The Bishops’ Ban of 1599 and the Ideology of English Satire

Abstract

AbstractOn June 1, 1599, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London banned the further printing of satires, epigrams, and unlicensed histories and plays. Furthermore, the order demanded the immediate recall and burning of specific works, many of which were verse imitations of the Roman satirist Juvenal. Although the order itself lacks specific motivational language, current explanations tend to foreground the potentially obscene and/or libelous nature of the recalled works. Comparatively little attention has been paid, however, to the internal ideologies of the banned satires themselves and to the dialogue between the satires and the cultural and political conditions that inspired them. Instead of an ad hoc response to any one particular transgression, this essay argues for the Ban as an attempt to stem the growing cultural influence of a particularly unorthodox mode of Juvenalian imitative satire expressed most forcefully in John Marston’s banned work, The Scourge of Villanie. Marston’s rejection of all established belief systems, especially the conservative literary traditions of native English and Horatian imitative satire, in favor of a highly individualistic and indecorous mode of social representation, was simply too ideologically destabilizing for the bishops to tolerate. In support of this reading, two relatively underexplored pieces of evidence are examined: first, the reprieve granted to Joseph Hall’s imitative satire entitled Virgidemiarum, which attempts to negotiate an ideologically safe middle‐ground between the radical Juvenalian mode and the conservative Horatian tradition; and second, the contemporary reflections on the bishops’ prohibition within John Weever’s 1599 Epigrams, his 1600 pastoral Faunus and Melliflora, and his 1601 direct attack on Marston in The Whipping of the Satyre. Weever’s support of the bishops’ actions derives from his identification of the banned Juvenalian mode as not merely morally offensive or personally defamatory, but as a tangible threat to the ideological stability of the English nation.