The Bible on the Shakespearean Stage: Cultures of Interpretation in Reformation England. Edited by Thomas Fulton and Kristen Poole. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Pp. xvi+304.

Abstract

Previous articleNext article FreeBook ReviewThe Bible on the Shakespearean Stage: Cultures of Interpretation in Reformation England. Edited by Thomas Fulton and Kristen Poole. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Pp. xvi+304.Kurt SchreyerKurt SchreyerUniversity of Missouri–St. Louis Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreJudging from the essays in The Bible on the Shakespearean Stage, the “turn to religion” remains a stimulating and productive approach to the study of early modern literature and culture. In fact, this volume offers some of the most important contributions to the topic of Shakespeare’s relationship to the biblical text since Hannibal Hamlin’s The Bible in Shakespeare (2013). No mere catalog of biblical allusions, the collection focuses on post-Reformation reading (broadly understood), interpretation, and debate in England and on the Continent. As the editors observe, “Though largely focused on ‘reading’ as an interpretive mode, scholars in this volume are also attentive to the ways that scriptural representations on the stage derive from both the written page and the pulpit; indeed, the pulpit and the stage are both places where the biblical text is, in a sense, performed as well as interpreted” (4). The Shakespearean stage is not dutifully acquiescent to the received doctrine of any denominational or theological camp but rather highly engaged with the vexatious manifestations of contemporary theological polemic. To paraphrase Jesse Lander’s reading of Hamlet in chapter 11, if the Bible may be said to be a groundwork for the play, its presence provokes rather than pacifies the maimed rites and the whirling words that disorient both characters and audience.In the first of the volume’s four parts, both Bruce Gordon and Aaron Pratt demonstrate that bibliographically fixing “the Bibles of the Reformation and post-Reformation periods” is considerably more difficult than we might expect, for they “were by no means static entities” (32), and our modern taxonomies “have obscured from view the actual Bibles and New Testaments that shaped the scriptural encounters of Shakespeare and his contemporaries” (35). Subsequent essays pursue other forms of complexity in fascinating ways, including the intricacies of literal meaning (Jay Zysk), hermeneutical interpretation and debate (Kristen Poole), exegetical harmonization (Tom Bishop), Roman oratory and biblical lament (Adrian Streete), biblical allusions (Beatrice Groves, Hannibal Hamlin, Richard Strier), and political theology (Thomas Fulton). Julia Reinhard Lupton’s afterword not only offers a thoughtful reflection on the contributions to the volume but also gleans the practical wisdom and virtues it promotes for our contemporary community of scholars. Along with Lander’s and Pratt’s essays cited above, Shaina Trapedo’s account of The Merchant of Venice must be singled out for its fresh and inspired approach. The play, she argues, explores the intellectual and doctrinal debt, simultaneously legitimized and denounced, of Reformed Christianity to Jewish scripture and hermeneutics. “Gratiano’s sarcastic ‘I thank thee, Jew’ and appropriation of the term ‘Daniel’ reveal the paradox of gratitude Shakespeare uses to power his play: ever-present in the admission of thanks is a confession of inadequacy and dependence” (184).The ideological thread that intertwines this diverse web of scholarly interests may be found in the book’s subtitle, Cultures of Interpretation in Reformation England. Whatever its disavowals of confessional sympathies, the volume’s focus and, one gathers, its real interest lie in Reformed discourses, with the result that the reading practices—biblical and theatrical—of recusant communities are not explored. English Catholicism is, it would seem, a past phenomenon by the late sixteenth century. Even Shakespeare’s medieval Danish prince is “quite clearly” Protestant (80). Some readers may find its contributions uneven or may quibble with particulars, but Fulton and Poole have gathered a formidable body of scholarship to help us think about and with Shakespeare’s religious culture. This collection of essays may be read, excerpted, and deployed in a number of productive ways in the undergraduate and graduate classroom: by Shakespeare play, by biblical book or genre, by early modern material text, or by exegetical debate, to name only a few. It is a must-read for scholars wishing to expand and deepen their knowledge of early modern biblical exegetes and their influence on Shakespeare’s culture and works. Previous articleNext article DetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Modern Philology Volume 117, Number 2November 2019 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/705615HistoryPublished online August 07, 2019 For permission to reuse, please contact [email protected]PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.