Ben Johnson’s Encomium To Shakespeare (1623)

For some years now I have been inter­est­ed in the Shake­speare author­ship ques­tion: did the man from Strat­ford real­ly pen the plays and poems attrib­uted to him, or was he just a front for some oth­er true genius? Anti-Strat­for­dians (those of the lat­ter per­sua­sion) point out that the sheer breadth of edu­ca­tion, knowl­edge, expe­ri­ence and eru­di­tion dis­played in the works of Shake­speare is sim­ply incom­pat­i­ble with a man born to illit­er­ate par­ents, raised in an unre­mark­able provin­cial town and edu­cat­ed (maybe) at his local gram­mar school. Evi­dence exists to show that the Shake­speare of Strat­ford engaged in grain-deal­ing, mon­ey-lend­ing, and act­ing, and was a share­hold­er in an act­ing company…but noth­ing that shows he was an actu­al writer.

In a rig­or­ous piece of research, Diana Price com­pared the extant doc­u­men­tary evi­dence of var­i­ous kinds with two dozen oth­er big-name Eliz­a­bethan poets and play­wrights. She looked at the lit­er­ary paper trails of the likes of Edmund Spencer, Christo­pher Mar­lowe, Robert Green and Thomas Nashe and found plen­ty of evi­dence of cor­re­spon­dences about lit­er­ary mat­ters, hav­ing patrons, hav­ing extant man­u­scripts, notice at death etc, but found pre­cious lit­tle evi­dence in favour of the man from Strat­ford; look at the emp­ty final col­umn here (click to enlarge):

Eliz­a­bethan lit­er­ary paper trail sum­ma­ry

It cer­tain­ly seems strange that no-one seemed to notice when Shake­speare died – where was the fan­fare? Some might point to Ben John­son as one who explic­it­ly laud­ed Shake­speare in his encomi­um To the mem­o­ry of my Beloved the Author, Mr William Shake­speare, in his pref­ace to the First Folio (the com­mon name for the col­lec­tion of 36 Shake­speare plays pub­lished in 1623), but this was pub­lished sev­en years after Shakespeare’s death. Plen­ty of stand­alone edi­tions of the plays, with his name embla­zoned on the cov­er, exist­ed pri­or to his death, so why the radio silence?

The schol­ar Alexan­der Waugh, a lead­ing Oxfor­dian (those advo­cat­ing for Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford as the true author), has a field day with this poem, remind­ing us that Ben John­son was known by con­tem­po­raries for his dou­ble mean­ings, clas­si­cal allu­sions and use of num­bers to reveal hid­den mean­ings to the learned few. Waugh argues that Ben John­son, along with all the oth­er drama­tists of the age, was “in the know” about the true iden­ti­ty of the writer of the Shake­speare plays, and he pep­pered his encomi­um with clues point­ing to Edward de Vere.

Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford

There is no room in this blog to explore that argu­ment, as com­pelling as it is, so instead let’s just take the con­tent on its pri­ma facie mean­ing. It is, after all, in praise of the great­est drama­tist of all time, respon­si­ble for all those works of genius, and that praise is sure­ly jus­ti­fied who­ev­er that man was!

To draw no envy, Shake­speare, on thy name,
Am I thus ample to thy book and fame;
While I con­fess thy writ­ings to be such
As nei­ther man nor muse can praise too much;
‘Tis true, and all men’s suf­frage. But these ways
Were not the paths I meant unto thy praise;
For seel­i­est igno­rance on these may light,
Which, when it sounds at best, but echoes right;
Or blind affec­tion, which doth ne’er advance
The truth, but gropes, and urgeth all by chance;
Or crafty mal­ice might pre­tend this praise,
And think to ruin, where it seem’d to raise.
These are, as some infa­mous bawd or whore
Should praise a matron; what could hurt her more?
But thou art proof against them, and indeed,
Above th’ ill for­tune of them, or the need.
I there­fore will begin. Soul of the age!
The applause, delight, the won­der of our stage!
My Shake­speare, rise! I will not lodge thee by
Chaucer, or Spenser, or bid Beau­mont lie
A lit­tle fur­ther, to make thee a room:
Thou art a mon­u­ment with­out a tomb,
And art alive still while thy book doth live
And we have wits to read and praise to give.
That I not mix thee so, my brain excus­es,
I mean with great, but dis­pro­por­tion’d Mus­es,
For if I thought my judg­ment were of years,
I should com­mit thee sure­ly with thy peers,
And tell how far thou didst our Lyly out­shine,
Or sport­ing Kyd, or Mar­lowe’s mighty line.
And though thou hadst small Latin and less Greek,
From thence to hon­our thee, I would not seek
For names; but call forth thund’ring Aeschy­lus,
Euripi­des and Sopho­cles to us;
Pacu­vius, Accius, him of Cor­do­va dead,
To life again, to hear thy buskin tread,
And shake a stage; or, when thy socks were on,
Leave thee alone for the com­par­i­son
Of all that inso­lent Greece or haughty Rome
Sent forth, or since did from their ash­es come.
Tri’umph, my Britain, thou hast one to show
To whom all scenes of Europe homage owe.
He was not of an age but for all time!
And all the Mus­es still were in their prime,
When, like Apol­lo, he came forth to warm
Our ears, or like a Mer­cury to charm!
Nature her­self was proud of his designs
And joy’d to wear the dress­ing of his lines,
Which were so rich­ly spun, and woven so fit,
As, since, she will vouch­safe no oth­er wit.
The mer­ry Greek, tart Aristo­phanes,
Neat Ter­ence, wit­ty Plau­tus, now not please,
But anti­quat­ed and desert­ed lie,
As they were not of Nature’s fam­i­ly.
Yet must I not give Nature all: thy art,
My gen­tle Shake­speare, must enjoy a part.
For though the poet­’s mat­ter nature be,
His art doth give the fash­ion; and, that he
Who casts to write a liv­ing line, must sweat,
(Such as thine are) and strike the sec­ond heat
Upon the Mus­es’ anvil; turn the same
(And him­self with it) that he thinks to frame,
Or, for the lau­rel, he may gain a scorn;
For a good poet­’s made, as well as born;
And such wert thou. Look how the father’s face
Lives in his issue, even so the race
Of Shake­speare’s mind and man­ners bright­ly shines
In his well-turned, and true-filed lines;
In each of which he seems to shake a lance,
As bran­dish’d at the eyes of igno­rance.
Sweet Swan of Avon! what a sight it were
To see thee in our waters yet appear,
And make those flights upon the banks of Thames,
That so did take Eliza and our James!
But stay, I see thee in the hemi­sphere
Advanc’d, and made a con­stel­la­tion there!
Shine forth, thou star of poets, and with rage
Or influ­ence, chide or cheer the droop­ing stage;
Which, since thy flight from hence, hath mourn’d like night,
And despairs day, but for thy vol­ume’s light.

Ben John­son

 

Wilfred Thesiger’s Arabian Sands (1959)

Back in 2003, whilst on a cruise of the Black Sea, we dined each night with an elder­ly cou­ple, Evan and Vivien Davies, who turned out to be charm­ing and inter­est­ing com­pa­ny. They were clear­ly well-con­nect­ed and rather posh, and Evan in par­tic­u­lar had lived what sound­ed like a pret­ty adven­tur­ous life back in the day: British Com­man­do dur­ing the war; mem­ber of Spe­cial Branch’s anti-ter­ror­ist unit, respon­si­ble for pro­tect­ing Win­ston Churchill, Clement Attlee and Ernest Bevin (1945–50); and Assis­tant Super­in­ten­dent of Police, British Malaya (1950–52). We got on tremen­dous­ly well despite an age dif­fer­ence of some four decades and I’ll nev­er for­get Evan, respond­ing to being gen­tly nudged by Vivien to calm down at one point, stat­ing to the table: “I do apol­o­gise – I do tend to get gid­dy when in good com­pa­ny”! To cap it all, Vivien men­tioned that she had recent­ly attend­ed the funer­al of Sir Wil­fred The­siger…

Wil­fred The­siger! I knew that name…one of the greats of British explo­ration, per­haps the last great British explor­er. Between 1945 and 1950 The­siger criss-crossed the Emp­ty Quar­ter of the Ara­bi­an penin­su­la, with the help of the Bedu peo­ple with whom he acquired a life­long bond, and with whom he endured hard­ships and real-and-present dan­gers on an almost dai­ly basis. Car­ry­ing basic sup­plies and water stored in goatskins (to be refilled at water­holes per­haps hun­dreds of miles dis­tant), The­siger set out with his Bedu com­pan­ions on camel­back across hun­dreds of miles of arid, sun-bleached dunes and grav­el plains. In cer­tain areas where there were trib­al ten­sions and they could be vio­lent­ly robbed of their camels, they had to be con­stant­ly on their guard and pre­pared to defend them­selves, whilst in oth­er areas The­siger had to be passed off as a fel­low Arab oth­er­wise he could eas­i­ly have been shot for being an infi­del Chris­t­ian.

Pestered by a friend to write about his expe­ri­ences, he even­tu­al­ly wrote Ara­bi­an Sands, which was pub­lished in 1959 and is now con­sid­ered a clas­sic of trav­el lit­er­a­ture. I have just got round to read­ing it and indeed it is a remark­able mem­oir. The insights into the lives of the Bedu are pro­found, and I was cer­tain­ly tak­en with a cou­ple of the char­ac­ters in par­tic­u­lar – bin Kali­ma and bin Ghabaisha — who became hard and fast friends with the man they called Umbarak. This para­graph sums up the sense of sat­is­fac­tion that The­siger derived from his expe­ri­ences:

In the desert I had found a free­dom unat­tain­able in civil­i­sa­tion; a life unham­pered by pos­ses­sions, since every­thing that was not a neces­si­ty was an encum­brance. I had found, too, a com­rade­ship that was inher­ent in the cir­cum­stances, and the belief that tran­quil­li­ty was to be found there. I had learnt the sat­is­fac­tion that comes with hard­ship and the plea­sure which springs from absti­nence: the con­tent­ment of a full bel­ly; the rich­ness of meat; the taste of clean water; the ecsta­sy of sur­ren­der when the crav­ing for sleep becomes a tor­ment; the warmth of a fire in the chill of dawn.

This also informs the sense of loss that The­siger express­es else­where when he bemoans the inevitable ero­sion of tra­di­tion­al Bedouin ways by the march of moder­ni­ty and the large-scale devel­op­ment begin­ning to be brought to the region by the Amer­i­can oil com­pa­nies. How he would have been aston­ished and dis­mayed by mod­ern-day Dubai and Abu Dhabi!

Wil­fred The­siger
Ara­bi­an Sands book cov­er

Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1865)

You could have safe­ly bet that at some point in this series of blogs I was always going to vis­it a cer­tain trin­i­ty of British uni­ver­si­ty dons who have done more for the lit­er­ary fan­ta­sy genre world­wide than, well, any oth­er trin­i­ty of uni­ver­si­ty dons. Huge. Immense. The Ronal­do, Mes­si and Mbap­pé of children’s fan­ta­sy lit­er­a­ture — I am talk­ing of course about Lewis Car­roll, C S Lewis and J R R Tolkien. If your bet had been an accu­mu­la­tor you would be quids in, too, because I shall cer­tain­ly be vis­it­ing C S Lewis and J R R Tolkien at some point in the future, but for today let’s look at the grandad­dy, that long-time maths pro­fes­sor at Christ Church Oxford, Charles Lutwidge Dodg­son AKA Lewis Car­roll (1832–1898).

Lewis Car­roll, what an inter­est­ing char­ac­ter! First and fore­most, he was a math­e­mati­cian and long-time uni­ver­si­ty schol­ar, spe­cial­is­ing in geom­e­try, alge­bra and log­ic; under his real name, he pub­lished eleven books on maths-relat­ed sub­jects. He was also an avid puz­zler and is cred­it­ed with the inven­tion of the “word lad­der” – you know it, that puz­zle that involves chang­ing one word into anoth­er, one let­ter at a time. He loved word play, amply dis­played in his non­sense poems Jab­ber­wocky (1871) and The Hunt­ing of the Snark (1876).

How­ev­er, it is of course Alice’s Adven­tures in Won­der­land (com­mon­ly Alice in Won­der­land) for which Lewis Car­roll will be for­ev­er remem­bered. As we all know, it details the sto­ry of a girl named Alice who falls through a rab­bit hole (and boy, don’t we hear that phrase a lot these days: “going down a rab­bit hole”?) into a fan­ta­sy world of anthro­po­mor­phic crea­tures. Car­roll first out­lined his sto­ry whilst out on row­ing trips on the Thames near Oxford which he often under­took with mem­bers of the Lid­dell fam­i­ly (Hen­ry Lid­dell being the Dean at Christ Church).

When he told the sto­ry to Henry’s daugh­ter Alice Lid­dell, she begged him to write it down, which he duly did and then passed the man­u­script to anoth­er friend and men­tor, the nov­el­ist George Mac­Don­ald. The enthu­si­asm of the Mac­Don­ald chil­dren for the sto­ry encour­aged Car­roll to seek pub­li­ca­tion, and so he approached Macmil­lan Pub­lish­ers, who loved it. After the pos­si­ble alter­na­tive titles were reject­ed – Alice Among the Fairies and Alice’s Gold­en Hour – the work was final­ly pub­lished as Alice’s Adven­tures in Won­der­land in 1865 (fol­lowed up of course by Through the Look­ing-Glass, and What Alice Found There in 1871). The rest, as they say, is his­to­ry.

The artist John Ten­niel pro­vid­ed a bril­liant set of wood-engraved illus­tra­tions for the book, of which we can see a gallery of some of the uni­ver­sal­ly famil­iar char­ac­ters here:

Lewis Car­roll