No description available.

No description available.

This dissertation enhances Marlovian studies by advancing ongoing scholarly efforts to demystify Marlowe’s stereotypical image as an outsider of his era. Specifically, it aims to challenge the prevailing perception of Christopher Marlowe as a subversive maverick, often delineated in contradistinction to William Shakespeare, England’s so-called national poet. Situating Marlowe in the context of nation-building in early modern England, this dissertation explores how Marlowe participated through his writing in the construction of English national identity. Through reading Marlowe’s five plays, Dido Queen of Carthage, Tamburlaine the Great Part One, Tamburlaine the Great Part Two, Edward II, and The Jew of Malta, my dissertation reveals that Marlowe’s ideal England is a political entity of complete sovereignty, a new empire of unprecedented achievement, and an imagined community ruled by its monarch and governors with good governance. With its emphasis on the inseparable fusion of nation and empire and the inevitable incorporation of outsiders, such English nationhood, I suggest, is an eighth form of nationhood in addition to the seven others proposed by Richard Helgerson. It is neither Patrick Cheney’s counter-nationhood nor completely Helgerson’s nationhood under royal absolutism. Since the monarch and patriotism are at its centre, Marlowe’s ideal English nationhood does not differ greatly from depictions offered by other contemporary writers. I argue that Marlowe shares more commonality with other authors of his era than has previously been understood, at least in terms of writing English nationhood. I propose that we should explore such commonality, rather than fetishizing Marlowe’s peculiarity, to gain a more nuanced, fuller image of Marlowe, who has long been obscured by his arguably more renowned contemporaries. / Dissertation / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / This dissertation reexamines Christopher Marlowe’s stereotypical image in current scholarship as an outsider of his era by looking at how Marlowe writes about England in the context of early modern nation-building. Focusing on Marlowe’s five plays, Dido Queen of Carthage, Tamburlaine the Great Part One, Tamburlaine the Great Part Two, Edward II, and The Jew of Malta, my readings reveal that what Marlowe envisions through his writing is an English nation marked by complete autonomy, remarkable achievement, and good governance. At the heart of this nationhood lies the patriotism similarly expressed by other Elizabethan writers in their literary fashioning of English nationhood. I argue that Marlowe, in this regard, shares more commonality with his contemporaries than has previously been understood. Exploring this commonality allows us to revalue the historical position of Marlowe, who has long been obscured by arguably more renowned writers of his day.

My dissertation proposes that the history of early modern repertory theatre cannot be understood free from the history of disability. I argue that disability was a far more ubiquitous presence in early modern theatre than scholars have hitherto recognized. This is because playing companies represented disability through a manifold web of tools pervading the theatrical marketplace, including player identity, props, embodied acts, gestures, vocalizations, fragments of dialogue, and even the staging of locational places. Tracing disability’s overt and allusive ubiquity is essential for understanding how assessments of (dis)ability consistently informed spectators’ encountering and interpretation of staged drama. Chapter One places period commentary on stage players in dialogue with Christopher Marlowe’s Tamburlaine, arguing that ability and able-bodiedness were valued and idealized by playing companies and audiences alike. Chapter Two examines Robert Greene’s Orlando Furioso, Thomas Middleton’s The Revenger’s Tragedy, and George Chapman’s The Blind Beggar of Alexandria, proposing that leading players’ consistent embodiment of disability troubled a firm binary between disability and able-bodiedness in theatrical performance, as players’ stage identities consistently bore the residues of disabled performance. Chapter Three examines William Shakespeare’s Richard III and Othello, as well as Shakespeare and John Fletcher’s The Two Noble Kinsmen, arguing that even minute tics and gestures onstage evoked the memory of past and present disabled performance. Disabled characters were, this chapter argues, often self-consciously constructed upon one another in ways that allowed repertory theatre to both recount and rework its history of disabled representation. Chapter Four examines the anonymous The Fair Maid of the Exchange, Thomas Dekker’s The Shoemaker’s Holiday, and Robert Armin’s The Two Maids of More-Clacke, arguing that disability was essential to the conception of place in early modern theatre—especially within a repertory system in which “place” often depended upon tools of theatrical representation that bore the residues of past and present disabled performance.