A.C. Hamilton wrote:-
>To my knowledge no recent critic has queried Spenser's authorship of The
>Shepheardes Calender, I think because from the beginning his identity was
>an open secret at least from 1580 when, in the Two Letters Harvey refers to
>Spenser's Rosalindula . . . mea bellissima Collina Clouta, and in his Latin
>poem Spenser, known as Immerito, names himself 'Edmundus'.
OK, I will lay my cards on the table. I am researching the early
life of Christopher Marlowe, after having a book published on
his authorship of the Shakespeare works after he was exiled
in 1593.
The alleged references to 'Shakespeare', in Spenser's works,
brought me to 'Colin Clout's Come Home Again' and 'The Tears
of the Muses'. I realised straight away that the story told by Colin
Clout fitted with what I had already learned of Marlowe and that is
why he doesn't mention the names 'Marlowe' or 'Shakespeare'
when he is discussing other poets: he was both of them!
In reading the letter from Spenser to Harvey, which prefaced 'The
Shephearde's Calendar', I realised that Spenser was singing the
praises of a 'new poet'. I could not believe that Spenser would talk
of himself in such terms -- and then I saw the note about 'pederasty'.
I have evidence that Marlowe was Philip Sidney's page-boy from
1572 to 1578. I also have evidence that there was a sexual
relationship between the two. In 1572, Marlowe was eight and
Sidney was eighteen -- pederasty? You bet. I would put money
on Hobbinol being Sidney and Rosalind being a girl who Marlowe
was keen on.
Spenser was working as a secretary to the new Bishop of Rochester
in 1578. He was introduced to Sidney by the latter's uncle, Robert
Dudley, and the two spent a lot of time together. That puts Spenser
in Kent and close to young Kit Marlowe.
>The poem was
>first openly acknowledged to be his in the 1611 Folio. Since the matter of
>authorship was not even raised - I hope I remember this correctly - in the
>Yale and Penguin editions of the Shorter Poems, nor in the Spenser
>Encyclopedia, any sound historical evidence that Spenser was not the author
>of the SC would be of major interest.
The editors of those books would have no reason to question the
authorship. The events of 1593 wouild have caused Spenser to
cover his tail re. Marlowe. The whole story is too big and complicated
to try to cover it via an e-mail. Anybody referring to Marlowe got into
deep water; he had been sentenced to a living death. The story of his
downfall was told by Ben Jonson in his 'Sejanus, his Fall' and Jonson
was hauled before the Privy Council. The play was taken off and it
had to be re-written before it was published.
>In fact, it would be necessary to
>begin Spenser criticism all over again.
As I said, I am new to Spenser's material -- but I am sure that there
are other poems that were really written by Marlowe. And there are
references to him by Spenser in his works and letters. The Blatant
Beast? The Phoenix? (Who else died and resurrected?)
Peter Zenner
P.S. Thanks for your note, Consuelo, I shall check that site
out tonight. What happened to your reply Carol? You returned
mine without adding yours!
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|