The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0515 Thursday, 28 August 2008
[1] From: Jess Winfield <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 27 Aug 2008 13:11:51 -0700
Subj: Re: SHK 19.0507 My Name Is Will
[2] From: Nicole M. Coonradt <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 28 Aug 2008 17:57:13 +0000
Subj: Re: SHK 19.0507 My Name Is Will
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jess Winfield <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 27 Aug 2008 13:11:51 -0700
Subject: 19.0507 My Name Is Will
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0507 My Name Is Will
>I thought QE1 adopted a "Don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding
>religion. A policy formed by her own experience having to embrace
>Catholicism while fearing the stake at the hands of Bloody Mary who
>burned hundreds of adults and a few children.
>
>Mike Shapiro
Whatever ER's personal experience and level of tolerance, her official policy
was not nearly as benign as Mike makes it sound. Throughout the 1580s, the
Crown was conducting grisly executions of Catholic priests (Campion, Cottom, et
al) -- as well as those who secretly harbored them (including Edward Arden, a
likely relative of Mary Arden Shakespeare). Perhaps one could argue that they
were executed for political, not religious reasons. But after the Act of
Supremacy in 1559, and Pope Pius' excommunication of Elizabeth in 1570, politics
and religion were officially indivisible. To be Catholic was to acknowledge the
Pope, not Elizabeth, as the head of the church, and that was a state crime. At
any rate it seems that those who were hiding priests in holes in the wall were
trying very hard not to "tell," but were often executed nevertheless. I think
Elizabeth let herself be guided by her more rabidly Protestant ministers
(Walsingham especially) in this regard.
[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nicole M. Coonradt <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Thursday, 28 Aug 2008 17:57:13 +0000
Subject: 19.0507 My Name Is Will
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0507 My Name Is Will
Dear SHAKSPEReans,
RE: Mike Shapiro's post. I think the take on the Liz/Mary "history" may not be
up to speed with the 21st-century. Most scholars (including even someone like
Greenblatt) seem to accept the "revisionist" history now finally being
revealed/discussed in the academy (though there are still some hold-outs for the
"Great Myth" -- see Edwin Jones' _The English Nation: The Great Myth_ [Sutton,
1998, 2003]). Someone like the fiery William Cobbett (_A History of the
Protestant Reformation in England and Ireland_ c. 1824-26) who based his history
on the dreadfully ignored Lingard History was not only dismissed but was
basically run out of town for his variously "seditious" views (he spent time in
Newgate Prison, and also fled to both France and then America), though he was
Protestant. A recent look at the matter that may be most useful is Arthur F.
Marotti's _Religious Ideology & Cultural Fantasy: Catholic and Anti-Catholic
Discourses in Early Modern England_ (Notre Dame, 2005). There are a slew of
others as well, but I especially recommend Marotti's salient study because he
examines non-canonical texts and is himself not Catholic and so cannot be
accused of having "an agenda" or ulterior motive. It was, in fact, Marotti's
friend, James Shapiro, who suggested the study saying, "Arthur, why don't you do
Catholics?" (Marotti xi).
A peer and I recently discussed the "Bloody" Mary vs. "Good Queen" Bess issue.
If one looks at a per year count of executions, this does make Mary look like
the worse of the two half-sisters (by about 38%); however, given that Mary's
reign was but five years and Elizabeth was queen for a lengthy 45 years this
severely distorts matters (which is why one must always be wary of statistics).
Overall, QEI killed, conservatively speaking, 300% more people than her
half-sister during the course of her long reign. For instance, Tom Betteridge in
_Literature and Politics in the English Reformation_ (Manchester UP, 2004) notes
that Elizabeth ordered the execution of 700 rebels after the Northern Rebellion
in 1570 (178), which was, of course, about the Catholic-Protestant rift. And
certainly regarding any possible "don't ask don't tell" policy, the Jesuit
mission was obviously secret and yet at least 124 priests were executed for
their faith (see Peter Marshall's _Reformation England 1480-1642_, Oxford UP,
2003), as were many of their recusant Catholic flock for attending or conducting
secret Masses (see especially Marotti's discussion of Margaret Clitherow and
Anne Line [48-41]). Note also that these numbers do not take into account those
who wasted away in prison, died in prison after heinous torture, lost everything
through fines and confiscations of property, were separated from their families
and country through exile, and denied education and public office.
Now, let me be clear that this is in no way meant to condone or make light of
the executions under Mary I, but, rather, to highlight the fact of Christian
hypocrisy as seen in Christian-on-Christian violence during the Early Modern
period in England and to avoid any continued white-washing of what occurred
under Elizabeth's reign where "mercy" did not season "justice."
Best regards,
Nicole
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the opinions
expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the editor assumes no
responsibility for them.