B 4.3 The Upstart Crow as Edward Alleyn

Loading...

From the course by University of London

Introduction to Who Wrote Shakespeare

60 ratings

University of London

Introduction to Who Wrote Shakespeare

60 ratings

This free course from the University of London explores critical thinking, and the interpretation of texts, through the Shakespeare authorship question. Using doubt about Shakespeare’s authorship as our playground, we will explore the key concept of authorship attribution, while developing skills in literary analysis, interpretation, and argument. Through forensic exploration of key texts, you will learn why Shakespeare’s authorship is questioned, and what evidence is cited on both sides of the debate. For those of you interested in exploring the works of Shakespeare from a new angle, or just wanting to hone your analytical thinking skills, this course offers an introduction to a fascinating area of interest. Those of you already interested in the Shakespeare authorship question will be encouraged to question your own assumptions in fruitful ways. Whether undertaken as a standalone course, or as preparation for the University of London BA in English, this course will be food for thought.

From the lesson

The Man and the Author

In this module we’ll look at questions of identity; chiefly at arguments that attempt to link William Shakspere the man to William Shakespeare the author – or to sever that link. The arguments surrounding “Hand D” in Sir Thomas More claim to establish a firm link between Shakspere and Shakespeare, and Shakespeare’s authorship of the “Hand D” pages is now being presented as fact, so it’s important to understand the evidence, arguments, and reasons for this attribution. You’ll look in detail at the non-Stratfordian argument that Shakespeare authorship doubt was first expressed within only four years after the first “Shakespeare” publication in the works of John Marston and Joseph Hall. You’ll consider some of the key Stratfordian and non-Stratfordian arguments related to William Shakspere’s coat of arms. And lastly, you’ll look critically at an important cornerstone of Shakespeare biography, Robert Greene’s reference to a plagiarising actor, the “upstart Crow”.

B 4.1 The Upstart Crow - Allusion or Illusion?3:22

B 4.2 Was Groats-worth Greene's?4:23

B 4.3 The Upstart Crow as Edward Alleyn8:45

B 4.4 Shake-scene and the 'Tiger's Heart'8:29

Meet the Instructors

Ros Barber
Dr
English and Comparative Literature

With the authorship of 'Groats-worth of Witte'

established is Robert Greene's,

let's return to the 'upstart Crow beautified with our feathers'.

The fable of the Crow in Borrowed Feathers was well known to Elizabethans,

who believed it to be by Aesop and associated it with plagiarism,

putting one's name on something that is not your own work.

Greene had referred to it in this context in an earlier pamphlet, 'Mirror of Modesty'.

'Your honor may think I play like Aesop's Crow,

which decked hisself with others' feathers, or like the proud

poet Batillus which subscribed his name to Virgil's verses,

and yet presented them to Augustus.'

Here we see Batillus again,

as someone whose name is on the poetry he didn't write and he

is linked to the Crow beautified with the feathers of others.

Given the Shakespeare apocrypha,

it's easy to see how this might be applied to Shakspere,

especially since Greene's accusation is against an actor,

one of those 'puppets',

as he calls them, that gain glory from speaking words that originated in writers' mouths.

But there is another candidate for an actor of

Greene's acquaintance who believed like a Johannes factotum -

a jack of all trades -

that he could bang out a play or two himself.

That candidate is Edward Alleyn,

one of the most famous actors of the Elizabethan era.

From April to June in the year 'Groats-worth' was written, as Greene was falling ill,

Lord Strange's Men - for whom Greene had recently been writing -

were playing a two-part play called 'Tambercam'.

Though the text hasn't survived,

there are reasons to think this was a rip-off of

Christopher Marlowe's hugely successful play 'Tamburlaine',

whose title role Edward Alleyn had made his own when it was

staged by the Lord Admiral's Men some three and a half years earlier.

It is thought to have been about another ruthless Asian warlord, Ghengis Khan.

Its style was similar too.

Ben Jonson lumped both plays together when he

complained about 'the Tamurlames and Tamerchams of

the late age, which had nothing in them but

the scenical strutting and furious vociferations to warrant them.''

A decade after Groats-worth was published,

Edward Alleyn sold Tambercam to his father-in-law Philip Henslowe.

Henslowe notes he paid 'forty shillings onto my son E.

Alleyn at the appointment of the company for his book of Tambercam.'

The possessive pronoun 'his' is important here.

In every other instance where Henslowe uses the possessive pronoun in his account book,

scholars accept that he is paying a playwright for their own creation.

It seems likely then that Tambercam was Edward Alleyn's attempt to create for

himself from his own pen another role as powerful as Tamburlaine.

Christopher Marlowe, whom Greene calls 'thou famous gracer of tragedians',

is addressed first in

the upstart Crow letter and at greater length than the other two playwrights.

If Greene's target was Edward Alleyn and the recently performed

Tambercam was his self-penned imitation of Tamburlaine,

that would explain why Greene addressed Marlowe first and foremost to warn him against

the actor who 'supposes he is as well

able to bombast out a blank verse as the best of you'.

Marlowe has been widely acknowledged as the best playwright of this era,

a master of blank verse.

He was certainly the best when set against

the other two playwrights Greene addressed in

the letter, thought to be George Peele and Thomas Nash.

Tambercam also provides a context for Greene's plea,

'Let those apes imitate your past excellence and

nevermore acquaint them with your admired inventions.'

We know that Greene and all three of the people he is addressing wrote plays for Alleyn.

It is accepted, for example, that Alleyn played the lead role in Greene's Orlando Furioso.

A large portion of Orlando Furioso is among the papers at Dulwich College with additions,

perhaps early attempts at shaping his own part, in Alleyn's hand.

In the main text of Groats-worth,

Greene describes the life of 'Roberto'

whose experience, says Greene, 'has most parts agreeing with mine',

inviting it to be read as a thinly veiled autobiography.

Greene describes how Roberto met

a successful actor who offered him employment

writing plays with the promise he would be well paid.

The player is a wealthy man and Roberto was surprised to discover his profession.

'I took you rather for a gentleman of great living,

for if by outward habit men should be censured,

I tell you, you would be taken for a substantial man.'

The player confirms his wealth and his shareholder status,

saying that his share in playing apparel will not be sold for

two hundred pounds and that he's rich enough to build a windmill.

Edward Alleyn's windmill stood on Dulwich common until 1814.

There is no record of Shakspere ever building a windmill.

It is clear that the player is not only a major shareholder

but also the leading actor of his troupe and he claims to be well known.

'I am as famous for Delphrigas and the King of

Fairies as ever was any of my time,' he says.

Edward Alleyn was a sharer in Worcester's Men from the age of 16,

and by the year Groats-worth was published when he was 25,

he had already become the manager of Lord Strange's Men.

The player is a strong fit for Alleyn.

He is a poor fit for William Shakspere who doesn't appear in the records as

a shareholder in any theatre company until after Greene's death

and was never, as far as we can tell,

cast in a leading role.

'Men of my profession get by scholars their whole living,'

Greene has the player say.

That actors depend upon writers for their living and are

beholden to them is a sentiment precisely echoed by Greene

in the attached letter just ahead of the Upstart Crow passage, where he complains of being

forsaken by the actors who have benefited from

his writing and in particular by the Upstart Crow.

Greene had written against Edward Alleyn before, two years earlier in

Francesco's Fortunes, in terms very similar to those used in Groats-worth.

'Why Roseus, art thou proud with

Aesop's Crow being pranked with the glory of others' feathers?'

Roseus was a famous Roman actor.

Scholars agree that Roseus,

in this passage, stands for Edward Alleyn.

Here, even though Greene associates Alleyn with Aesop's Crow,

the accusation is not one of plagiarism.

It is that Edward Alleyn is using words supplied to him

by the writers known as the University of Wits to gain glory,

fame and importantly wealth.

In Groats-worth, contrasting the playwrights with the Upstart Crow,

Greene implies that the Crow is a usurer -

one who lends at high interest -

who has failed to provide for him in his sickness.

'I know the best husband of you all will never prove a usurer and the kindest of them all'

- he means actors - 'will never prove a kind nurse.'

Actors are 'as changeable in mind as in many attires'.

And as a result 'Robert Greene, whom they have so often flattered,

perishes now for want of comfort.'

His chief concern in 'Groats-worth' is not plagiarism, but money.

This is obvious even from the title of the publication:

'A Groats-worth of Witte, bought with a million of Repentance'.

A groat was a small coin worth four pence.

That Greene might have expected Alleyn, his wealthy former employer, to come to

his aid when he was ill and without other means of income is not unreasonable.

A letter from actor Richard Jones to Edward Alleyn in February of the same year

reveals that Alleyn had provided financial assistance to Jones during a recent illness.

It opens with, 'Thanks for your great bounty

bestowed upon me in my sickness when I was in great want.'

A fair explanation of both Greene's bile

against the Upstart Crow and his sense of being forsaken

is that Greene, following Richard Jones's example, had asked

Edward Alleyn for money but, unlike Jones, had been turned down.

Explore our Catalog

Join for free and get personalized recommendations, updates and offers.

Coursera provides universal access to the world’s best education, partnering with top universities and organizations to offer courses online.

© 2018 Coursera Inc. All rights reserved.

Download on the App Store

Get it on Google Play