The Essex Rebellion and Its Relationship to the Shakespeare Authorship Question
New London, CT
Introduction
Throughout her reign, Elizabeth I survived numerous plots on her life and her throne. There were the Babington and the Throgmorton plots. The final attempt on her throne would occur near the end of her reign. Richard II, a play by William Shakespeare, was used to incite a mob to assist in a coup d’état. It was the only one of the author’s plays to be weaponized in such a way. The author of the play, the Thomas Paine of the day, was never prosecuted or even questioned.
The Essex Rebellion
Having failed to subdue rebellious Catholic Ireland, the Earl of Essex, Henry Devereux was punished. He had some £16, 000 in debt. The main source of his income was a duty on sweet wines. The Queen decided to cut it off. This fear of ruin pushed the Earl over the edge (Williams 339).
The following gives a view to his mindset at the time:
The Queen’s conditions were as crooked as her carcase’, he swore. Megalomania and fast approaching bankruptcy drove him to a final gamble; in which young adventurers and cronies from past campaigns eagerly joined. They planned to take the Tower, the city and the court and wring from the aged Queen Essex’s right to be Lord Protector of the realm. As a manifesto for their designs they bribed the players at The Globe to put on Richard II for the night of Saturday 7 February; they would rescue the Queen from Cecil and her other evil advisers, but if the need arose, they would not shrink from shedding her blood (Williams 340).
Why would Essex have chosen to play Richard II? It was to turn the mind of the public against the government. He knew that his own forces were limited. The following documents that two earls were involved in the rebellion:
In order to stir up London and to influence the public mind in a direction favorable of the overturning of those in authority, the company gave a performance of Richard II, the Earl of Southampton subsidizing the players. In the rising itself Southampton took an active part (Looney 329).
One of most controversial portions of the play was the deposition scene:
BOLINGBROKE
Are you contented to resign the crown?
KING RICHARD
210 Ay, no; no, ay; for I must nothing be.
Therefore no “no,” for I resign to thee.
Now, mark me how I will undo myself.
I give this heavy weight from off my head
And this unwieldy scepter from my hand,
215 The pride of kingly sway from out my heart.
With mine own tears I wash away my balm,
With mine own hands I give away my crown,
With mine own tongue deny my sacred state,
With mine own breath release all duteous oaths.
220 All pomp and majesty I do forswear.
My manors, rents, revenues I forgo;
My acts, decrees, and statutes I deny.
God pardon all oaths that are broke to me.
God keep all vows unbroke are made to thee.
225 Make me, that nothing have, with nothing grieved.And thou with all pleased that hast all achieved.
Long mayst thou live in Richard’s seat to sit,
And soon lie Richard in an earthy pit (Shakespeare 166–7).
Essex had 200–300 followers. Despite this, the poorly conceived rebellion failed (Britannica). Why? The most likely explanation is that Essex did not have enough men. The ones he did have were probably not adequately trained and armed to defeat the Queen’s forces. It is also probable that the government, who had spies everywhere, was informed of his movements beforehand. The military success which the Earl of Essex previously enjoyed in Spain was not replacated in England; he suffered a defeat more resounding than that which he suffered in Ireland. It cost him his life.
The Resulting Trial Essex was executed; Southampton was imprisoned. The Lord Chamberlin’s men were questioned. There was one individual who was never tried for treason, arrested or even questioned: William Shakespeare-the author of Richard II. Queen Elizabeth stated, “ I am Richard II. Know you not that?” Essex obvioulsy saw himself as a modern day Bolingbroke.The play had incited a rebellion and the author got away Scot- free.Why? Unless, of course, we have the wrong guy. Thomas Looney had the following to say:
Upon its collapse he was tried for treason along with its leader Essex; and it was then that Edward de Vere emerged from his retirement for the first time for nine years to take his position amongst the twenty-five peers who constituted the tribunal before whom Esssex and Southampton were to be tried. It is certainly a most important fact in connection with our arguement that this outstanding action of Oxford’s later years should be in connection with the one contemporary that “Shakespeare” has immortalized (Looney 329).
Conclusion
Richard II was weaponized against the government like none of the other works on the canon. In that respect, from an Oxfordian viewpoint, the adoption of the nom de plum, William Shakespeare served as a mask for the true author, Edward De Vere. In the police state that was Elizabethan England, the authorities, the precursors of Scotland Yard and MI5, were obviously in the know about who the real author of the work was. It was inconceivable for a commoner, such as William Shakspere, to escape consequences of any kind.
Works Cited
Encyclopedia Britannica. Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Elizabeth-I.
Looney, J. Thomas. Shakespeare Identified. Forever Press, 2018. Print.
Shakespeare, William. Richard II. Folger Shakespeare Library.
Williams, Neville. Elizabeth I Queen of England. E.P. Dutton & Company Inc, 1968. Print.
Wordpress.com. Shakespeare and the Essex Rebellion. https://wartsandbrawls.wordpress.com/2016/03/25/shakespeare-and-the-essex-rebellion/.
