trial of friendship between Damon and Pythias, two faithful friends o' the Bankside" (5.3.7-11). Historically, Jonson and King are associated because both wrote elegies following Nashe's death that were collected together in Henry Stanford's commonplace book. Stanford was associated with Nashe's sometime patron George Carey in 1596. The poems are written in his hand and found in the Berkeley Bifolium (see Katherine Duncan-Jones, '"They say made a good end': Ben Jonson's Epitaph on Thomas Nashe," The Ben Jonson Journal 3 : 1-20, 9). DuncanJones also discusses Jonson's final lines: "Farewell greate spirite my pen attird in blacke / Shall whilst I am still weepe & mourn thie lacke" (29-30). King's verse might respond to Jonson's: "Others with showers of teares will dew thie herse/ Ile wepe for the in wine & not in verse" (9-10).
(41.) Midas is too stupid to realize the contest is fixed (Olympian gods always beat terrestrial deities) and his failure to engage in hypocrisy paradoxically emphasizes that of the townspeople who voted the "right" way. Apollo's punishment offers another example of arbitrary authority; he shouldn't have asked Midas' opinion if he didn't want it (see Metamorphoses 11.163-216).
(42.) Richard A. Burt, '"Licensed by Authority': Ben Jonson and the Politics of Early Stuart Theater," English Literary History 54.3 (1987): 529-60.
(43.) Keith M. Botelho, Renaissance Earrvitnesses: Rumor and Early Modern Masculinity (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2009), 107.
(44.) Burt, '"Licensed by Authority,"' 529-60.
(45.) Laura Irvine, Men in Women's Clothing: Anti-theatricality and Effeminization, 1579-1642 (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1994), 89-107.
(46.) Richard Edwards (trans.), Damon and Pythias, reprint of 1571, 1578 edition, eds. Arthur Brown and E. P. Wilson (Oxford: Malone Society, Oxford UP, 1957). Classical versions of the story of Damon and Pythias culminate in the virtuous friends' influence on the state as it is represented by King Dionysius. Edwards' "Pythagorean" example expands lamblichus' version of Damon and Pythias' story by incorporating Cicero's ideology of friendship (108-213). Representing Pythagorean friendship in a monistic context, Iamblichus broadly represents his predecessor's ideal as a translation of the gods' love for man among one another (sec On the Pythagorean Life, trans. Gillian (dark, [Liverpool: Liverpool UP, 1989]). Cicero later explains that "friendship was given to us by nature as the handmaid of virtue" (De Senectute, De Amiatta, De Diiinatione, trans. William Armistead falconer, cd. T. E. Page [Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1959], Amidtia 22 83.191) and that the antithesis of friendship is "fawning cajolery, or flattery" (24 91-93.199). Edwards illustrates these precepts by positing the idealized Damon and Pythias in contrast to the parasitical relationship of Aristippus and Carisophus. Edwards' plot is simple: Damon and Pythias are travelling and enter King Dionysius's realm; the parasite Carisophus immediately accuses Damon of spying. Dionysius sentences Damon to death, but agrees to hold Pythias hostage while Damon returns to Greece to sort out his affairs. The friends are interchangeable: "when one is made away, they take another to kyll" (348). Conflict arises only when Damon returns to take his place and die, but Pithias argues that he would rather die for him: "Damon hath a frinde, / That loues him better than his owne life" (992-93). Ultimately, Dionysius is so impressed with their friendship that he pardons Damon and offers to be their friend. Dionysius, however, must first step down as king. Thus, Dionysius gives up his throne to study the precepts of friendship under the tutelage of Damon and Pythias. Again, central to the classical ideal is that "likeness in both sex and status is (the only) political equality in period terms; on the basis of this likeness writers stress the making of a consensual and social bond or body that is not inherently subordinating" (Laurie Shannon, Sovereign Amity: Figures of Friendship in Shakespearean Contexts [Chicago: U Chicago P, 2002], 3).
(47.) Jonson's play on the word "hole" additionally recalls I zander's sophistry regarding Hero's virginity in Marlowe's version of Hero and Leander (269-76). This scene may also echo Chaucer's fabliau, The Miller's Tale (Riverside Chaucer; gen. ed. Larry D. Benson (Oxford: OUP, 2008), when Alisoun offers her suitor Absolon a kiss while in bed with her lover "hende Nicholas": "And at the window out she putte hir hole, / And Absolon, hym fil no bet ne wcrs, / But with his mouth he kiste her naked crs (3733-735). The joke in the Miller's Tale comes to fruition when Absolon returns for another kiss--and revenge. Alisoun and Nicholas swap roles and he offers his posterior: Absolon, "redy with his iren hoot, / And Nicholas amydde the ers he smoot (3809-810).
(48.) Scott Cutler Shershow in Puppets and "Popular" Culture (Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1995) discusses the puppets' literal commodification: "At the fair itself the puppet was also a cultural site in which histrionic illusion merged with the commercial power of the marketplace" (48).
(49.) Shershow explores the implications of this feminine etymology at length (Puppets, 69-72).
(50.) Burt, "Licensed by Authority,'" 533.
(51.) Kiernan Ryan, "The lixtcmporal Vein: Thomas Nashe and the Invention of Modern Narrative," in Narrative from Malory to Motion Pictures, ed. Jeremy Hawthorn (London: I id ward Arnold, 1985), 41-54, 49.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Bennett, Kristen Abbott|
|Publication:||Marlowe Studies: An Annual|
|Article Type:||Critical essay|
|Date:||Jan 1, 2016|
|Previous Article:||Moving Marlowe: The Jew of Malta on the Caroline Stage.|
|Next Article:||Of Knife, Quill, Horn, and Skin: Inscription and Violence in Christopher Marlowe's Edward II.|