Marlowe'sLiteraryScepticism

byChloePreedy

3:OathTakingandOathBreaking
Theenforcementofoutwardreligiousconformityandthestruggletodiscernanindividuals
privatebeliefswereurgentconcernsforanEnglishProtestantregimethatequated
confessionalallegiancewithpoliticalloyalty.ElizabethIsgovernmentandmanyofher
subjectsregardedCatholicismandtreasoninGodsnameasvirtuallysynonymous,
especiallyafterthepapalproclamationof1570whichexcommunicatedtheEnglishqueen
anddeclaredhersubjectstobeforeverabsolvedfromtheirpoliticaloathsofobedience.
Explicitlylinkingoathbreakingwiththereligiousdutytorebel,thispapalbullconsolidated
EnglishfearsaboutthedualandconflictingallegiancesowedbyEnglishCatholics.
ConcernsthatEnglishCatholicsmightprioritisetheirperceivedreligiousdutyoversecular
loyaltyandrebelagainsttheProtestantstatewereespeciallyacuteinthelater1580s,
whenEnglandlivedinfearofanimminentSpanishinvasion,andwereexacerbatedby
tractssuchasWilliamAllensAdmonitiontotheNobility(1588).Writinginsupportofthe
SpanishArmadainvasionattempt,theJesuitCardinalremindedElizabethsCatholic
subjectsthattheyhadareligiousobligationtobreakthesecularoathsbindingthemtotheir
hereticqueen,sincethiswomanwasbygoodPiusQuintusexcommunicatedand
deprived,andallhersubjectsdischargedofotheandobediencetowardesher.[172]
Inthe1580sElizabethanfearsofinvasioncentredonCatholicSpain,butthestruggleto
reconcileconflictingloyaltieswasnotanexclusivelyCatholicissue.TheradicalProtestant
factionofpresbyteriansledbyThomasCartwrightsimilarlystrovetoresolvetheirdivided
allegiances,asdidsomeofthemoreextremeseparatistsects.Whilenottarredby
associationwithaninternational Catholicconspiracy,thesegroupswerestillregardedas
anactivepoliticalthreat.InthecaseoftheextremeProtestantsorpuritansthepolitical
implicationswereacute,sincethe155960revoltbytheScottishLordsofthe
CongregationhaddemonstratedthatradicalProtestantswereaslikelyasCatholicsto
rebelinthenameoftheirreligion.AlthoughElizabethIsnewlyestablishedgovernment
hadgivenmilitaryassistancetotheScottishdissidentsin1560,theEnglishauthorities
wereawareofthepotentiallysubversiveimplicationsofsuchcampaignstheideological
justificationfortheScottishrebellionwasprovidedbythepreacherJohnKnox,whoargued
in1558thatneithercanoathnorpromisebindanysuchpeopletoobeyandmaintain
tyrantsagainstGodandagainstHistruthknown.[173]
ElizabethanEnglandssensitivitytothedangersofpuritandissidencereachednewheights
in15889,withthepublicationoftheMartinMarprelatepamphlets.Theseradical
ProtestanttractsattackedthehierarchyoftheElizabethanChurchinscathingterms,
claimingthateveryarchbishopisapettypopethefictionalMartinsviolentassaultonthe
establishedchurchwasstronglycondemnedbytheElizabethanauthorities,who
characterisedhisrejectionofecclesiasticalhierarchyasathreattoallsocialorder.[174]
WhentheEnglishbishopshiredpropagandiststorespond,thelatterbrandedMartinan
outrightrebel.ThepamphleteerThomasNasheevenlinkedtheMarprelatescandaltothe
threatofCatholicinvasion:inAnAlmondforaParrat(1589)heimaginesasceneinwhich
ItalianCatholicsrejoiceatMartinssuccess,discussinghowthisfamousSchismatikehas

93

broughtthattopassewhichneitherthePopebyhisSeminaries,Philipbyhis
power,noralltheholyLeaguebytheirunderhandpractisesandpoliciescouldat
anytimeeffect:forwherastheylivedatunitiebeforeheehathinventedsuch
quidditiestosetthemtogetherbytheearesthatnowthetemporaltieisreadieto
pluckeoutthethrotesoftheCleargie,andsubjectstowithdrawtheirallegeance
fromtheirSoverayne.[175]

Thepuritanssoongainedapopularreputationfortreason,particularlyafterafewradicals
proclaimedtheirleaderWilliamHackettthenewMessiahandsoughttodeposeQueen
Elizabethinhisfavour.WhileinpracticemostpuritanswereloyaltoElizabethI,many
membersofhergovernmentsharedNashesdoubts.Thusin1593theBishopofLondon,
RichardBancroft,publiclydenouncedthepretendedrefourmers,arguingthattheywereas
traiterousandseditiousasthedivelishCatholics,andaddingthatanyoathtakenbya
puritanwasworthlesssincetheydallysoexceedinglywithit.[176]

94

AsBancroftscritiqueofpuritanloyaltyindicates,theactofoathtakingwasincreasingly
centraltoElizabethanidealsofcivilobedience.TheEnglishauthoritiesreliedheavilyon
oathsthattestedtheconfessionalandpoliticalloyaltiesofthequeenssubjects:by1563
Englandslawyers,schoolmasters,universitygraduatesanddivineswereallrequiredto
taketheOathofSupremacy,apromiseofloyaltytoElizabethandtheestablishedchurch,
whilefrom1571onwardsmembersoftheclergyhadalsotoswearanoathacceptingthe
authorityofthe1559PrayerBookandtheThirtyNineArticles.Suchoathswereoften
imposedindirectresponsetoimmediatestatefears,castingpoliticalloyaltyincontractual
terms.Forexample,rumoursintheearly1580sthatElizabethIslifewasindanger
resultedintheBondofAssociation,whichcreatedaswornbrotherhoodofvoluntary
defendersoftherealm.Elizabethangovernmentpropagandasimilarlypresentedtheactof
oathtakingasaconfirmationofthepromiserspoliticalallegiance:forinstance,oneanti
CatholictractcompiledonLordBurghleysordersmakesmuchofthepublicoathofloyalty
giventothequeenbyViscountMontague,aCatholicloyalistwhodidprofesseandprotest
solemnelytodefendEnglandagainstallInvaders,whetheritwerePope,Kingor
Potentatewhatsoever.[177]Comparableoathsofpoliticalallegiancewereexactedfrom
Elizabethssubjectsasapreventivemeasureagainstrebellion,especiallyrebellioninthe
nameofreligion.
WithEnglandssecuritybalanceduponascaffoldofpromises,thegovernmentwas
naturallyfearfulofandantagonistictoclaims thatreligiousdutymighttakeprecedence
overloyaltytothestate.Yet,inanactivelyreligioussociety,incidentsinwhichspiritual
considerationsclashedwiththedemandsofthestatewerecomparativelycommon.In
1583,forexample,therewasamajorscandalwhenatleastthreehundredclericsrefused
tosubscribetotheThreeArticlesimposedbyArchbishopWhitgift.InthisinstancetheEarl
ofLeicesterandSirFrancisWalsinghamintervenedontheministersbehalf,andWhitgift
eventuallyacceptedaneditedversionoftheoathbytheearly1590s,however,Leicester
andWalsinghamweredeadandanewcampaignagainstthepuritanshadbegun.
EnglandsCatholicsfacedamoreseveredilemmawhenitcametothenationally
prescribedOathofAllegiance:whileaCatholiccouldnotagreethatElizabethwasthe
SupremeGovernoroftheChurchwithoutbreakingfaithwiththePope,arefusaltoswear
thisoathwasconsideredtreason.Indeed,anypromissoryundertakingthatmight
supersedeEnglishbondsofloyaltywasroundlycondemnedbyElizabethanpropagandists:
thegovernmentinformerAnthonyMundayforinstancewrotethatwhenEnglishCatholic
priestsreceivetheirPreestehood,theyenterintotheyroath,whichoathcontayneththe
sumoftheTreason.[178]EnglishProtestantanxietieswerefurtherexacerbatedbysecular
attacksontheinherentsanctityofpoliticaloathsNiccolMachiavellissuggestionthat
considerationsofselfinterestmightsupersedeabstractnotionsofcontractualdutywas
particularlynotorious.[179]AmplifyingtheProtestantgovernmentsexistingfearsaboutoath
breakinginthenameofreligion,suchcommentsgeneratedsignificantconcernaboutthe
securityoftheElizabethanregimeanditscomplex,perhapsprecariousnetworkof
promissoryallegiance.
TheElizabethanpreoccupationwithoathtakingandoathbreakingisreflectedin
ChristopherMarlowesplaysandpoems.But,whileliterarycriticshavelongbeenawareof

95

theimportanceofcontractsinShakespearesdrama,Marloweswritingshaveonlyrecently
attractedsimilarattention.Thenewstudiesremainfairlyspecialised:RichardWilsons
discussionofcontractinTamburlainelooksexclusivelyatcommercialundertakingsLuke
Wilsons perceptiveanalysisofFaustusspactwithMephistophelesconsidersonlythe
stagetraditionofthedemoniccontractwhileothercriticshavefocusedondiscerning
Machiavellisinfluence.[180]Suchresearchhasmadeavaluablecontribution,
demonstratingMarlowesfamiliaritywithlegalterminologyandinterestincontractual
questions.However,theextensivespiritualandpoliticalsignificanceofhiscontractual
episodeshasnotbeenfullyrecognised.Crucially,thesereflectMarlowesextensive
interestintherelationshipbetweenoaths,religionandpoliticalloyaltyindeed,he
consistentlycreatesscenariosinwhichcharactersareencouragedtobreakalegal
contractorpoliticaltreatyinthenameofreligion.

96

Marlowesinterestinoathsiswidereaching:everyoneofhismajorpoeticanddramatic
worksincludesoneormoreepisodesinwhichcontractualundertakingsarerepresentedor
reported.WritinginElizabethanEngland,Marlowerespondedtocontemporaryanxieties
aboutoathbreakingasheportraysactsofperjurywhichhischaracterscastasreligious
dutyinMarlowesscepticalimagination,however,suchpiousclaimsalmostinvariablyring
hollow.ThischapterexploreshowMarlovianprotagonistsfromAeneastoFernezecallon
theirgodstovindicateactsofoathbreakingandperjury,whileMarlowesimultaneously
revealstheirunderlyingfinancialandpoliticalmotives.Ibeginwiththebrokenloversvows
ofOvidsElegiesandDidoQueenofCarthage,whichrelateindirectlytocontemporary
debatesaboutpromissoryloyalty,beforeturningtoTamburlainePartTwoandTheJewof
Maltathetwoplaysthatmostovertlyshowcharactersbreakingpoliticaloathsinthe
nameofreligion.

VenusandFalseVowsinOvidsElegies
Marlowesfascinationwithcharacterswhoappropriatereligiousprecedentstoexcusea
selfinterestedrepudiationofcontractualloyaltiesisapparentthroughouthisliterarycareer,
complementinghisbroaderexposoftherolereligionplaysinjustifyingselfishandoften
immoralactions.Thefirsthintsofhisinterestinoathbreakingarefoundinhisvernacular
translationofOvidsAmores, usuallyconsideredtobeoneofhisearliestworks.InOvids
ElegiesMarlowepresentsseveralepisodesinwhichthenarratorappealstothegoddess
Venus,citingherasaprecedentforanddefenderofhiseroticallyinspiredperjury.InBook
Two,forinstance,thepairedelegiesonthemaidCypassiscreateavignettethatexposes
thefalsefaithoftheloverwhonarratesthem.First,inElegy7,thereaderencountershis
denialofguiltandpledgeofhonesty.Thespeakerdeniesanysexualinvolvementwithhis
mistressCorinnasmaidCypassisandappealstothegodstofreehimfromsuspicion,
vowingbyVenus,andthewingedboysbowthatmyselfunguiltyofthiscrimeIknow
(OvidsElegies2.7.19,278).Ourtrustintheunnamedspeakerswordisshortlived,
however,sincethenextelegyshowshimberatingCypassisforherindiscretion:

Whothatourbodieswerecompressedbewrayed?
WhenceknowsCorinnathatwiththeeIplayed?
YetblushedInot,norusedIanysaying,
Thatmightbeurgedtowitnessourfalseplaying.
(OvidsElegies2.8.58)

Thereadercanrecognisethedubiousaccuracyofthesechargesthetruebewrayerisnot
thehaplessslavebutthespeakerhimself.Indeed,evenheimplicitlyacknowledgesthatby
makinglovetoCypassishehasbeenfalsetoCorinna.Yet,particularlyinMarlowes
translation,thereisnomoodofcontrition:renderingOvidsphrasenumtamennumas
nontamennec,MarlowetransformstheguiltyexclamationsofOvidsloverCanI
haveblushed?intothespeakersselfsatisfiedstatementthat,underpressure,yet
blushedInot.[181]Astheelegycontinues,thespeakerboastsabouthissuccessin
deceivingCorinna.HeopenlyadmitshisfalseplayingandmarvelshowbyVenusdeity
didIprotest!(18),secureintheknowledgethatthou,goddess,dostcommandawarm
southblast/MyfalseoathsinCarpathianseastocast(1920).

97

Themostsignificantelementinthesepairedelegiesisnotthedeceptionitself,thoughthis
obviouslycompromisesthereaderstrustinthenarrator,butratherthemeansbywhichthe
speaker justifieshisperjuryandhisrelatedassumptionthatVenuswillexcusehis
behaviour.ThispointismadeparticularlyforcefullyinMarlowestranslation.Whereas
Ovidsspeakerambiguouslydescribesthevowshehasmadeasperiuriapuri(pureor
moralperjuries)inaskingVenustosendthemaway,Marlowesnarratoropenly
acknowledgesthefalsityofhiswords.[182]Inaddition,thegoddessbecomesamore
complicitconspiratorinOvidsElegiesthanshewasintheLatinoriginal:whenthespeaker
announcesthatVenusdostcommandawarmsouthblast/MyfalseoathsinCarpathian
seastocast(1920),Marlowesforcefuluseofthefutureverbdostremovesanysenseof
uncertaintyorpleadingfromthespeakersstatement.NoristhisconceptofVenusasa
championofoathbreakinguncommoninElizabethanwritings.Inthesixteenthcentury
emblembookAmorumemblemata,forinstance,theemblemLoveexcusesfromperjurie
isaccompaniedbyaversestatingthatvenusdothdispenceinloversothesabused
intriguingly,DonnaHamiltonnotesthatthisbooksEnglishtranslatorRichardVerstegan
wasbetterknownasaCatholicpolemicist,andpositsaconnectionbetweenLove
excusesandtheCatholicpracticesofequivocationIexploredinChapterOne.[183]Any
connectionisimplicitatbest,butitispossiblethatappealstoareligiousfigureheadsuch
asVenusmightresonatewithcontemporaryElizabethanfearsofoathbreaking:according
tosixteenthcenturyProtestantpropaganda,theCatholicmissionarypriestswereequally
guiltyofcommittingperjuryinthepopesname,andaccordingtohismandate.

98

AgainstAllLawsofLove:AeneassBetrayalof
Dido
WhiletheideathatthegoddessVenuscansanctionanactofoathbreakingmayarguably
echoEnglishconcernsabouttheloyaltiesofCatholicandpuritansubjects,inAllOvids
Elegiesthesepossibleallusionsareglancingandindirect.InDidoQueenofCarthage,on
theotherhand,itseemsthatMarloweandhiscowriterThomasNasheexploiteda
coincidentalconnectionbetweenthemythological DidoandQueenElizabethItohintthat
theirfictionalnarrativemightspeaktoearlymodernEnglishissues.Dido,achildless
femaleruler,washistoricallyknownbythenameElissavariousElizabethantextsdrew
flatteringcomparisonsbetweenEnglandssixteenthcenturyElizaandthewidowedDido
praisedbyJustinandBoccaccioforherchastity,includingJamesAskesElizabetha
TriumphansandEdmundSpensersShepheardesCalender.[184]SincetheTudordynasty
claimedAeneasastheirmythicalancestor,allusionstotheTrojanprinceinearlymodern
literaturemightalsohavecontemporaryresonance.Indeed,inthesocalledSienaPortrait
byQuentinMetsystheYoungerEnglandsmonarchiscomparedtoboththehistoricalDido
andVirgilspiusAeneasasthisportraitsuggests,Elizabethsiconographymight
simultaneouslycreditthequeenwiththechastityofthehistoricalDidoandthemartial,
empirebuildingattributesofAeneas.
ButtheVirgiliantaleofDidosloveforAeneascouldalsoservelessflatteringpoliticalends.
AsDonaldStumpnotes,Elizabethsdetractorsemployedthesameanalogytodisputeher
proposedmarriagetotheFrenchCatholicDukeofAlenonandAnjou,HenriIIIsyounger
brother.InthecaseoftheSienaportrait,forinstance,itispossiblethatthisostensibly
flatteringpaintingisactuallyawarningagainsttheFrenchmatch,suggestingthatElizabeth
risksbecomingasecondDido.[185]WilliamGagersuniversityplayDidoTragoedia(1583)
similarlycelebratestheEnglishqueenDido,ourVirginQueenisforallthatfarsuperior
toyou(11.12601)butstressesthedangersofmarryingaforeignertheLatindrama
was,revealingly,commissionedbyElizabethsEnglishProtestantsuitortheEarlof
Leicester.[186]ThroughthestoryofDidosdoomedlove,DidoTragoediaimplicitlycensures
Elizabethsmarriageplans,evendemandingwhetherthequeenssubjectswillwith
impunitypermitastrangertobetakenintothekingdomwhilethenativesaredespised(11.
4478).ThefinalchorusexplicitlyattributesElizabethIspoliticalsuccesstohermoral
decoruminaffairsoftheheart,andpointedlycontraststhissuccesstothedisasters
causedbyDidosrecklesspassion.SubtlydenouncingElizabethsunpopularmarriage
negotiations,Gagers playexploresthefateofaqueenwhosemarriageisincompatible
withherpoliticalduty.
MarlowesdramaticversionofDidoandAeneassstorymayhavebeenpartlyinspiredby
Gagersplay.Indeed,somecriticsconsiderthatMarloweandNasheschildrensdrama

99

100

alsoengageswiththecontroversyoverElizabethsmarriagenegotiationsandmocksher
FrenchsuitorinthefigureofAeneas.[187]AsustainedanalogybetweenAeneasandthe
DukeofAlenonandAnjouisdoubtful,sinceDidoQueenofCarthagewasmostprobably
writtenafterthelattersdeathin1584,andthetoneoftheplayisverydifferenttothatof
Gagersdidacticandmoralisingdrama.However,MarloweandNashedoseemtofollow
Gagersleadinonemajorrespectinbothplays,DidosrelationshipwithAeneasmight
figurativelysuggestanEnglishencounterwithCatholicism,whenQueenElissais
betrayedbythelegendaryfounderofimperial,CatholicRome.ButwhereasGager
emphasisesDidosuncontrolledpassionforaforeignprince,inMarloweandNashes
dramaitishercontractualrelationshipwithAeneasthattakescentrestage.
WhenreadersofVirgilsAeneidconsiderthemoralityofAeneassdecisiontoleaveDido,
littleislefttochance.Althoughtheepicshowssympathyfortheabandonedqueen,
Aeneassdecisionispresentedasunequivocallycorrect.HispartingwordstoDido
epitomisethisapproach,drawinguponbothlawandreligiontojustifyhisdeparture:I
neverheldoutthebridegroomstorchnorenteredsuchacontract,Aeneasexplains,
beforeaddinghisclinchingargument:ThemessengerofthegodssentfromJovehimself
hasbornehiscommanddownthroughtheswiftbreezes.[188]Virgilspiusherois
justified,bothlegallyandtheologically,inleavingCarthageforItaly.Thesixteenthcentury
EnglishtranslatorsoftheAeneidendorsedAeneassdefence,stressingthatdespiteOvids
claimsinhisHeroidestherewasnothingbetweenAeneasandDidothatcouldlegallybe
termedamarriage.HenryHowardsDidoisledagainsthonourwithunhonestlust,andher
claimstobemarriedaremerelyapretencewhosefayrenameclokethherfault,whilein
RichardStanyhurstsAeneistherelationshipbetweenDidoandAeneasis reductively
termedtheebedmatchandDidoissaidtousetheenameofwedlocktocloakhercarnal
leacherye.ThomasPhaersEneidosmoresympatheticallydescribesaDidowhoisjoyned
inlovewithAeneas,buttheirrelationshipisstillnothingmorethanasexualcowpling
again,PhaersDidouseswedlocksnametohideherfaut.[189]EvenGagersDido
Tragoediafollowsthistradition,asanydoubtsaboutAeneassabandonmentofDidoare
soothedbytheepiloguespronouncementthatitispropertobeobedienttothepredictions
ofthegods(1.1249).

101

InthesesixteenthcenturyversionsoftheAeneid,asintheVirgilianoriginal,Aeneascan
usereligiousandlegalargumentstojustifyhisdeparturefromCarthagebecausehis
relationshipwithDidodoesnotconstituteabindingmarriage.MarloweandNashewere
undoubtedlyfamiliarwiththistraditionbothmenwouldhavestudiedtheAeneid
extensivelyatgrammarschool,whileNashesallusiontothePhaerandStanyhurst
translationsinhis1589prefacetoRobertGreenesplayMenaphonmaysuggestthatit
wastheseparticulareditionsheconsultedforDidoQueenofCarthage.[190]YetMarlowe
andNashebreakwithtraditionintheirplay,stagingaceremonialagreementbetweenDido
andAeneasthatseemstoconformtoacceptedsixteenthcenturynuptialpractice.Thus,in
asignificantdeparturefromVirgil,MarloweandNasheintroducethetellingpossibilitythat
AeneasowesacontractualdutytoDidoasherhusband.Theshiftensuresthattheir
Aeneas,unlikeVirgilshero,facesaconflictbetweenhisreligiousandsecularloyalties.
WhenthegodscommandhimtoleaveCarthagehemustchoosebetweenhiscontractual
obligationtohislawfullyweddedwifeandhisreligiousdutytothegodshisfictional
dilemmaperhapsechoingthedifficultiesfacedbyEnglandsreligiousdissidents.
ThemostimportantindicationthatMarloweandNashesAeneasislegallyboundtoDidois
theceremonythattakesplacebetweenthetwocharactersastheyshelterfromastorm.
ThebasicepisodeistakenfromVirgilsAeneid,butithasbeenextensivelyrevisedand
expandedinDidoQueenofCarthage.Initially,theomensarepoor:Aeneassfirstwords
invoketheprecedentofMars andVenus,recallinganotoriousadulterouscoupling,while
therapidvacillationofDidosemotionsinthissceneintroducesanoteofdeflationary
comedy(3.4.259).YetMarloweoftenusescomicparodytoemphasiseamoreserious
message:inDoctorFaustus,forinstance,theparallelsbetweenthemainnarrativeandthe
comicsubplotcallattentiontothetransitorynatureofthegiftsforwhichMarlowes
protagonistsellshissoul.AeneassominousreferencetodivineinfidelityandDidoscomic
indecisivenessperhapssimilarlyforeshadowAeneassultimateabandonmentofherhis
thoughtslaterfluctuatewildlyashedecidesfirsttogo,thentostay,thentogo,whilehis
betrayalofhisloversvowsaccordswiththeprecedentsetbyhisadulterousmotherVenus.
Afterthisinauspiciousstart,however,thenoteofirreverentcomedyseemstofadeinthe
finalexchangebetweenthetwocharacters.Aeneas,promptedbyDidobutcertainlynot
coerced,deliversalongandelaboratevowoflove:

102

WiththismyhandIgivetoyoumyheart,
Andvow,byalltheGodsofhospitality,
Byheavenandearth,andmyfairbrothersbow,
ByPaphos,Capys,andthepurplesea
Fromwhencemyradiantmotherdiddescend,
AndbythisswordthatsavdmefromtheGreeks,
Nevertoleavethesenewuprearedwalls
WhilesDidolivesandrulesinJunostown
Nevertolikeorloveanybuther!
(Dido3.4.4250)

Hispromiseofloveisperhapsamusinglygrandiloquent,butitisalsoasignificantaddition
toMarloweandNashesVirgiliansource.WhereasVirgilveilseventsinthecave,
authorisingsympathyforDidowithoutjeopardisingAeneassmoralstature,DidoQueenof
Carthageprovidesasceneinwhichtheirunionisceremoniallyconfirmed.Aeneaspledges
himselftoDidocomprehensively,swearingbythegods(43)byheavenandearth(44)by
hisfamily(446)andbyhissword,thesymbolofhismilitaryandchivalric honour(47).
Therepetitionofbyfourtimeswithinfivelinesfurtheremphasisestheallencompassing
natureoftheoathandthemimickingoftherepetitiousformatofalegaloathaddstothe
sensethatitisindeedbinding.

103

Despitethepagansettingandtheabsenceofapriest,itislikelythatMarlowesaudience
wouldhaveregardedAeneasandDidosexchangeofvowsasamarriageceremony.In
ElizabethanEngland,theessentialprerequisiteforalegallybindingunionwasnotaformal
solemnisationofthemarriageinchurchbutratherthecontractknownasspousalsorhand
fasting,whichrequiredonlythatacoupleshouldcommittoeachotherashusbandand
wifeusingpresenttensepronouncements.[191]AlthoughAeneasdoesnotspecificallyuse
thetermhusband,hispromisenevertolikeorloveanybutherconstitutesabinding
arrangementafterthemannerofmarriagethatanElizabethanaudiencewouldmost
probablyhaveaccepted.DidoswordsconfirmthepactbyexplicitlyappointingAeneastoa
placeathersideasjointrulerandhusband:Sichaeus,notAeneas,bethoucalld/The
KingofCarthage(3.4.589).Finally,visualcluesprovidefurtherevidencethatamarriage
istakingplace:AeneasandDidoarehandfastedforthisscene(3.4.42),whileDidos
actioninpresentingherweddingringtoAeneasprovidestheconcludingactionofthe
ceremony(3.4.601).
Theseprecisedetailsareoftenoverlookedinmodernproductionsinthe2009National
Theatreproduction,forinstance,thehandfastinginsteadtooktheformofaloversclasp
withAnastasiaHillesDidoandMarkBonnarsAeneasgazingintentlyintoeachothers
eyes,asinthepictureoverleaf.Nonetheless,thescenewasplayedseriouslyand
sensitively,providingthetragiccruxofaproductionwhichinterpretedDidoasthe
vulnerablevictimofanastydivinepracticaljokeforamodernaudience,thealmostformal
posingofthetwoactorsandthelongwhitedressDidoworestillhintedvisuallyata
weddingoranarrangementakintomarriage.[192]EvenifMarlowesoriginalspectatorsdid
notidentifyAeneasspromisestoDidoasformalweddingvows,theoathheswearsto
Didointhisscenecertainlycomplicateshiseventual departure.InAct4Marloweand
NashethenaddedanothercontractualepisodeinvolvingDidoandAeneas,inaninvented
scenewhichhasnobasisintheAeneid.TheagreementAeneasandDidonegotiate
confirmsthatAeneaswillstayinCarthage,andthatinreturnDidowillgranthimasmuch
powerandwealthashemightexpecttofindinItaly(4.4.567).Thevaluablegiftsshe
offersreinforcethelegalstatusoftheirpact,sincetheabsoluteessenceofsixteenth
centurycontractualtheorywasreciprocity:foranarrangementtobeconsideredbinding
underearlymodernlaw,eachpartytoitmustbenefit.[193]Aeneas,havingreceivedthe
materialbenefitsthatwerelegallytermedconsideration,isthereforeboundtoareciprocal
performanceofhispromise:onceDidohasmadehimjointrulerofCarthage(3.4.59),given
himjewelsandgoldenbracelets(3.4.601)andmendedhisshipsconditionallythatthou
wiltstaywithme(3.1.113),heshouldinreturnremainatherside.
ThelegalhistorianP.S.Atiyahhassuggestedthat,whenitiscustomarytousespecial
ceremoniestocreateabindingobligation,theirveryabsencemayimplythattheobligation
[194]

104

doesnotexist.[194]VirgilusesthesamestrategyintheAeneid:thereaderdoesnotwitness
aweddingceremony,andsoAeneasowesDidonothing.AlthoughtheVirgilianDidodoes
attempttoassertherstatusasbride,askingAeneastohonourourmarriageandthe
wedlockbegun,herclaimsaresoondismissedandsheacknowledgesthatAeneasbears
onlythenameofhusband(myitalics):thepointismadeemphaticallybyThomasPhaer,
whotranslatesDidosconfessionashusbandtheeIdarenotcall.Aeneashimself
consistentlydeniesthelegalityofthemarriage,eitheruponapointofceremony(Inever
heldoutthebridegroomstorch)or(inPhaerswords)throughalegallyviabledenialof
intention:NorIforwedlockevercame,northusdidmyndtodeale.[195]ForVirgilandthe
sixteenthcenturytranslatorsoftheAeneid,AeneassdisavowalofalegaldutytoDido
prefacesanyreferencetothewillofthegodsinhisselfdefence.
Conversely,MarloweandNashesDidoQueenofCarthagefillsintheVirgilianblanksand
presentsasceneofformallynegotiated,

105

DidoQueenofCarthage,3.4:Aeneas(MarkBonnar)andDido(AnastasiaHille)pledgetheir
lovetoeachotherintheNationalTheatreproductionof2009,directedbyJamesMacDonald.

officiallycontractedunion.Sincehisfatheroftenactedasabondsmanforcouplesaboutto
marry,testifyingtothevalidityofmarriagecontracts,Marlowepresumablysharedwith
Nashetheclergymanssonagoodunderstandingofthepreciselegalprinciplesinvolvedin
aceremonyofspousals.[196]ThelegallybindingmarriageceremonyheandNashepresent
inDidoQueenofCarthageisthusasignificantmoveawayfromtheirVirgiliansource,and
onethatallowsthemtoengagemorefirmlywiththeissueofAeneasslegalobligationto
Dido.Thisemphasisiscomplementedbytheirintroductionofasecond,originalscenethat
reiteratesthecontractualbondstyingAeneastoCarthage.ThesedeparturesfromVirgils
epicdemonstratethattheirabscondingherohasalegalobligationtoremainwithDido.
Indeed,duringhisfirstattempttoleaveevenAeneasprivatelyadmitsthathehas
transgressedagainstalllawsoflove(4.2.48)whilecriticsusuallyinterpretthisstatement
inanabstractromanticsense,theconjoiningoflawandlovealsoeconomically
condensestheelementsofamarriageceremonyandremindsreadersandspectatorsof
Aeneassearliervows.Ashedepartsforgood,thisAeneassignallyfailstorefuteDidos
claimthatthyhandandminehaveplightedmutualfaith!hesimplystatesthatthedecrees
ofthegodsmustcomefirst(5.1.122,1267).

106

InDidoQueenofCarthage,incontrasttoothersixteenthcenturyversionsoftheAeneid,
legalandreligiousjustificationsarenolongerunitedinAeneassdefence.Instead,Aeneas
explicitlyprioritisestheGodsbehestoverhisspousalrites(5.1.127,134).Byobeying
divinecommandsratherthanthedictatesoflaw,heactsinthemanneradvocatedby
sixteenthcenturytheoristsofreligiousresistanceinfactthemessengergodHermes,who
isdismissiveofAeneasssecularandfamilialbondsanddemandsthathemuststraightto
Italy(5.1.513),soundsnotunliketheCatholicpropagandistswhourgedEnglishsubjects
torepudiatetheirsecularallegiancetoElizabethI(aswellasanyfamilytiestonon
believers).Thissimilarityisstrengthenedbythefactthat,inbothcases,thenon
performanceofreligiousdutiescarriesspiritualpenalties:thepapalbullof1570threatened
excommunication, whileAeneasmustelseabidethewrathoffrowningJove(5.1.54).Yet
thereisacasualcrueltyaboutJovesultimatum,aswellasanindifferencetoDidoslegal
rightsthisbrutalaspectwasemphasisedeffectivelyinthe2003Globeproductiondirected
byTimCarroll,inwhichDaveFishleysHermesimpatientlystampeddownAeneass
sandcastledreamversionofareconstructedTroyasheenteredtodeliverJovesorders.

107

Byeventuallychoosingtoprioritisereligiousdutyovertheclaimsofsecularloyalty,Aeneas
mightbesaidtoalignhimselfwiththeCatholicandProtestantproponentsofreligious
resistance.ThereisperhapsanechohereofAeneassalternatemedievalandearly
modernreputationasatraitorwhobetrayedTroytoherforeignenemies:inJohnLydgates
TroyBook,forexample,Aeneasisidentifiedasafalseserpentwhotreacherouslyhelped
theGreekstoenterthecity(1.6442).ThislatemedievaltraditionofAeneasthetraitorwas
stillfamiliarinthelatersixteenthandearlyseventeenthcenturiesinWilliamAlexanders
JuliusCaesar(1607),forinstance,JunocondemnsfalseAeneasasatreacherous
usurper(11.1256)anditshedsanintriguinglightuponMarloweandNashesprotagonist,
whobetrayshissecularloyaltiesinthenameofreligion.[197]Moreover,asusualin
Marloweswritings,Aeneasarguablyexploitstheplaysreligiousrhetorictofurtherhisown
interestswhendefendinghisdecisiontoDidoheblameseverythingonthestern,
unyieldingwillofthegods,buthisprevioussoliloquyindicatedthatheisreallyquiteeager
topursuehisgoldenfortunes(4.3.8).SuchdoubtsaboutthepurityofAeneassmotives
arereinforcedbythefactthat,damningly,hisrebuttaloftheoathhesworebyhispaternal
andmaternalancestorsandhissuspectwillingnesstoabandonhisownsonseverely
complicatestheRomandynasticprojectthatJupiterscommandostensiblyupholds
(1.1.821083.4.4464.4.2930).
DespiteDidosstatusasqueen,thecontractAeneasbreaksmightberegardedasa
domesticratherthanstatematter,justasthebondsviolatedbythespeakerofOvids
Elegiesaremaritalratherthanpolitical.However,thisdoesnotnegatetherelevanceof
suchepisodestoElizabethanconcernsaboutoathbreaking, sincereligiousresistance
tractsinfactexploitedcomparableanalogiesbetweenmaritalandpoliticalcontracts.
RadicalCatholicpropagandistsused2John10toarguethataCatholicpeoplecouldbe
divorcedfromtheirheretickinginthesamewaythatamarriagebetweenaCatholicanda
hereticcouldbedissolved,whiletheFrenchProtestanttractsVindiciaeContraTyrannos
andHotmansFrancogalliacomparedthekingspoweroverhisdomainstoahusbands
controlofhiswifesdowry.[198]Perhapsmoststrikingly,ThodoredeBzeusesthe
languageofmaritallawtosupporthisjustificationofresistanceinDuDroitdesMagistrats,
andcitesMatthew19.5toarguethatthedutiesofmarriagearecomparabletothedutyof
asubjecttohissuperiorabiblicalparallelbetweenmarriageandstateloyaltythatisthen
extendedtojustifyresistancetoatyrannicalruler.[199]
Marlowemayhaveknownabouttheanalogiesthattheoristsofreligiousresistancedrew
betweenmarriagevowsandpoliticaloathsofloyalty,andperhapshintsatthesame
connectioninhisownworks.MarlowesElegiessuggestivelycharacterisetheirspeakers
seductiveassaultuponthebondsofmarriageasanactofrebellious,overreaching
ambition(2.4.48),whileAeneassrepudiationofhismaritalobligationsinDidoQueenof
CarthageleadstothepoliticaldownfalloftheCarthaginianmonarchy(5.1.31227).In
theseworksanypoliticalconnotationsremainambiguous,whilethedeitieswhocommand
orarecomplicitinactsofperjuryarepaganratherthanChristian.Marlowesliterary
fascinationwithoathbreakinginthenameofreligionisnotalwayssodiscreet,however.In
playssuchasTamburlainePartTwoandTheJewofMaltathepoliticalsignificanceofoath
takingandoathbreakingismorereadilyapparent,withMarlowecontroversially
dramatisingactsofperjurythatarecommittedbyChristiancharactersandwhichentailthe
treacherousrepudiationofpoliticalalliances.ThusinTamburlainePartTwo,Marlowe
showstheHungarianemperorSigismundbreakinghistrucewiththeTurkishleader

108

Orcanesinthenameofreligion,whileinTheJewofMaltaFernezesimilarlybreaksfaith
withhisTurkishassociates.Inbothinstances,theseCatholicoathbreakerscitethe
notoriouspapistdictumthat faithisnottobeheldwithhereticsastheybetraytheirmore
honourableTurkishallies(JewofMalta2.3.313).AtatimewhenProtestantEngland
regardedtheOttomanEmpireasapotentialallyagainsttheencroachingforcesof
Catholicism,thetypeofbetrayalMarlowedepictsmighthaveprovocativeimplications.[200]

109

PerjuryandPoliticalTreacheryinTamburlainePart
Two
InTamburlainePartTwo,thecontractualepisodefeaturingtheHungariankingSigismund
andtheTurkishrulerOrcanesisanahistoricalinterpolationapparentlyinspiredbyhistorical
accountsoftheBattleofVarna.ItsinclusionsuggeststhatMarlowedeliberatelydeparted
fromhismainsourcesinordertointroduceanotoriousexampleofreligiouslyjustifiedoath
breaking.Certainly,theincidenthasadisproportionateimpactinthefirsthalfoftheplay,
raisingunfulfilledexpectationsthateitherOrcanesorSigismundwillbeTamburlaineschief
adversaryinPartTwo:perhapsforthisreason,theepisodeisalmostinvariablycutin
modernproductions.Infact,however,thissubplotservesasignificantthematicpurpose:its
prominencereflectsMarlowescontinuinginterestintheactofoathbreaking,whichhenow
considersinamoreformalandceremoniallight.Inaplaythatispreoccupiedwithmilitary
spectacle,Marloweplacesparticularemphasisontheformaldecisionmadebythetwo
kingstonegotiateapeacefulallianceratherthanwagingwar.Orcanesaskshisfollowers,
What,shallweparleywiththeChristian,/Orcrossthestreamandmeethiminthefield?
(1.1.1112),whileSigismundusesthesymbolicdeviceofaswordtoofferOrcaneseither
friendlypeaceordeadlywar(1.2.3).Thoughtoamodernaudiencetheirinitialmeeting
mayseemdrawnout,thedialoguecarefullymapsthedecisionthatbothcharactersreach
toenterintoanalliance.Bypresentingtheirearlydiscussionsinsuchdetail,Marlowe
carefullydemonstratesthatbothOrcanesandSigismundenterthisagreementoftheirown
freewillandpresumablyintendtohonourthetreaty.Theportrayalofthedecisionmaking
processalsoconfirmsthateach partywillbenefitfromthecontractbynothavingtofighta
costlybattle,andthattisrequisitetoparleyforapeace(1.1.50).SinceElizabethan
contractuallawtooktheintentionofbothpartiesandthebenefiteachgainedfromthe
agreementintoaccountwhenevaluatingthevalidityofapromise,thispassage
demonstratesthatSigismundandOrcanesagreementiscontractuallybinding.
Marlowethendepictsalengthyexchangeofvowsbetweenthetwoallies,astheypledge
theircommitmenttothenewtreaty:
SIGISMUND:
Byhimthatmadetheworldandsavedmysoul,
ThesonofGodandissueofamaid,
SweetJesusChrist,Isolemnlyprotest
Andvowtokeepthispeaceinviolable.
ORCANES:
BysacredMahomet,thefriendofGod,
WhoseholyAlcoranremainswithus,
Whosegloriousbodywhenhelefttheworld
Closedinacoffinmounteduptheair
AndhungonstatelyMeccastempleroof,
Isweartokeepthistruceinviolable
(TamburlainePartTwo1.2.5665)

Thesevows,packedwithreligiousimagery,areexplicitlymadeinsightofheaven(55).
Legaltermssuchasswear,vowandsolemnlyaddweighttotheassurances,while
Sigismundsuseoftheverbprotestindicatesanassertionmadeinformalandsolemn
terms.[201]Therepetitionofthefinallineacrossvows,especiallytheterminviolable,
furtherhighlightstheformalnatureofthereligiousandsecularpromisestherulers
exchange.Finally,Marloweintroducesavisualconfirmationoftheiroath:Orcanes

110

announcesthateachshallretainascroll/Asmemorablewitnessofourleague(1.2.67
8).SincetheTurkishleaderspecifiesthatthescrollsshallbesignedwithourhandsitis
likelythesewereexchangedonstage,theirphysicalpresencetestifyingtothevalidityof
theoaththeyrecord.
DespiteMarlowescarefulrepresentationofaformalcontractualagreement,however,the
HungarianrulerSigismundbreakshiswordonlytwosceneslater.Byallowingsolittletime
toelapse, MarloweemphasisesSigismundstreachery:theinitialvowswouldstillbefresh
inanaudiencesmind,andOrcanesevendisplayshiscopyofthescrolltheyhavejust
signedasavisualtestamenttothisChristiankingsperjury(2.2.456).InfactSigismund,
whoisclearlyguiltyofbreakinghispledgedword,exemplifiescontemporaryEnglishfears
aboutoathbreakingdissidents:heisledintoperjurybythepersuasiverhetoricofthe
CatholiclordsFrederickandBaldwin,anddefendshisactionswithappealstoreligious
precedent.

111

SigismundsadvisorFrederickisthefirsttocounselhimtobreakthealliance,basinghis
argumentonemotivereferencestopastatrocitiescommittedbytheTurks:

FREDERICK:Yourmajestyremembers,Iamsure,
WhatcruelslaughterofourChristianbloods
TheseheathenishTurksandpaganslatelymade
BetwixtthecityZulaandDanubius,
...
Itrestethnowthenthatyourmajesty
Takealladvantagesoftimeandpower
Andworkrevengeupontheseinfidels.
(TamburlainePartTwo2.1.413)

Comparableargumentsforrevengewereusedincontemporaryreligiousresistancetracts.
TheJesuitCardinalWilliamAllensimilarlyemphasisedthepersecutionofCatholicpriests
inhisTrue,Sincere,andModestDefense(1584),arguingthatmanyhavebeen
condemnedandputtodeath,eitherwithoutalllaw,orelseonlyuponnewlawsbywhich
matterofreligionismadetreason.Allenarguesthatsuchpersecutionprovidesjustification
forrebellion,recountinghowKingJohnwas,forpersecutionofbishops,withhiswhole
landinterdictedandbroughttoyieldhiscrowntothecourtesyofthePopesLegate.[202]
HuguenotwriterslikewisejustifiedrebellionagainsttheFrenchCatholicregimethrough
referencetotheatrocitiescommittedduringtheStBartholomewsDayMassacre.In
TamburlainePartTwo,Fredericksstrategyofusingpastviolencetojustifypresentoath
breakingthusimplicitlyalignshimwithpostReformationEuropesreligiousdissidents.
SigismundinitiallyresistsFrederickandBaldwinsadvicetobetraytheTurks,warningthem
toremembertheleaguewelatelymadewithKingOrcanes,/Confirmedbyoathand
articlesofpeace(2.1.289)thoughhisrathersuspectreferencetoprofessionmay
indicatethatheismoreconcernedabouthisreputationthanthesanctityofhispledged
word(2.1.32).TheHungarianlordsareundismayed,andcontinuetourgeapolicyofoath
breakinginthenameofreligion.Baldwinnextemploysthestandarddistinctionin
resistanceliteraturebetweentruebelieversandheretics,arguingthat

withsuchinfidels,
Inwhomnofaithnortruereligionrests,
Wearenotboundtothoseaccomplishments
TheholylawsofChristendomenjoin.
(TamburlainePartTwo2.1.336)

HeconcludeswithadistinctlyMachiavellianargument:

112

Butasthefaithwhichtheyprofanelyplight
Isnotbynecessarypolicy
Tobeesteemedassuranceforourselves,
Sowhatwevowtothemshouldnotinfringe
Ourlibertyofarmsandvictory.
(TamburlainePartTwo2.1.3741)[203]

AhalfconvincedSigismundhesitates,protestingweaklythatthoseinfirmitiesthatthus
defame/Theirfaiths,theirhonours,andtheirreligion,/Shouldnotgiveuspresumptionto
thelike(2.1.446).ButFredericknowprovidestheclinchingargument,assuringhimthat
tissuperstition/Tostandsostrictlyondispensivefaith(2.1.4950).Hisreasoning
convincesthewaveringSigismund,whoordersatreacherousattackontheTurksin
violationofhisswornword.
Baldwinsargumentthatpromisesmadetoahereticarenotbindingisworthnoting,sinceit
drawsuponacentraltenetofreligiousresistancetheory.OneofMarlowesprobable
sourcesforTheMassacreatParis,theanonymousFrenchtractContreGuyse, explains
thatfromthefifteenthcenturyonwardsCatholicswereinstructedto

113

keepenofaithwiththeenemiesofthefaith:bywhichdecree,JohnHusand
HieromeofPraguewerecondemnedtodeath,andtheCardinallS.Julianwas
sentaslegateintoHungarie,tobreakethetreatieofpeacemadewiththe
Turkes.[204]

AsthisreferencetoCardinalJuliansactionsinHungarysuggests,theinformationreported
intheContreGuyseishighlyrelevanttoMarlowesportrayaloftheoathbreaking
HungarianrulerSigismund.ThesameargumentrecursinvariousCatholicresistance
tracts,whichadvocaterebellionagainstProtestantrulersonthegroundsthatheresyis
sufficienttobreakthebondsofloyaltybetweenaprinceandhissubjects.WilliamAllen,for
instance,assertsthatwhenmyKingeorPrincehathebrokenwithChriste,bywhomand
fordeffenceofwhosehonorhereigneth,thatthenImaymostlawfullybreakewithhim.[205]
SuchclaimsarecomparativelycommoninpostReformationresistancewritings,andtheir
useinTamburlainetojustifyanactofoathbreakingmightwellhavetroubledan
Elizabethanspectator.TheseworryingimplicationsareamplifiedbyFredericksreference
todispensivefaithorpapaldispensation.InElizabethanEnglandappealstopapal
dispensationwerestronglyassociatedwiththespectreofCatholicrebellion,sincefor
Catholicradicalsthe1570excommunicationofElizabethIhadeffectivelypromised
salvationtoheropponents:indeed,apapalannouncementof1580confirmedthatanyone
whoassassinatedElizabethwiththepiousintentionofdoingGodservicenotonlydoesnot
sin,butgainsmerit.[206]
SinceSigismundsadvisorsusethesameargumentsasthesixteenthcenturypolemicists
whoadvocatedrebellionagainsthereticalrulers,hisdecisiontobreakhiswordtoOrcanes
andfightthehereticTurksarguablyalignshimwiththereligiousrebelsofpost
ReformationEurope.Atthesametime,Fredericksassumptionthatpapaldispensation
mightbetakenforgrantedor confirmedretrospectivelyistheologicallydubious,implicitly
undercuttingacentraltenetoftheCatholicresistancetheoryheandBaldwinostensibly
promote:itisapragmaticappealtoSigismundtorejectsuperstitionthatultimatelywins
theday.Infact,thecrusadingrhetoricheadoptstoexcusethistreacherousassaultupon
hisallylacksthestereotypicallyCatholicelementsareaderorspectatormightexpect:

114

Thenarm,mylords,andissuesuddenly,
Givingcommandmenttoourgeneralhost
Withexpeditiontoassailthepagan,
AndtakethevictoryourGodhathgiven.
(TamburlainePartTwo2.1.603)

SigismundsexculpatoryreferencetoGodsdivinemasterplanmirrorsTamburlainesown
claimthathepersecutesrulerssuchasOrcanesbecauseheisthescourgeofGod.The
HungariankingsdefencemayalsohavebeeninspiredbyanaccountinJohnFoxes
ProtestantinfluentialmartyrologyActesandMonuments,inwhichFoxedescribes
SigismundswaragainsttheTurksasanoccasionofferedhim,asitwerefromheaven,to
destroyandutterlytorooteoutthatbarbarousnation,andcruellenemiestothename
andReligionofChrist.[207]YetSigismundsemptyallusionstoGodswillsuggestthateven
thelanguageofdivineprovidencecanbeexploitedbythosewhowishtojustifypolitically
expedientactions,hisownreferencetoaheavenlymasterplancomplementing
TamburlainesappropriationoftheprovidentialistrhetoricthatissoplentifulinEnglish
Protestantpropaganda.
SigismundsreligiouslyjustifiedbetrayalofOrcanesreflectsbutalsoreassesses
Elizabethanconcernsaboutpoliticallythreateningactsofoathbreaking.Marlowes
Protestantspectatorsmighthavebeenratherrelievedtorealisethat,forSigismund,oath
breakingatthebehestofCatholicadvisorsleadsnottovictorybuttodefeatanda
repentantdeath:unusually,Marlowecraftsanarrativeinwhichdivineprovidenceseemsto
beatwork.SigismundhimselfreassuringlyacknowledgesthathisdefeatisGods
vengeancefromonhigh/Formyaccursedandhatefulperjury (2.3.23).Yetthedoubts
thatMarlowesworksoftensuggestaboutprovidentialinterventionstillcreepin,with
SigismundsownconclusioncontradictedbyOrcanessgeneral:Gazellusfamouslyavers
thatthelinkbetweenSigismundsperjuryandhisdeathiscoincidental,notingthattisbut
thefortuneofthewarsWhosepowerisoftenprovedamiracle(2.3.312).Whilethe
roleplayedbychanceinwarfarewasproverbial,thescepticalemphasisthatGazellus
introducesismoreunusualandmorecontroversial.

115

FernezesSpanishPolicy:OathBreakinginTheJew
ofMalta
EventheslightcomfortprovidedbySigismundsarguablyprovidentialdeathisabsent
when,inTheJewofMalta,Marlowereturnstothethemeofpoliticalundertakingsbrokenin
thenameofreligion.InthisplayhedramatisesafictionalalliancebetweentheCatholic
KnightsofStJohnandtheOttomanTurksledbySelimCalymath.Thoughthispolitical
treatyiscentraltotheplaysplot,itisnotceremoniallyconfirmedonstagetheagreement
betweenthetwopartiesisalreadyanacceptedfactatthestartoftheplay,havingbeen
sealedtenyearsearlier.Thelongduranceofthecontractmightbesaidtoendorseits
validity,despitetheabsenceofastagedundertaking,andMarloweemphasisesthestatus
ofthisalliancethroughhisuseofcontractualterminology.Thus,intheplaysopening
scene,thetermleagueisusedthreetimeswithinsixlines(1.1.153,157,158),while
BarabassownresponsetothearrivaloftheTurkishfleetcanbereadasacoincidental
defenceofMarlowesomission:heasks,whatneedtheytreatofpeacethatarein
league?(1.1.157).
HavingestablishedtheexistenceofaleaguebetweentheTurksandtheKnights,Marlowe
thendepictsthemeetingofthetwoparties.TheoccasionforthismeetingisMaltasfailure
topaythetributedictatedbytheoriginalpacttotheSultan.Fernezeandhiscompanions
seemuncommittedtothealliance,describingCalymathsclaimashardconditions
(1.2.18)Calymath,incontrast,showsclemencybygrantingMaltaamonthsrespitein
whichtopaythedebt(1.2.25).Hisleniencyhelpstoestablishhimasacomparatively
honourablecharacter,butisalsosignificantinalegalsense:Elizabethancontractual
theoryrequiredthateachpartytoanagreementshouldgainconsideration(benefit).The
originalconsiderationreceivedbytheKnightsfromtheirTurkishalliesishiddeninthepast,

116

butFernezesrequestthatCalymathconsiderusintroducesaverbalechoofthelegal
termalthoughCalymathinitiallystatesthathemaynot,naydarenotdallyinhis
fatherscause(1.2.1012),heagreestogivetheKnightsmoretimetocomeupwiththe
money.Theyareonlygrantedanextensionofonemonth,withthelimitednatureofthe
benefitimplyingthattheKnightsarenotequalpartners,butthereisnosuggestionthatthe
contractitselfisinvalid.Thelegalterminologyusedthroughoutthescenecommission
(22),grant(28),conditions(18)lendstheexchangeaformalairdespitethelackofa
directlyreciprocalpledge,andestablishestheexpectationthatFernezeshouldkeephis
promise.WhentheTurkishBashawreturnsinAct3torequireofFernezetheperformance
ofyourpromisepassed(3.5.9),hiscontractualreferencetoperformancecontinuesthis
theme:underElizabethanlaw,theperformanceofthispromiseisrightlydue.
Ferneze,however,doesnotkeephispledgedword.Onthecontrary,hecompletely
repudiatesMaltasalliancewiththeTurks,replyingthatBashaw,inbrief,shalthaveno
tributehere,/Norshalltheheathensliveuponourspoil(3.5.1112).Byrefiguringthe
leaguebetweentheTurksandtheKnightsasonebetweensubjectandmasterthroughhis
referencetotributeFernezeseekstocharacterisehisoathbreakingasanactof
principledresistance,concludingthathonourisboughtwithbloodandnotwithgold
(2.2.56).However,FernezesstancemayindirectlycasttheMalteseKnightsasrebels
againsttheirswornoverlords,whilehisrejectionofhispreviouspromisesinfavourofa
militaryattackonMaltasformeralliesmightevenreflectElizabethanfearsaboutoath
breaking,whichwassimilarlybelievedtothreatenthepoliticalandhierarchicalsecurityof
theEnglishstate.
ThepossiblerelevanceofFernezesoathbreakingtoElizabethanconcernsis
strengthenedbyhisostensiblereasonsforbreakingthe alliance:heexcuseshisactionsin
religiousterms,describingtheTurksasheathens(3.5.12).BarryKyles1987RSC
productionemphasisedthishypocriticalpiety,withtheoathbreakingFernezeflankedby
twoknightsonwhosewhitetunicsflamboyantlyredChristiancrosseswereclearlyvisible
themotifrecallingthecrusaderpastandChristianstatusofMarlowesKnightsofStJohn,
anordersymbolisedbytheMaltesecross,whileperhapsalsoinvokingtheStGeorge
crossofEngland.ForMarlowesoriginalspectators,thedramaticparallelswiththe
situationincontemporaryEnglandwerefarmoreurgentandimmediate.Fernezes
decisionispresumablyinspiredbyhisconversationwiththeSpanishviceadmiralMartin
DelBosco,whocontraststheKnightspoliticalalliancewiththeTurkswiththeirreligious
dutyasCatholicbelievers:WillKnightsofMaltabeinleaguewithTurks,/Andbuyit
baselytooforsumsofgold?(2.2.289).AccordingtoDelBoscotheTurkishtreatyisa
betrayaloftheKnightsfaithand,likeFrederickinTamburlainePartTwo,hecitespast
instancesofTurkishviolenceagainstChristianstomakehispoint(JewofMalta2.2.303).
RatherthansidewiththeheathenTurks,thisSpanishcommanderproposesthatthe
CatholicKnightsshouldinsteadtransfertheirloyaltytohismaster,theCatholicKingof
Spain(2.2.3740).Fernezeissoonconvinced,andconcludesthatBoscoshallbeMaltas
general/Weandourwarlikeknightswillfollowthee/Againstthesebarbarous
misbelievingTurks(2.2.446).Hisspeechdemonstratestheextenttowhichhehas
absorbedandlearnedfromDelBoscosseeminglypiousargumentsthecomingviolence
istobejustifiedbyreferencetoTurkishbarbarityandsacrilege.
Ferneze,whofollowsaSpaniardsadvicetobreakasecularpromiseinthenameof
religion,mayagainrealiseElizabethananxietiesabouttheperceivedconnectionbetween
religiousdissidenceandpoliticaldisloyalty.TheargumentsforresistancewhichDelBosco
putstoFernezesuggestivelymimicthoseemployedbyproSpanishCatholicpolemicists
suchasWilliamAllenandRobertParsons,whorecountedthesufferingsofElizabethan
EnglandsCatholicmartyrsinordertoinciteEnglishsubjectsto rebellion:WilliamAllens
1588calltoarms,forinstance,remindshisreadersthatElizabethhasconstrainedby
greatepenaltiesandextremepunishmentmanythowsandpoorechristiansoules.In
addition,DelBoscopresentstheCatholicKingofSpainasapotentialallyfortheMaltese
rebelsinthesamewaythatpolemicistssuchasAllencastPhilipIIasasaviourwho
plannedtoinvadeEnglandforthegodlypurposeofrestoringetheCatholikereligion.[208]
Indeed,thecharactersinvolvedinthisepisodeperhapsstrengthentheseechoesofSpains
1588invasionattempt:DelBoscointroduceshimselfasviceadmiraluntotheCatholic
king(2.2.7),whilethenameFernezeprobablyinventedbyMarlowesoundsvery
similartothatofAlessandroFarnese,DukeofParma:PhilipIIsgeneralintheNetherlands,
andthemilitaryarchitectofthe1588Armadaexpedition.Itismoreoverpossiblethatthe
roleofFernezewasdoubledwiththatofMachevillduringtheplaysoriginalperformances,
asitwasinthe1987RSCproduction.Ifso,theassociationsbetweenCatholicrhetoric,

117

118

MachiavellispoliticadviceaboutoathbreakingandFernezeshypocriticalrepudiationof
analliancethatisnolongeradvantageousconvergeprovocatively:Marlowesgovernor
mayclaimtobemotivatedbyreligiousconsiderations,buthisownmusingssuggesta
greaterinterestintheacquisitionofpersonalmilitarygloryand,significantly,theopportunity
tokeepthegoldtheTurkswouldotherwiseclaim(2.2.39).
AsinTamburlainePartTwo,oathbreakinginTheJewofMaltaispredominantly
associatedwithCatholiccharactersandthestereotypicallyCatholicdictumthatfaithisnot
tobeheldwithheretics(2.3.313).However,Fernezestreacherousactionsare,like
Sigismunds,somewhatcomplicatedbyhissubsequentadoptionofaprovidentialist
rhetoricpotentiallyreminiscentofProtestantElizabethandiscourse.Afterbetrayinghisnew
allyBarabasinthefinalactoftheplay,thistimebreakingavowformallyconfirmedonstage
(5.2.1028),FernezeostentatiouslyattributeshisdualvictoryovertheJewBarabasand
theTurkCalymathtodivineintervention:Letduepraisebegiven/Neithertofatenor
fortune,buttoheaven(5.5.1223).Theaudience,however,remainawarethatthisvictory
wasinrealitysecuredbytheforsworngovernors deceitfultrickeryFernezetakes
advantageofBarabassplantooutmanoeuvretheTurkishinvaders,butthenbetrayshis
formerallytohisdeath.AsinSigismundscase,Fernezessuspectappropriationof
providentialdiscourseblursanystraightforwardconfessionalalignmentbetweenhisperjury
andanexclusivelyCatholicagendaoathbreakingisinsteadidentifiedasapracticethat
surpassesdenominationalboundaries,withtheJewBarabasandhisTurkishservant
IthamoreequallyguiltyofbreakingtheirpromisesandvowsinMarlowesplay.

119

Marlowesidentificationofoathbreakingwithrebellionseemstohaveinspiredhis
contemporariestoexploresimilarthemesintheirwritings.ThusinShakespearesKing
HenryVIPart2,usuallydatedto1592,hisaudienceswouldhaveencounteredacharged
instanceofoathbreakingthatleadstorebellion:
SALISBURY:
Mylord,IhaveconsideredwithmyselfThetitleofthismostrenownedduke,Andinmy
consciencedoreputehisgraceTherightfulheirtoEnglandsroyalseat.
KING:
Hastthounotswornallegianceuntome?
SALISBURY:
Ihave.
KING:
Canstthoudispensewithheavenforsuchanoath?
SALISBURY:
Itisgreatsintoswearuntoasin,Butgreatersintokeepasinfuloath.
(HenryVIPart25.1.17583)

SinceSalisburyisanobleandfairlypositivecharacter,thefactthathevoicesatheoryof
conditionalallegiancecomparabletothatespousedbysixteenthcenturytheoristsof
resistanceisdistinctlycontroversial.TheepisodehasastrongaffinitywithMarlowesown
fictionalrepresentationsofoathbreaking:Salisburysexplanatoryreferencetoconscience
(177)andhisappealtoheavenlyprecedentisreminiscentofSigismundsrejectionofhis
peacetreatywithOrcanesandAeneassabandonmentofDido,whiletheequation
betweencontractualandsecularallegiancealsoevokesFernezesrepudiationofhis
Turkishalliance.Indeed,theparallelswithMarlowesworkaresostrongthatsomecritics
believe MarlowecollaboratedwithShakespeareinwritingtheHenryVIplays.The
argumentsthatMarlowewasinvolvedtosomeextentaresuggestive,thoughfarfrom
conclusive.[209]Certainly,Marloweremainedfascinatedthroughouthisliterarycareerby
rebellioninthenameofreligion,creatingepisodesinwhichcomparativelypositiveor
charismaticcharactersargueinfavourofconscientiousresistance.YetinMarlowesplays
andpoems,unlikeinHenryVI,thereisalwaysanaggingsuspicionthatsuchclaimsare

120

nothingmorethanselfinterestedandpoliticposturing,withnofoundationoftruebelief.
172.WilliamAllen,Anadmonitiontothenobility(Antwerp,1588STC368),Sig.C7v.
173.JohnKnox,SummaryoftheSecondBlastoftheTrumpet,inRogerA.Mason(ed.),JohnKnox:On
Rebellion(Cambridge,1994),p.128.
174.MartinMarprelate[pseud.],OhreadoverD.JohnBridgesOranEpitome,inJosephL.Black(ed.),The
MartinMarprelateTracts:AModernizedandAnnotatedEdition(Cambridge,2008),p.53.
175.ThomasNashe,AnAlmondforaParrat,inNashe,Works,III,p.342.
176.RichardBancroft,Daungerouspositionsandproceedings(London,1593STC1344.5),Sig.B1vB3r.
177.WilliamCecil,LordBurghley[?],ThecopieofalettersentoutofEnglandtoDonBernardinMendoza(London,
1588STC15412),Sig.D1v.AlthoughostensiblywrittenbyanEnglishCatholicthisletterwasalmostcertainly
producedbyeitherLordBurghleyoroneofhissecretaries.
178.AnthonyMunday,AdiscoverieofEdmundCampion(London,1582STC18270),Sig.E8v.
179.Machiavelliarguedthatforcedagreementswillbekeptneitherbyaprincenorbyarepublic.The
Discourses,trans.LeslieJ.Walker,ed.BernardCrick(London,1970rpt.withrevisions2003),p.258.
180.RichardWilson,VisibleBullets:TamburlainetheGreatandIvantheTerrible,inChristopherMarloweand
EnglishRenaissanceCulture,ed.DarryllGrantleyandPeterRoberts(Aldershot,1996),pp.5169LukeWilson,
TheatersofIntention:DramaandtheLawinEarlyModernEngland(Stanford,2000),pp.184215.
181.Ovid,HeroidesandAmores,trans.GrantShowerman,ed.G.P.Goold,2ed,ndedn,LoebClassicalLibrary
(Cambridge,Mass.,1977),2.8.7.
182.Ovid,Amores,2.8.19.Thealternativeprintingofselfeoathesinthe1603editionseemstoreflectafairly
straightforwardconfusionofs/fbythecompositor,butcoincidentallyandaptlygesturestowardstheselfishnature
ofthespeakersperjury.SeeChristopherMarlowe,Ovidselegies(London,1603[?]STC18931),Sig.C5v.
183.OttovanVeen,Amorumemblemata,trans.RichardVerstegan(Antwerp,1608STC24627.a.9),Sig.S2v
S3rDonnaB.Hamilton,RichardVersteganandCatholicResistance:theEncodingofAntiquarianismandLove,
inRichardDutton,AlisonFindlayandRichardWilson(eds),TheatreandReligion:LancastrianShakespeare
(ManchesterandNewYork,2003),pp.97101.
184.SeeSaraMunsonDeats,MarlowesInterrogativeDrama:Dido,Tamburlaine,FaustusandEdwardII,in
SaraMunsonDeatsandRobertA.Logan(eds),MarlowesEmpery:ExpandingHisCriticalContexts(Newark,
2002),pp.10910DianaE.Henderson,PassionMadePublic:ElizabethanLyric,Gender,andPerformance
(UrbanaandChicago,1995),p.148.
185.DonaldStump,MarlowesTravestyofVirgil:DidoandElizabethanDreamsofEmpire,ComparativeDrama
34.1(2000),pp.814LisaHopkins,ChristopherMarlowe,RenaissanceDramatist(Edinburgh,2008),p.131.
186.WilliamGager,DidoTragoedia,ed.AdrianneRobertsBaytop,inDido,QueenofInfiniteLiteraryVariety:The
EnglishRenaissanceBorrowingsandInfluences,(Salzburg,1974).Allfuturetranslationsarefromthisedition.
187.SeeforexampleStump,MarlowesTravesty,pp.79107.
188.Virgil,Eclogues,Georgics,AeneidIVI,trans.H.RushtonFairclough,ed.G.P.Goold,LoebClassical
Library,3ed,rdedn(Cambridge,Mass.,1999).
189.Virgil,CertainbokesofVirgilesAeneis,trans.HenryHoward,EarlofSurrey(London,1557STC24798),
Sig.E1vE2rVirgil,TheefirstfourebookesofVirgilhisAeneis,trans.RichardStanyhurst(Leiden,1582STC
24806),Sig.L1rVirgil,ThenynefyrstbookesoftheEneidosofVirgil,trans.byThomasPhaer(London,1562
STC24800),Sig.*3v,Sig.I2rI2v.
190.SeeNashes,prefacetoRobertGreenesMenaphon(London,1589STC12272),Sig.**4vA1r.
191.SeeMartinIngram,ChurchCourts,SexandMarriageinEngland,15701640(Cambridge,1987),pp.189
90.
192.DidoQueenofCarthage,NationalTheatre,London,2009,dir.JamesMacDonald.
193.SeeSirJohnBaker(ed.),TheOxfordHistoryoftheLawsofEngland,12vols(Oxford,2003),VI,8628.
194.P.S.Atiyah,Promises,Morals,andLaw(Oxford,1981),p.170.
195.Virgil,Aeneid,4.324,339Phaer,Eneidos,Sig.I4v.
196.SeeWilliamUrry,ChristopherMarloweandCanterbury,ed.AndrewButcher(London,1988),pp.267.
197.JohnLydgate,Theauncienthistorieandonelytreweandsyncerecronicleofthewarresbetwixtethe
GreciansandtheTroyans(TroyBook)(London,1555STC5580),Sig.Aa2rWilliamAlexander,JuliusCaesar,in
TheMonarchickeTragedies(London,1607STC344).SeeLisaHopkins,TheCulturalUsesoftheCaesarson
theEnglishRenaissanceStage(Aldershot,2008),pp.11718.
198.FranoisHotman,Francogallia,trans.J.H.M.SalmonwithRalphE.Giesey(Cambridge,1972),pp.2547
StephanusJuniusBrutus[pseud.],Vindiciae,ContraTyrannos,ed.GeorgeGarnett(Cambridge,1994),pp.113
14.
199.LobligationdemariagecompareaudevoirdusujetsonsuperieurSiparlescanonsecclesiastiquesune
femmenepouvantestreenseurtdesapersonneavecunmari,nepeutestrecontraintedhabiteraveclui,
pourquoineserailloisibleunMagistratinferieurdesepourvoiretauxsiens,etavoirrecoursauxEstatscontre
unTyrantoutmanifeste?ThodoredeBze,DuDroitdesMagistrats,ed.RobertM.Kingdom(Genve,1970),p.
51.
200.MatthewDimmock,NewTurkes:DramatizingIslamandtheOttomansinEarlyModernEngland(Aldershot,
2005),pp.1718.
201.SeeOED,protest,v.1a.

202.WilliamAllen,ATrue,SincereandModestDefenceofEnglishCatholics,inExecutionandDefense,ed.
Kingdompp.78,168.
203.CompareNiccolMachiavelli,ThePrince,ed.QuentinSkinnerandRussellPrice(Cambridge,1988),p.62.
204.ThecontreGuyse(London,1589STC12506),Sig.E4vF1r.
205.Allen,Admonition,Sig.C5v.
206.QuotedbyJohnWarren,ElizabethI:ReligionandForeignAffairs(London,1993),p.140.
207.JohnFoxe,Actesandmonuments(London,1583STC11225),Sig.SS4r.
208.Allen,Admonition,Sig.A7r,D2r.
209.SeeLisaHopkins,ChristopherMarlowe:ALiteraryLife(Basingstoke,2000),pp.812.
2012ChloeKathleenPreedy
AllmaterialsonthisWebsitearethecopyrightofthepublishersorarereproducedwithpermissionfromothercopyrightowners.All
rightsarereserved.Thematerialsonthiswebsitemaybeaccessedsolelyforpersonaluse.Nomaterialsmayotherwisebecopied,
modified,published,broadcastorotherwisedistributedwithoutpriorwrittenpermissionofthepublisher.