Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
The identification of the writers employed by the bishops in their counterattack against Martin Marprelate is almost as difficult as is that of Martin himself. Most prominent of those suspected is Thomas Nashe; indeed, at one time or another every one of the anti-Martinist pamphlets has been ascribed to him. Since in his own day his name was frequently associated with Martin's, shortly after his death the legend sprang up that he was chiefly responsible for downing Martin. Until 1903, when McKerrow began his edition, it was taken for granted that Nashe was the leading anti-Martinist writer.
1 Commenting on Nashe's Preface to Greene's Menaphon, Richard Harvey in his Lamb of God includes Nashe and Martin in the same scathing comment—R. B. McKerrow, The Works of Thomas Nashe (London, 1907), v, 179–180. Similarly Gabriel twice sneers at the two literary “innovators”—The Complete Works of Gabriel Harvey ed. by A. B. Grosart (Huth Library, 1884), i, 231.
2 McKerrow, op. cit., v, 45–48.
3 Ibid., v, 50 n.
4 McKerrow suggests several other possible connections that Nashe might have had with the anti-Martinists: he might have confined his activities to the “plays or shows”; or, like Anthony Munday, he might have been employed “simply to gather information and to direct the pursuivants”; or he might have “contributed stories or jests to the work of others, without producing any complete pamphlet himself”—Ibid., v, 49.
5 Ibid., v, 60.
6 Ibid., v, 63.
7 Ibid., v, 65.
8 Ibid., v, 55. Modest as this contribution to our knowledge of the tract may seem, it is far more valuable than Grosart's flat assertion, unsupported by facts, that “the ‘Almond for a Parrat’ as even Maskell pointed out is out and out of a different stamp from anything of Nashe's, of a ‘higher strain’ than he ever reached, and like ‘Pap with an Hatchet’ belongs to Lylly”—The Complete Works of Thomas Nashe (Huth Library, 1883–84), i, xlix.
9 An Almond for a Parrot: being a Reply to Martin Marprelate, “Puritan Discipline Tracts” (London, 1846), p. iii. The italics are mine.
10 Phillip Stubbes's Anatomy of the Abuses in England in Shakspere's Youth, reprinted by F. J. Furnivall (N.S.S. vi, 6; London, 1879), p. 37 n.
11 Cambridge History of English Literature, iii, 450–451.
12 That the author of An Almond was correct I attempt to demonstrate in “The Real Martin Marprelate,” PMLA, lviiii (1943), 84–107.
13 Though in Pap with a Hatchet Lyly attempts it, his writing retains so much of his artificial euphuistic style that his railing lacks the spontaneity of Nashe's and Martin's and succeeds in being merely abusive. For example: “He [Martin] hath a wanton spleene, but wee will have it stroakt with a spurne, because his eyes are bleard, hee thinkes to bleare all ours; but let him take this for a warning, or else looke for such a warming, as shall make all his devices as like wood, as his spittle is like woodsere”—The Complete Works of John Lyly ed. by R. W. Bond (Oxford, 1902), iii, 399.
14 Whatever plain, homespun, almost coarse language occasionally is found in the Anatomie of Absurditie may have been added just before it was published; that is, after Nashe had begun to imitate Martin. For the Anatomie, though undoubtedly a Cambridge exercise, was not printed until February or March, 1589, about the time of publication of An Almond—McKerrow, op. cit., iv, 1.
15 Grosart, Works of Gabriel Harvey, i, 156.
16 McKerrow, op. cit., i, 268.
17 Ibid., iii, 345, 346, 347, 354.
18 “And yet Dame Lawson so notorious, for the vilenesse of her tongue, and other unwomanly behaviour, is one of Marlins cononized Saints”—An Admonition to the People of England ed. by E. Arber, “The English Scholar's Library,” 15 (Birmingham, 1882), p. 33. In the Preface to Menaphon Nashe also echoes Cooper—McKerrow, op. cit., iv, 448.
19 Ibid., iii, 344.
20 Ibid., i, 270.
21 Similarly, in Have with you to Saffron-Walden Nashe takes as a personal insult Harvey's supercilious criticism in a later tract that “it had bin better to have confuted Martin by Reverend Cooper than such levitie,” and he rushes to the defense of the anti-Martinists with “Tell mee why was hee not then confuted by Reverend Cooper, or made to hold his peace, till Master Lillie and some others with their pens drew upon him.” Then in phraseology strikingly similar to that on the title-page of An Almond, “Beware you catch not the hicket with laughing,” Nashe jeers at Harvey for daring even to hint that he was suspected to be Martin: “A day after the faire, when he [Martin] is hangd, Harvey takes him in hand, but if he had beene alive now, even as he writ more worke for the Cooper, so would hee have writte Earveys whoope diddle, or the non-suting or uncasing of the animadvertiser. I have a laughing hicocke to heare him saye, hee was once suspected for Martin, when there is nere a Pursivant in England, in the pulling on his boots, ever thought of him or imputed to him so much wit”—Ibid., iii, 138. Nashe is referring to the hanging of Penry, who in An Almond, written six years earlier, had been exposed and threatened with the gallows—Ibid., iii, 348, 369.
22 The Anatomie of Absurditie apparently was none too popular; at least Harvey never mentions it—Ibid., iv, 2. The two Prefaces, of course, would not be considered significant in themselves.
23 Grosart, op. cit., i, 193–194.
24 Ibid., i, 229. See also i, 231: “the peacock and the parrat.”
25 Regarding this allusion Professor E. I. Fripp, repeating the usual editorial commentary on the passage, writes: “Respice funem (‘bear in mind the rope’ or halter) was a well known jest on respice finem (‘bear in mind your end‘) and taught to parrots.” As evidence he quotes from Lyly's Midas: “A rope for Parrot, a rope” —i. ii. 45. And from Mother Bombie:
—iii. iv. 55–57.
Though these two quotations may indicate that it was customary to teach parrots to call for a rope, they do not prove that parrots were taught to say either “Respice funem” or “Beware the rope's end.” Fripp admits, however, that Shakespeare is alluding to Nashe—Shakespeare Man and Artist (London, 1938), i, 320–321. The phrase Respice finem, respice funem appears as the concluding line of Buchanan's Chamæleon—“De Jure Regni apud Scotos,” Opera Omnia, i, 115. But though Buchanan may have originated the pun or may merely have been repeating a proverb, he does not associate it either with a particular rope or with a parrot as do both Shakespeare and Nashe.
26 McKerrow, op. cit., i, 268.
27 Ibid., i, 71; iii, 176.
28 Ibid., i, 301.
29 Ibid., iii, 348, 369.
30 Ibid., iv, 56.
31 This allusion suggests a date of composition for the Comedy of Errors well before December, 1594, “the earliest recorded date of the performance—The Comedy of Errors ed. by Sir A. T. Quiller-Couch and Professor J. D. Wilson (Cambridge, 1923), p. 75.
32 McKerrow, op. cit., iii, 347.
33 Ibid., iii, 350.
34 Ibid., i, 199.
35 In An Almond Mar-Martin Junior likewise writes of Martin: “Much inkehorne stuffe hath hee uttered in a jarring stile—Ibid., iii, 361—and sneers at his ”revelling riffe raffe of Tapsterly tauntes—Ibid., iii, 374.
36 Ibid., iii, 315.
37 Ibid., i, 195.
38 Ibid., iii, 369.
39 Ibid., iii, 347–348.
40 Ibid., iii, 354.
41 Ibid., iii, 374. Nashe in his preface to Menaphon refers to Martin's “tapsterly termes”—Ibid., iii, 315. Here likewise he declares that “it is for a Poet to examine the pottle-pots—Ibid., iii, 321. And in his Preface to Astrophel and Stella he writes: ”Wee … sette an olde goose over halfe a dozen pottle pots“—Ibid., iii, 333. In Summers Last Will he refers to the ”riffe rafe of the ramming of Elanor“—Ibid., iii, 252.
42 Ibid., iii, 356.
43 Ibid., ii, 184.
44 Ibid., i, 304.
45 Ibid., iii, 35.
46 Ibid., iii, 44.
47 Ibid., v, 211–369.
48 Asterisks denote the examples cited by the N.E.D. In the left column are listed the excerpts from An Almond, 1590. In the right column the passages illustrating the use of the word by Nashe have been chronologically arranged: Preface to Menaphon (P.M., 1589), Anatomie of Absurditie (A.A., 1590), Preface to Astrophel and Stella (A.S., 1591), Pierce Penilesse (P.P., 1592), Strange News (S.N., 1593), Terrors of the Night (T.N., 1593), Christs Teares over Jerusalem (C.T., 1593), The Unfortunate Traveller (U.T., 1594), Have with you to Sajfron-Walden (E.W.Y., 1596), Nashes Lenten Stufe (L.S., 1599), Summers Last Will and Testament (S.L.W., 1600).
49 The N.E.D. refers to Nashe's Preface to Menaphon for its first example of insult (intrans.) meaning “to have occasion for boasting”:
England might have long insulted in his wit.
Ibid., iii, 319.
For the use of insult in this sense see An Almond, iii, 362.:
All geering puritans shall have small cause to insult and rejoyce at my silence.
50 In An Almond the author is addressing Penry-Martin; in Pierce Penilesse he is describing how Cartwright and Penry-Martin became ames.
51 Nashe evidently considered “extemporall” the most complimentary adjective to describe a literary work. He particularly prided himself on his own “extemporall” vein.
52 The writer of An Almond gives this warning to the reader before telling who Martin is. Nashe in Have with you is referring to Harvey's supposed connection with the Marprelate tracts.
53 In the Anatomie of Absurditie as in An Almond the writer is referring to the puritans, particularly to Thomas Cartwright.
54 Of the passage in An Almond McKerrow writes, “There may be an allusion to the ‘dreaming dunce’ mentioned in Anat. of Abs. i. 27. 22–27; and if there is, it would be an argument in favour of Nashe's authorship of this part of the Almond”—v, 382. The parallel phrasing supports McKerrow's hypothesis.
55 Nashe was fond of the word sheepebyter:
He … steales away like a sheepbyler—P.P., i, 175.
They are no Sheepe, but Sheep-byters—C.T., ii, 98.
Liere like a sheepbiter—U.T., ii, 260.
Then the sly sheepe-biler issued into the midst—L.S., iii, 190.
56 Ibid., iii, 332.
57 Ibid., iii, 20.
58 Ibid., i, 368.
59 Ibid., iii, 345.
60 Ibid., i, 276.
61 Ibid., i, 292.
62 Ibid., i, 360.
63 Ibid., iii, 360.
64 Ibid., i, 181. McKerrow on this passage comments as follows: “Nashe has the word ‘Letter leapper’ at i. 309. 9, but apparently in a different sense. I have not met with it elsewhere. Compare, however, Harington's Apology, ed. 1814, p. 43: ‘What, if one should write Misacmos is malcontent: I would leap upon the letter and reply, By your leave you he like a lout, lewd master libeller’ ”—Ibid., iv, 108–109. Though McKerrow does not interpret his two illustrations, they both define “letter-leaping” as alliteration. At i. 309. 9 Nashe dubs Harvey a “Letter leapper” because Harvey calls Pierce Penilesse a “diabolicall dis course”; in other words, because Harvey resorts to alliteration for his satirical effect. Harington's use of the phrase to mean alliteration is self-evident.
65 In the Anatomie of Absurditie Nashe shows that he has mastered the euphuistic style. This youthful exercise abounds in such passages as: “Never remembring, that as there was a loyall Lucretia, so there was a light a love Lais, that as there was a modest Medullina, so there was a mischivous Medea, that as there was a stedfast Timoclea, so there was a trayterous Tarpeya, that as there was a sober Sulpitia, so there was a deceitful Scylla, that as there was a chast Claudia, so there was a wanton Clodia”—Ibid., i, 11. But a few years after its publication he repudiates Lyly. Though admitting that he had enjoyed Euphues at Cambridge, he protests that he “abhors ”to imitate it, “otherwise than it imitates Plutarch, Ovid, and the choisest Latine Authors”—i, 319.
66 Ibid., iii, 341.
67 Ibid., iii, 341.
68 Ibid., iii, 341.
69 Ibid., iii, 344.
70 Ibid., iii, 345.
71 Ibid., iii, 342.
72 Ibid., iii, 343.
73 Ibid., iii, 344.
74 Ibid., iii, 353.
75 Ibid., iii, 361.
76 Ibid., iii, 372.
77 Ibid., iii, 376.
78 Ibid., iv, 215.
79 Ibid., ii, 13.
80 Ibid., i, 383.
81 Ibid., iii, 123.
82 Ibid., iii, 368.
83 Ibid., iv, 468.
84 Ibid., iv, 469.
85 Ibid., ii, 182.
86 Ibid., iii, 317.
87 Ibid., i, 220.
88 Ibid., iii, 212.
89 Ibid., i, 200.
90 Ibid., iii, 376.
91 Ibid., iii, 355.
92 Ibid., iii, 357.
93 Ibid., iii, 372.
94 Ibid., v, 60. McKerrow's only other argument against Nashe's authorship, namely, that the writer of An Almond implies that he is entering the conflict for the first time, whereas Nashe's reference to Richard Harvey's attack on the anti-Martinists in Plain Perceval—Ibid., i, 270 ff.—might suggest that he had already participated, has been discussed. McKerrow himself regards this argument as “of very doubtful value.”
95 Ibid., v, 61.
96 Ibid., iii, 369–370.
97 Ibid., iii, 314. The N.E.D. gives this passage as the first and only example of the use of crepundio from crepundian meaning “empty talker.”
98 Ibid., iii, 66–67.
99 Ibid., iv, 169.
100 Ibid., i, 278.
101 Ibid., iii, 371–372.
102 Ibid., iii, 368. See also v, 61.
103 Ibid., i, 22.
104 Ibid., i, 43–44.
105 Ibid., i, 171.
106 Ibid., iii, 315.
107 Ibid., i, 37.
108 Ibid., iii, 358.
109 Ibid., iii, 362.
110 Ibid., iii, 358.
111 Ibid., iii, 359.
112 Ibid., iii, 345.
113 Ibid., iii, 345. Cf. Nashe's reference to the Martinists who wear “a hood with two faces to hide their hypocrisie”—Ibid., i, 172.
114 Ibid., i, 220.
115 Ibid., iii, 347.
116 Ibid., iii, 376. There seems to be a confusion of scriptural reference here, the usual phrasing being a wolf in sheep's clothing or raiment—Matt. vii. 15. In Strange News, immediately after accusing Harvey of being a Martinist, Nashe writes, “You have put on wolves raiment already, seduced manie simple people under the habit of a sheep in Wolfes print”—i, 333. This error is typical of Nashe.
117 Ibid., i, 20.
118 Ibid., iii, 356.
119 Ibid., i, 33.
120 Ibid., iii, 370.
121 Ibid., iii, 371.
122 Ibid., iii, 63.
123 Ibid., iii, 365–366.
124 Ibid., iii, 64, 69.
125 Ibid., iii, 366. The writer of An Almond opens his tale of Penry's life at Cambridge: “For whiles hee was yet a fresh man in Peterhouse, and had scarce tasted, as we say, of Setons Modalibus.” McKerrow informs us that the work referred to “must be J. Seton's Dialectica, which … was in use in manuscript at St. John's College, Cambridge, some years before its publication in 1572,” but he does not understand why it “should be referred to as ‘modalibus‘” unless that were a cant university term, as its use in Pedantibus written by Cambridge students, would suggest—Ibid., iv, 472. Nashe was a member of the College where Seton's work was introduced and probably still used. If we assume Nashe to be the author of An Almond, the insertion of student slang, particularly that of St. John's, in order to embellish the account of Penry's education would be appropriate.
126 Ibid., iii, 367–368.
127 Ibid., i, 43.
128 Ibid., iii, 312–313.
129 Ibid., i, 195–196.
130 Ibid., i, 269. “Io. Pæan” was a term of contempt for Richard Harvey, who wrote Ephemeron, sive Pæm—Ibid., iv, 121.
131 Ibid., iii, 85.
132 Ibid., i, 158–159.
133 Ibid., i, 241.
134 Ibid., iii, 341.
135 Ibid., v, 58.
136 Ibid., iii, 175; v, 112.
137 Ibid., v, 58.
138 Ibid., v, 118.
139 Ibid., iii, 367.
140 Ibid., iv, 472.
141 Ibid., ii, 264.
142 Ibid., v, 128.
143 Ibid., iii, 342.
144 Ibid., iii, 344, 353, 367. A tendency toward inexactness, either studied or accidental, characteristic of Nashe is evident in these quotations.
