1. On Sidney’s poetic project and its relation to Spanish imperialism, see Roland Greene, Unrequited Conquests: Love and Empire in the Colonial Americas (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999). For a recent account of the Sidney circle and his use of La Celestina, see Elizabeth Bearden, “Sidney’s ‘Mongrell Tragicomedy’ and Anglo-Spanish Exchange in the New Arcadia,” in The Spanish Connection, ed. Barbara Fuchs and Brian Lockey, special issue, Journal of Early Modern Cultural Studies (Spring/Summer 2010): 29–51.
2. Diana de Armas Wilson takes issue with Ian Watt’s Anglocentric account in her Cervantes, the Novel and the New World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
3. Antonio de Corro, The Spanish Grammar, trans. John Thorius (London: J. Wolfe, 1590). Harvey’s copy is at the Huntington Library (ref. no. 53880). For an account of Anglo-Spanish trade, see Jason Eldred, “ ‘The Just Will Pay for the Sinners’: English Merchants, the Trade with Spain, and Elizabethan Foreign Policy, 1563–1585,” in Fuchs and Lockey, eds., 5–28.
4. John Minsheu’s 1599 Spanish Grammar, based on the work of Richard Perceval, incorporates excerpts from such Spanish best-sellers as Celestina, Lazarillo, and Diana, as well as Alonso de Ercilla’s epic La Araucana, among others. While Minsheu’s extensive title provides the rationale for including these texts, they also suggest a Spanish canon fully established in England. Richard Perceval and John Minsheu, A Spanish grammar, first collected and published by Richard Perciuale Gent. Now augmented and increased with the declining of all the irregular and hard verbes in that toong, with diuers other especiall rules and necessarie notes for all such as shall be desirous to attaine the perfection of the Spanish tongue. Done by Iohn Minsheu professor of languages in London. Hereunto for the yoong beginners learning and ease, are annexed speeches, phrases, and prouerbes, expounded out of diuers authors, setting downe the line and the leafe where in the same bookes they shall finde them, whereby they may not onely vnderstand them, but by them vnderstand others, and the rest as they shall meete with them (London: Bollifant, 1599), 75–82.
5. Lazarillo, as noted above, had been translated by Rowland before 1586 and published in multiple editions; the earliest surviving one is the second: The Pleasaunt Historie of Lazarillo de Tormes a Spaniarde wherein is Conteined His Marueilous Deedes and Life. With the Straunge Aduentures Happened to Him in the Seruice of Sundrie Masters. Drawen out of Spanish by Dauid Rouland of Anglesey (London: Jeffs, 1586); Examen de ingenios para las ciencias was translated by Richard Carew from the Italian version by Camilo Camilli in 1594, and published as Examen de ingenios: The examination of mens wits: in which by discouering the varietie of natures, is shewed for what profession each one is apt, and how far he shall profit therein (London: Adam Islip, for Richard Watkins, 1594). Carew’s translation was published again in 1596, 1604, and 1616. The Diana saw only one edition, Diana of George of Montemayor: translated out of Spanish into English by Bartholomew Yong of the Middle Temple Gentleman (London: Bollifant, 1598), yet, Dale Randall notes, “the single printing of Yong’s rendition is no accurate gauge of England’s reception of the Spanish romance” (The Golden Tapestry: A Critical Survey of Non-Chivalric Spanish Fiction in English Translation [1543–1657] [Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1963], 80), as Barnabe Googe had included partial translations in his own published poetry as early as 1563, and the book had also circulated widely in the original. Tracing the broader echoes of the Diana across a variety of texts, Randall concludes that the subject of the book’s reception is virtually inseparable from that of its influence (81).
6. The inscription is on the penultimate leaf of Harvey’s copy of The Spanish Grammar.
7. As Randall’s subtitle makes clear, a full account of Spanish chivalric fiction in English translation (which he briefly considers) would easily take another volume. On chivalric fiction, see Donna Hamilton, Anthony Munday and the Catholics, 1560–1633 (Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate, 2005), and Deborah Uman and Belén Bistué, “Translation as Collaborative Authorship: Margaret Tyler’s The Mirrour of Princely Deedes and Knighthood,” Comparative Literature Studies 44, 3 (2007): 298–323.
8. Richard Helgerson, Forms of Nationhood: The Elizabethan Writing of England (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), and “Language Lessons: Linguistic Colonialism, Lingustic Postcolonialism, and the Early Modern English Nation,” Yale Journal of Criticism 11, 1 (1998): 289–99.
9. For a related project, see Eric Griffin, English Renaissance Drama and the Specter of Spain: Ethnopoetics and Empire (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009), in which he explores the role played by drama in the increasingly racialized and hostile representation of Spain in England and, conversely, the role of the Black Legend of Spanish cruelty on the drama and English culture more broadly.
10. See Intricate Alliances: Early Modern Spain and England, ed. Marina Brownlee, special issue JMEMS 39, 1 (2009), and Fuchs and Lockey, eds., The Spanish Connection.
11. The term appropriation is useful for reminding us of the agency and the various relations of power that underlie literary “transmission.” See Kathleen Ashley and Véronique Plesch, introduction to The Cultural Processes of “Appropriation”, special issue, JMEMS 32, 1 (2002): 3.
12. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Conversations with Eckermann, 1823–1832, trans. John Oxenford (San Francisco: North Point, 1984), 133.
13. Ben Jonson, “On the Author, Work, and Translator,” in The Rogue, or the Life of Guzmán de Alfarache, Written in Spanish by Mateo Alemán and Done into English by James Mabbe, 1623, ed. James Fitzmaurice-Kelly (London: Constable, 1924), 31.
14. I take the term from Christine Gerrard, The Patriot Opposition to Walpole: Politics, Poetry, and National Myth, 1725–1742 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), and analyze this moment further in Chapter 4.
15. See my Mimesis and Empire, Chapter 5 and Claire Jowitt, The Culture of Piracy, 1580–1630: English Literature and Seaborne Crime (Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate, 2010).
16. Adrian Johns, Piracy: The Intellectual Property Wars from Gutenberg to Gates (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009), 13.
17. Ibid., 23.
18. Joseph Loewenstein, Ben Jonson and Possessive Authorship (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 85.
19. See Richard L. Kagan, “Prescott’s Paradigm: American Historical Scholarship and the Decline of Spain,” American Historical Review 101 (1996): 423–46, and Spain in America: The Origins of Hispanism in the United States (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2002).
20. T. G. Tucker, The Foreign Debt of English Literature (London: Bell and Sons, 1907), 225.
21. Tucker, 229.
22. Rudolf Schevill, “On the Influence of Spanish Literature upon English in the Early 17th Century,” Romanische Forschugen 20 (1907): 604–34, 627.
23. Ibid., 633.
Epigraphs: Timber, or Discoveries, in Ben Jonson’s Literary Criticism, ed. James D. Red-wine, Jr. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1970), 31; Charles Whibley, Literary Studies (London: Macmillan, 1919), 60.
1. “. . . siempre la lengua fue compañera del imperio,” in the Prologue to Queen Isabel, Antonio de Nebrija, Gramática castellana, ed. Miguel Ángel Esparza and Ramón Sarmiento (Madrid: Fundación Antonio de Nebrija, 1992).
2. On early modern translation as cultural negotiation, see Peter Burke, “The Renaissance Translator as Go-Between,” in Renaissance Go-Betweens: Cultural Exchange in Early Modern Europe, ed. Andreas Höfele and Werner von Koppenfels (Berlin: Gruyter, 2005), 17–31, and Peter Burke and Ronnie Po-Chia Hsia, eds., Cultural Translation in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007). See also Massimiliano Morini, Tudor Translation in Theory and Practice (Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate, 2006).
3. Morini, 28.
4. See Renaissance Go-Betweens, 11. Even Morini, who dedicates part of his chapter on “Practice” to the two early modern English translations of La Celestina, largely leaves Spanish out of his discussion of theories of translation, as when he notes: “English, as compared with Greek and Latin, but also with more prestigious contemporary languages (Italian and French), is seen as poor, rude, plain, barren, barbarous” (39). And yet at least some of the translators who theorized their practice, such as George Pettie, included Spain in their list of source languages to contend with:
There are some others yet who wyll set lyght by my labours, because I write in Englysh: and those are some nice Travaylours, who returne home with such quaesie stomackes, that nothyng will downe with them but French, Italian, or Spanishe, and though a woorke be but meanely written in one of those tongues, and finely translated into our Language, yet they wyll not sticke farre to preferre the Originall before the Translation . . . , but they consider not the profit which commeth by reading thynges in their owne Tongue.
(Stefano Guazzo, The Civile Conversation, trans. George Pettie [London: Richard Watkins, 1581], iir, v). On Pettie as a translator, see Carmela Nocera, “George Pettie and his Preface to The Civile Conversation (1581),” in Thou Sittest at Another Boke . . . : English Studies in Honour of Domenico Pezzini, ed. Giovanna Iamartino, Maria Luisa Maggioni, and Roberta Facchinetti (Monza, Italy: Polimetrica, 2008), 75–84.
5. Following Yehudi Lindeman and Theo Hermans, Morini recognizes the significance of the metaphorics of translation:
Attempts at defining and systematizing translation always call for figurative language, for the nature of the process seems too fleeting to be described through the naked syntax of denotation. But the figures, if they serve the purpose of apt description and reader-persuasion, are also liable to betray their wielders. If closely read, they reveal deep-seated notions on the nature and process of translation which may either illustrate or give the lie to the translators’ explicit statements on their art and principles. (35)
Yet because Morini examines primarily literary texts, he misses the strong current of pugnacious metaphors that appear in translations of a broad range of texts from the Spanish in the later sixteenth century. Peter Burke, for his part, notes that early modern translation involves emulation—competition between the translators and the original authors—but he does not consider this in a political or transnational context (“Renaissance Translator,” 28).
6. Terence Cave, The Cornucopian Text: Problems of Writing in the French Renaissance, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979), 3.
7. Cave, 3, 6.
8. Richard Foster Jones, The Triumph of the English Language (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press 1953); Richard Helgerson, Forms of Nationhood: The Elizabethan Writing of England (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), Paula Blank, Broken English: Dialects and the Politics of Language in Renaissance Writings (London: Routledge, 1996), especially Chapter 2, “The Thieves of Language” (33–68).
9. Pettie, “Preface” to The Civile Conversation, iii.
10. Blank, Broken English, 33. Blank cites from Carew’s short treatise on The Excellency of the English Tongue (c. 1595), first published in William Camden, Remaines Concerning Britain (1614), 41. As Blank recalls, “the period 1500–1659 saw the introduction of between 10,000 and 25,000 new words into the language, with the practice of neologizing culminating in the Elizabethan period” (40).
11. Carew, 40.
12. Carew, 43, 40.
13. Samuel Daniel, Musophilus (1599), in Samuel Daniel: The Complete Works in Verse and Prose, ed. Alexander Grosart, 5 vols. (New York: Russell and Russell, 1963), 1:957–62.
14. Stephen Greenblatt discusses Daniel’s “linguistic colonialism” in “Learning to Curse: Aspects of Linguistic Colonialism in the Sixteenth Century,” in his Learning to Curse: Essays in Early Modern Culture (New York: Routledge, 1990), 16–39.
15. On the English rivalry with Spain, and its implications for England’s construction of its national identity, see Richard Helgerson, “The Voyages of a Nation,” in his Forms of Nationhood, and “Language Lessons.”
16. For a survey of how translation functioned within the larger context of English competition with Spain, see Jonathan Hart, Representing the New World: The English and French Uses of the Example of Spain (New York: Palgrave, 2000).
17. Philemon Holland, The Historie of the World, Commonly called, The Naturall Historie of C. Plinius Secundus. Translated into English by Philemon Holland, Doctor in Physycke, The First Tome (London: Adam Islip, 1601), “The Preface to the Reader,” unpaginated.
18. All citations from Luis Gutiérrez de la Vega, A Compendious Treatise entitled De Re Militari, trans. Nicholas Lichfield (London: Thomas East, 1582), “The Epistle Dedicatorie to the right Worshipful Maister Philip Sidney, Esquire,” Aii. Lichfield also translated Lopes de Castanheda’s The first booke of the historie of the discouerie and conquest of the East Indias, enterprised by the Portingales, in their daungerous nauigations, in the time of King Don Iohn, the second of that name (1582) from the Portuguese, and dedicated it to Francis Drake.
19. For the legal context for the Smerwick massacre, see Brian Lockey, Law and Empire in English Renaissance Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 1–4.
20. Philip Sidney, The Defence of Poesie (London: William Ponsonby, 1595), I3.
21. Ibid., C2.
22. Greene argues that Sidney’s own poetic project “produces lyrics that treat geopolitics more directly than most poems of the preceding generations ever do,” giving voice to “the English impulse to rule abroad” (Unrequited Conquests, 178, 180).
23. Francisco de Valdés, Dialogue of the Office of a Sergeant Major, trans. John Thorius (London, 1590), A2.
24. Theorique and Practise of Warre, Written to Don Philip Prince of Castil, by Don Bernardino de Mendoza. Translated out of the Castilian tonge into Englishe, by Sr. Edwarde Hoby, Knight. Directed to Sr. George Carew (London, 1597). The above citations are all from the dedication, “Al muy Illtre. y discreto Cavallero Don Jorge Carew, Lugarteniente general de la Artillería, por su Sacra Cesárea Católica, Real Magd Donna Elizabeth nuestra Señora, en todos sus reinos, provincias y estados.”
25. Clark Hulse, Elizabeth I: Ruler and Legend (Urbana: Illinois University Press, 2003), 55.
26. The normal clarification in these cases, “all translations mine unless otherwise noted,” hardly seems adequate here. It is ironic that a chapter on English translations from the Spanish should require my translations of those very same texts from Spanish into English, but it does. Therefore: all translations of English translators writing in Spanish are mine; actual translations of Spanish texts into English are for the most part theirs.
27. Hoby, 9–10.
28. Richard Perceval, Bibliotheca Hispanica (London, 1591), unpaginated dedication.
29. Ibid.
30. George Carew, The Historie of Aravcana written in verse by Don Alonso de Ercilla translated out of the spanishe into Englishe prose allmost to the Ende of the 16 Canto, transcribed with an introduction and notes by Frank Pierce (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1964), 2. Here is the original passage in Ercilla:
Hacen su campo, y muéstranse en formados
escuadrones distintos muy enteros,
cada hila de más de cien soldados;
entre una pica y otra los flecheros
que de lejos ofenden desmandados
bajo la protección de los piqueros,
que van hombro con hombro, como digo,
hasta medir a pica al enemigo.
Si el escuadrón primero que acomete
por fuerza viene a ser desbaratado,
tan presto a socorrerle otro se mete,
que casi no da tiempo a ser notado.
Si aquél se desbarata, otro arremete,
y estando ya el primero reformado,
moverse de su término no puede
hasta ver lo que al otro le sucede.
De pantanos procuran guarnecerse
por el daño y temor de los caballos,
donde suelen a veces acogerse
si viene a suceder desbaratallos;
allí pueden seguros rehacerse,
ofenden sin que puedan enojallos,
que el falso sitio y gran inconveniente
impide la llegada a nuestra gente.
Del escuadrón se van adelantando
los bárbaros que son sobresalientes,
soberbios cielo y tierra despreciando,
ganosos de estremarse por valientes.
Los picas por los cuentos arrastrando,
poniéndose en posturas diferentes,
diciendo: “Si hay valiente algún cristiano,
salga luego adelante mano a mano.”
Hasta treinta o cuarenta en compañía,
ambiciosos de crédito y loores,
vienen con grande orgullo y bizarría
al son de presurosos atambores;
las armas matizadas a porfía
con varias y finísimas colores,
de poblados penachos adornados,
saltando acá y allá por todos lados.
Hacen fuerzas o fuertes cuando entienden
ser el lugar y sitio en su provecho,
o si ocupar un término pretenden,
o por algún aprieto y grande estrecho;
de do más a su salvo se defienden
y salen de rebato a caso hecho,
recogiéndose a tiempo al sitio fuerte,
que su forma y hechura es desta suerte:
señalado el lugar, hecha la traza,
de poderosos árboles labrados
cercan una cuadrada y ancha plaza
en valientes estacas afirmados,
que a los de fuera impide y embaraza
la entrada y combatir, porque, guardados,
del muro los de adentro, fácilmente
de mucha se defiende poca gente.
Solían antiguamente de tablones
hacer dentro del fuerte otro apartado,
puestos de trecho a trecho unos troncones
en los cuales el muro iba fijado
con cuatro levantados torreones
a caballero del primer cercado,
de pequeñas troneras lleno el muro
para jugar sin miedo y más seguro.
En torno de esta plaza poco trecho
cercan de espesos hoyos por defuera:
cuál es largo, cuál ancho, y cuál estrecho,
y así van sin faltar desta manera,
para el incauto mozo que de hecho
apresura el caballo en la carrera
tras el astuto bárbaro engañoso
que le mete en el cerco peligroso.
También suelen hacer hoyos mayores
con estacas agudas en el suelo,
cubiertos de carrizo; yerba y flores,
porque puedan picar más sin recelo;
allí los indiscretos corredores
teniendo sólo por remedio el cielo,
se sumen dentro, y quedan enterrados
en las agudas puntas estacados.
(Alonso de Ercilla, La Araucana, ed. Isaías Lerner [Madrid: Cátedra, 1993], 1: 23–32.)
31. For a full reading of La Araucana as a traveling text, see my “Traveling Epic: Translating Ercilla’s La Araucana in the Old World,” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 36, 2 (Spring 2006): 379–95.
32. Richard Hakluyt, The Principal Navigations, Voyages, Traffiques and Discoveries of the English Nation [1589/1600], 12 vols. (Glasgow: Maclehose and Sons, 1903), “The Epistle Dedicatory to Sir Robert Cecil” [1599], 1: lxvi. For Hakluyt’s role in promoting England’s early imperial expansion and recuperating failures, see Mary Fuller, Voyages in Print: English Travel to America, 1576–1624 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995). On the emulation of Spain, see Hart, Representing the New World.
33. Donald Beecher, “The Legacy of John Frampton: Elizabethan Trader and Translator,” Renaissance Studies 20, 3 (2006): 320–39, citation on 321.
34. Beecher, 322.
35. Frampton entitled his translation Joyfull Newes out of the Newe Founde Worlde wherein is declared the rare and singular vertues of diverse and sundrie hearbes, trees, oyles, plants and stones, with their applications, as well for phisicke as chirurgerie (London: William Norton, 1577).
36. Beecher, 329.
37. All citations from the Dedication to Gilbert, Frampton, trans., A Brief Description of the Ports, Creeks, Bays, and Havens of the West India (London: 1578).
38. Beecher, 332.
39. Joseph Loewenstein, The Author’s Due: Printing and the Prehistory of Copyright (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002).
40. Franklin Williams’s Index of Dedications and Commendatory Verses in English Books Before 1641 (London: Bibliographical Society, 1962) is one exception to the general critical neglect of the genre. Even Williams, however, dismisses commendatory verses as “metrical puffs” (xi). See also his “Commendatory Verses: The Rise of the Art of Puffing,” in Studies in Bibliography: Papers of the Bibliographical Society of the University of Virginia, 19, ed. Fredson Bowers (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia: 1966).
41. Jonson leads the way, by Franklin’s count, with 30 commendatory poems to his name (“Commendatory Verses,” 6). Jonson’s habitual participation is obliquely recognized in William Cartwright’s defense of John Fletcher in his own verses for the Beaumont and Fletcher folio, which Franklin cites:
Nor hadst thou the sly trick, thy selfe to praise
Under thy friends names, or to purchase Bayes
Didst write stale commendations to thy Booke,
Which we for Beaumonts or Ben. Johnsons tooke.
42. In this respect, Jonson’s canonization of Shakespeare is more intriguing for its concern with an international stage—“Triumph, my Britain, though hast one to show, / to whom all scenes of Europe homage owe”—than for the English literary history it puts forth. As Heather James points out in her Shakespeare’s Troy: Drama, Politics, and the Translation of Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), “When Shakespeare bests the great dramatists of Greece and Rome, not to mention Elizabethan England, his credit wondrously affects England as an emergent nation,” 7.
43. For Jonson’s denunciation of the would-be poet who “makes each man’s wit his own,” see Epigrams LVI, “On Poet-Ape,” LXXIII, “To Fine Grand,” LXXXI, “To Prowl the Plagiary,” C, “On Playwright,” and CXII, “To a Weak Gamester in Poetry.”
44. Jonson’s poem, generally grouped with the “Miscellaneous Poems” in modern editions, follows Drayton’s in the 1618 Georgicks of Hesiod (London: H. Lounes for Miles Partrich). Subsequent citations are from this edition.
45. Chapman’s translation of the Iliad was completed in 1611; the first half of the Odyssey appeared in 1614 and the second in 1615. The Georgicks of Hesiod followed in 1618.
46. As Millar MacLure underscores in his George Chapman: A Critical Study (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1966), “however [Chapman] might inveigh against detractors who claimed that he turned his Greek ‘out of the Latine onely,’ he always availed himself of the ease of a bilingual edition” (212).
47. In his Imitation and Praise in the Poems of Ben Jonson (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1981), Richard S. Peterson notes that “even the name ‘Chapman,’ or peddler, contributes to the mercantile metaphor here.” Peterson reads the imagery of discovery as one of Jonson’s “central, classically inspired metaphors for the process of imitation in writing,” stressing Chapman’s individual “monopoly excluding competition with potential rivals” rather than imperial rivalries between emerging powers (14). It is precisely the imbrication of the discourses of imperial discovery and of cultural value that interests me here. While other poets—including Chapman himself, in his own earlier commendatory poem to Jonson—use the imagery of the voyage and discovery of classical culture, Jonson seems particularly intent on the enrichment of England through such excursions.
48. See Foster Jones’s chapter “The Eloquent Language,” in his The Triumph of the English Language.
49. A Worlde of Wordes, Or Most copious and exact Dictionarie in Italian and English, 1598, “To the Reader,” cited in Jones.
50. Cf. Drayton’s commendatory poem, published alongside Jonson’s:
Chapman; We finde by thy past-prized fraught,
What wealth thou dost upon this land conferre;
Th’olde Grecian Prophets hither that hast brought,
Of their full words the true Interpreter:
And by thy travell, strongly hast exprest
The large dimensions of the English tongue;
Delivering them so well, the first and best,
That to the world in Numbers ever sung.
Thou hast unlock’d the Treasury, wherein
All Art, all Knowledge have so long been hidden:
Which, till the gracefull Muses did begin
Here to inhabite, was to us forbidden . . .
Like Jonson, Drayton describes Greek culture as treasure and celebrates the expansive possibilities of an English language of “large dimensions.” Yet Drayton emphasizes the artless past of England, a land where the Muses have only recently alighted.
51. For the English voyages “Made to the North and North-east quarters of the World, with the directions, letters, privileges, discourses, and observations incident to the same,” see Hakluyt’s Principal Navigations, vols. II, III. The OED cites Richard Eden on the fabled Northeast passage in its nautical definition of the term: “Into the frosen sea . . . and so forth to Cathay (yf any suche passage may be found).” The parenthetical conditional is highly revealing.
52. See, for example, the ambivalent, hypothetical “Certain arguments to prove a passage by the Northwest” (1580), or the “Second voyage of John Davis for the Northwest Passage” (1586), collected in Hakluyt’s Principal Navigations, VII, 191–203, 393–407. For the history of exploration “North and Northwest,” see the chapter of that title in Kenneth Andrews, Trade, Plunder and Settlement: Maritime Enterprise and the Genesis of the British Empire: 1480–1630, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984).
53. Hakluyt, VII, 191.
54. The Voyages of William Baffin, 1612–1622, ed. Clements. R. Markham (London: Hakluyt Society, 1881), 150, cited in Andrews.
55. Hakluyt himself contributed to the textual inflation of English accomplishments. As T.E. Armstrong has pointed out, many of the Arctic sea-routes for which Hakluyt claimed English primacy were well established in Russian and German sources (“The Arctic,” in The Hakluyt Handbook, ed. D. B. Quinn, 2 vols. [London, 1974], 1: 254–60).
56. See, for example, the account of the “Second voyage made by Sir John Hawkins to the Coast of Guinie” in Hakluyt’s collection, which describes how the English force the Spaniards to trade with them in the West Indies (Principal Navigations X, 9–63).
57. The trope of translation as glorious imperial achievement, which Jonson applies to The Works and Days, is central to a far more famous poem on Chapman’s translations, John Keats’s “On First Looking into Chapman’s Homer” (1816). Keats’s sonnet figures literary exploration as a voyage of discovery:
Much have I travell’d in the realms of gold,
And many goodly states and kingdoms seen;
Round many western islands have I been
Which bards in fealty to Apollo hold.
Oft of one wide expanse had I been told
That deep-brow’d Homer ruled as his demesne;
Yet did I never breathe its pure serene
Till I heard Chapman speak out loud and bold:
Then felt I like some watcher of the skies
When a new planet swims into his ken;
Or like stout Cortez when with eagle eyes
He star’d at the Pacific—and all his men
Look’d at each other with a wild surmise—
Silent, upon a peak in Darien.
The English version of Homer domesticates the “wide expanse” of Greek letters, subjecting the newly discovered realm to the proprietary glance of the adventurer. Strikingly, the sonnet’s last lines link the English translation of a Greek original to a glorious moment of Spanish discovery, and feature Hernán Cortés—the leader of the Spanish conquest of Mexico, perhaps the ultimate “realm of gold”—instead of the historically correct but less prestigious figure of Vasco Núñez de Balboa. While Keats does mention the English discovery of the planet Uranus, the metaphoric voyage out culminates in a return home from “western Islands”—the West Indies of the Spanish Main—to an English translation, with a pirating of Spanish discovery along the way, replacing the lackluster early history of British discoveries with a more prestigious narrative of Spanish imperial exploits. Moreover, by reprising Jonson’s poem to Chapman, the sonnet inscribes itself within a preexisting tradition of such appropriations, which prospectively authorize its imperial vagaries.
58. For Fletcher’s own relation to Spanish materials, see Chapter 3.
59. Jonson’s own satirical response to the fashion for all things Spanish pervades The Alchemist (1610), a play in which even pretending to be a Spaniard guarantees success.
60. There is a similar operation at work in Jonson’s “To Mr. Joshua Sylvester” (Epigram CXXXII), in which Jonson praises Sylvester’s translation of Du Bartas by commending the translation over the original:
Bartas doth wish his English were now his.
So well in that are his inventions wrought,
As his will now be the translation thought,
Thine the original; and France shall boast.
No more, those maiden glories she hath lost.
Yet in the first lines of the poem Jonson confesses that he is an “utter stranger to all air of France,” and therefore cannot really assess Sylvester’s “great pains” in translating the text.
61. All citations of Jonson or Mabbe’s text are from The Rogue, or the Life of Guzmán de Alfarache, Written in Spanish by Mateo Alemán and Done into English by James Mabbe [1623], ed. James Fitzmaurice-Kelly (New York: Knopf, 1924). Jonson’s poem is on 31.
62. This is also the scene where Falstaff states, “Well, I cannot last forever, but it was alway yet the trick of our English nation, if they have a good thing, to make it too common” (213–16).
63. “Pero yo que, aunque parezco padre, soy padrastro de Don Quijote . . . ,” Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, El ingenioso hidalgo Don Quijote de la Mancha, ed. Martín de Riquer (Barcelona: Planeta, 1997), 12.
64. Williams suggests that the mock-commendations that preface Don Quijote are the model for the “fantastic anthology” of commendatory poems in Thomas Coryate’s Crudities (1611), including Jonson’s (“Commendatory Verses,” 11). Given that the publication of the Crudities predates Shelton’s translation, Jonson may well have known the original Spanish text, although Shelton’s translation may of course have circulated in manuscript form. Jonson refers to Don Quijote and the Spanish craze for chivalric romances as he mourns his own books in “An Execration upon Vulcan”:
Had I compiled from Amadis de Gaul,
The Esplandians, Arthurs, Palmerins, and all
The learnèd library of Don Quixote,
And so some goodlier monster had begot . . . (29–32)
65. Thomas Shelton, trans., The History of the Valorous and Wittie Knight-Errant, Don-Quixote of the Mancha (London: Edward Blount, 1612), 3r–3v.
66. Cf. also John Florio’s epistle dedicatory to his translation of Montaigne, where he describes himself as “at least a fondling-father, having transported [the text] from France to England; put it in English clothes; taught it to talke our tongue” (Michel de Montaigne, The essayes or morall, politike and militarie discourses . . . , trans. John Florio [London: Val. Sims for Edward Blount, 1603], A2).
67. Leonard Digges, “To Don Diego Puede-Ser, and His Translation of Guzman.”
68. For a detailed analysis of Mabbe’s frequent reliance on the Italian translation in Part II, see Fitzmaurice-Kelly’s introduction, xxxii–xxxvi.
69. Jones, 21.
70. For a fascinating vision of the role of clothiers in the making of the English nation, see Thomas Deloney’s Elizabethan prose fictions, Iacke of Newberie (registered 1597–98) and Thomas of Reading (written in 1597–1600). In the latter, Deloney emphasizes that “Among all crafts this was the onely chiefe, for that it was the greatest merchandize, by the which our Countrey became famous through all nations.” The Works of Thomas Deloney, ed. Francis Oscar Mann (Oxford: Clarendon, 1912), 213. In the same text, the clothiers are instrumental in establishing uniform measures and regularizing the coin of the realm.
71. Barry Supple, Commercial Crisis and Change in England, 1600–1642 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959), 52. For an overview of the causes of the crisis, see also J. D. Gould, “The Trade Depression of the Early 1620s,” Economic History Review 2nd ser. 8, 1 (August 1954): 81–90.
72. Commons Debates 1621, II.75, cited in Supple, 54.
73. Gould, 83; Supple, 58.
74. Ben Jonson, ed. C. H. Herford, Percy Simpson, and Evelyn Simpson, 11 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1925–52), 8: 465.
Epigraph: Nahum Tate, A Duke and No Duke, cited in Randall and Boswell, 520.
1. For the particular conditions of the Blackfriars stage, see Tiffany Stern, “Taking Part: Actors and Audience on the Stage at Blackfriars,” and Leslie Thomson, “Who’s In, Who’s Out: The Knight of the Burning Pestle on the Blackfriars Stage,” in Inside Shakespeare: Essays on the Blackfriars Stage, ed. Paul Menzer (Selinsgrove, Pa.: Susquehanna University Press, 2006), 35–53, 61–71.
2. Francis Beaumont, The Knight of the Burning Pestle, ed. Sheldon P. Zitner (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), 51. Subsequent references are in the text, by page or line number.
3. J. A. G. Ardila, “The Influence and Reception of Don Quixote in England, 1607–2005,” in The Cervantean Heritage: Reception and Influence of Cervantes in Britain, ed. Ardila (London: Legenda, 2009), 2–31, citation on 3. For a collection of the more than one thousand allusions to Cervantes’s works before 1700 that critics have identified to date, see Dale Randall and Jackson Boswell, Cervantes in Seventeenth-Century England: The Tapestry Turned (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).
4. The other literary text was the pastoral romance by Luis Gálvez de Moltalvo, El pastor de Fílida, first published in 1600. For a complete list of the texts purchased with this donation, as well as its political and ideological context, see Gustav Ungerer, “The Earl of Southampton’s Donation to the Bodleian in 1605,” Bodleian Library Record 16, 1 (April 1997): 17–41. The entry by John Hales in the Bodleian Benefactors’ Register is the first item in Randall and Boswell’s catalog (1).
5. Ungerer, 30.
6. Tiffany Stern, “ ‘The Forgery of some modern Author’?: Theobald’s Shakespeare and Cardenio’s Double Falsehood,” Shakespeare Quarterly 62, 4 (Winter 2011): 555–93, citation on 558.
7. On Burre’s strategies to find a market for the published text, see Zachary Lesser, “Walter Burre’s The Knight of the Burning Pestle,” English Literary Renaissance 29, 1 (1999): 22–43.
8. Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, The Knight of the Burning Pestle, ed. Herbert Murch (New York: Henry Holt, 1908), xxxiii.
9. Murch, ed., xxxv.
10. These are such classic moments in Don Quijote that one could easily argue that even without reading the original Beaumont may well have been aware of these highlights. But of course there is no reason to imagine that he would not have been aware of them at all.
11. Murch, ed., xlii–xliv.
12. Rudolf Schevill, “On the Influence of Spanish Literature upon English in the Early 17th Century.” Romanische Forschugen 20 (1907): 618, 620.
13. Francis Beaumont, The Knight of the Burning Pestle, ed. Michael Hattaway (London: New Mermaids, 1969), 18–19.
14. It is interesting to recall that toward the end of Part II of the novel, Don Quijote also gravitates toward a communal option: forbidden to play a knight any longer, he turns to the pastoral.
15. Donna B. Hamilton, Anthony Munday and the Catholics, 1560–1633 (Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate, 2005), 80 ff.
16. Hamilton notes that the translation was “announced and entered” in 1580–81, then published repeatedly in 1596, 1602, 1609, and 1616 (81). The romance was first published in Portugal in 1544, by the Portuguese Francisco de Moraes.
17. Janette Dillon, “ ‘Is Not All the World Mile End, Mother?’: The Blackfriars Theater, the City of London, and The Knight of the Burning Pestle,” Medieval and Renaissance Drama in England: An Annual Gathering of Research, Criticism and Reviews 9 (1997): 127–48, citation on 127.
18. Ibid., 128.
19. As Jean Howard points out, with a population of 200,000 in 1600, London was far larger than the next nineteen largest English towns put together, which totaled 136,000 people. The second largest city, Norwich, had a population of only 15,000. Howard, Theater of a City: The Places of London Comedy, 1598–1642 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007), 1.
20. Wendy Wall, Staging Domesticity: Household Work and English Identity in Early Modern Drama (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 163.
21. Wall, 187.
22. Howard, 20.
23. Patricia Parker, “Barbers and Barbary: Early Modern Cultural Semantics,” Renaissance Drama 33 (2004): 201–44. The red beard is the key element in the disguise that the barber adopts in order to lure his friend Don Quijote home. See my Passing for Spain: Cervantes and the Fictions of Identity (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003), 23–28.
24. The dream of marrying a princess, or taking her by force if need be, is at the heart of Don Quijote’s most prolonged fantasy of social climbing, in Part I, Ch. 21 of Cervantes’s novel. In a fascinating exchange with Sancho, Don Quijote worries about the extent to which his lineage will impede his being recognized for his works, however heroic, and allowed to marry the princess he deserves. Some chapters later, when the wealthy farmer’s daughter Dorotea is convinced to pretend she is the exotic Princess Micomicona, Sancho will urge Don Quijote to abandon his fantasies of Dulcinea and seize the immediate advantage in marrying her, to no avail.
25. On the staged representation of gender and conversion, see Jane Degenhardt, Islamic Conversion and Christian Resistance on the Early Modern Stage (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2010).
26. With her reference to “properer women,” Nell reminds us that the so-called Lady is a boy on the English transvestite stage, in one of the many metatheatrical moments in the play.
27. Dillon, 137; Howard, 6.
28. Gurr, “ ‘Within the compass of the city walls’: Allegiances in Plays for and About the City,” in Plotting Early Modern London: New Essays on Jacobean City Comedy, ed. Dieter Mehl, Angela Stock, and Anne-Julia Zwierlein (Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate, 2004), 109–22, citation on 117.
29. “Wee have signifyed to your Highnesses many tymes heartofore the great inconvenience which we fynd to grow by the Comon exercise of Stage Playes . . . specially beinge of that frame and matter as usually they are, conteining nothinge but prophane fables, lascivious matters, cozeninge devises, & scurrilus beehaviours, which are so set forth as that they move wholie to imitation & not to the avoydinge of those faults & vices which they represent. . . . wee have fownd by th’ examination of divers apprentices & other servantes whoe have confessed unto us that the said Staige playes were the very places of theire Randevous appoynted by them to meete with such otheir as wear to joigne with them in theire designes & mutinus attemptes, beeinge allso the ordinarye places for maisterless men to come together & to recreate themselves.” Cited in E. K. Chambers, The Elizabethan Stage, 4 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1923), 4:321.
30. It is interesting to contrast how martial enterprise, however satirized, elides class difference in the mercantile Knight of the Burning Pestle, where Rafe’s mock-muster can bring together “gentlemen” and “countrymen” as a matter of course, with the work required to transcend class lines and create an English army in a play like Henry V (1599), characterized by its aristocratic and chivalric ethos. Henry explicitly takes on the problem of class difference in his two most famous speeches: “Once more into the breach, dear friends, once more” (3.1.1), he begins, but the fellowship is soon fractured into class lines, so that by the end of the speech he must make a specific (and somewhat taunting) appeal to the yeomen:
And you, good yeomen,
Whose limbs were made in England, show us here
The mettle of your pasture; let us swear
That you are worth your breeding—which I doubt not,
For there is none of you so mean and base
That hath not noble lustre in your eyes. (3.1.25–30)
In the Crispin’s Day speech in 4.3, Henry calls forth the famous “We few, we happy few, we band of brothers” (4.3.60), but follows the rousing invocation with a reminder of how exactly the social leveling will work: “For he today that sheds his blood with me / Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile, / This day shall gentle his condition” (61–63). The reminder of vile condition even as the promise is made to erase it suggests at best an imperfect transformation. Moreover, the occasion for the speech is the fear that there are not enough soldiers on the English side, so that the offer of social leveling has the distinct feel of a transaction offered in a moment of acute need. Dillon notes the echoes of Henry’s Agincourt speech in Rafe’s lines, but she argues that it “substitutes London for England” (139).
31. Lesser, “Walter Burre’s The Knight of the Burning Pestle,” 37.
32. Lesser, 35–38. Gurr notes, along similar lines, “Beaumont placed his product in a playhouse where he expected the gentry, gallants, and court-followers, to welcome a satire on citizen values” (116).
33. I make a similar argument about the different valences of A Game at Chess for different audiences in Chapter 3.
34. Thomas Kyd, The Spanish Tragedy, ed. J. R. Mulryne (London: A&C Black, 1989), 1.1.5–7.
35. Kyd, 1.1.1–2.
36. Alexander Legatt notes how money serves to buy the privileged audience of two exactly the play they want, no matter how discontinuous: “The Audience as Patron: The Knight of the Burning Pestle,” in Shakespeare and Theatrical Patronage in Early Modern England, ed. Paul Whitfield White and Suzanne Westfall (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 306. But he misses the Cervantine antecedent to Rafe’s refusal to pay for his lodging because the genre of chivalric romance does not allow it (300–301).
37. See Lesser, “Walter Burre’s The Knight of the Burning Pestle,” on the connection between Rafe and the apprentice Face in Jonson’s The Alchemist as masterful manipulators of dramatic convention.
38. Kathleeen Ashleyn and Véronique Plesch. Introduction to The Cultural Processes of “Appropriation”, special issue, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 32, 1 (2002): 6.
1. On English mistrust of the peace, see Paul C. Allen, Philip III and the Pax Hispanica, 1598–1621: The Failure of Grand Strategy (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2000), 137–38.
2. On Fletcher’s zealously protestant family, see Gordon McMullan, The Politics of Unease in the Plays of John Fletcher (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1994).
3. Alexander Samson, “1623 and the Politics of Translation,” in Samson, ed., The Spanish Match: Prince Charles’s Journey to Madrid, 1623 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006), 91–106, esp. 100–101.
4. For the diplomatic correspondence and court intrigue around the “Spanish match,” see Glyn Redworth, The Prince and the Infanta: The Cultural Politics of the Spanish Match (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2003). Redworth betrays a very English disdain for Spanish mores, yet underscores the constant Spanish advantage in the negotiations. See also the more balanced collection edited by Sansom.
5. Middleton used several of these pamphlets, including Thomas Scott’s Vox Populi (1620, 1624) and Reynold’s Vox Coeli (1624) in his construction of the Black Knight Gondomar. See Jerzy Limon, Dangerous Matter: English Drama and Politics in 1623/4 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986). Tellingly, the full title of the pamphlet is Vox Coeli, or, Newes from heauen, of a consvltation there held by the high and mighty princes, King Hen. 8, King Edw. 6, Prince Henry, Queene Mary, Queene Elizabeth, and Queene Anne; wherein Spaines ambition and treacheries to most kingdomes and free estates of Europe, are vnmask’d and truly represented, but more particularly towards England, and now more especially vnder the pretended match of Prince Charles, with the infanta Dona Maria; Whereunto is annexed two letters written by Queene Mary from heauen, the one to Count Gondomar, the ambassadour of Spaine, the other to all the Romane Catholiques of England (London, 1624).
6. Samson, 100.
7. See Claire Jowitt, “Massinger’s The Renegado (1624) and the Spanish Marriage,” Cahiers Élizabéthains 65 (2004): 45–54.
8. Thomas Middleton: The Collected Works, ed. Gary Taylor and John Lavagnino (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 1776.
9. I cite here and throughout from A Later Form of A Game at Chess, in Collected Works.
10. Taylor, 1826.
11. Interestingly, Richard Wilson finds equivocation throughout Marlowe’s play: “Much has been written about the Jesuit casuistry of ‘lying like truth,’ but The Jew of Malta may be the first play to highlight ‘equivocation’ as negotiable currency in modern markets” (Wilson, “Another Country: Marlowe and the Trading Factor,” in Renaissance Go-Betweens: Cultural Exchange in Early Modern Europe, ed. Andreas Höfele and Werner von Koppenfels [Berlin: Gruyter, 2005], 77–99, citation on 182).
12. A key figure in this improbable link between Machiavelli and Catholicism may have been Tommaso Campanella, the Neapolitan theologian who both denounced Machiavelli and adapted his insights to Counter-Reformation ends. Although Campanella was involved in several plots against Spanish rule in Naples, he also wrote the Monarchia di Spagna (1600) in which he offered theological justifications for Spain’s universal rule. While a translation of Campanella, that “second Machiavel,” into English was not published until 1653, a German translation from 1620 gives some sense of the work’s wide circulation. The English and German versions are Edmund Chilead, Thomas Campanella, an Italian friar and second Machiavel, his advice to the King of Spain for attaining the universal Monarchy of the World (London, 1659) and Von der spanischen Monarchy (Frankfurt, 1620). Middleton himself read Italian, so he may have been acquainted with Campanella’s text in the original. It seems likely that Campanella’s Monarchia is itself an example of equivocation, as Campanella, a committed foe of Spanish rule in Italy, wrote it while in prison. The text that these early English readers seized on as evidence of Spain’s universal ambitions may itself be far more slippery than it appears.
13. Arthur F. Marotti, Religious Ideology and Cultural Fantasy: Catholic and Anti-Catholic Discourses in Early Modern England (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005), 133.
14. Marotti, 131–32.
15. Reynolds, Vox Coeli, 86.
16. James Howell, Epistolae Ho-Elianae: The Familiar Letters of James Howell, ed. Joseph Jacobs (London: D. Nutt, 1890), 193.
17. Ann Rosalind Jones, “Italians and Others: The White Devil (1612),” in Staging the Renaissance: Reinterpretations of Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama, ed. David Scott Kastan and Peter Stallybrass (New York: Routledge, 1991), 251–62, citation on 251.
18. On the racialization of Spain, see my “The Spanish Race” in Rereading the Black Legend: The Discourses of Religious and Racial Difference in the Renaissance Empires, ed. Margaret Greer, Walter Mignolo, and Maureen Quilligan (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007) and Griffin, English Renaissance Drama and the Specter of Spain.
19. Richard Dutton, “Thomas Middleton’s A Game at Chess: A Case Study,” in The Cambridge History of British Theatre, vol. 1, ed. Jane Milling and Peter Thomson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 424–38, citation on 435.
20. While the OED uses the publication date 1613, the play is usually dated to 1607. OED, s.v. plot 6. Plat seems to have been used with the same meaning at the end of the sixteenth century (s.v. plat, 3.6).
21. Taylor points to “The Spaniard’s Speech in Spanish” (129–39) in Middleton’s pageant The Triumphs of Honour and Industry (1617) as evidence for the playwright’s knowledge of the language (Gary Taylor and John Lavagnino, eds., Thomas Middleton and Early Modern Textual Culture: A Companion to the Collected Works [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007], 437).
22. As I discuss in greater detail in Chapter 5, in 1994 the self-styled expert Charles Hamilton published The Second Maiden’s Tragedy as Shakespeare’s Cardenio. Although the identification was given virtually no credence by serious scholars, it has led to a spate of productions of Middleton’s play under the Shakespearean imprimatur and brisk sales of Hamilton’s edition.
23. John Reynolds, The Triumphs of God’s Revenge (1621), History IV. Reynolds locates Alsemero precisely as a Spanish soldier, frustrated by the truce in the Netherlands, and bemoans the immorality of Alsemero and Beatrice-Joanna meeting in a “Popish” church that serves as a “stewes” or brothel (114).
24. For a discussion of the play’s authorship, see Douglas Bruster’s entry for The Changeling in Taylor and Lavagnino, eds., Thomas Middleton and Early Modern Textual Culture, 422–23.
25. Swapan Chakravorty, Society and Politics in the Plays of Thomas Middleton (Oxford: Clarendon, 1996), 145.
26. In a production in Los Angeles by the Independent Shakespeare Company (October–November 2009), De Flores was played by a swarthy Hispanic actor, Luis Galindo, and Beatrice-Joanna by a fair blonde, Melissa Chalsma. The casting brought out the uneven “Spanishness” of the play, in which some characters are marked by ethnicity while others are not.
27. It is interesting to juxtapose The Changeling to the fascinating contemporaneous play by Lope de Vega, El perro del hortelano (The Dog in the Manger, pub. 1618). In Lope’s play, produced in English as part of the Royal Shakespeare Company’s 2004 Spanish Golden Age season, a duchess is tricked into marrying her secretary, a fate she happily accepts, given that she has been in love with him all along. The pretense assumes that the characters recognize the arbitrariness and constructedness of class distinctions.
28. Margot Heinemann, Puritanism and Theatre: Thomas Middleton and Opposition Drama under the Early Stuarts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980); A. A. Bromham and Zara Bruzzi, The Changeling and the Years of Crisis, 1619–1624: A Hieroglyph of Britain (London: Pinter, 1990).
29. Cristina Malcolmson, “ ‘As Tame as the Ladies’: Politics and Gender in The Changeling,” English Literary Renaissance 20 (1990): 320–39, citation on 332.
30. The Spanish Gypsy is very difficult to attribute correctly, given the number of collaborators and the intense level of collaboration, even within scenes. For purposes of my discussion, however, what is most important is the rich and contradictory vision of Spain that emerges from the use of Spanish materials, not the authorship of any individual scene. Moreover, as Gary Taylor argues, “If the plot/scenario for the play was written primarily by one author, Middleton is the likeliest candidate” (Thomas Middleton and Early Modern Textual Culture, 437). For a discussion of the play’s authorship, see 433–38.
31. For a comparison of The Spanish Gypsy and A Game at Chess, see Gary Taylor, “Historicism, Presentism, and Time: Middleton’s The Spanish Gypsy and A Game at Chess,” SEDERI: Journal of the Spanish Society for English Renaissance Studies 18 (2008): 147–70.
32. For the enduring interest in Spanish materials, see Trudi Darby, “The Black Knight’s Festival Book? Thomas Middleton’s A Game at Chess,” in Samson, ed., The Spanish Match, 184.
33. Taylor, “Historicism, Presentism, and Time,” 151–55.
34. Taylor, 155–56. In setting up this love triangle, Middleton may also be rewriting Don Quijote I.42–43, where the young Don Luis is discovered at the inn that he has reached in search of his beloved Clara. Don Fernando, the predatory nobleman who steals Cardenio’s Luscinda (as I discuss in Chapter 4), and who seems eager to help Luis in this episode, recalls Roderigo. I am grateful to Walter Cohen for pointing out this connection.
35. In her introduction to the play in the Collected Works, Suzanne Gossett links this plot to the others by arguing that it is “also constructed around conflicting filial emotions” (Thomas Middleton: The Collected Works, 1724) and that, like Clara, Luis will seek “A noble satisfaction, though not revenge” (3.3.96). Although these echoes certainly contribute to the intricate patterning of the play, they do not really constitute dramatic necessity or a strong plot link.
36. As Taylor points out in his edition, the play takes much of its cant and depiction of the underworld from James Mabbe’s The Rogue (1622), a translation of the wildly popular Spanish picaresque Guzmán de Alfarache, which I discuss in Chapter 1. What is striking, is how that generic identification is repeatedly refused in the play.
37. See Trudi Darby, “Cervantes in England: The Influence of Golden-Age Prose Fiction on Jacobean Drama, c.1615–1625,” Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 74 (1997): 425–41; Darby and Alexander Samson. “Cervantes on the Jacobean Stage,” and Samson, “ ‘Last Thought upon a Windmill”?: Cervantes and Fletcher,” both in The Cervantean Heritage: Reception and Influence of Cervantes in Britain, ed. J. A. G. Ardila (London: Legenda, 2009); and Diana de Armas Wilson’s two essays on Fletcher’s debt to Cervantes, “Contesting the Custom of the Country: Cervantes and Fletcher,” in From Dante to García Márquez: Studies in Romance Literatures and Linguistics, ed. Gene H. Bell-Villada, Antonio Giménez, and George Pistorius (Williamstown, Mass.: Williams College, 1987), 60–75, and “Of Piracy and Plackets: Cervantes’ La señora Cornelia and Fletcher’s The Chances,” in Cervantes for the 21st Century, ed. Francisco La Rubia Prado (Newark, Del.: Juan de la Cuesta, 2000, 49–60).
38. McMullan, The Politics of Unease, 258.
39. James Mabbe, The Rogue, or the Life of Guzmán de Alfarache, Written in Spanish by Mateo Alemán and Done into English by James Mabbe [1623], ed. James Fitzmaurice-Kelly (London: Constable, 1924), 29.
40. McMullan, 257.
41. George Walton Williams follows Cyrus Hoy in attributing Rule a Wife solely to Fletcher in his edition of the play, in The Dramatic Works in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon, gen. ed. Fredson Bowers, 10 vols. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 6: 483–605. Subsequent references are to this edition, by act, scene, and line number.
42. Both Fletcher’s Spanish sources and his competence in Spanish were convincingly established by Hispanist Edward M. Wilson. See Wilson, “Rule a Wife and Have a Wife and El sagaz Estacio,” Review of English Studies 24 (1948): 189–94.
43. Margarita was also the name of the mother of Charles’s intended, Princess Maria, and her brother Philip IV of Spain.
44. Hakluyt, ed., The Principal Navigations, XI.116.
45. On Drake as a fire-drake, cf. the ravishment of Spanish ships recounted in the contemporaneous play Dick of Devonshire (pub. 1626), where piracy and sea-battles are figured as a macabre domestic scene of childbirth:
when or shipps
carryed such fire drakes in them, that ye huge
Spanish Galleasses, Galleons, Hulkes & Carrackes,
being great wth gold, in labour wth some fright,
were all delivered of fine red cheekt Children
At Plymouth, Portsmouth, & other English Havens,
& onely by men midwives: had not Spayne reason
to cry out, oh Diablos Ingleses?
(James Gilmer McManaway and Mary R. McManaway, eds., Dick of Devonshire [London: Malone Society Reprints, 1955], 9–10)
46. Cf. Cervantes’s supremely ironic Exemplary Novels, the collection from which Fletcher takes his subplot, where enlisting often serves as a cover for picaresque activity.
47. Williams notes in his “Textual Introduction” to the play an 1816 review in Edinburgh Review that echoes the striking possessiveness of Rule a Wife, which, the review claims, “holds, to this day, undisputed possession of the stage” (485).
48. For an analogous argument on the layered, iterative historiographical and cultural use of central figures, see Kevin M. F. Platt, Terror and Greatness: Ivan and Peter as Russian Myths (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2011).
Epigraph: Rudolf Schevill, “On the Influence of Spanish Literature upon English in the Early 17th Century,” Romanische Forschugen 20 (1907): 631.
1. E. K. Chambers, William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1930), 2:343.
2. Double Falshood; or The Distrest Lovers. A play, as it is acted at the Theatre-Royal in Drury-Lane. Written originally by W. Shakespeare; and now revised and adapted to the stage by Mr. Theobald, the author of Shakespeare Restor’d (London: J. Watts, 1728). David Scott Kastan notes the irony of Shakespeare’s “restorer” revising and adapting Double Falshood, a dichotomy that exemplifies the two approaches that he finds contemporaneously in the eighteenth century: “But in the single figure of Lewis Theobald can be seen the era’s schizophrenic relation to Shakespeare—always admiring, but, in one mode, presumptuously altering his plays for success on the stage, while, in another, determinedly seeking the authentic text in the succession of scholarly editions that followed Rowe’s” (Shakespeare and the Book [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001], 93). See also Michael Dobson, The Making of the National Poet: Shakespeare, Adaptation and Authorship, 1660–1769 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1992) and James Marino, Owning Shakespeare (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011).
3. G. Harold Metz, ed., Sources of Four Plays Ascribed to Shakespeare (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1989), 257.
4. Dobson, The Making of the National Poet, 131n.
5. For the most recent skeptical account of Theobald’s role, see Tiffany Stern, “ ‘The Forgery of some modern Author’?: Theobald’s Shakespeare and Cardenio’s Double Falsehood,” Shakespeare Quarterly 62, 4 (Winter 2011): 555–93.
6. In a letter “To the Author of the British Gazetteer,” Weekly Journal or the British Gazetteer, February 10, 1728, 142, cited in Metz, 261.
7. “The Modern Poets,” Gentlemen’s Magazine 111 (November 1731): 493; cited in Metz, 261.
8. For a full account of the acrimony between Pope and Theobald, and the cultural capital at stake, see Brean Hammond, Double Falsehood, or The Distressed Lovers (London: Arden Shakespeare, 2010), 66–70, 307–19.
9. Howard Marchitello, “Finding Cardenio,” English Literary History 74 (2007): 957–87, citation on 979.
10. Double Falshood; or The Distrest Lovers. A play, as it is acted at the Theatre-Royal in Drury-Lane. Written originally by W. Shakespeare; and now revised and adapted to the stage by Mr. Theobald, the author of Shakespeare Restor’d. The second edition (London: J. Watts, 1728), Preface.
11. Theobald, my emphasis.
12. Hammond, ed., 92.
13. John Freehafer, “Cardenio, by Shakespeare and Fletcher,” PMLA 84 (1969): 507.
14. Kenneth Muir, Shakespeare as Collaborator (London: Methuen, 1960), 160.
15. Stephan Kukowski, “The Hand of John Fletcher in Double Falsehood,” Shakespeare Survey 43 (1991): 84.
16. Kukowski, 89. Theobald seems to have been unaware of the entry in the Stationers’ Registry that ascribed the play to both Shakespeare and Fletcher.
17. Marchitello, “Finding Cardenio,” 961.
18. William Shakespeare and John Fletcher, Henry VIII (All Is True), ed. Gordon McMullan (London: Arden, 2000), 181. On collaboration, see also Jeffrey Masten, Textual Intercourse: Collaboration, Authorship, and Sexualities in Renaissance Drama (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
19. Leah Marcus, Puzzling Shakespeare: Local Reading and its Discontents (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), 44.
20. For Pope’s vicious emphasis on this line, see Hammond, ed., Double Falsehood, 322–24.
21. Richard Wilson, “Unseasonable Laughter: The Context of Cardenio,” in Shakespeare’s Late Plays: New Readings, ed. Jennifer Richards and James Knowles (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1999): 193–209.
22. Double Falshood, 5.2, p. 59.
23. William Shakespeare: The Complete Works, 2nd ed., ed. Stanley Wells and Gary Taylor (Oxford: Clarendon, 2005); The Norton Shakespeare, Based on the Oxford Edition, 2nd ed., ed. Stephen Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean E. Howard, and Katharine Eisaman Maus (New York: Norton, 1997, 2008), vi. Love’s Labours Won receives similar treatment (837), although the evidence for that play is much scanter than for Cardenio. Greenblatt’s slight revision of the Oxford entry on Cardenio carries a whiff of optimism, with much more Cardenio on the horizon. Whereas the 2005 Oxford edition concludes: “Though [Double Falsehood] deserved its limited success, it is now no more than an interesting curiosity” (1245), Greenblatt’s revision for the Norton, published just three years later, is more open-ended: “Theobald’s play stands as a tantalizing reminder of what has been lost” (3117).
24. Jonathan Gil Harris, “Recent Studies in Tudor and Stuart Drama,” SEL Studies in English Literature 1500–1900 51, 2 (2011): 465–513, citation on 501–2.
25. Hammond, ed., 81–84.
26. Hammond, ed., “General Editors’ Preface,” xvi.
27. Ibid., 3.
28. Ibid., 6.
29. Bernard Richards, “Now am I in Arden,” Rev. of Double Falsehood, or The Distressed Lovers, ed. Brean Hammond, Essays in Criticism 61, 1 (2011): 79–88.
30. Trudi Darby and Alexander Samson, “ ‘Cervantes on the Jacobean Stage” and Alexander Samson, “ ‘Last Thought upon a Windmill’?: Cervantes and Fletcher,” in The Cervantean Heritage: Reception and Influence of Cervantes in Britain, ed. J. A. G. Ardila (London: Legenda, 2009).
31. Stern, 580–83. The full title of the novella is The Adventures on the Black Mountains; A Tale, Upon which the Plan of a Posthumous Play, call’d Double Falsehood, was written Originally by W. Shakespeare (Samuel Croxall, ed., Select Collection of Novels and Histories, 6 vols. [London, 1729], 1:311–38). Shakespearean “originality” here masks Cervantine origins. Stern argues, moreover, that the Arden Shakespeare publication of Double Falsehood “has obliged its excellent editor, Brean Hammond, to avoid the bits of the Theobald story that relate to Fletcher (there is no mention in the Arden edition that Theobald was a Fletcher editor) or Don Quixote (there is no mention in the Arden that Theobald was a Cervantes fanatic, or that he worked with, and perhaps wrote or translated, a novel based on the Cardenio story)” (592–93).
32. See Dale B. J. Randall and Jackson C. Boswell, eds., Cervantes in Seventeenth-Century England: The Tapestry Turned (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009) and Ardila, ed, The Cervantean Heritage.
33. For a more suspicious reading of Jonson’s praise, see Marino, Owning Shakespeare, 134–35.
34. Dobson, 5. Dobson makes a fascinating case for the construction of Shakespeare both as a national deity and as cultural capital for export in the eighteenth century. As my reading of Jonson suggests, I see some of the same dynamics much earlier.
35. On landscape as property in early modern drama, see Garrett Sullivan, The Drama of Landscape: Land, Property, and Social Relations on the Early Modern Stage (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1998).
36. Theobald, Double Falshood, Prologue.
37. On eighteenth-century efforts to make Shakespeare conform to neoclassical norms, see Kastan.
38. Margreta de Grazia, Shakespeare Verbatim (Oxford: Clarendon, 1991), 44–45.
39. Hammond, ed., 60.
40. See Christine Gerrard, The Patriot Opposition to Walpole: Politics, Poetry, and National Myth, 1725–1742 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), esp. Chapter 6, “Political Elizabethanism and the Spenser Revival,” 150–84, citations on 157. Theobald may have absorbed some of his own jingoism from Jacobean texts. Stern notes that, when offered a benefit night by the Drury Lane company, Theobald chose to present Rule a Wife and Have a Wife, which I discuss in Chapter 3.
41. Lewis Theobald, Memoirs of Sir Walter Raleigh (London: W. Mears, 1719).
42. Ibid., 5, 7.
43. Ibid., 20.
44. Ibid., 26.
45. Gerrard.
46. Cited in Dobson, 201.
47. See John Loftis, “English Renaissance Plays from the Spanish Comedia,” English Literary Renaissance 14, 2 (Spring 1984): 230–48, reprised in his Renaissance Drama in England and Spain: Topical Allusion and History Plays (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1987).
48. Barbara Mowat, “The Theater and Literary Culture,” in A New History of Early English Drama, ed. John D. Cox and David Scott Kastan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997), 213–30.
49. Cohen’s disappointment at the relative formalism of the studies is evident in his afterword to Comedias del Siglo de Oro and Shakespeare, ed. Susan L. Fischer (Lewisburg, Pa.: Bucknell University Press, 1989), 142–51.
50. Aside from the Cohen and Loftis monographs and Fischer’s collection, there are two volumes of conference proceedings on the topic: Parallel Lives: Spanish and English National Drama, 1580–1680, ed. Louise and Peter Fothergill-Payne (Lewisburg, Pa.: Bucknell University Press, 1991) and Vidas paralelas: el teatro español y el teatro isabelino, 1580–1680, ed. Anita K. Stoll (London: Támesis, 1993). A more promising recent bilingual collection, Between Cervantes and Shakespeare: Trails Along the Renaissance, ed. Zenón Luis Martínez and Luis Gómez Canseco (Newark, Del.: Juan de la Cuesta, 2006), includes some essays under “Crossroads” but far more under “Parallel Paths.”
51. Valerie Wayne, “The Don Quixote Effect on Early Modern Drama,” in the program for the RSC Cardenio: Shakespeare’s Lost Play Re-imagined (2011) and “Don Quixote and Shakespeare’s Collaborative Turn to Romance,” forthcoming in Gary Taylor and David Carnegie, eds., The Quest for Cardenio. I am grateful to Professor Wayne for sharing the unpublished essay with me.
52. See Catherine Boyle and David Johnston, eds., with Janet Morris, The Spanish Golden Age in English: Perspectives on Performance (London: Oberon, 2007).
53. Catherine Boyle, “Perspectives on Loss and Discovery: Reading and Reception,” in Boyle and Johnston, eds., 61–74, citation on 61–62. Boyle is citing Susannah Clapp, “Putting Shakespeare in His Place,” The Observer, April 25, 2004. In an interview with David McGrath in Boyle and Johnston’s volume, director Jonathan Munby claims, “We should absolutely be looking to our own forgotten works at the same time as bringing Golden Age into the repertoire. There are many, many plays that I want to do, contemporaries of Shakespeare and so on, but at the moment I simply cannot get a production of them in a professional context” (133–40, citation on 138). What Munby fails to note is how many of those plays might lead back to Spain.
Epigraph: Antonio Machado, “El mañana efímero,” in Campos de Castilla (1907–1917), ed. Geoffrey Ribbans (Madrid: Cátedra, 2006), 213–14.
1. The play has also been recreated by Gary Taylor, whose The History of Cardenio produced in Wellington, New Zealand, in May 2009, is an attempt to “unadapt” Double Falshood, and by Bernard Richards, whose Cardenio, produced in March 2009 at Queen’s College, Cambridge, added six scenes by Richards to Double Falshood. See Hammond, ed., Double Falshood, 124–30.
2. Stephen Greenblatt, “Theatrical Mobility,” in Greenblatt et al., eds. Cultural Mobility: A Manifesto (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 75–95.
3. “Cardenio: Greenblatt Interview,” YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRxd2Q0-UXc, consulted March 31, 2009.
4. Greenblatt, “Theatrical Mobility,” 78.
5. “About the (Re)making Project,” http://www.charlesmee.org/html/about.html, consulted March 31, 2009.
6. Interview by Ryan McKittrick, http://www.amrep.org/articles/6_4/como.html, consulted March 31, 2009.
7. I am grateful to Professor Greenblatt for making available to me a late draft of the play, which is now available online at http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~cardenio/us-script.html
8. Greenblatt, “Theatrical Mobility,” 85.
9. See David Quint, Cervantes’s Novel of Modern Times (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2003) on how to read the interpolated novellas in relation to the main plot.
10. Greenblatt, “Theatrical Mobility,” 84.
11. See A. S. Rosenbach, “The Curious-Impertinent in English Dramatic Literature before Shelton’s Translation of Don Quijote,” MLN 17, 6 (June 1906): 179–84, and William Peery, The Plays of Nathaniel Field (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1950).
12. Theatre Communications Group—New Plays Website, http://www.tcg.org/tools/newplays/details.cfm?ShowID=1.
13. On the canonization of Shakespeare, see Michael Dobson, The Making of the National Poet: Shakespeare, Adaptation and Authorship, 1660–1769 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1992).
14. The Life and Complete Works in Prose and Verse of Robert Greene, ed. Alexander. B. Grosart, 15 vols. (London, 1881–86), XII.144. See Loewenstein, Ben Jonson and Possessive Authorship, 84–89.
15. Boston Globe, May 10, 2008.
16. Charles Hamilton, William Shakespeare and John Fletcher: Cardenio or the Second Maiden’s Tragedy (Lakewood, Colo.: Glenbridge, 1994), 1.
17. See Hamilton, Chapter 3, “Shakespeare and Cervantes: Collaborators.” The title aside, Hamilton sets out to chart the “vast disparity between their literary talents, with Shakespeare far outshining his Spanish counterpart” (187). Despite such tendentiousness, Hamilton’s bizarre edition continues to sell; such is the power of the Shakespearean imprimatur.
18. Greenblatt, “Theatrical Mobility,” 90.
19. Interestingly, in his Cardenio entre Cervantes et Shakespeare: Histoire d’une pièce perdue (Paris: Gallimard, 2011), Roger Chartier notes the early modern cultural mobility of Cervantes’s Cardenio, adapted on the Spanish stage by Guillén de Castro and on the French by a certain Pichou.
20. See, for example, the front-page article by Reshmi Sengupta, “Shakespeare, Found via Tagore,” which notes, “Shakespeare is said to have written Cardenio inspired by an episode from Cervantes’s Don Quixote, where the character Cardenio tests the chastity of his wife by asking his friend to seduce her” (Telegraph, Calcutta, Thursday January 4, 2007), or the subsequent review in the same paper (March 24, 2007), “Finding El Dorado,” in which Ananda Lai deems Cardenio the “El Dorado of Shakespearean texts” and explains the plot of Jaha Chai: “As in Cervantes’ episode, a husband (Goutam Halder) foolishly decides to test the virtue of his wife (Sohini Sengupta-Halder) by persuading his best friend (Debsankar Halder) to try to seduce her,” http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070324/asp/opinion/story_7552011.asp, consulted August 3, 2011.
21. E-mail communication from Stephen Greenblatt to Jesús Eguía Armenteros, July 2, 2007. I am grateful to Jesús Eguía Armenteros for making these materials available to me.
22. E-mail from Greenblatt to Eguía Armenteros, July 17, 2007.
23. Letter from Stephen Greenblatt, “To whom it may concern,” October 11, 2007.
24. E-mail between Greenblatt and Eguía Armenteros, July 24–25, 2007.
25. It is striking that the sole press announcement of the play included on Greenblatt’s website describes it as “una propuesta nacional para un proyecto internacional” [a national proposal for an international project], http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~cardenio/spain-press.html, consulted August 17, 2011.
26. E-mail between Stephen Greenblatt and Jesús Eguía Armenteros, July 24, 2007.
27. Personal communication with Eguía Armenteros, August 16, 2011.
28. Jesús Eguía Armenteros, The Cardenio Project, http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~cardenio/spain-script.html, downloaded August 8, 2011, 3–4.
29. Eguía Armenteros, The Cardenio Project, trans. Teresa Álvarez-Garcillán and Karen Velásquez, http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~cardenio/spain-script.html, downloaded August 8, 2011, 3–5.
30. Personal communication with Eguía Armenteros, August 16, 2011.
31. Eguía Armenteros, The Cardenio Project, 63.
32. Eguía Armenteros, The Cardenio Project, trans. Álvarez-Garcillán and Velásquez, downloaded August 8, 2011, 82–83.
33. “The Cardenio Project,” http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~cardenio/spain-production.html, consulted August 17, 2011.
34. Greenblatt, “Theatrical Mobility,” 91.
35. “The Cardenio Project,” consulted August 3, 2011.
36. Double Falshood was staged at the Union Theater in London in January 2011, directed by Phil Willmott, and by the Classic Stage Company in New York in March–April, 2011, directed by Brian Kulick. Both productions attributed the play to Shakespeare, although CSC attempted to hedge its bets, with a publicity campaign that placed the onus on the spectator: “Shakespeare’s long lost play? Decide for yourself.”
37. http://www.rsc.org.uk/whats-on/cardenio/, consulted August 17, 2011.
38. Cardenio: Shakespeare’s “Lost Play” Re-Imagined (London: Nick Hern, 2011), unpaginated.
39. Ibid.
40. Ibid., 5.
41. Ibid., 6.
42. http://www.rsc.org.uk/whats-on/cardenio/qa-doran.aspx, consulted August 18, 2011.
43. Ibid.
44. The website for Cardenio’s publisher, Nick Hern Books, puts yet another spin on matters, listing Doran and Álamo as “editors,” and Shakespeare and Fletcher as authors, http://www.nickhernbooks.co.uk/?isbn=9781848421806, consulted August 18, 2011. On editorship and copyright, see James Marino, Owning Shakespeare: The King’s Men and Their Intellectual Property (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylania Press, 2011).
45. Hammond, ed., 131, citing a private communication with Gregory Doran, July 23, 2007.
46. Gregory Doran, private communication, August 31, 2011.
47. On the construction of Spain as non-European or exotic, see my Exotic Nation: Maurophilia and the Construction of Early Modern Spain (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylavnia Press, 2009), and José Colmeiro, “Exorcising Exoticism: Carmen and the Construction of Oriental Spain,” Comparative Literature 54, 2 (2002): 127–43.
48 Doran, “Week Four Already,” February 25, 2011, http://www.rsc.org.uk/explore/blogs/entry/week-four-already/, consulted August 18, 2011.
49. In his now classic Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes Its Object, Johannes Fabian identifies the “denial of coevalness” that places “the referent(s) of anthropology in a Time other than the present of the producer of anthropological discourse” (New York: Columbia University Press, 1983, 2nd. ed. 2002), with a new foreword by Matti Bunzl, 31, emphasis original. While the RSC Cardenio is by no means anthropological, its construction of Spain emphasizes its timeless otherness.
50. Gregory Doran, “Introduction,” Cardenio: Shakespeare’s “Lost Play” Re-Imagined, 6–7.
51. Doran, “Pancake Tuesday,” March 18, 2011, http://www.rsc.org.uk/explore/blogs/reimagining-cardenio/pancake-tuesday/, consulted August 22, 2011.
52. Marvin Carlson, The Haunted Stage: The Theater as Memory Machine (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2001), 8.
53. Doran, “Serenatas in Spain,” January 21, 2011, http://www.rsc.org.uk/explore/blogs/reimagining-cardenio/serenatas-in-spain/, consulted August 22, 2011.
54. Charles D’Avillier, Spain, illus. Gustave Doré, trans. J. Thomson (London: Bickers & Son, 1881), 8.
55. Ibid., 134.
56. “The Escorial,” January 26, 2011, http://www.rsc.org.uk/explore/blogs/entry/the-escorial/, consulted August 18, 2011.
57. Michael Billington, “Cardenio—Review.” The Guardian, April 28, 2011, http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2011/apr/28/cardenio-review, consulted August 5, 2011.
58. Charles Spenser, “Cardenio, RSC, Stratford-upon-avon, Review,” Daily Telegraph, April 28, 2011, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/theatre-reviews/8479816/Cardenio-RSC-Stratford-upon-avon-review.html, consulted August 5, 2011.
59. Paul Taylor, “Shakespeare with a Stylish Spanish Twist,” Independent, May 2, 2011,
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/reviews/
cardenio-swan-theatre-stratforduponavon–2277636.html, consulted August 5, 2011.
60. Jonathan Thacker, “History of Performance in English,” in The Spanish Golden Age in English: Perspectives on Performance, ed. Catherine Boyle and David Johnston with Janet Morris (London: Oberon, 2007), 15–30, citation on 21–22.
61. “El Papa, en Madrid: Los incidentes registrados en la manifestación laica ensombrecen la llegada del Papa,” El País, August 17, 2011, http://politica.elpais.com/politica/2011/08/17/actualidad/1313607443_608832.html, consulted August 22, 2011; Raúl Salazar, “Madrid, plagada de confesionarios portátiles,” http://www.unrespetoalascanas.com/2011/madrid-plagada-de-confesionarios-portatiles, consulted August 22, 2011.
62. Personal communication with Eguía Armenteros, August 16, 2011.
63. “The Spanish Golden Age,” season brochure, ed. Royal Shakespeare Company, June 2004, cited in Kathleen Jeffs, “Golden Age Page to Stratford Stage: Rehearsing and Performing the Royal Shakespeare Company’s Spanish Season,” D.Phil Thesis, University of Oxford, 2009, 1. I am grateful to Dr. Jeffs for sharing her work with me. The RSC’s metaphor is the same as in Felix Schelling’s 1923 account of Spanish sources: “The coffers of Spanish drama, thus opened, continued to afford English playwrights their treasures.” Having surveyed multiple foreign sources, Schelling asks, in a kind of literary-historical mercantilism: “What was there left that was native after all this use of the coin of other realms?” His confident answer: “Nearly everything is left” (Schelling, Foreign Influences in Elizabethan Plays [New York: Harper, 1923], 123, 138).
64. Perhaps unsurprisingly, even the “discovery” of Golden Age Spanish theater by British companies leads to chauvinistic coverage. In response to the much vaunted RSC Spanish Golden Age season in 2004, and their performance in Madrid of Lope de Vega’s El perro del hortelano (The Dog in the Manger), directed by Boswell, Dominick Cavendish recounts in The Telegraph “How the RSC Gave Spain a Lesson in Teatro,” November 1, 2004. In an interview with David Johnston, Boswell is far more cautious and modest about the enterprise, recognizing the wariness about appropriation: “There are always issues around ownership. We were nervous because it would be very easy to say that we were doing something inappropriate, that Lope should be performed by Spanish actors. We really had very little idea as to how classical Spanish theatre worked in contemporary Spain.” In Boyle and Johnston, eds., The Spanish Golden Age in English, 148–54, citation on 151.
65. Ibid., 153. Boswell has since directed a production of Lope’s Fuenteovejuna both at the Canadian Stratford Shakespeare Festival (2008), where his own translation of the text was used, and in both Madrid and Alcalá (2009).
66. Jeffs, 24.