Brute Parts: From Troy to Britain at the Rose, 1595–1600

Part of the Early Modern Literature in History book series (EMLH)


One of the arguments that Thomas Heywood invokes to defend the theatre industry in his Apology for Actors is that plays have served a vital public function: providing audiences with an education in English history.


National History British History Political Relevance Historical Imagination Greek Drama 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 5.
    T. D. Kendrick, British Antiquity (London: Methuen, 1950), 78–167;Google Scholar
  2. Arthur B. Ferguson, Utter Antiquity: Perceptions of Prehistory in Renaissance England (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1993), 84–105;Google Scholar
  3. Graham Parry, “Ancient Britons and Early Stuarts,” in Neo-Historicism: Studies in Renaissance Literature, History and Politics, eds. Robin Headlam Wells, Glenn Burgess and Rowland Wymer (Rochester, NY: D. S. Brewer, 2000), 155–78;Google Scholar
  4. Laura Ashe, “Holinshed and Mythical History,” in The Oxford Handbook of Holinshed’s “Chronicles”;, eds. Paulina Kewes, Ian W. Archer and Felicity Heal (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 153–69. On the debates surrounding the historicity of King Arthur, see Paul Whitfield White’s contribution to this volume. Sixteenth-century chronicles of England often began with the non-Galfridian prehistory of Samothes, grandson of Noah, and his arrival in Britain, based on the forgeries of Annius of Viterbo.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    For broader surveys and lists of early British history on the Renaissance stage, see Irving Ribner, The English History Play in the Age of Shakespeare, rev. edn. (London: Methuen, 1965), 224–65;Google Scholar
  6. Geoffrey Bullough, “Pre-Conquest Historical Themes in Elizabethan Drama, ” Medieval Literature and Civilization: Studies in Memory of G. N. Garmonsway, ed. D. A. Pearsall and R. A. Waldron (London: Athlone, 1969), 289–321;Google Scholar
  7. Gordon McMullan, “The Colonisation of Early Britain on the Jacobean Stage”, Reading the Medieval in Early Modern England, ed. Gordon McMullan and David Matthews (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 119–40, esp. 138–40.Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    Edmund Spenser, The Faerie Queene, ed. A. C. Hamilton, rev. 2nd edn. (Harlow: Longman, 2001), III.ix.33–51 (and II.x.5–68). On this passage, seeGoogle Scholar
  9. Heather Dubrow, “The Arraignment of Paridell: Tudor Historiography in The Faerie Queene, III.ix,” Studies in Philology 87 (1990): 312–27 andGoogle Scholar
  10. David Galbraith, Architectonics of Imitation in Spenser, Daniel, and Drayton (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000), 52–65. For Spenser’s skepticism about Brute’s historicity,Google Scholar
  11. see A View of the State of Ireland: From the First Printed Edition (1633), ed. Andrew Hadfleld and Willy Maley (Maiden, MA: Blackwell, 1997), 44.Google Scholar
  12. 14.
    On secondhand playbooks, see Roslyn L. Knutson, “The Commercial Significance of the Payments lor Playtexts in Henslowe’s Diary, 1597–1603,” Medieval and Renaissance Drama in England 5 (1991): 117–63. Greg believed Day’s “Boocke” was unfinished (Diary, 2.195).Google Scholar
  13. 15.
    Gieg, Diary, 2.195; Harold Jenkins, The Life and Work of Henry Chettle (London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1934), 216;Google Scholar
  14. Neil Carson, A Companion to Henslowe’s Diary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 62. E. K. Chambers noted that “[t]he prices paid by the Admiral’s and Lord Worcester’s men between 1597 and 1603 ranged lrom£4 to £10 10s.; a lee ol£6 maybe taken as about normal”: The Elizabethan Stage, 4 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1923), 1.373; qtd. in Knutson, “Commercial Significance,” 117. Elsewhere in the Diary, Henslowe explicitly records different parts with plays’ titles, as with Dekker and Drayton’s “Civil Wars of France”, ff. 50v, 51v, 52v.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 16.
    As the antiquarian John Layer wrote: “I could never learn how these hills came to be called Gogmagog hills, unless it were from a high and mighty portraiture of a giant wch the schollars of Cambridge cut upon the Turf or superficies of the earth within the said trench”. Qtd. in W. M. Palmer, John Layer (1586–1640) of Shepreth, Cambridgeshire: A Seventeenth-Century Local Historian (Cambridge: Bowes and Bowes, 1935), 110. For the restrictions against “plays and games”,Google Scholar
  16. see Alan H. Nelson, REED: Cambridge, 2 vols. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989), 1.269–72. Nelson suggests that “plays” in this context may not necessarily indicate stage plays (2.1218).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    In 1599, for example, see Clare Williams, trans., Thomas Platter’s Travels in England 1599 (London: Jonathan Cape, 1937), 165–6. See also Holinshed, Historie, 4.17[9]4.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    See Lawrence Manley, Literature and Culture in Early Modern London (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 180–200.Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    Roslyn L. Knutson, “Marlowe Reruns: Repertoriai Commerce and Marlowe’s Plays in Revival,” Marlowe’s Empery: Expanding His Critical Contexts, ed. Sara Munson Deats and Robert Logan (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2002), 32–5.Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    Greg, Diary, 2.195–6; Andrew Gurr, Shakespeare’s Opposites: The Admiral’s Company 1594–1625 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 238n. The main argument for lumping is that no earlier records give the title “Brute Greenshield”. Of course, that is not quite proof: several days earlier, Henslowe recorded payments for the licensing of “a boocke called the 4 kynges” (f. 54), the first and only entry of that title in the Diary. Google Scholar
  21. 26.
    Philip Schwyzer, “Thirteen Ways of Looking Like a Welshman: Shakespeare and his Contemporaries,” Shakespeare and Wales: From the Marches to the Assembly, ed. Willy Maley and Philip Schwyzer (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2010), 33.Google Scholar
  22. 27.
    J. S. P. Tatlock, The Legendary History of Britain: Geoffrey of Monmouth’s “Historia Regum Britanniae” and Its Early Vernacular Versions (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1950), 305–20. For the use of Galfridian history in Tudor articulations of British imperialism, seeGoogle Scholar
  23. Peter J. French, John Dee: The World of an Elizabethan Magus (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972), 188–99;Google Scholar
  24. Andrew Hadfield, Edmund Spenser’s Irish Experience: Wilde Fruit and Savage Soyl (Oxford: Clarendon, 1997), 86–97;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. David Armitage, The Ideological Origins of the British Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 36–7, 45–7, 52–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 29.
    Francis Ingledew, “The Book of Troy and the Genealogical Construction of History: The Case of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia regum Britanniae,” Speculum 69 (1994): 665–704, esp. 677. See alsoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Richard Waswo, “Our Ancestors, the Trojans: Inventing Cultural Identity in the Middle Ages,” Exemplaria 7 (1995): 269–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 30.
    The identification of this play with Dido, Queen of Carthage by Marlowe and Nashe has been rejected on the grounds that no “tome of Dido”, such as that recorded in a properties inventory of March 1598, appears in the extant play: see Greg, Diary, 2.190 and Henslowe Papers (London: A. H. Bullen, 1907), 116n. For the opposite view, see Andrew Gurr, “The Great Divide of 1594,” Words That Count: Essays on Early Modern Authorship in Honor of MacDonald P. Jackson, ed. Brian Boyd (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2004), 30–1. The January 8 performance is specifically recorded by Henslowe as having taken place “at nyght”, suggesting to some that it must have been a private performance, perhaps even at court: see Gurr, “Great Divide”, 31; Gurr, Shakespeare’s Opposites, 231n. It is possible the play may also have been performed at the Rose.Google Scholar
  29. 33.
    Geoffrey of Monmouth, The History of the Kings of Britain, ed. Michael D. Reeve, trans. Neil Wright (Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell, 2007), 14.Google Scholar
  30. 42.
    For Lydgate and Caxton as sources for Heywood’s 2 Iron Age, see John S. P. Tatlock, “The Siege of Troy in Elizabethan Literature, Especially in Shakespeare and Heywood,” PMLA 30 (1915): 721–5 and Inga-Stina Ewbank, “‘Striking too short at Greeks’: The Transmission of Agamemnon to the English Renaissance Stage,” Agamemnon in Performance 458 bc to ad 2004, ed. Fiona Macintosh et al. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 37–52, esp. 45.Google Scholar
  31. 49.
    James Simpson, Reform and Cultural Revolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 95.Google Scholar
  32. 51.
    See, recently, Martin Wiggins, in association with Catherine Richardson, British Drama, 1533–1642: A Catalogue. Volume 3, 1590–1597 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 284, 286 andGoogle Scholar
  33. David Mann, “Heywood’s Silver Age: A Flight Too Far?” Medieval and Renaissance Drama in England 26 (2013): 185–9.Google Scholar
  34. 54.
    British Library Add. MS 10449, fol. 5; transcribed in W. W. Greg, Dramatic Documents from the Elizabethan Playhouses, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1931), vol. 2, document V. Lineation will refer to Greg’s transcription. For Greg’s commentary, including arguments for identification, see Dramatic Documents, 1.138–43.Google Scholar
  35. 61.
    If, that is, the extant “platt” for 2 Seven Deadly Sins dates from the late 1590s, as David Kathman has suggested: “Reconsidering The Seven Deadly Sins,” Early Theatre 7.1 (2004): 13–44. For Andrew Gurr’s counterargument and Kathman’s rebuttal, see “The Work of Elizabethan Plotters, and 2 The Seven Deadly Sins,” Early Theatre 10.1 (2007): 67–87, and “The Seven Deadly Sins and Theatrical Apprenticeship,” Early Theatre 14.1 (2011): 121–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 64.
    Wallace Notestein, The House of Commons, 1604–1610 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971), 78–85. During the parliamentary debates surrounding the name “Britain”, the argument of its etymological connection with Brute was raised and dismissed.Google Scholar
  37. See James Spedding, The Letters and the Life of Francis Bacon, 7 vols. (London, 1861–74), 3.194 (“he would be King of Britany — as Brutus and Arthur were, who had the style and were kings of the whole island”); and April 23, 1604, Journals of the House of Commons: Volume 1 (London, 1802), 955 (“A mere Fiction, Brittaine to take the Name of Brutus”). Google Scholar
  38. 65.
    Parry, “Ancient Britons”; Tristan Marshall, Theatre and Empire: Great Britain on the London Stages under fames VI and I (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000);Google Scholar
  39. Lisa Hopkins, “We were the Trojans: British National Identities in 1633,” Renaissance Studies 16 (2002): 36–51. On the idea of Britain in earlier literature, see the essays inCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Andrew Hadfield, Shakespeare, Spenser, and the Matter of Britain (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Misha Teramura 2014

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations