Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:42:16.708Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Spenser's Acrasia and Mary Queen of Scots

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Kerby Neill
Kerby Neill*
Affiliation:
The Catholic University of America
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The theory that in Book II of the Fairie Queene Spenser represents Mary Stuart allegorically in the character of Acrasia has never been presented with sufficient evidence to raise it above a level of general probability, and although the further cumulation of proof that I have gathered together here hardly seems enough to establish it as a fact of literary history, it may help to recapture some of the mental associations of his original readers and the figurative medium in which they were expressed. It is my purpose here to show that when the Faerie Queene was published Elizabethan courtiers had for a considerable time looked upon Mary Stuart as the epitome of intemperance and had characterized her as a Circean enchantress, a rather striking parallel to Book II with its political study of temperance and its major evil character—the Circean witch Acrasia.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 60 , Issue 3 , September 1945 , pp. 682 - 688
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1945

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For a summary of previous theories see the Variorum Spenser, ii, 401-408. Miss Winstanley's main evidence is the characterization of Mary Stuart as an enchantress by John Knox; Dr. Greenlaw's more ample proof is based largely on the general interpretation of the political aspects of Book II. I have treated Mary Stuart's relation to the Faerie Queene at some length in two previous articles which must be considered as background for the present study. See ELH., ii, 192-214 and SP., xxxiv, 134-137.

2 The Elizabethans made no effective distinction between public and private virtues. See Ruth Kelso, “The Doctrine of the English Gentleman in the Sixteenth Century,” Univ. of Ill. Studies in Lang. and Lit., xiv (1929), p. 75.

3 See, for instance, Elyot's Governour (1531, eight editions to 1580), Bk. iii, cap. 20; Laurence Humphrey, The Nobles (1563), sig. r2v ff.; King James, Basilikon Doron (ten editions to 1604), reprinted in A Miscellany, ed. Morley, London, 1888), p. 139; Henry Crosse, Verities Common-wealth (1603), sig. C2 ff.; James Cleland, , or The Institution of a Young Noble Man (1607), p. 206. In Barnabe Barnes, Four Bookes of Offices (1606), an imitation of Cicero, there is an elaborate allegory of the cardinal virtues as officers of state. Temperance is treasurer.

4 Haslewood, ed., Mirror for Magistrates, i, vi. It should be noted that Higgins is following rather closely the ethical tradition of the original Mirror by Baldwin and others. See Lily Campbell, Tudor Conceptions of History and Tragedy in “A Mirror for Magistrates” (Berkley, 1936), especially p. 19: “But the Mirror was concerned not simply with sin; it was concerned with political sin.”

5 Op. cit., i, 9. For a full discussion of the significance of this fear of civil discord see Greenlaw, Studies in Spenser's Hisorical Allegory (Baltimore, 1932), p. 7 ff.

6 F. Q., ii, vii, 13.

7 F. Q., ii, vii, 46.

8 Mirror for Magistrates, ed. Haslewood, i, 3. The looseness and lack of originality in Higgins' treatment of the virtue makes it a better index to popular opinion than a more philosophic presentation. The definition which he ascribes to Plotinus is probably taken from Elyot's Governour, who, in turn, took it from Macrobius through Patrizzi (see the note in Croft's ed., iii, 326). Crosse, Verities Common-wealth, sig. C2, drew whole phrases out of Elyot. For Spenser's possible knowledge and use of Higgins, see J. W. Bennett, The Evolution of the Faerie Queene (Chicago, 1942), pp. 223-224.

9 I have developed this point in ELH., ii, 200-201.

10 John Scott, A Bibliography of Works Relating to Mary Stuart, 1544-1700 (Publications of the Edinburgh Bibliographical Society, 1896), 2, No. 76. The Latin version was published in 1571, and there were five editions, including English and French translations, in the next two years. The work is sometimes referred to as the “Detectio.”

11 Simon Goulart (Meidleburg, 1578), i, fol. 182v.

12 The Copie of a Letter to the Right Honorable Earle of Leycester (London, 1586), p. 9.

13 Works, ed. Laing (Edinburgh, 1846), i, 294, 319, 427. His printed views were suppressed in England but apparently found MS circulation.

14 Opera Omnia, ed. Ruddiman (Edinburgh, 1715), vol. i, “Chamaelon,” p. 14. This work was suppressed in Scotland but found MS circulation.

15 For Circe as a Renaissance symbol of intemperance see M. Y. Hughes, “Spenser's Acrasia and the Circe of the Renaissance,” JHI, iv (1943), 381-399. Hughes does not deal with the political allegory.

16 Loc. cit., vol. i, “De Maria Scotorum,” p. 28.

17 Sempill Ballales, ed. Stevenson (Edinburgh, 1872), no. 1.

18 Wilson to Burghley, Nov. 8, 1571, in Murdin and Haynes, Collection of Papers Relating to Cecil, Lord Burghley (London, 1740-59), ii, 57.

19 Isabel Rathborne, The Meaning of Spenser's Fairyland (N. Y., 1937), and Greenlaw, Studies in Spenser's Historical Allegory, p. 89 ff.

20 James Anderson, Collections Relating to the History of Mary Queen of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1727), ii, 40, 64. He reprints the Scottish edition of 1572.

21 This and the two following poems are reprinted in The Huth Fugitive Tracts, ed. W. C. Hazlitt (first series, privately printed, 1875), without pagination. The reference to the net is an interesting parallel to that used to capture Acrasia.

22 For a full discussion of the significance of this chronical material see Greenlaw, Studies, p. 83 ff., and p. 205.

23 See note 19 above. It should also be recalled that Spenser invites us to look for contemporary references in the Proem to Book ii.

24 Studies, p. 205.

25 For a convenient summary of the terms of the will see Kitchen's note (Variorum ii, 338); for the controversy over the validity of the will, which was lost or hidden at the time, see my previous article (ELH, ii, 196-197).

26 Spenser's method of using history as example is such that it is not essential to my theory that he should have planned Cantos vii, x, xii before the execution of Mary Stuart although my guess is that he did. For a discussion (which I accept with some reservation) of the date of Book ii, see Chapter x of Mrs. Bennett's The Evolution of the Faerie Queene.