# data[].attributes.body
Website with info on gender roles, power and government, Queen Elizabeth I, and more!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
CONTENTS

About Queen Elizabeth I

Tudor Queen

The daughter of King Henry VIII and his second wife,Anne Boleyn, Queen Elizabeth I was born in Greenwich Palace, London, on the 7th of September 1533. Famously unwanted, because her tyrannical father was obsessed with having a son to succeed him, Elizabeth's was troubled. When she was only two and a half years old her mother was beheaded and Elizabeth spent the rest of her childhood in the shadow of her father's court. No one imagined then that she would grow up to become one of the most successful and famous rulers of all time.

Elizabeth came to the throne in 1558, at the age of 25, having survived the troubled reign of her half-brother, King Edward VI, and imprisonment in The Tower of London during the reign of her Catholic half-sister, Queen Mary I. Elizabeth went on to rule for almost 45 years and her reign is known as The Golden Age, a time that saw the birth ofShakespeare, the defeat of the Spanish Armada, and the emergence of England as a world power.

Queen Elizabeth, known as The Virgin Queen because she never married or had children, was the last Tudor monarch. When she died in 1603, deeply mourned by her people who called her Good Queen Bess or Gloriana, a new dynasty came to the throne: the Stuarts.

On this website you can read about Queen Elizabeth I's remarkable life, her struggles and triumphs, the world in which she lived, her ,royal court,courtiers and statesmen, her rivalry with Mary, Queen of Scots, her effort to re-establish the Protestant Church of England, her , , , , and all the people and events that make this one of the most fascinating and important eras of history.

You can also test your knowledge of the Queen's life and times in a number of quizzes, for books and dvds, find to other websites of interest, and discover historicplaces to visit that still survive from the Tudor age.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Queen Elizabeth I of England (1533-1603) : Tudor Queen : Elizabeth 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CONTENTS The daughter of King Henry VIII and his second wife,Anne Boleyn , Queen Elizabeth I was born in Greenwich Palace, London, on the 7th of September 1533. Famously unwanted, because her tyrannical father was obsessed with having a son to succeed him, Elizabeth's was troubled.

# data[].attributes.body
Folger Shakespeare Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
William Shakespeare: A biography

Since William Shakespeare lived more than 400 years ago, and many records from that time are lost or never existed in the first place, we don't know everything about Shakespeare's life. For example, we know that he was baptized in Stratford-upon-Avon, 100 miles northwest of London, on April 26, 1564. But we don't know his exact birthdate, which must have been a few days earlier.

We do know that Shakespeare's life revolved around two locations: Stratford and London. He grew up, had a family, and bought property in Stratford, but he worked in London, the center of English theater. As an actor, a playwright, and a partner in a leading acting company, he became both prosperous and well-known. Even without knowing everything about his life, fans of Shakespeare have imagined and reimagined him according to their own tastes.

Looking for more in-depth information? Need something you can cite? Read an essay about Shakespeare's life from the Folger Shakespeare Editions. Read essay

Early life: Birth and childhood

William Shakespeare was probably born on about April 23, 1564, the date that is traditionally given for his birth. He was John and Mary Shakespeare's oldest surviving child; their first two children, both girls, did not live beyond infancy. Growing up as the big brother of the family, William had three younger brothers, Gilbert, Richard, and Edmund, and two younger sisters: Anne, who died at seven, and Joan.

Their father, John Shakespeare, was a leatherworker who specialized in the soft white leather used for gloves and similar items. A prosperous businessman, he married Mary Arden, of the prominent Arden family. John rose through local offices in Stratford, becoming an alderman and eventually, when William was five, the town bailiff-much like a mayor. Not long after that, however, John Shakespeare stepped back from public life; we don't know why.

Shakespeare, as the son of a leading Stratford citizen, almost certainly attended Stratford's grammar school. Like all such schools, its curriculum consisted of an intense emphasis on the Latin classics, including memorization, writing, and acting classic Latin plays. Shakespeare most likely attended until about age 15.

A horn book in the Folger collection, similar to one that Shakespeare might have learned to read from

Marriage (to Anne Hathaway) and children

A few years after he left school, in late 1582, William Shakespeare married Anne Hathaway. She was already expecting their first-born child, Susanna, which was a fairly common situation at the time. When they married, Anne was 26 and William was 18. Anne grew up just outside Stratford in the village of Shottery. After marrying, she spent the rest of her life in Stratford.

In early 1585, the couple had twins, Judith and Hamnet, completing the family. In the years ahead, Anne and the children lived in Stratford while Shakespeare worked in London, although we don't know when he moved there. Some later observers have suggested that this separation, and the couple's relatively few children, were signs of a strained marriage, but we do not know that, either. Someone pursuing a theater career had no choice but to work in London, and many branches of the Shakespeares had small families.

Shakespeare's only son, Hamnet, died in 1596 at the age of 11. His older daughter Susanna later married a well-to-do Stratford doctor, John Hall. Their daughter Elizabeth, Shakespeare's first grandchild, was born in 1608. In 1616, just months before his death, Shakespeare's daughter Judith married Thomas Quiney, a Stratford vintner. The family subsequently died out, leaving no direct descendants of Shakespeare.

London theater

For several years after the birth of Judith and Hamnet in 1585, nothing is known for certain of Shakespeare's activities: how he earned a living, when he moved from Stratford, or how he got his start in the theater.

Following this gap in the record, the first definite mention of Shakespeare is in 1592 as an established London actor and playwright, mocked by a contemporary as a "Shake-scene." The same writer alludes to one of Shakespeare's earliest history plays, Henry VI, Part 3, which must already have been performed. The next year, in 1593, Shakespeare published a long poem, Venus and Adonis. The first quarto editions of his early plays appeared in 1594.

For more than two decades, Shakespeare had multiple roles in the London theater as an actor, playwright, and, in time, a business partner in a major acting company, the Lord Chamberlain's Men (renamed the King's Men in 1603). Over the years, he became steadily more famous in the London theater world; his name, which was not even listed on the first quartos of his plays, became a regular feature-clearly a selling point-on later title pages.

Final years and death

Shakespeare prospered financially from his partnership in the Lord Chamberlain's Men (later the King's Men), as well as from his writing and acting. He invested much of his wealth in real-estate purchases in Stratford and bought the second-largest house in town, New Place, in 1597.

Among the last plays that Shakespeare worked on was The Two Noble Kinsmen, which he wrote with a frequent collaborator, John Fletcher, most likely in 1613. He died on April 23, 1616-the traditional date of his birthday, though his precise birthdate is unknown. We also do not know the cause of his death. His brother-in-law had died a week earlier, which could imply infectious disease, but Shakespeare's health may have had a longer decline.

The memorial bust of Shakespeare at Holy Trinity Church in Stratford is considered one of two authentic likenesses, because it was approved by people who knew him. The other such likeness is the engraving by Martin Droeshout in the 1623 First Folio edition of Shakespeare's plays, produced seven years after his death by his friends and colleagues from the King's Men.

Timeline

View a timeline of Shakespeare's life with links to key supporting documents on Shakespeare Documented.
View timeline

The bust of Shakespeare in the Folger Reading Room is a copy of the statue at Holy Trinity Church in Stratford.

Frequently asked questions

Why did Shakespeare leave his wife his "second best bed"?

William Shakespeare wrote in his last will and testament, dated March 25, 1616, "Item I gyve unto my wife my second best bed with the furniture" (furniture is used to refer to the curtains and bedcover which formed part of the complete bed).

This was not an unusual bequest, nor was it likely to have been intended as a snub. The best bed was usually regarded as an heirloom piece, to be passed to the heir rather than the spouse. It is also probable that the best bed would have been reserved for guests, meaning the "second best" was the bed that William and Anne shared.

What did Shakespeare's son die of?

We don't really know how Shakespeare's young son Hamnet died. He had a twin sister named Judith, who lived to adulthood and married, but Hamnet died at the age of 11 and a half. Child mortality was high in the 16th century; there were no antibiotics and many childhood diseases might therefore prove fatal, such as scarlet fever, whooping cough, diphtheria, and even measles. He was buried on August 11, 1596.

What is the inscription on Shakespeare's grave?

GOOD FREND FOR JESUS SAKE FORBEARE,
TO DIGG THE DUST ENCLOASED HEARE:
BLESTE BE Ye [the] MAN Yt [that] SPARES THES STONES,
AND CURST BE HE Yt [that] MOVES MY BONES.

Did Shakespeare have a coat of arms?

Yes, William's father, John Shakespeare, was granted a coat of arms in 1596. It was disputed in 1602 by York Herald, Ralph Brooke, saying that the arms were too similar to existing coats of arms, and that the family was unworthy. However, the challenge was unsuccessful, as the Shakespeare coat of arms appears in later heraldic collections and on William Shakespeare's funeral monument in Holy Trinity Church, Stratford-upon-Avon.

Does Shakespeare have descendants?

William Shakespeare and Anne Hathaway had three children. The eldest, Susanna, was baptized on May 26, 1583, and married John Hall in 1607. They had one child, Elizabeth, in 1608. Elizabeth was married twice, to Thomas Nash in 1626, and to John Bernard in 1649. However, she had no children by either husband.

William and Anne also had twins, Judith and Hamnet, who were baptized on February 2, 1585. Hamnet died at age 11 and a half. Judith married Thomas Quiney in 1616, and the couple had three sons: Shakespeare Quiney, who died in infancy, and Richard and Thomas, who both died in 1639 within a month of each other. Since neither of the boys married, there is no possibility of any legitimate descendants from Shakespeare's line.

It is possible, however, to claim a relationship to Shakespeare through his sister, Joan. She married William Hart some time before 1600, and there are many descendants of this marriage alive today, in both the male and female lines.

Find out what's on, read our latest stories, and learn how you can get involved.

Sign up

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shakespeare's life | Folger Shakespeare Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about Shakespeare's life and family: birth in Stratford-upon-Avon, marriage to Anne Hathaway and their children, work in London theaters, and death.

# data[].attributes.body
Username: asbtech
Password: spain

# data[].attributes.body
Search here for many topics of interest

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We are the UK's national library. Open to everyone and free to use. Explore our buildings, study, meet friends, attend an event and get free access to over 170 million items.

# data[].attributes.body
BBC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC Bitesize - GCSE History - Life in Elizabethan England - Edexcel - Revision 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about and revise what life was like in Elizabethan England with this BBC Bitesize History (Edexcel) study guide.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Theatre as an art form has a long history of pressing the boundaries of gender.

The tradition of men portraying women on public stages dates back to the theatre of the Ancient Greeks, and is present in several other theatrical traditions from around the world. The reasons for the development of these traditions, which were to endure to various degrees for thousands of years, are intricately connected to how concepts of gender and sex were understood, and specifically the role of women in society. Ancient Greek women, like many women of Shakespeare's England, did not have the right to vote or own property, and were expected to remain at home and rear children.

Many of these same concepts were to form the core of 17th century English gender dynamics. During the time of Shakespeare and the reigns of Queen Elizabeth I and King James I, English ideas of sex and gender, the legal rights of women and the social expectations of femininity all played a significant role in the way that theatre was performed, the stories it told and who told them. In addition to other legal restrictions on the rights of women, there was considerable social pressure on women to behave according to specific social roles. Women were expected to be subservient, quiet and homebound, with their primary ambitions entirely confined to marriage, childbirth and homemaking; granted, social status and economic class played into what degree these expectations manifested, with the chief example being Queen Elizabeth I herself.

Acting was, in some ways, the exact opposite of those expectations, and female actors were associated with sexual incontinence, prostitution, lasciviousness and indecency. Though there is evidence that women acted in street performances, and in other notorious venues, all commercial acting companies of the time were made up entirely of men and it was illegal for women to act on stage professionally until 1661. Despite the profession of acting having a less than virtuous reputation, as well as a growing orthodox Christian objection to the theatre, these all-male companies were deemed as socially legitimate because they did not threaten gender hierarchy. Only the idea of women was portrayed and embodied on stage, and not the reality. These professional companies were often financed by royal patronage, for example, The King's Players.

To have a greater understanding of why the practice of young men playing women was an accepted convention in Elizabethan England, and why women were legally restricted from the stage, it is helpful to examine contemporary concepts of gender. There were two central influences in the way that sex and gender were constructed in Early Modern England: medicine and religion. Medical science of the time relied heavily upon the work of Greek and Roman philosophers like Plato, Hippocrates and Galen among many others, to understand and treat the human body. This medical tradition held that female humans were essentially incomplete or unfinished males; a phenomenon caused by a lack of heat that would have otherwise resulted in the formation of male genitalia. It followed that women were understood as being weaker, more prone to psychological and physical ailment and in need of supervision, control and at times restraint by the one true sex, men.

Curiously, biblical ideas conflicted with secular ones about sex and gender; the Bible made room for two distinct yet unequal sexes: Adam and Eve. Though the English crown had split from the Roman Catholic Church during the 15th century, in the reign of King Henry VIII, Christian biblical values still governed much of the way that gender was understood and coded. Though there are conflicting messages about sex and gender in the Bible, it was deployed by Early Modern English society to enforce the idea that women were in need of domination and stewardship by men. Additionally, the Bible was used to enforce gender expectations for all people, and to prohibit the practice of "cross-dressing."

Despite a few differences, these two main influences manifested in similar legal and social expectations for women of the time and enforced a strict binary between men and women. When a woman of this period transgressed gender boundaries and dressed in men's clothing in public, it associated her with the same social stigma that faced female actors, except that she was subject to arrest and imprisonment. One such woman was named Mary Frith, who was nicknamed Moll Cutpurse. Mary regularly went out in public dressed in men's clothing and was associated with London's criminal underground. She was also the subject of the 17th century play The Roaring Girl. Such behavior was understood as a threat to gender hierarchies of the time, and any woman apprehended "cross-dressing" was understood to be in rebellion against her betters, i.e. men. Any man caught in similar circumstances was also punished, as dressing in women's clothing was understood as a perversion of masculinity and a sign of moral and sexual degeneration.

Though the consequences for what is referred to as "cross-dressing" in public were considerable on a legal and social level, the theatre was a unique arena in which gender could be manipulated and toyed with in public, albeit by men only. Whether or not the practice of men playing women was generally perceived as a legitimate threat to masculinity is open for interpretation; it also can't be said for sure whether or not such a practice constituted an intentional challenge to the hierarchy or construction of gender in Early Modern England. Regardless, it was standard theatrical practice for men to portray women on stage in mannerism and in costume and for playwrights to write towards this expectation, just as it was convention for audiences to be fully aware of this practice.

During Shakespeare's time, theatres were experiencing social and legal pressure from the growing conservative Puritanism of the era. Tracts against the theatre often pointed to the moral and spiritual danger present in contemporary theatrical practices, including the portrayal of women by young men. These tracts also pointed to the danger in the act of public commercial theatre in general, especially because it destabilized gender expectations for women. The theatre was a commercial interest where women were, in Puritan imagination, at risk of overthrowing their rightful masters by exercising economic and social independence. These Puritan interests succeeded in shuttering the theatres for a period between 1642 and 1660, during the political turmoil of the English Civil Wars and Restoration. Even after 1661, with the rule of King Charles II, when women were legally allowed to act professionally, the negative social stigma of acting and the attending gender expectations were still in effect. As time passed and women of all races fought and agitated for expanded rights and privileges both in England and its colonies, and then later in what is now known as the United States, gender roles and expectations continued to change. In addition to the law, these changes were reflected (and sometimes caused by) evolutions in style, business, education and art. As women continued to be involved in theatre, gender play of a different sort emerged.

Perhaps one of the most famous examples of a woman portraying a man is Sarah Bernhardt's 1899 performance as Hamlet. In fact, by the turn of the 20th century it had become increasingly common for women to portray men in what was termed "breeches" roles. Scientific constructions of sex and gender have continued to shift since the time of Shakespeare alongside an ever-evolving social understanding of sex and gender. Of special note are current social trends with regard to gender non-conformity and gender variance amongst humans that are inviting new and exciting questions into the performance of Shakespeare's storied work. At a time when gender non-conforming people are becoming more accepted in mainstream entertainment, the possibilities and challenges of Shakespeare's texts deepen. All female companies such as Phyllida Lloyd's all-female Henry IV, and companies that include trans and gender nonconforming actors, such as Chicago's own Eclectic Full Contact Theatre's As You Like It, are continuing to push boundaries and discover new interpretations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gender on Shakespeare's Stage: A Brief History

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Theatre as an art form has a long history of pressing the boundaries of gender.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Shakespeare wrote most of his plays during the reign of Queen Elizabeth (1558 - 1603), who allowed theater and drama to flourish, but forbade the subject of politics or religion on stage. As for the era's societal restrictions, a female actor would be considered an abomination, and so men and boys performed the roles of both sexes. England lagged far behind European countries in accepting female actors.

Shakespeare never shied away from confusing gender-swaps and played with the all-male mandate to create cross-dressing roles that were both challenging and entertaining. Now that men and women are both allowed on stage, deliberate gender play in Shakespeare productions such as London-based Donmar Warehouse's all-female staging of Henry IV are inherently valuable for their comment on gender constructs. This summer the all-female Manhattan Shakespeare Project presents free park performances of A Study in Othello, which examines "the other" through Shakespeare's Othello text and writing by Muslim girls in New York City schools.

Below are some gender-swapping moments as conceived by the Bard himself.

The swap: A woman disguises herself as a man to travel safely in the forest after being banished.

Rosalind disguises herself as a young man named Ganymede after she is banished from the royal court. In the Forest of Arden, Ganymede runs into the exiled Orlando, who is aching for Rosalind, who happens to love him back. Ganymede tells Orlando that "he" can cure him of his lovesickness by pretending to be Rosalind, so Orlando can express his feelings out loud. In the meantime, Phoebe falls in love with Ganymede, causing a huge fight because Silvius loves Phoebe. Ganymede solves this by having Phoebe promise to marry Silvius and Orlando promise to marry Rosalind. This the pastoral comedy that features Shakespeare's often quoted speech, "All the world's a stage."

THE MERRY WIVES OF WINDSOR

The swap: A man disguises himself as a woman to hide from the man whose wife he is wooing.

Short on funds, Falstaff decides to court two rich housewives-Mistress Ford and Mistress Page. Not knowing that they are in on the plot, Falstaff is tricked by the merry wives into dressing as Mistress Ford's obese aunt to hide from Mistress Ford's husband. The husband, however, hates the aunt and beats the cross-dressed Falstaff.
TWELFTH NIGHT
The swap: A woman disguises herself as a man to serve a Duke.

This romantic comedy begins with a shipwreck that separates Viola from her twin brother Sebastian. Viola disguises herself as a man, Cesario, so that she can get employment by serving Duke Orsino. She falls in love with the duke, who loves Olivia, who falls for his new servant, Cesario. Oliva mistakes Sebastian for Cesario and asks him to marry her. After much confusion, Viola reveals her identify and marries Duke Orsino.
THE MERCHANT OF VENICE
The swap: A woman disguises herself as a man to come to the aid of a man.

The wealthy heiress Portia disguises herself as a doctor and takes her lady-in-waiting, Nerissa, dressed as a law clerk, to court in order to defend Antonio, the merchant of Venice, against his debtor, the money-lender Shylock. Shylock is demanding a pound of flesh from Antonio for a debt owed by Bassanio, Portia's husband. Portia's speech in court, which refers to the " quality of mercy " is considered one of Shakespeare's greatest passages. Portia and Nerissa outsmart Shylock and save Antonio's flesh.
CYMBELINE
The swap: A woman disguises herself as a boy to survive a murder ordered by her lover.

Iachimo bets Posthumus that he can seduce his wife, Imogen, and by stealing her bracelet, makes Posthumus believe he has succeeded. Posthumus sends his servant Pisanio to kill Imogen. Instead, Pisanio advises Imogen to disguise herself as a boy named Fidele and flee. Eventually Fidele and Posthumus end up in jail together, where Iachimo comes clean about the bracelet theft that led Posthumus to believe in the affair. Posthumus states his guilt in having Imogen killed. An elated Imogen, still disguised as Fidele, throws "himself" on Posthumus, who strikes the boy, which leads to Pisanio revealing that Fidele is Imogen. All reconcile in this play that veers between tragedy and comedy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gender Swaps in Shakespeare Plays | THIRTEEN - New York Public Media

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Shakespeare wrote most of his plays during the reign of Queen Elizabeth (1558 - 1603), who allowed theater and drama to flourish, but forbade the subject of politics or religion on stage. As for the era's societal restrictions, a female actor would be considered an abomination, and so men and boys performed the roles of both sexes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By using this site, you agree we can set and use cookies. For more details of these cookies and how to disable them, see our cookie policy.

Clothing in Elizabethan England

Liza Picard describes the laws, trends and standards of hygiene that determined who wore what in Elizabethan England.

Status symbols

Cloth of gold and silver, tinselled satin, woollen cloth embroidered with gold and silver, sables and other furs... the clothes worn by the rich make any fashionista's mouth water. But that list was taken from one of a series of Proclamations against 'excess of apparel'. Who was allowed to wear what was supposed to be strictly controlled. It was essential that the Queen's subjects should know their place, and dress accordingly, so that no one could be misled.

The 1597 Proclamation went into minute detail. Only earls could wear cloth of gold, or purple silk. No one under the degree of knight was allowed silk 'netherstocks' (long stockings) or velvet outer garments. A knight's eldest son could wear velvet doublets and hose, but his younger brothers couldn't. A baron's eldest son's wife could wear gold or silver lace, forbidden to women below her in the pecking order.

Proclamation against Excess of Apparel by Queen Elizabeth I

Elizabeth I issued numerous proclamations about clothing. This edict, from 1574, details the colours and fabrics people could wear according to their social rank. Only barons and others of high degree could wear 'golde' or 'tinseld sattern'.

Furs in bewildering variety were similarly controlled. Elizabeth and her favourite the Earl of Leicester enjoyed the softness of sables. She had hers from an unexpected source - Ivan the Terrible, Tsar of Russia, who sent them, as well as two ermine gowns, with a proposal of marriage. She kept the furs but refused the proposal.

Proclamations do not always change human behaviour. Great offence was caused by prostitutes who dared to flaunt themselves in rich garments. Young apprentices who were supposed to dress in modest blue were apt to burst out in colours, such as popinjay blue or lusty-gallant red. 'Great ruffs' and over-long swords were regularly forbidden, too, and as regularly worn.

Rapier, c. 1600

Swords, such as this ornate rapier, were an important part of male dress.

Usage terms © Victoria and Albert Museum, London
Held by© Victoria and Albert Museum

Ruffs

Ruffs were worn by both sexes, by old and young, courtiers and working people. They began as a simple frill at the neck of a full-cut shirt, where it was gathered into a neck band. They culminated in the astonishing structures worn by Elizabeth in her state portraits. At first they sagged limply round the neck, until someone hit on the idea of starching them - an art in which the Dutch excelled. Successive restorers of portraits have made all the ruffs in ancestral portraits a uniform white, but in fact they were tinted pink or yellow, much more becoming. Blue seems to have been reserved for prostitutes.

Doctor Lopez is accused of poisoning Elizabeth I

This illustration, from a 1627 book recounting an Elizabethan scandal, shows two men wearing large ruffs.

Portrait of William Herbert, 3rd Earl of Pembroke, 1617

Pembroke, a favourite at King James's court, wears a handsome white ruff.

Usage terms Royal Collection Trust © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, 2016 / Bridgeman Images

Women's dress

Working women wore fitted bodices and long full skirts. For the more fashionable, the bodice was stiffened to lie flat across the bosom, and skirts were often divided in front to show an underskirt. The edges of the skirt could be adorned with jewelled borders. A fashionable Elizabethan woman's wardrobe was complex. Sleeves, bodice, ruff, skirt, underskirt - all came as separate pieces which were held in place by pins, and could be reassembled with other elements to look quite different. The Queen was always pleased to accept presents of valuable garments, such as a pair of sleeves embroidered with pearls, or a ruff with matching cuffs.

Photograph of Mark Rylance in Olivia costume in Shakespeare's Globe's production of Twelfth Night, 2002

Mark Rylance dresses for the role of Olivia, showing the many parts of an Elizabethan woman's outfit.

Usage terms © Photo of John Tramper, courtesy of Shakespeare's Globe

Portrait of Mary Fitton, c. 1595

This fashionable lady was soon to become a maid of honour at Elizabeth I's court. Each piece of her complex outfit - the sleeves, bodice, ruff and skirt - was a separate bit of clothing.

Skirts were held out on a frame or 'farthingale'. If you couldn't afford a farthingale, a 'bum roll' tied round your waist under the skirt would do almost as well.

Elizabeth's portraits show her wearing a staggering amount of jewellery, especially pearls. She bought the six ropes of pearls that had belonged to Mary Queen of Scots. New ones were coming in by the chestful from the New World, and needed only boring and polishing to be ready to wear. Diamonds needed careful cutting, and were never so prized. Other stones might be worn as charms. Sapphires and unicorn's horn averted the plague, coral was useful against witchcraft. A bezoar protected against poison, but was hardly attractive; the best came from the intestines of Persian goats.

Sieve Portrait of Queen Elizabeth I, c. 1583

Queen Elizabeth in a lavish gown with ruff and jewellery.

Usage terms © Portrait of Queen Elizabeth I (1533-1603) in Ceremonial Costume (oil on canvas), Zuccari, or Zuccaro, Federico (1540-1609) / Pinacoteca Nazionale, Siena, Italy / Bridgeman Images

One essential garment for the English climate had not yet been invented: the raincoat. A starched ruff would collapse if it got wet. If you were going to a party you would carry your ruff - also known as a 'band' - in a bandbox, and get your maid to pin it on when you got there. A hooded cloak would keep off the worst, but unless it had been made colour-fast by that elusive alum, you risked arriving in a puddle of leaking dye.

Men's dress

'Except it were a dog in a doublet you shall not see any so disguised as are my countrymen of England', wrote a contemporary historian, and indeed the Elizabethan era saw men's clothes depart more widely from their physique than in any other time. At least if you had good legs - and they were important - you could show them off up to crotch level. Next to your skin, a white linen shirt, which might support your ruff unless it had become a separate item by then.

Photograph of Michael Brown as Viola/Cesario and Rhys Meredith as Sebastian in Shakespeare's Globe production of Twelfth Night, 2002

Designer Jenny Tiramani took inspiration from contemporary portraits to create costumes that resembled fashions for young men in c. 1600.

Usage terms © Colin Willoughby / ArenaPal

Portrait of a young man among roses by Nicholas Hilliard, c. 1587

If you had good legs, you could show them off up to crotch level.

Usage terms © Victoria and Albert Museum, London
Held by© Victoria and Albert Museum

There were extreme fashions which surely were not always followed by every man, and did not always last long. Sleeves were swollen far beyond the shoulder line, kept that shape by mountains of stiffening and padding ('bombast'). The doublet was cut tight across the chest, swelling out at diaphragm level and back again, making an ugly - to our eyes - 'peasecod' shape, unrelated to the natural body.

The doublet had a skirt, of varying length, under which were ties ('points'), or hooks, onto which the breeches were tied or hooked. The breeches of a working man were baggy and knee-length, like old-fashioned plus fours. The fashionable Elizabethan could opt for short 'hose' (breeches), at groin level: or longer ones covering his thighs, or even down to knee level. But they were all padded, so that they looked like melons or marrows, and made it difficult to walk gracefully, let alone dance. That was not all; they were 'paned' - cut into narrow panels, joined at the waist and hem, with a coloured lining showing in the spaces between the panes. The great days of the codpiece were declining, giving way to a modest buttoned or lace-up opening; but they were still useful as somewhere to keep pins - they were heavily padded - or your purse, and maybe a refreshing orange or two. Both doublet and hose were decorated by 'pinking': slits cut in the fabric, in a pattern, with a differently coloured lining pulled through the slits in little puffs.

The Life of a Satirical Puppy Called Nim

17th-century male fashion: in this satire, a young dandy called Nim shows off his new suit of clothes.

Portrait of Henry Wriothesley, 3rd Earl of Southampton, c. 1600

The Earl of Southampton (1573-1624) was well-known for his showy, expensive clothes. In this painting, he wears a silk doublet, hose, coloured garters and embroidered gloves.

Usage terms NPG L114
Private collection; on loan to the National Portrait Gallery, London

The ensemble was completed by a hat or cap with a feather or a jewel, and a cloak, varying from a useless waist level to a practical full length.

Personal hygiene

For a modern lavatory, read 'close stool': a padded box with a hole in it, the lid making a comfortable back. For lavatory paper, read 'old linen rags'.

Former ages were rarely keen on washing. A deodorant could be made from camomile, wormwood and alum, which may have worked. (Alum is an ingredient in most modern deodorants.) But how often was it used? An advice book of 1547 suggests that after you've got out of bed and stretched, and coughed, and spat, and defecated, and put your breeches on, 'comb your head... and wash your hands and wrists, your face and eyes and your teeth with cold water' - and that was that. A really fastidious person might clean her teeth with burned rosemary wood, to 'make the teeth white and flee (drive out) the worms in them', which as everyone knew caused holes and toothache.

Cosmetics

Ceruse, a thick white toxic paste containing mercury, gave a smooth complexion until it melted and turned grey, shiny and smelly. Its pallor could be corrected by a round dab of vermilion on the cheeks. The Queen relied increasingly on ceruse.

Liza Picard researches and writes about the history of London. She spent many years working in the office of the Solicitor of the Inland Revenue and lived in Gray's Inn and Hackney, before retiring to live in Oxford.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Clothing in Elizabethan England | The British Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By using this site, you agree we can set and use cookies. For more details of these cookies and how to disable them, see our cookie policy. Clothing in Elizabethan England Liza Picard describes the laws, trends and standards of hygiene that determined who wore what in Elizabethan England.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By using this site, you agree we can set and use cookies. For more details of these cookies and how to disable them, see our cookie policy.

Crime and punishment in Elizabethan England

Liza Picard takes a look at crime in Elizabethan England and describes the brutal punishments offenders received, from whipping and public humiliation to hanging and burning at the stake.

Thieves and pickpockets

The crowded nave of St Paul's Cathedral was a favourite with pickpockets and thieves, where innocent sightseers mixed with prostitutes, and servants looking for work rubbed shoulders with prosperous merchants. A visitor up from the country might be accosted by a 'whipjack' with a sad story of destitution after shipwreck, or a woman 'demander for glimmer' begging because she'd been burned out of house and home. Just keep walking, pay no attention. If you hear someone shout 'look to your purses', remember, this is not altruistic; he just wants to see where you keep your purse, as you clutch your pocket. There was a training school for young thieves near Billingsgate, where graduates could earn the title of 'public foister' or 'judicial nipper' when they could rob a purse or a pocket without being detected. But if the victim did feel an intrusive hand, he would shout 'stop thief' to 'raise the hue and cry', and everyone was supposed to run after the miscreant and catch him. But this rarely succeeded, thieves being adept at disappearing through the crowd.

The Bellman of London by Thomas Dekker, 1608

View images from this item (3)

This pamphlet, The Belman of London, exposes the scams of beggars and confidence tricksters operating in the city. The title page shows a watchman, with his bill and lantern, on patrol in London.

Minor punishments

Fornication and incest were punishable by 'carting': being carried through the city in a cart, or riding backwards on a horse, wearing a placard describing the offence - an Elizabethan version of naming and shaming. Many offences were punished by the pillory - the criminal stood with his head and his hands through holes in a wooden plank. This could be as painful as public opinion decided, as the crowd gathered round to throw things at the wretched criminal. Stones were banned, in theory, but if the public felt deeply, the offender might not finish his sentence alive. Sometimes one or both of the offender's ears were nailed to the pillory, sometimes they were cut off anyway. A sentence of whipping meant that the offender's back was laid open raw and bloody, as he staggered along the appointed route through the city.

Woodcuts showing the four humours and marriage in Peacham's Minerva Britanna

View images from this item (7)

A male figure with his feet in the stocks - another early modern punishment.

More serious punishments

There was a curious list of crimes that were punishable by death, including buggery, stealing hawks, highway robbery and letting out of ponds, as well as treason.

To deny that Elizabeth was the head of the Church in England, as Roman Catholics did, was to threaten her government and was treason, for which the penalty was death by hanging. But first, torture, to discover any fellow-plotters. Although in theory it was 'greatly abhorred', torture happened: and hideously. The Rack 'tears a man's limbs asunder' - not literally, but it could snap the ligaments and cause excruciating pain. Perhaps the Pit was preferable, or the Little Ease, where a man couldn't stand upright. The Scavenger's Daughter was an ingenious system of compressing all the limbs in iron bands. For all of these an official order had to be given. Optional extras such as needles under the fingernails could be left to the examiner's discretion.

Slavery was another sentence which is surprising to find in English history. From 1598 prisoners might be sent to the galleys if they looked strong enough to row.

Burning

Poisoners were burned at the stake, as were heretics such as Anabaptists. Two died in 1572, 'in great horror with roaring and crying'.

Hanging

The usual place of execution in London was out on the road to Oxford, at Tyburn (just west of Marble Arch). But sometimes the jury, or the court, ordered another location, outside St Paul's Cathedral, or where the crime had been committed, so that the populace could not avoid seeing the dangling corpses. Sometimes murderers were hanged alive, in chains, and left to starve.

Discussion of Venice and London in Florio's Italian language manual

View images from this item (20)

John Florio comments on the 'great number' of criminals who are hanged daily in London, and he describes the 'traytors' who are quartered at the Queen's command.

Drawing and quartering

Traitors were sentenced to be hanged, drawn and quartered. The grisly details included cutting the prisoner down before he died from hanging, and disembowelling him. After various other horrors, the corpse was cut into four pieces and the head was taken off. The quarters were nailed up in various places in London, and the head was displayed on a pole fixed over one of the gateways into the city, especially the gate on London Bridge.

Perhaps this deterred others from treasonable activities. But imagine the effect on innocent citizens as they went about their daily life, suddenly confronted with a rotting piece of human flesh, on a hot summer's day.

Rebellion by London apprentices in 1595

View images from this item (1)

Around 1,000 apprentices rioted on Tower Hill to protest about the poor conditions in London. This woodcut shows their gruesome punishment - they were hanged, drawn and quartered for treason.

Peine forte et dure

The words were a survival from the old system of Norman French law. This was, strictly speaking, a procedural hiccup rather than a punishment. The first step in a trial was to ask the accused how he pleaded. If he said he was not guilty, he faced trial, and the chances of acquittal were slim. If he pleaded guilty, or was found guilty by the court, all his property was forfeited to the Crown, leaving his family destitute. So a very brave and devoted man could refuse to answer, when asked to plead, knowing that he would die a painful and protracted death but his family could still claim his possessions. Heavy stones were piled on him and he was left in a dark cell, given occasional sips of foul water and stale bread until death came as a relief.

Peine forte et dure was not formally abolished until 1772, but it had not been imposed for many years.

Excuses

A woman sentenced to death could 'plead her belly': claim that she was pregnant. If a 'committee of matrons' was satisfied, her execution was deferred until she had given birth, since it would be wrong to kill both mother and unborn child. With luck she might then get lost in the system. At least it gave her a few more months of life.

'Benefit of clergy' dated from the days, long before the Reformation, when anyone who could read was bound to be a priest because no one else could. So if a literate man, or one who had had the foresight to learn by heart the relevant verse of the Bible ('the neck verse'), had been found guilty of a crime for which the penalty was death, or some terrible punishment, he could 'claim his book', and be handed over to the ecclesiastical authorities. They would impose a more lenient sentence, such as branding on the hand. But you could only do that once, and the brand was proof that your immunity had expired.

Benefit of clergy was not abolished until 1847, but the list of offences for which it could not be claimed grew longer.

Satire on watchmen and playhouses in Dekker's The Gull's Horn-book

View images from this item (11)

This playful book by Thomas Dekker, 1609, gives advice on how pleasure- seekers can outwit useless watchmen and get away with crimes in London.

Imprisonment

There were prisons, and they were full, and rife with disease. But they mostly held offenders against the civil law, such as debtors. The Elizabethan punishments for offences against the criminal law were fast, brutal and entailed little expense to the state.

Liza Picard researches and writes about the history of London. She spent many years working in the office of the Solicitor of the Inland Revenue and lived in Gray's Inn and Hackney, before retiring to live in Oxford.

Ideas and inspiration directly to your inbox

Join our mailing list to keep up to date

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
crime and punishment in elizabethan england

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Crime and punishment in Elizabethan England | The British Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Liza Picard takes a look at crime in Elizabethan England and describes the brutal punishments offenders received, from whipping and public humiliation to hanging and burning at the stake.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Queen Elizabeth I was an incredibly popular queen whose reign is remembered as a "golden age" of culture and growth even during foreign and domestic challenges. The Elizabethan Era, during which Shakespeare lived and wrote, is also known for Sir Francis Drake's exploration of the "new world," the English defeat of the Spanish Armada (a naval campaign to invade and bring Roman Catholicism back to England), Sir Walter Raleigh's colonial exploration, the blossoming of theatre and poetry in England, and setting the stage for English empire and colonization. Yet it was also a time marked by war, economic depression, and complex spiritual and political conflict. Deep tensions between Protestants and Catholics came from England's recent departure from the Roman Catholic Church, initiated by Elizabeth's father, King Henry VIII.

Unlike America, England at the time had no separation between church and state. Traditionally, the country was ruled politically by the king and spiritually by the Roman Catholic Church. However, Shakespeare's was the first generation in which the monarch, rather than the Pope, served as the country's spiritual head.

The shift to Protestantism came shortly before Shakespeare's birth, during King Henry VIII's rule. Henry desperately wanted a male heir, but had only one daughter, Mary, with his wife Catherine of Aragon. Henry decided to branch off from the Roman Catholic Church in order to divorce Catherine and, in 1533, marry Anne Boleyn. This spawned the birth of the establishment of the Church of England, of which the King was head, and created tensions between the Roman Catholic Church and England. Yet Anne Boleyn also had a daughter, Elizabeth, and when she did not have a son, Henry had her executed in 1536 on charges of treason. Henry went on to marry four more times, but only his marriage to Jane Seymour, who died in childbirth, produced a son, Edward VI.

Edward VI assumed the throne at the age of nine. He reigned as a Protestant king and bolstered the strength of the Protestant Church in England. Edward introduced the Book of Common Prayer (and with it English, rather than Latin, services), did away with stained glass in churches and Roman Catholic statues, and allowed English clergy to marry. However, Edward was never very healthy and died of tuberculosis when he was only fifteen years old.

Edward VI was succeeded by his half-sister, Mary I, who ruled for five years, from 1553-1558. Mary was a devout Roman Catholic and began reinstating portions of the Roman Catholic Church. During her reign, she burned over 300 Protestant heretics. Heresy, or believing a religion other than the one recognized by the crown, was both a spiritual and state crime comparable to treason. Mary married Phillip, King of Spain, in 1554, in hopes of producing an heir to succeed her and complete England's conversion back to a Roman Catholic state. However, the couple had no children, and Elizabeth, her half-sister, became queen in 1558.

With Queen Elizabeth on the throne, the pendulum swung back toward Protestantism. In efforts to quell sectarian violence, Elizabeth was lenient toward practicing Catholics, however specific laws, such as fining those who did not attend church, kept the Church of England firmly in place. Freedom of religion was assumed as long as laws were obeyed, but this did prevent Catholics from worshipping openly, and some sought to rise up against persecution. During her reign, Catholic factions, supported by Catholic countries including Spain, threatened the Queen's reign and even life.

Throughout this period, everyday life in England could be quite complicated. A holiday on the calendar one year might be revoked the next, only to be added a few years later. A person's religious practices were bound tightly to his or her political leanings. Landholders who developed property on what was once a monastery might have faced opposition from those seeking to reclaim the land. King James I, who succeeded Elizabeth and commissioned the King James Bible, would also experience a threat to his life in the infamous Gunpowder Plot-a conspiracy by a Catholic faction to bomb parliament while the King would be present. Father Henry Garnet, a Jesuit priest, was known for claiming confidentiality and withholding knowledge of the conspiracy confessed to him by followers, an act for which he was found guilty of treason and executed. Some Elizabethans were strong supporters of the Protestant reformation, some were staunchly Catholic, some were ambivalent, and some still practiced a stricter form of Christianity, Puritanism.

Shakespeare, along with all Elizabethans, would have been well aware of the ebbs and flows of this power struggle, and Shakespeare often referenced religion and its effects on culture and politics in his plays. In Twelfth Night, Shakespeare's characterization of Malvolio pokes fun at a strict Puritan lifestyle. The porter's speech in Macbeth is commentary on the act of equivocation, or not telling the whole truth in order to avoid incriminating oneself or others. Father Garnet's "equivocation" during the Gunpowder Plot trial had grave consequences. In Hamlet, Claudius holds a more Protestant view of grief customs and observances while Hamlet is more conservative, observing a more Catholic lifestyle. While Hamlet wears black and insists on mourning traditionally for his father, Claudius encourages Hamlet to move on from the funeral and celebrate his marriage to the Queen:
CLAUDIUS Tis sweet and commendable in your nature, Hamlet,
To give these mourning duties to your father;
But, you must know, your father lost a father;
...'tis unmanly grief;
It shows a will most incorrect to heaven,
A heart unfortified, a mind impatient,
An understanding simple and unschool'd:
(1.2.87-89, 94-97)

Shakespeare's audiences would have been familiar with the Bible and Christianity, regardless of where they fell on the religious spectrum. While Shakespeare often commented on current events regarding the Protestant/Catholic debate within the action of his plays, his personal religious leanings are unknown. His plays, however, do give a clear picture of the religious climate in Elizabethan England and its effect on daily life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Religion in Elizabethan England | Hartford Stage

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Religion in Elizabethan England By Aurelia Clunie, Education Associate for Student Audiences Queen Elizabeth I was an incredibly popular queen whose reign is remembered as a "golden age" of culture and growth even during foreign and domestic challenges. The Elizabethan ... Continue reading →

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Clothes in the Elizabethan era (1558-1603 CE) became much more colourful, elaborate, and flamboyant than in previous periods. With Elizabeth I of England (r. 1558-1603 CE) herself being a dedicated follower of fashion, so, too, her court and nobles followed suit. Clothing was an important indicator of status so that those who could afford it were careful to wear the correct colours, materials, and latest fashions from Continental Europe. Heavy brocade, stockings, tight-fitting doublets, long billowing dresses embellished with pearls and jewels, knee-length trousers, stiff linen collars or ruffs, and feathered hats were all staple elements of the wardrobes of the well off. The commoners, meanwhile, attempted to follow the new designs as best they could using cheaper materials, but those who tried to dress beyond their station had to beware the authorities did not fine them and confiscate the offending item.

The Historical Record

Reconstructing what exactly people wore and when has its problems. Cloth, of course, is not a very good survivor at the best of times. There are a few rare surviving examples such as a woollen shirt and breeches set belonging to a man who died after falling into a peat bog on the Isle of Shetland. However, these are few and far between. In addition to the ravages of time, the Elizabethans typically repaired and then cut and reused their clothes to get the longest life from them. The shabbiest clothes would then have been used as rags. Consequently, our knowledge of Elizabethan fashion often comes from secondhand sources such as written descriptions, sumptuary laws, and representations in art.

The pictorial record for the Elizabethan period is, fortunately, a very rich one in terms of portraits and so for the higher classes we have ample information on the type of clothing worn, at least on special occasions. Illustrations in contemporary books are another valuable source, especially for the poorer classes. To modern eyes, Elizabethan clothes seem rather stiff and heavy but we should remember that in 16th century CE England and in the absence of adequate indoor heating just about everywhere, the best way to keep out the cold was one's wardrobe.

As the Elizabethan period wore on, regions like East Anglia & Kent saw the arrival of immigrants (especially Dutch & Italians) with cloth-manufacturing skills.

The increasing population of England in the 16th century CE stimulated a corresponding growth in the cloth and clothing industries. Wool was the main material and there were four sheep for every person in England in the 1550s CE. At the same time, an increased contact with northern Europe saw new ideas and fashions spread, creating a demand for brighter colours and lighter materials. Unworked and undyed cloth was England's most important export, especially to Antwerp. However, inflation and disruptions to international trade caused by the Anglo-Spanish war led to a decline in the second half of the 16th century CE.

The manufacture of clothing for the domestic market became more sophisticated with a greater use of small machines to help in some stages of the process. These included the Dutch loom and stocking-frame knitting machine. The once staple wool, felt, and worsted clothing was now supplemented with lighter fabrics - especially cotton, linen, fustian (cotton and linen), and sometimes silk - while even the traditional materials became finer in quality and texture. Yarnspinners, weavers and dyers all worked independently and usually in their own homes. There were, as yet, no factories, even if workers were semi-professionals and many diverse households might produce for a single large-scale dealer, known as a clothier.

The Welsh borders, Gloucestershire, Wiltshire and Hampshire had long-enjoyed a reputation as the best places for English cloth manufacture. As the Elizabethan period wore on, regions like East Anglia and Kent saw the arrival of immigrants (especially Dutch and Italians) with cloth-manufacturing skills, which greatly increased the quality of local production. Hybrid fabrics lighter than the traditional English ones were produced which created new demand and, because they wore out quicker, increased sales in the longterm. The new varieties of cloth or 'new draperies' went under many names such as bays, says, serges, perpetuanas, shaloons, and grosgraines.

The Aristocracy
Men's Clothes
For men, linen underclothes (shirt and long shorts) were often embroidered and given lace decoration. Outer clothing was made of all the materials mentioned above. Additional options worn only by the aristocracy because of their expense included velvet, damask (an elaborately woven fabric of diverse material), and silk. Trousers were knee-length ('Venetian breeches') or thigh-length (trunkhose), and were often billowed out over the upper thighs and hips; later versions had pockets. Trousers often featured a codpiece which was a padded covering of the crotch. Sometimes of impressive proportions (but less so than during Henry VIII of England's reign, 1509-1547 CE), the codpiece could be unbuttoned or untied separately from the trousers when required. By the end of the century, they were replaced by the button or tied fly.

The most common upper garment for men was the doublet, a short, stiff, tight-fitting jacket which was made of wool, leather, or thick fabric. Just as today, minor changes became a sign of fashion such as the lower hem of the doublet, which started off straight but then developed into a deep V-form pointing downwards at the front. A curiosity of some doublets was the peascod - extra padding over the abdomen to imitate armour but which ended up making the wearer look as if he was strutting like a peacock. Such padding, known as 'bombast', consisted of wool, cotton or horsehair and was used in other areas to create fashionable shapes to outer clothing. Detachable collars and cuffs were highly fashionable too and were made from stiffened linen or lace. As the century wore on the ruffs became ever-more outlandish and required wire supports.

The doublet might have sleeves which could be detachable and it was closed using hooks, laces, or buttons. The shoulders could have wings and decorative tabs hanging at the waist known as 'pickadills'. On top of a doublet in colder weather, a man might wear a jerkin waistcoat and on top of that a coat which could be of any length, cut, and material. Cloaks and semi-circular capes were also worn. Trousers and upper garments were often slashed vertically in places so that underclothing or a lighter lining material could bulge through the gaps in a decorative way.

Some dyes were expensive to produce such as scarlet & black & so these were another indication of wealth & status.

Leather was popular for some outer garments, belts, gloves, hats, and shoes. Leather was sometimes made more decorative by tooling it. Shoes for men were typically square-toed and without a noticeable heel. Earlier types of footwear were slip-on, but laces and buckles came into fashion by the end of Elizabeth's reign. Courtiers often wore fancy slipper-like shoes made from silk or velvet. Leather boots were worn when riding.

Colours often contrasted in the same outfit. All colours came from natural dyes and so the most common for the aristocracy were red, blue, yellow, green, grey, and brown. As natural dyes tend to fade relatively quickly (although outer clothes were rarely washed at all but were only brushed), wearing the brightest colours clearly showed one had the newest of clothes. Some dyes were expensive to produce such as scarlet and black and so these were another indication of wealth and status. Buttons, typically small in size but large in number, were a similar badge of wealth with the cheapest using wood, bone or horn and the more dazzling made using gold, silver, or pewter. Similarly, instead of buttons a garment might be closed or joined to another by tying a ribbon through matching holes. These ribbons were known as 'points' and the ends could be decorated with pieces of metal. In the absence of pockets, both men and women wore belts or girdles from which were suspended purses, daggers, and rapiers for men, and mirrors, grooming kits, and fans for women.

Women's Clothes

Aristocratic women often wore long dresses which had not changed very much since the Middle Ages. The kirtle dress was fitted and very long so that the feet of the wearer were almost hidden. On top of this other garments were worn. Skirts were free-flowing early in Elizabeth's reign, but there then developed a fashion for rigid skirts in the shape of a bell or cylinder. These forms were created by a series of hoops inside the material or in an undergarment. This latter construction was known as a wheeled farthingale and it had a padded roll around the waistline to push the exterior garment outwards so that the material of the dress then fell perpendicular.

An alternative to the kirtle was wearing a series of light skirts (petticoats) combined with a bodice which was usually a stiff garment made from wool and which emphasised a narrow waistline. Bodices gave support to or even constricted the upper body. They were given rigidity by inserting thin pieces of whalebone, wood or metal. Finer bodices were closed using buttons or hooks. Sometimes a reinforcing piece of wood called a 'busk' was inserted at the front of the bodice and held in position using a ribbon in the centre of the chest (which survives to this day in some undergarments). The bodice could be fastened at the front, side or back. As with the hemlines of men's waistcoats, the neckline of women's bodices varied in cut. In the mid-16th century CE, the cut was low, then rose over time and finally became low-cut again by the end of the century. Aristocratic women wore sleeves to their bodice if it were worn as an outer garment.

A third alternative was to wear a gown which was essentially a skirt and bodice attached together and worn over undergarments. These were the most extravagant of the Elizabethan garments and were typically worn with false sleeves and decorated with pearls, jewels and gold brocade.

Children of the wealthy were typically dressed as if they were miniature adults. In addition, boys up to the age of five or six were often dressed as the girls were with plenty of frilly lace and brocade.

Sign up for our free weekly email newsletter!

The Commoners

Commoners wore similar clothes to the aristocracy but made along much simpler lines and with cheaper materials. Workers obviously did not wear restrictive clothing when doing their daily tasks. Materials such as cheaper linen, linen canvas, hemp canvas, and lockram (from coarse hemp) were all used for everyday working clothes that needed to be durable to wear and weather. For this reason, hems were sometimes made of more durable material so that they could take the extra wear and tear and be easily replaced if necessary to give the garment a longer life. Aprons of thick fabric or leather were worn to protect clothes, too. For a special outfit, an affordable luxury was satin (about ten times cheaper than damask). As some dyes were expensive, grey and brown shades were the most common colours in the clothing of the poorer classes.

Travelling salesmen and local mercers would have sold simple clothes like stockings and underclothes. For more elaborate outerwear, a specialised tailor or seamstress would have made the clothes on demand. Hose or loose-fitting stockings remained popular with men, although fashionable aristocrats would have preferred trunkhose. Shorter stockings tied with a garter and ribbon at the knee were popular with all classes. Lower class women sometimes wore sleeveless bodices and fastened them using laces, something upper-class women did not do. A wool or linen cap or flat hat was commonly worn, even indoors. Hats for the rich were sometimes made with fur (especially beaver) while commoners might use straw, felt, or leather. Shoes were as mentioned above but workers sometimes wore ankle-boots made of leather.

Silk, ribbons, and lace were luxury items but could be easily added in moderation to even plain clothes to make them more attractive. This was especially so as the English followed the fashion trends set by the French and Italians whose upper classes favoured more ostentatious clothing. The trend for elaborate decoration then trickled down to all classes.

Controlling Fashion

Elizabeth was the last monarch to impose sumptuary laws (notably in 1559 and 1597 CE) to curb extravagant spending on clothing and ensure the elite remained the only ones with the finest clothes. There was genuine concern that young men, in particular, outspent their inheritances in trying to keep up with the fashions set by the richer members of society. Consequently, there were strict rules on who could wear certain types of clothes, certain materials, and certain colours. There were other reasons to limit dress such as the religious views of Protestantism that called for more austere clothing, and the fact that finer and more dazzling clothes typically came from abroad and so hurt the sales of plainer home production.

Examples of restrictions included only earls or higher ranks being able to wear gold cloth. Only royalty could wear purple and only peers and their relations could wear wool garments made abroad. Servants of anyone lower than a gentleman could not wear fur of any kind, and commoners were banned from wearing stockings made from material costing more than a certain price per yard. Anyone caught breaking these sumptuary laws risked various degrees of fines and having the article of clothing confiscated. The fact that such fines were in place illustrates, though, that many Elizabethans of all classes were willing to pay any price to wear the finest fashions of the day.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Clothes in the Elizabethan era (1558-1603 CE) became much more colourful, elaborate, and flamboyant than in previous periods. With Elizabeth I of England (r. 1558-1603 CE) herself being a dedicated...

# data[].attributes.headline
How did Shakespeare think about the Issues of Race?

# data[].attributes.subject
How did Shakespeare think about the Issues of Race?

# data[].attributes.body
Bowdoin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The enduring attraction of William Shakespeare, say scholars, is his ability to touch on so many subjects and themes which resonate today: jealousy, ambition, betrayal, revenge, and of course, love.

But what do The Bard's plays tell us about the issue of race? It's a question of particular interest to Associate Professor of English Aaron Kitch.

"Perhaps the most important thing to remember," he said, "is that race means something quite different today, compared to what it did in Shakespeare's time. It wasn't until the nineteenth century." he explained, "that race meant inherited, biological dispositions of features. At the turn of the sixteenth century race could mean a group with common ancestry, but it could mean a whole range of other things too." Kitch teaches a class on this issue, and he also delivered the lecture Shakespeare's Racial Imagination October 20, 2016, as part of the Bowdoin Book Lecture Series organized by the Association of Bowdoin Friends.

Historical context
At the time Shakespeare was writing-the late 1500s and early 1600s-England was not yet a major global player, said Kitch, but the expanding series of trade routes being established by merchant-adventurers like Sir John Hawkins, were laying the foundation for what would be the world's biggest empire 150 years later. "The main empires in Shakespeare's day were the Dutch, the Spanish, the Venetians and the Ottoman Turks. If you saw a person of color in London four hundred years ago," said Kitch, "he was more likely to be a slave-owner than a slave."

So while there was not established racism in the modern sense, there was a suspicion of darker skinned people-Moors from North Africa ("blackamoors" as they were often termed)-and indeed Queen Elizabeth I issued a proclamation that they be expelled. This hostility though, said Kitch, was more due to religious and political concerns than racial ones: Moors were likely to be closely associated with the Spanish empire, with whom England was at war for much of the time Shakespeare was writing.

And then there's the issue of the slave trade, in which England participated. Sir John Hawkins was active in transporting captured slaves from West Africa to the Americas. Queen Elizabeth's attitude towards this was conflicted, said Kitch. "On the one hand she opposed the practice of taking slaves against their will, but on the other hand she invested in Hawkins' enterprises."

Shakespeare's characters of color
This complicated attitude towards race was reflected, for example, in Othello, explained Kitch, the character and the play. "One of the ironies of Othello is that the main character is black, but he's also a general defending Christianity against the Turks." Although he's essentially a sympathetic character, said Kitch, Othello's skin color does become an issue through the machinations of Iago, who is Othello's ensign but hates his boss for promoting someone else ahead of him. As Iago's plotting turns people against Othello, the latter's color, and a fear of miscegenation fueled by Iago and his allies, causes Othello to take on racist attributes, including irrational behavior and uncontrollable rage.

Shylock, the Jewish money-lender from the Merchant of Venice, is another character whose racial identity becomes a central theme of the play, "although in this case," said Kitch, "it's more open to interpretation whether he's an evil character, or just a victim of anti-semitism." Shylock's loan is relied upon in the play to enable one of the main characters, Bassanio, to pursue his love interest, Portia, and attain her hand in marriage. "Although Shylock is an alien within the state," said Kitch, "the state is dependent on people like him to supply wealth and facilitate trade, so as well as race, the play is also about commerce and sexuality, because he's the obstacle to all the marriages in the play."

Another play Kitch talked about was The Tempest, which tackles issues of race and colonization, and which is thought to have been inspired by a real shipwreck in Bermuda in the early 1600s. Most of the main characters are Italian nobility who find themselves stranded on a remote island. Caliban, an island native, is described as villainous and deformed. He is always cursing his master, Prospero, who says of him "This thing of darkness / I acknowledge mine." This idea of native people being enslaved by outsiders, said Kitch, "anticipates colonial discourse, even though England was more than a century away from having any empire to speak of."

Shakespeare's own thoughts on race?
Kitch said it's crucial to remember that William Shakespeare never communicated directly to his audience about race or any other issue: he spoke through his characters, who of course represent multiple voices. "We don't know if any of these voices are that of Shakespeare, but what's interesting is the way he wants to stage problems and questions using the materials he finds. Whether it concerns a fantastical story, a shipwreck, court intrigue, navigation, politics, or anything else, he combines these elements and doesn't say just one thing about race."

Consider also, said Kitch, how Shakespeare's ability to convey such a nuanced approach to the issue of race was helped by his extraordinary knowledge of the English language. "He had a vocabulary of about twenty-five thousand words, which is approximately ten times greater than the average English speaker in America."

Listen to Aaron Kitch being interviewed on WBOR Radio (audio may take a few seconds to load)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Did Shakespeare Think About the Issue of Race?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The enduring attraction of William Shakespeare, say scholars, is his ability to touch on so many subjects and themes which resonate today: jealousy, ambition, betrayal, revenge, and of course, love. But what do The Bard's plays tell us about the issue of race? It's a question of particular interest to Associate Professor of English Aaron Kitch.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Elizabethan England had four main classes: the Nobility, the Gentry, the Yeomanry, and the Poor. A person's class determined how they could dress, where they could live, and the kinds of jobs people and their children could get.

A nobleman was rich and powerful and therefore during the reign of Elizabeth as well as the reigns of her father and grandfather Henry VIII and Henry VII, the monarch rarely appointed new nobles. They viewed the noble class as a threat to their power and liked to keep their numbers small. A person could become a noble either by birthright or by grant from the king or queen. Nobility could lose their fortune, but it took a high crime like treason to lose their title.

The gentry were knights, squires, gentlemen and gentlewomen whose fortunes were great enough that they did not have to work with their hands for a living. Their numbers grew rapidly, and became the most important class during Elizabethan time. They could start as a knight and through generations and marriages they could gradually build a wealth and title. Most of the important people of this time came from this class.

The Yeomanry were the 'middleclass'. They could live comfortably with the little savings they built up, but at any moment, be it illness or famine, could lose everything. While the gentry spent their wealth building large homes, the yeomen used their wealth more simply and instead worked to expand their land and improve it.

At the bottom were the Poor who for some reason or another found themselves without money, food, or shelter. Because their numbers were increasing, the Poor Laws were passed to assist them. Any Poor person found guilty of being able to do an honest day's work but who chose not to, could be sentenced to death.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Elizabethan England had four main classes: the Nobility, the Gentry, the Yeomanry, and the Poor. A person's class determined how they could dress, where they could live, and the kinds of jobs people and their children could get.

# data[].attributes.body
Information about how the plays were published from the Folger Shakespeare Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Publication history of Shakespeare's plays, from early quartos through modern editions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How was society structured in Elizabethan England?

During the Elizabethan era there was a strict social hierarchy. God was at the top followed by the monarch. Everyone was expected to respect the hierarchy and follow it. This meant following the orders of the class above you and taking some responsibility for those below you.

Hierarchy: a system in which members of a society are ranked according to relative status or authority. The people at the top of the hierarchy are the most important.

Monarch: King or Queen

There were six main social classes in Elizabethan England:
* Nobility
* Gentry
* Yeomanry
* Tenant farmer
* Poor
* Vagrant

Read and watch the short videos to learn about each social group.

Nobility
They were rich and powerful. There were only a small number of noblemen in the country, less than one hundred. They were the Queen's main advisers.

Gentry
The gentry included knights, gentlemen and gentlewomen. They owned land but did not work the land. They spent their money on large houses. There were lots of opportunities during the Elizabethan period for the gentry to make money and improve their status. They were important in their local areas. For example, they worked as judges.

Yeomanry
Yeomen had savings and lived a comfortable life. They owned land but not as much as the gentry. They worked to expand their land and improve it. Their wealth was not secure like the gentry. There were more yeomen than gentry.

Tenant Farmer
Tenant farmers rented their land from the yeomen or gentry. They lived a comfortable life.

Poor
This was the biggest group and included many different people from labourers and servants. They had a very hard and difficult life. In towns they might work in trades whilst in the countryside they work on the land. They struggled for food, money and shelter. They could easily become unemployed. They did not own any land. During the Elizabethan era people thought it was an individual's fault if they were poor.
N.B Covered in more detail in another blog.

Vagrant
A vagrant was a homeless person. During the period people believed they were fit able bodied people who avoided work.
N.B Covered in more detail in another lesson.
Well done you have completed your learning.

Visit Red Lodge Museum,P ark Row. Bristol. BS1 5LJ
This museum is free to visit - take along your family.
The Great Oak Room is the last complete Elizabethan room in Bristol.

What to know more?
Grades 9-7

To find out more about 'The Elizabethan big society' with Phil Withington a lecturer in the Faculty of History in the University of Cambridge and is a Fellow of Christ's College. Using this information add more details to your diagram.
https://www.historyextra.com/period/elizabethan/the-elizabethan-big-society/
Gain more knowledge about the rich in Elizabethan England by stepping back in time. Watch this 11 minute video.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/teach/class-clips-video/history-ks3-who-were-the-rich-in-elizabethan-england/znbv47h

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Early Elizabethan England - Society: social hierarchy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How was society structured in Elizabethan England? During the Elizabethan era there was a strict social hierarchy. God was at the top followed by the monarch. Everyone was expected to respect the hierarchy and follow it. This meant following the orders of the class above you and taking some responsibility for those below you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Gender roles are a collection of behavioral and social norms that acceptable for people of a particular sex in the framework of a specific culture (Dusinberre 12). Gender roles change widely between different cultures and periods. To better understand gender roles in Shakespeare's plays, it is crucial to understand gender-based roles in the Elizabethan Era.

Gender Roles in Shakespeare's Plays

In the Elizabethan era, gender roles were clearly defined. Elizabethan England was highly patriarchal in attitudes and structure. Women were not allowed to claim any independence but were considered subservient to their male relatives, whether husbands, brothers, or fathers. During this era, social advancement for women was almost impossible. They were denied access to literary rhetoric, an essential linguistic and intellectual tool for social promotion (Emmison 36).

During this era, Men were granted dominion over women, and it was expected that they were the heads of the household and demanded obedience from their wives and children. Men arranged marriages for the daughters and women relatives to suitable suitors. Bravery and intellect were expected for all men. The service to the crown and the church was required for all.

On the other hand, women were expected to be submissive to their male counterparts. They had to be respectable, obedient, and knowledgeable of domestic issues. A woman's duty was to obey her husband and make him proud (Loomba 16). From birth, women were taught how to carry out domestic tasks and govern the household, such that when they were married, regardless of their class, they would make their husbands proud. In marriage, a woman was supposed to provide a dowry to the man. Once married, she passed her material wealth to the husband.

Education during this time was only granted to women from noble families. Education mainly included knowledge of several languages such as French, Latin, Italian, and Greek. Throughout their lives, women of the Elizabethan era were made to become highly dependent on their male husbands, and deviance from this would constitute a social crime. It may have led to a woman being socially shunned and labeled a witch or other inappropriate titles (Emmison, 45).

Shakespeare's great works have been recognized mainly because of the reality check that they had in the society of the time. However, having examined Shakespeare's works, one cannot help but notice how he firmly emphasizes the place of each gender in society. According to Shakespeare, it is a man's world, meaning that it is the male gender that has got the upper hand in society over their female counterparts. In almost all his books and poems, Shakespeare depicts women as being submissive to men, not having the same opportunities and freedom as their male counterparts, and giving up a lot for the male figures in society.

In the book The Women of Richard III, Shakespeare brings out another side of the women. Shakespeare depicts a woman as one who will not tolerate the oppression and the inequality in society. She is ready to raise her voice to speak against the unfairness and injustices in society. Therefore, in Shakespeare's world, women are victims of their male counterparts who are always sidelined and who must constantly complain and protest to have their grievance addressed.

It is as though they are not part of society, and they have to sort of struggle to fit in a male-dominated society. Shakespeare depicts a chauvinistic society where the male gender occupies the entire society, oblivious to the existence of their female counterparts.

Women have played various roles and characters in the plays and poems written by Shakespeare. However, they are weak and inferior to men. This is so evident, even in the manner that Shakespeare chooses his characters. For instance, in The Tempest, there is only one female character, Miranda, while the rest are male. This deliberate choice of fewer female characters in comparison to the male characters sometimes makes the female character have a minimum impact. By the end of the play, the reader may have disregarded or forgotten about the existence of the female character.

It is important to remember that when William Shakespeare came up with his creative pieces of writing, it was the Elizabethan era. This was when Queen Elizabeth of England was reigning. During this era, women were highly looked down upon, and men heavily dominated their women to the extent of oppressing. Therefore, Shakespeare's depiction of women was just a reflection of what in society at the time. However, he was on several occasions accused of exaggerating the demeaning of women in society. Some of his critics even argued that he was a male chauvinist. Scholars, however, argue that William Shakespeare was a feminist.

One of Shakespeare's greatest plays that received worldwide acrimony is Romeo and Juliet. Like many other of his works, one of the loudest character traits of all the females depicted in these works is silence. Women are almost afraid of complaining or protecting the situation of their lives in society, yet it is evident that they are not content with their situations.

In Romeo, there are only a few women who can be noted. They include Juliet, her mother, and Juliet's nurse. Throughout the play, it becomes evidently clear that these women have little control or none at all on their lives and even on the lives of others. Juliet's mother, for instance, does not have any influence on Juliet, the kind of influence that a mother would be expected to have on her daughter. The manner in which the play ends with Juliet being silenced to death is parabolic, showing the loud silence among the women in Shakespeare's world.

The aspect of silence can also be seen in Othello, where the wife of Othello is a good Christian wife who knows nothing else but to remain submissive to her husband. She does not ask any question but rather follows instructions from her husband without fail. Hamlet, another great work of Shakespeare, features two key women who also portray a great deal of silence. One cannot help but notice that in all works of Shakespeare, the main women characters are finally sentenced at the end of the play or poem. They are actually silenced practically through death as a result of the actions of their male counterparts.

While William Shakespeare may have been accused of being a male chauvinist by his critics, the truth of the matter is that Shakespeare helped the rest of the world know what was happening and especially as far as the oppression of women was concerned. It is perhaps due to such works of William Shakespeare that women came together and protested. The world today has no comparison with the society back then. Women have now risen to positions of power, and now they have equal and similar opportunities as their male counterparts. The oppression is now an issue of gone days. Women are now enjoying just as much freedom as the male gender.

Conclusion

Shakespeare was able to forge the relationship between the different gender roles to bring out different plots in a manner acceptable to the audience in the Elizabethan era. He uses the gender roles defined at the time to develop his characters. He presents how various characters meet their gender roles to complete a given role as required by the plot of the play. Although modern critics may deem Shakespeare a sexist, it is essential to remember that gender roles are defined by the moment they are applied and that Shakespeare utilized his gender roles in an exemplary manner to meet his objectives.

Works Cited

Chedgzoy, Kate. Shakespeare, Feminism, and Gender: Contemporary Critical Essays. New York: Palgrave, 2001.

Dusinberre, Juliet. Shakespeare and the Nature of Women. London: MacMillan, 1996.

Faucet, Helena. On Some of Shakespeare's Females Characters. New York: AMS, 1970.

Loomba, A. Gender, Race, Renaissance Drama. Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1989.

Orgel, Stephen. "Prospero's Wife." Representations 8.10 (1984): 1-13.

Shakespeare, William. The Tempest: With New and Updated Critical Essays. New York: Signet Classic, 1998.

Thompson, Ann. "Miranda, Where's your Sister: Reading Shakespeare's The Tempest." Kamps 1 (1995): 168-177.

Thomson, Peter. "The Comic Actor and Shakespeare. In Wells, Stanley and Sarah Stanton" The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Stage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Tillyard, E. M. Shakespeare's Last Plays. London: Chatto and Windus, 1938.

Woolf, Virginia. "A Room of One's Own." The Longman Anthology of British Literature: Second Compact Edition: Volume B. Ed. David Damrosch. New York: Pearson, 2004. 1240-1242.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Elizabethan Era Gender Roles in Shakespeare's Plays | Free Essay Example

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gender roles are a collection of behavioral and social norms that acceptable for people of a particular sex in the framework of a specific culture (Dusinberre 12). Gender roles change widely between different cultures and periods. To better understand gender roles in Shakespeare's plays, it is crucial to understand gender-based roles in the Elizabethan Era.

# data[].attributes.body
Information about the Globe Theatre from Folger Shakespeare Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shakespeare’s theater | Folger Shakespeare Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
History of The Globe and other theaters in London where Shakespeare's company, the Lord Chamberlain's Men, performed, audience experiences in playhouses, expectations for actors, costumes and other staging choices.

# data[].attributes.headline
Philosophy and Science in the Elizabethan Era

# data[].attributes.subject
Philosophy and Science in the Elizabethan Era

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By the early sixteenth century the mystery of what lay beyond the three known continents of Europe, Asia, and Africa had been solved. Thanks to the work of brave explorers, the unknown regions, which had previously been described in supernatural terms, were suddenly transformed into concrete world geography. (For more information on exploration, see Chapter 6.) This discovery marked a gradual change in the way European people viewed the universe during the Renaissance, the era beginning around 1350 in Europe, in which scholars turned their attention to classical Greek and Latin learning and shifted to a more rational (based on reason rather than spiritual belief or church authority) approach to philosophy, religion, and science. Historians consider the Renaissance the beginning of the last of three major divisions of European history: the classical or ancient era, during which the Greek and Roman civilizations flourished (c. 500 bce to c. 500 ce); the Middle Ages, or medieval era, which lasted from c. 500 to c. 1500; and the modern era, which began with the Renaissance and continues to the present. During the Elizabethan Era in England, the period associated with the reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603) that is often considered to be a golden age in English history, people were in transition between the Middle Ages and modern times.

During the Middle Ages the mysteries of the natural world were viewed as part of God's design. Europeans considered it beyond the capacity of humans to understand these mysteries, and they believed it was wrong and even dangerous to try to control or change the set order of the world. During the Renaissance, however, more and more people accepted secular (non-religious) attempts to understand the natural world. They did not feel that their endeavors conflicted with Christian beliefs; rather, they believed that human learning and accomplishments increased the glory of the God that created them. Many events contributed to this change in worldview. Exploration, the rediscovery of the writings of the ancient Greek and Roman philosophers, new methods of education, the widespread distribution of books due to the development of the printing press, new scientific techniques, increasing trade and commerce, growing cities, and a rising middle class were all contributing factors.

The changing shape of the universe

In ancient and medieval times there was little or no distinction between the disciplines of science, philosophy, and religion. What we call science today was a part of a wider system called philosophy that combined factual, spiritual, and moral knowledge. The medieval model of the universe described below demonstrates this concept.

WORDS TO KNOW

alchemy:

A science of medieval times that attempted to transform base metals into gold and find a potion for eternal life.

angel:

A spiritual being ranking superior to humans, but at the lowest level of heavenly beings.

archangel:

A spiritual being ranked above the angels.

astrology:

The study of the position of stars and planets in the belief that they influence human affairs and events on Earth.

astronomy:

The scientific study of the stars, planets, and other celestial bodies.

civic:

Relating to the rights and duties of citizens.

classical:

Of or relating to the art, literature, architecture and way of life of ancient Greece or Rome, roughly between 500 bce and 500 ce.

empirical scientist:

A scientific researcher who relies on observation and experiments rather than theory.

heliocentric:

Relating to the principle that the sun is the center of the solar system, with the planets rotating around it.

humanism:

A cultural and intellectual movement during the Renaissance, following the rediscovery of the art and literature of ancient Greece and Rome, that focused on human values, interests, and welfare.

hypothesis:

An explanation of natural phenomenon that has not yet been tested; a theory.

scholasticism:

An effort to reconcile the teachings of the ancient classical philosophers with medieval Christian theology.

secular:

Non-religious.

seraphim:

The top level of angels, ranking closest to God.

Medieval scholars adapted the ancient model of the universe that had been described in detail in the second century by the Greek philosopher Claudius Ptolemy (c. 100-c. 178). In the medieval model the universe was usually depicted as a system of spheres. At the center was a stationary, or unmoving, sphere called Earth. The spheres surrounding the Earth were the seven so-called "planets": the moon, Mercury, Venus, the sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. Beyond the planets was a crystalline (hard and perfectly clear) sphere where the stars existed as fixed objects. Beyond these spheres were the heavens, with progressively higher spheres for the angels (spiritual beings ranking superior to humans, but at the lowest level of heavenly beings), archangels (spiritual beings ranked above angels), and seraphim (the top level of angels, ranking closest to God). God existed outside of the spheres, where he could watch over the entire system. His primary focus, however, was on human beings at the center of the universe. Beyond the realm of God was the end of the universe, which was considered finite (having a definite end).

According to the Christian religion the Earth had become a place of change, corruption, and death after Adam and Eve committed the original sin of eating the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge. Medieval people considered everything in the sublunar sphere (located beneath the sphere containing the moon, sun, and planets; Earth) to be mortal, or subject to death, while everything above the sphere of the moon was eternal. The outer spheres rotated around the Earth in a state of perfect harmony, but because of Original Sin, no human being was able to experience this perfection unless he or she reached heaven after death.

In Elizabethan England most people accepted the medieval model of the universe and the moral lesson it conveyed. They had faith in the set order of the universe and feared chaos if the order of things-God's design-was disrupted. Everyone and everything had its assigned role and rank, or degree, in the universe, from the lowest rocks to the highest orders of angels. Evil and misfortune were thought to result when people tried to change their place in this order. English playwright William Shakespeare (1564-1616) expressed this common view in a famous passage of his 1603 play Troilus and Cressida:

    ... The heavens themselves, the planets, and this centre [the Earth]
    Observe degree, priority, and place....
    Take but degree away, untune that string,
    And hark what discord [disharmony] follows.

            Source: The Riverside Shakespeare. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1974, p.455.

Although the medieval model of the universe persisted throughout the Renaissance, a new theory about the shape of the universe arose around 1512, when Polish astronomer Nicholaus Copernicus (1473-1543) wrote De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium (Revolution of the Heavenly Spheres), explaining his heliocentric theory. This theory held that the Earth, along with the other planets, rotated around the sun. Copernicus had arrived at this theory using mathematics and observation of the stars and planets. Though he was convinced of his findings, he was reluctant to publicize his ideas, since they contradicted the teachings of the church. According to church leaders the Earth was the center of the universe because the humans who lived there were the constant focus of God's divine rule. Copernicus waited more than thirty years to have his work published, but many European astronomers knew of his theories and some continued his work.

The heliocentric model of the universe would not find widespread acceptance until 1609, but by the time Elizabeth took the throne in 1558 people had started to doubt the medieval model. Europeans no longer looked up at the sky with the same certainty that they were looking at the home of the angels. As people began to understand the universe as an infinite (having no end) realm, the human place within it grew increasingly uncertain. Where previously there had been an almost unquestioned belief that all human experiences were part of a divine plan, during the Renaissance many people began to believe in chance: the idea that events occur at random. The individual now felt that he or she had some control over daily life. Elizabethans found a new faith in the power of the individual to unravel the mysteries of the physical world-just as human beings in the early sixteenth century had explored the great unknown areas on the world map. These changes happened very gradually, however; most people during the Elizabethan Era held onto the medieval model of the universe even as they began to adopt a new worldview.

Renaissance education and the rise of humanism

Most scholars in the Middle Ages had been part of a movement called scholasticism, an effort to reconcile the teachings of the ancient classical philosophers with medieval Christian theology. They had rediscovered the works of the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 bce) during the thirteenth century and followed his example in trying to explain their religion through logic and reason. Medieval universities and monasteries adopted a technique in which a teacher raised a question, usually about an aspect of Christian knowledge that seemed to conflict with ancient philosophy. The students then entered a philosophical debate trying to reconcile Christianity and ancient philosophy through logic.

Scholasticism was gradually replaced with a new form of higher education, called humanism. Humanism is the cultural and intellectual movement during the Renaissance, following the rediscovery of the art and literature of ancient Greece and Rome, that focused on human values, interests, and welfare. The movement began in the city-state of Florence around 1350. The father of humanism, poet and scholar Francesco Petrarch (1304-1374), was frustrated by the scholastics' continual arguing over the fine points of religion. Such debates, he felt, were abstract and not particularly relevant to daily life. Petrach began to collect and study the texts of ancient writers other than Aristotle. The ancients had been more interested in the way humans lived-in learning to live as a good citizen of one's homeland-than in what happened after death. Studying the ancient texts directed readers' focus to moral truths that could be applied to human life. Petrarch persuaded other scholars to join his search for ancient manuscripts from the early civilizations of Greece and Rome, and widespread interest in classical texts followed.

The Printing Press Helps Bring Humanism to England

The printing press, a machine that could quickly print copies of text in large quantities, helped spread the values of humanism across Europe during the Renaissance. The early development of the printing press took place in Germany in the mid-fifteenth century. German inventor Johannes Gutenberg (c. 1398-1468) developed the first press to publish a long printed book, the famous Gutenberg Bible, between 1454 and 1456. By 1500 more than one thousand printing presses had been established across Europe, and they had collectively produced more than nine million copies of more than forty thousand separate book titles. For the first time books were readily available to anyone who could read them. Though most early books were religious works, there was also a market for the printed texts of the recently rediscovered Greek and Roman writings.

The printing press arrived in England in 1476, when royal servant and translator William Caxton (c. 1422-c. 1491) established a press in Westminster, a city near London. Because European printers were already selling printed copies of ancient classics in England, Caxton decided to focus on original English works or translations in the vernacular, or everyday language. Caxton's books found a ready market among the nobility and wealthy merchants, and because they were printed in the vernacular, the middle and lower classes were also drawn to them. In his fifteen years as a printer at Westminster, Caxton published more than one hundred titles, helping to bring humanism to England. His works also promoted early English literature, providing a basis for the Elizabethan poets, essayists, and dramatists to come.

A new program of education resulted from the study of the classics. First students learned the classical Latin and Greek languages, then studied the classical texts intently in order to learn their moral and civic (relating to the rights and duties of citizens) principles. At universities throughout Europe the earlier emphasis on logic, classification, and philosophical debate gave way to a new focus on moral philosophy, literature, and history. These studies were considered humanistic, focusing on humans rather than religion, and hence the movement came to be called humanism. Though these courses were secular, the people who taught them were usually devout Christians.

Most Renaissance humanists did not limit their knowledge to one branch of learning. The term "Renaissance man" describes an individual whose talents spanned a variety of disciplines. Two of the most famous Italian Renaissance artists, for example, followed several fields of study. Michelangelo (1475-1564) was a remarkable painter and sculptor and also a skilled architect and poet. Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) enhanced his artwork by studying mathematics, engineering, and anatomy, the study of the structure of the human body. Though some upper-class Renaissance women were well educated, they were usually not considered men's intellectual equals or given the opportunity to achieve independent fame and fortune. Queen Elizabeth, however, was a ruler, poet, translator, dancer, and musician, and she would certainly fit into the definition of the Renaissance individual.

The first English humanists

The values of humanism spread from Italy to France, Germany, England, and the Netherlands around the end of the fifteenth century. One of the greatest humanist scholars was the Dutch cleric Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536), who had been trained in a monastery and had taken his orders as a priest. Displeased with the monastery's scholastic approach to education, Erasmus went to Paris to teach. He eventually became a professor of Greek at Cambridge University in England. His best-known writings were about Christianity. Like Petrarch, he believed that scholastics had corrupted the faith, making doctrines too complicated to be useful in everyday life. His book In Praise of Folly (1509) is a criticism of the clergy and scholars of his day. In this and many other works he captivated the reading public with his common sense and his practical application of humanist theory to real life. When Martin Luther's (1483-1546) Protestant reforms spread in the 1520s many colleagues thought Erasmus would join the efforts to form a new Christian church. But Erasmus remained a loyal Catholic, believing reforms should be undertaken within the church.

Erasmus's good friend, English writer and statesman Thomas More (1478-1535), shared his frustration with the corruption in religion and politics. More's greatest work, Utopia (1516), was based on the Greek philosopher Plato's (c. 428-c. 348 bce) classic work The Republic, which attempts to determine the traits of a perfect state. Utopia describes an imaginary land noticeably lacking the greed and violence common to Europe. Contrasting contemporary England to the ideal world of his book, More demonstrates a more reasonable way to live, in which the government functions to increase human happiness. Like Erasmus, More had no trouble reconciling his Catholic faith with the teachings of the ancient Greeks.

Humanism during the reign of Henry VIII

Renaissance humanism was popular among educators and scholars in England in the early 1500s-the first decades of King Henry VIII's (1491-1547; reigned 1509-47) rule. The king had been educated by humanists and placed humanist statesmen in high government positions. Thomas More became one of his chief advisors. But in the 1530s Henry VIII broke with the Roman Catholic Church because it would not grant an annulment to his marriage, and created his own English religion. Those who would not comply with his religion were punished or executed. During the remainder of his reign few dared speak freely or honestly about what they believed. Thomas More was an exception. Unable to support the king's actions in breaking with the church, he resigned from his office as the king's advisor. Henry still demanded that More swear an oath rejecting the Roman Catholic pope's authority over the church in England and endorsing the king's right to lead the church in England. More's conscience would not allow him to take the oath, and for his refusal, he was executed in 1535.

During the Middle Ages England's two major universities, Oxford and Cambridge, had been bustling centers of scholasticism, active in the training of young men for careers in the Catholic Church. During the reign of Henry VIII, however, when the Catholic Church was no longer accepted in the kingdom and few dared discuss their beliefs, attendance at the universities dropped greatly and did not pick up again until after the king's death. In the 1550s Oxford and Cambridge once again filled with students. At this time, though, the revived schools were staffed by well-educated humanists, an increasing number of whom were Protestant reformers. Along with the traditional curriculum of liberal arts and philosophy, English universities featured a new focus on the study of Greek and Latin. Students were mainly members of the nobility, and many of them did not intend to enter church-related careers. A university education had become necessary for many other professions, such as serving in Parliament or becoming an officer of the state.

The queen's education

Queen Elizabeth exemplified the transition between medieval times and the Renaissance. For her, as for many others, the new worldview of the Renaissance existed side by side with the well-established views of the Middle Ages. Her understanding of her power as a queen was based on the medieval concept that everyone's role in life had been determined by God and could not be questioned or changed; she held firmly to this belief throughout her life. Elizabeth's education, though, was based on the new learning of the Renaissance. It fostered within her a lifetime curiosity about astronomy and mathematics, the new geography, and classical philosophy.

Renaissance Medicine

Since the days of Aristotle science had been based on the belief that all of the Earth's matter was made up of four elements: earth, water, air, and fire. Human beings were thought to be microcosms, or little worlds, that were smaller versions of the macrocosm, or the world at large. Thus the four elements of the world were thought to correspond to four humors, or body fluids, in humans. These fluids, which were associated with human characteristics, were believed to exist in a state of balance within the body. The four humors had the following corresponding elements and traits:

Blood corresponded to the element of fire and was associated with a cheerful character.

Phlegm (mucus) corresponded to earth and was associated with a slow, unexcitable nature.

Black bile (digestive juices) corresponded with water and was associated with sadness and depression.

Yellow bile corresponded to air and was associated with anger and bad temper.

Renaissance philosophy held that imbalance in the body's humors resulted in disease. Thus treatments for disease were usually attempts to restore balance by draining off an excess of one of the humors. Elizabethan doctors frequently practiced bloodletting-cutting open a vein to let the blood flow-to cure fevers, infections, and diseases. Sometimes they placed leeches (blood-sucking worms) on prescribed parts of the body to suck out blood. In other cases they induced vomiting. According to modern medicine most of these remedies were harmful, or at least not helpful, to the patient.

In the early Renaissance, some scholars began to study the human body through dissection, cutting the body open in order to examine the organs, and systematic observation. The pioneers of the new science of anatomy were Leonardo da Vinci, whose fascination in the workings of the human body led to masterful sketches of its internal structures, and Belgian anatomist and physician Andreas Vesalius (1514-1564). In 1543 Vesalius wrote a seven-volume text on the structure of the human body illustrated with engravings based on his own drawings. Vesalius rejected the medical theories that had been passed down from the ancient Greeks and Romans. He believed that the only reliable source of information on human anatomy was the close observation of a dissected human corpse. He showed the human body to be composed of internal organs that function together, and his descriptions and drawings were the most accurate study of anatomy ever undertaken up to that time.

As a young girl Elizabeth lived in a royal household at Hatfield, twenty miles north of London. There she, her half-brother Edward (1537-1553), half-sister Mary (1516-1558), and other noble children were educated by England's finest teachers. Most of the royal tutors came from the humanist tradition at Cambridge University, and among them was one of the top Greek scholars in England, Roger Ascham (1515-1568). Ascham had arrived at Cambridge in 1530, just in time to participate in the revolutionary changes brought about by the Renaissance. He remained there as an educator after graduating.

In 1548 Elizabeth invited Ascham to be her personal tutor. Under Ascham's guidance Elizabeth studied languages, religious studies, grammar, logic, mathematics, philosophy, history, penmanship, and music, but Ascham stressed language studies over all else. His method of teaching Elizabeth Greek, Latin, and French languages was to have her translate texts from their original language into English and then to translate her own English translations back into the original language. Elizabeth was an exceptionally good student; she was fluent in six languages by the age of eleven. Ascham took a bold step in instructing her in the art of public speaking, which was a highly unusual subject for a woman at the time. Elizabeth excelled in it.

As a humanist, Ascham believed that education's purpose was to provide a practical guide to living a moral life. Though we cannot know the extent of his effect on the future queen, a comparison of Elizabeth and her father, Henry VIII, shows a widely different view of the monarch's responsibility. While Henry viewed his every whim as divinely ordained, Elizabeth carefully crafted her public image and her actions to try to meet her civic responsibility. One of the things Ascham valued most was style, or speaking, writing, and comporting oneself with intelligence and elegance. This emphasis on style was fundamental to Elizabeth's reign as queen of England, and undoubtedly influenced her court and the culture of her land.

John Dee, mathematician, astrologer, and magician

In Elizabethan England people did not distinguish between astronomy, the scientific study of the stars and planets, and astrology, the study of the influence of the stars and planets on human life. Most accepted that the positions of the planets and stars determined human fate. In 1558, when it was time for Elizabeth to choose the day of her coronation, or crowning as queen, she turned to astrology to find the most favorable day. She selected as her astrologer John Dee (1527-1608). Dee was not only a respected astrologer, but also a scholar, mathematician, astronomer, ancient text collector, geographer, and author. Dee was a true example of a Renaissance man in England.

Dee was a brilliant student who, at the age of fifteen, studied Greek, Latin, philosophy, geometry, arithmetic, and astronomy at Cambridge University, finishing his degree in just two years. In 1547 he studied with the famed mapmaker Gerardus Mercator (1512-1594) in Belgium. (For more information on Mercator, see Chapter 6.) He would later use his mathematical skills and knowledge of mapmaking to instruct English sailors on geometry and navigation prior to their voyages to the New World. Dee was an excellent mathematician. He drew large crowds to hear him in Paris when he spoke about the Greek mathematician Euclid's (c. 325-c. 260 bce) principles of geometry.

Dee compiled a huge library of more than four thousand ancient and scholarly books. It was possibly the largest library in Europe at the time. Among his books Dee was most fascinated with those dealing with the supernatural. He was particularly interested in the symbols, language, and numbers used in communicating with the spirit world. He became absorbed in trying to find the pure language that had been used at the beginning of life on Earth, as well as magic numbers that could tap into the powers of the universe. He became absorbed in the supernatural, and soon rumors spread throughout England that he was a witch or black magician. Dee's purpose, though, was to find the ultimate truths about the universe. A Christian, he believed that God's power was beyond human understanding, but he sought to find the ways that divine power worked in the natural world, believing it was possible for humans to draw upon that power.

During his early years, Dee wrote two books that explored the power of the stars and planets to influence events in the human world-that is, to scientifically explain astrology. His work was equally devoted to astronomy. A new star appeared in the skies around 1572, bringing great fear to Europeans who thought it might be an evil omen. Dee studied it empirically, through scientific investigation, and accurately determined its distance from Earth using advanced mathematics. Queen Elizabeth was impressed with his skills, and asked him to advise her and teach her mathematics. However, she did not give him financial support, and Dee struggled with poverty throughout his life.

Dee is often remembered for the work of his later years. By 1581, certain that spirits were trying to communicate with him, he began gazing into a crystal ball, hoping to make contact with the supernatural world. A man named Edward Kelley convinced Dee that he could talk with angels. Dee gave Kelley a crystal ball and soon Kelley was relaying the messages of the angels to Dee, who recorded them. The two men wrote a book about their communications and the language used by the angels. This late period, during which Dee was reportedly communicating with the angels and practicing alchemy, a science of medieval times that attempted to transform base metals into gold and find a potion for eternal life, led later historians to dismiss his efforts as unscientific. But Dee's search for the

Alchemy

Alchemy was one of the most popular sciences of the Renaissance. At its most basic form, alchemy was the attempt to find the philosopher's stone, a stone or substance that could turn base metals, such as lead, into gold. For some, this pursuit was simply an effort to find great wealth, but for others, the ancient science of alchemy was actually far more complex, combining natural philosophy, metallurgical arts (the science of metals), and magic. True alchemists believed that if they could find the purifying agent that refined lead into gold, they could use the same substance or process to transform other matter into its perfect form. In trying to understand how metals develop within the Earth and their evolution toward perfection (gold), alchemists sought to understand the powers of divine creation in the natural world. In this way, alchemy was a kind of scientific exploration of God's work. Some Renaissance scientists pursued alchemy as a branch of medicine, seeking to find a process of purification, that could be practiced on humans. The end result would be perfection, or eternal life.

Most people viewed alchemy with awe and fear. They believed that to change the nature of metals was a disruption of the set order of the universe, since it moved beings from a low degree to a higher one. Interfering in God's creation was considered magic, but it was also considered science; in fact, science and magic were almost indistinguishable concepts in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. One university in Poland even offered an advanced degree in black magic. Nonetheless, magicians were often suspected of causing the world's problems. Scientists and mathematicians were viewed with suspicion as well.

Though alchemy is considered highly unscientific today, some of the top alchemists of the past were pioneers in the fields of chemistry and modern medicine. Perhaps the greatest alchemist, Swiss physician Philippus Aureolus Paracelsus (1493-1541) used knowledge from his alchemy experiments to develop successful chemical drug treatments for disease. Although his interest was in magic, astrology, and alchemy, Paracelsus was an empirical scientist. (An empirical scientist is one who relies on observation and experimental methods.) He contributed significantly to the development of medicine. Later scientists, including English physicist Isaac Newton (1642-1727), also experimented with alchemy.

truth is a remarkable story of the exploration of the universe and its powers based on the existing philosophy of his times.

Thomas Harriot, mathematician and astronomer

Mathematician and scientist Thomas Harriot (1560-1621) was among the next generation of Elizabethan scientists. After taking his degree at Oxford University, Harriot was employed in 1584 by statesman and poet Walter Raleigh (1552-1618) as household accountant and the designer of Raleigh's ships. When Raleigh organized his first expedition to establish a colony in the New World, Harriot instructed its seamen in methods of navigation. The expedition returned, carrying two natives named Manteo and Wanchese, who had been kidnapped in the colony of Roanoke off the coast of what is now North Carolina. Harriot spent time with the two natives, learning their language and creating an alphabet so he could write it down. The following year Raleigh sent a second expedition to settle a colony in the New World. Harriot accompanied the group as the scientist and historian of the expedition. While sailing to the New World, Harriot observed and recorded a solar eclipse with remarkable accuracy. At the Roanoke colony Harriot worked with artist John White (died c. 1593), studying the native people, vegetation, animal life, and other natural resources. He published A Briefe and True Report, an account of his findings, in 1588. It was the first book in English to describe the New World. Among its many merits, the book served as a foundation of the science of anthropology. (Anthropology is the study of human beings, particularly in reference to their cultures, environment, physical characteristics, and origins.)

After returning to England Harriot continued his scientific observations of the natural universe, first with the financial support of Raleigh, and later under Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland (1564-1632). In his early thirties he began working in astronomy and optics, the study of light. Harriot studied the way light bent when it passed through a glass or through liquid, discovering the law of refraction (the bending of light). He is credited with being the first person in England to build and use a telescope. He used his telescope to draw some of the earliest maps of the moon's surface. He also observed Jupiter's moons, studied sunspots, dark spots that sometimes appear on the surface of the sun, and calculated the speed of the sun's rotation. Harriot considered many practical problems in his work, such as the flight of cannon shells in order to improve their accuracy. He even investigated specific gravity, the density of a substance compared to the density of water, and developed tables of the specific gravity of various materials. He never published any of his findings and is rarely credited for them.

Harriot is probably best known as a mathematician. He wrote an algebra textbook that was widely used for many years. In this book he developed a number of equations and notations that simplified algebra. He become the first mathematician to use the greater than (>) and less than (<) symbols, and he was one of the first to adopt the plus sign (+) and minus sign (−), lowercase letters for variables, and the equal sign (=).

Sir Francis Bacon, philosopher of science

Francis Bacon (1561-1626) was a statesman, lawyer, writer, philosopher, and scientist. During the reign of Elizabeth he was involved in many political schemes. Though he fell from the queen's favor for a time, by the end of her life he had proved his keen intelligence, and he went on to a more promising career in the reign of James I (1566-1625; reigned 1603-25).

Bacon is probably best remembered for his ambitious plan to revise the methods of science. His scientific approach, often called the Baconian method, was to study the natural world empirically, through collection of data, experimentation, observation, and testing hypotheses. (A hypothesis is an explanation of natural phenomenon that has not yet been tested; a theory). Bacon believed that science had not advanced because it was based on false theories-such as alchemy, the four humors, and the shape of the universe-derived from Aristotle and Plato. He believed that science should be based on the observation of nature and a process of reasoning developed out of such observation. He promoted a practical view of science as a discipline that could improve the quality of human life and eventually help humans to conquer nature. His philosophy of science greatly influenced the next generation of scientists, and spawned the Scientific Revolution, a period of major scientific change that took place in the seventeenth century.

For More Information

BOOKS

Aston, Margaret, ed. The Panorama of the Renaissance. London: Thames and Hudson, 1996.

Kirkpatrick, Robin. The European Renaissance, 1400-1600. Harlow, England: Pearson Education, 2002.

The Riverside Shakespeare. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1974.

Wightman, W. P. D. Science in a Renaissance Society. London: Hutchinson University Library, 1972.

Woolley, Benjamin. The Queen's Conjurer: The Science and Magic of Dr. John Dee, Adviser to Queen Elizabeth I. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2001.

WEB SITES

Kreis, Steven. "Renaissance Humanism." The History Guide: Lectures on Modern European Intellectual History. http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/humanism.html (accessed on July 11, 2006).

"The Renaissance Connection" (interactive). Allentown Art Museum. http://www.renaissanceconnection.org/main.cfm (accessed on July 11, 2006).

"The Spell Binder." http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/S/spellbinder/index.shtml (accessed on July 11, 2006).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Changing View of the Universe: Philosophy and Science in the Elizabethan Era

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By the early sixteenth century the mystery of what lay beyond the three known continents of Europe, Asia, and Africa had been solved. Thanks to the work of brave explorers, the unknown regions, which had previously been described in supernatural terms, were suddenly transformed into concrete world geography.

# data[].attributes.body
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All the latest Shakespeare news and behind the scenes action at the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust

# data[].attributes.body
Mentor Text from class

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shakespeare in Love | 'Bonus Feature' (HD) - Joseph Fiennes, Gwyneth Paltrow | MIRAMAX

# data[].attributes.body
Biography.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
William Shakespeare - Quotes, Plays & Wife

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
William Shakespeare, often called England’s national poet, is considered the greatest dramatist of all time. His works are loved throughout the world, but Shakespeare’s personal life is shrouded in mystery.

# data[].attributes.body
Biography.com

# data[].attributes.headline
A Darker Side of Shakespeare: Social Justice Approach 

# data[].attributes.subject
A Darker Side of Shakespeare: Social Justice Approach 

# data[].attributes.body
Shakespeare's Globe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In his anti-immigrant musings about the value of cultural assimilation, Boris Johnson writes of the necessity for an English-first approach: "This is our language, the language of Shakespeare, the King James Bible, the language that has been spoken in London for centuries; and in the face of the vast migratory influx we have seen, we must insist on English if we are to have any hope of eupeptic absorption and assimilation." Linguistic identity is firmly tethered to ethnic identity, and thus the true desire here is that those who are not white should strive to approximate whiteness. In Johnson's estimation, Shakespeare is an icon of that identity.

In the US, Shakespeare exists as a monument to whiteness. In print, on stage, on screen, and in the popular imagination, the whiteness of Shakespeare is ubiquitous. And like Johnson, many here in the US feel that those not white of skin should speak English, should adapt culturally, and should approximate whiteness. But the truth is that, in their eyes, those of us who are dark of skin will never belong. In the realm of the Shakespeare industry, such attitudes also persist. Still, much has been done to bring to Shakespeare diverse understandings by so many BIPOC scholars, actors, dramaturges, students, educators, and readers. Lest you think that this speaks to Shakespeare's universality, I want to be clear that this is not at all the case. What this speaks to is the value of multilingual, multicultural, multiracial, and truly diverse perspectives. In this, our present moment, monuments are being torn down, and Shakespeare is no exception. You can keep your white Shakespeare, because what I want to see, and what I want others to see, is a darker shade of Shakespeare.

What, you might ask, attracts a Chicano living on the US-Mexico border to Shakespeare? The answer to that is not so easy. My early interactions with Shakespeare were not unlike many in the US and in the UK - I came to Shakespeare in my high school classroom. But it was popular culture that led me to engage a bit more closely with his work. As a high school student with an affinity for literature, the film Dead Poets Society spoke to me. In that film, the character Neil (played by Robert Sean Leonard) is encouraged by his English teacher, Mr. Keating (played by Robin Williams) to pursue his love of acting. Against his father's wishes, Neil auditions for A Midsummer Night's Dream and is cast as Puck. In my high school lived experience, I was not cast as Puck, but instead as Oberon. Still, the point is that I was clearly trying to emulate these white kids at a fancy prep school on the big screen in an effort to express my own love of literature. I did not see that then, but I do know that the desire to approximate whiteness was and is widespread for so many of us brown of skin, because we are made to feel inferior.

In the US, Shakespeare exists as a monument to whiteness. In print, on stage, on screen, and in the popular imagination, the whiteness of Shakespeare is ubiquitous.

In this, our present moment, monuments are being torn down, and Shakespeare is no exception. You can keep your white Shakespeare, because what I want to see, and what I want others to see, is a darker shade of Shakespeare.

I loved Shakespeare then because one is taught to love Shakespeare if one loves literature. One is taught to love Whitman, Joyce, Hemingway, Faulkner, and Fitzgerald. And I'm sure you can easily recognize the problem with that pattern. It is the literary canon that is taught and thus it is the canon that upholds the dominance of whiteness. Thankfully, my experiences and the literature and popular culture I subsequently chose to consume exposed me to so much more. My decision, then, to study Shakespeare later in life was not an attempt to approximate whiteness. I felt that I had something to offer Shakespeare and so I followed that path. And while I will not pretend that I recognized the value of a Chicano perspective on Shakespeare early on, I can confidently say that I did recognize value within myself even in a nation where so many sought, and continue to seek, to devalue me and my kind.

My kinship now is with the community of scholars who, through critical race studies, use Shakespeare as a vehicle to interrogate structures of racism and white supremacy in our day. My kinship is with those unafraid to tear down the monuments to Shakespeare and imagine him anew. They are why I love Shakespeare now. Through their eyes, a darker shade of Shakespeare emerges. It is this Shakespeare I love to teach.

As someone who teaches in a city defined by its bilingual, binational, and bicultural energies, I recognize an opportunity to harness these energies any time I ask my students to engage with Shakespeare. I want my students, and my Chicanx students in particular, to recognize in major filmic productions of Shakespeare who is included and who is left out. I want them to ask why. And I want to know and genuinely to understand, what they see in Shakespeare. So often, it is not so white, not necessarily in English, but always it is something worth seeing.

What do these racist realities have to do with Shakespeare? Well, if the likes of Johnson can claim him to promote white supremacy, perhaps we can use him to pursue anti-racist efforts.

As I write this from my home in la frontera, under this pandemic we all face, I would be remiss not to recognize the pivotal moment we find ourselves in when it comes to our racialized society. What we have witnessed in the act of kneeling, when it is on the neck of a Black man, is our racist, violent history and the deep danger and absolute monstrosity of elevating whiteness. In my corner of the world, brown children are separated from their families at the border and caged in for-profit detention centers. What, you might ask, do these racist realities have to do with Shakespeare? Well, if the likes of Johnson can claim him to promote white supremacy (that is, the perpetuation of systems that benefit white people at the expense of people of color), perhaps we can use him to pursue anti-racist efforts. Johnson's version of Shakespeare is tired, old, and white. This darker shade of Shakespeare that is emerging is so much more vibrant, so much more powerful, and full of the potential for change.

FINIS.

Our third Shakespeare and Race festival takes place online with a series of events, workshops and discussions from 21 - 23 August 2020. Find out more and book your tickets.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A darker shade of Shakespeare | Blogs & features

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This new side of Shakespeare is so much more vibrant, so much more powerful, and full of the potential for change, writes guest author Dr Ruben Espinosa.

# data[].attributes.body
Shakespeare's Globe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Step inside the Globe Theatre

Everyone, no matter where they are in the world, can now walk around Shakespeare's Globe with our virtual tour and 360 iOS app.

Use this page or download the app to tour the Globe Theatre from the comfort of your own home. Our interactive 360 degrees virtual tour uses photos, videos and audible wonder to guide you along the way.

This online digital tour is free. We ask that you consider a donation to us in return, as a charity currently relying on your support more than ever before. Thank you.
DONATE

Using your mouse or your finger if you are on a mobile or tablet tap the box that says "VIEW 360".

Then click and hold or tap and drag the screen to look around the interior of the Globe Theatre.

Tap on the circles and explore the images, videos and sounds that are located around the Globe Theatre.

Tap out when you are done and keep tapping away to find discover more!

Have fun and keep on discovering!

Packed with interesting facts, videos and photos, our free app allows anyone in the world to explore a virtual version of the world's most iconic theatre.

Move around the virtual theatre, zoom in and out and reveal the theatre's oak frame. Venture through the oak doors and head inside, where you can explore the theatre as stunning 360 degree images. Locations include an actor's-eye view from the stage, backstage in the tiring-house, the musicians' gallery and standing in the Yard.

×

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience from our website.

Carry on browsing if you're happy with this, or find out how to manage cookies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Walk around the Globe Theatre at Shakespeare's Globe with our online virtual tour and 360 iOS app.

# data[].attributes.headline
Shakespeare: an overview of his life, time and works

# data[].attributes.subject
Shakespeare: an overview of his life, time and works

# data[].attributes.body
National Arts Center

# data[].attributes.body
Macbeth Teacher Resource Guide

# data[].attributes.body
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Analytical cookies are used to determine how visitors are using a website, enabling us to enhance performance and functionality of the website. These are non-essential cookies but are not used for advertising purposes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Guiding your search through Shakespeare's life, works, and time.

# data[].attributes.body
Shakespeare Birthplace Trust

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A visual representation of the major events in Shakespeare’s Life and Elizabethan England.

# data[].attributes.body
Shakespeare's Globe Trust

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Explore our fact pages and discover the world that Shakespeare lived in

We are committed to making our scholarship public through a range of online resources.

Use our Research Resources as a guide to finding archive links, research papers and bulletins from our free to access archive catalogue.
DISCOVER MORE

×

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience from our website.

Carry on browsing if you're happy with this, or find out how to manage cookies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shakespeare's world | Shakespeare's Globe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore our fact pages and discover the world that Shakespeare lived in.

# data[].attributes.body
BBC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shakespeare's life and inspiration - Shakespeare's life and inspirations - KS3 English Revision - BBC Bitesize

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Revise and learn about Shakespeare's life and the things that inspired him with BBC Bitesize KS3 English Literature.