The hidden beliefs and coded politics of William Shakespeare

Clare Asquith

This is without any doubt the most revolutionary book on Shakespeare to be published for a generation - or even for several generations. Its message is completely original. If it is correct, it completely transforms our understanding of Shakespeare. Looking below the surface of Shakespeare's works, Clare Asquith has discovered a hidden level of meaning. She shows how, from start to finish, his works can be read as a coded allegorical commentary on the political events of the time, aimed primarily at the Catholic dissident community but also embodying an appeal for tolerance addressed (with a hopefulness that seems almost touching, considering how little effect it had) to Elizabeth and later to James I.

Asquith hit upon the idea that Shakespeare's works might have a hidden message when living in Russia, where she encountered a form of dissident theatre that used coded messages. These were innocuous enough on the surface to escape censorship, but would have been instantly understood by those who were in the know. If Shakespeare did not address political events directly, there were sound reasons for it. Two of his most gifted contemporaries, Kyd and Marlowe, were less cautious. Kyd died after undergoing torture, and Marlowe was almost certainly murdered at the instigation of the government.

The message, then, had to be a coded one. And the basis of the code uncovered by Asquith is breathtakingly simple. 'High' and 'fair' stand for Catholic, 'low' and 'dark' for Protestant - terms used by Spenser, with equally patent allegorical intent, in The Shepheardes Calendar. Other characteristic and recurring symbols are tempest, and exile. Tempest and shipwreck are always meant to suggest the dire upheaval and destruction of traditional values that had been the Catholic experience of the Reformation. As for exile, the most cursory reading of the plays cannot fail to notice how often Shakespeare's plots feature the splitting up of a family or community. All these can be seen as allusions to the schism in the body politic of England that had resulted from the religious divide; and more specifically, to the plight of the English Catholic exiles on the Continent (of whom there were tens of thousands), their longing to return home and their hopes for the restoration of the old faith.

It is impossible in the space of a short review to do justice to the historical scholarship and persistence with which Asquith has delved into the background to Shakespeare's works, uncovering a wealth of forgotten detail. In play after play she demonstrates connections between the story and the immediate historical circumstances. Take Troilus and Cressida. Here the siege of Troy can be recognised (in view of the traditional association of Britain with Troy) as the standoff between Protestant and England and the Catholic powers led by Spain. The Greeks have failed to take Troy, as Spain failed with its Armada. Even individual characters can be identified. The gloomy and fatalistic Agamemnon suggests Philip II, old Nestor is the Pope, and the astute and diplomatic Ulysses is the Jesuit Robert Persons. Even Ulysses' famous speech - 'Time hath, my lord, a wallet at his back, / Wherein he puts scraps for oblivion' - is taken from an image in Persons' Christian Directory, an immensely popular work at the time.

Leaving code messages aside, the book reminds us of the dimension in Shakespeare that express a deeply Christian - and characteristically Catholic - spirituality. In The Winter's Tale we find a 'chapel' in the last act of the play, where something infinitely precious that was thought to have been lost forever has been preserved inviolate. And when the statue of Hermione comes to life, in response to Paulina's injunction 'It is required you do awake your faith', and Leontes exclaims 'If this be magic, let it be an act / Lawful as eating', we cannot be left in any doubt that this is an allusion to the Mass.

It is important to make clear that the allegorical reading of Shakespeare's work does not conflict with the traditional and literal reading. The existence of multiple levels of interpretation, existing in parallel and all equally valid - was taken for granted by Shakespeare's contemporaries. Shadowplay encourages us to rediscover the way in which Shakespeare and his contemporaries approached literature, and literary creation. His relevance to the events of his own day was veiled in his own lifetime, and since then has been obscured. This book rediscovers it. And it changes our experience of Shakespeare radically - not by substituting something different but by adding an extra dimension.

Asquith's scholarship is meticulous and painstaking, and her argument deserves to be taken very seriously indeed. I cannot urge you too strongly to look at the evidence she puts forward, and look at it carefully, before making up your mind.

Writing a biography or an analysis about Shakespeare - putting it mildly - is a challenge, especially if the aim is to present and discuss new information as we have here. The idea that one might find new ideas about a 450 year old Shakespeare is virtually impossible. Thus, all the Shakespeare biographers and writers including Asquith are dependent on Shakespeare's works themselves, plus those books that immediately followed Shakespeare's life such as John Aubrey's book Brief Lives (1626 to 1697), and the various civic records from London and Stratford, along with court records, land transfer documents, and wills, etc. He left no notes nor did he write a biography.

All these books - including the present book - are not about new information. They are about presenting a coherent picture of Shakespeare and his environment: political, socio-economic, historic, sources of myths, religious ideas, other writers, etc. In reviewing the books the differences one sees in the books are in the styles, depth of knowledge, amount of speculation, facts, writing skill, holding the reader, etc.

The present book attempts to bring us an analysis based on the "hidden meanings" or code words and phrases, or simply a deeper understanding of his works, so we can find clues in his writings. This concept is not new since Shakespeare left no diaries and all we have are his writings and those writings of his contemporaries. There have been thousands of books and articles on Shakespeare, but as I wrote above, none by him, and most are centuries after he died.

In trying to judge her arguments - and I am not an expert - I looked fairly carefully at Chapter 15 or "Silenced" where she puts forward the theory that the Tempest was a sort of final personal tour de force for Shakespeare and that he was forced to retire - since he had a Catholic bias in childhood or some Catholic tendencies - and he had to leave London. We will never really know the real story unless we suddenly discover Shakespeare's secret diary after 400 years, but to me this seems like mostly speculation. Around this time he bought property at the Blackfriars in London so clearly he was not completely cutting his ties with London and the theatre. For myself, I suspect that he was simply getting tired after 20 years of writing and had accumulated enough money to retire, and in fact he lived only a few more years. That is the generally accepted view. It is generally thought that his father was a secret Catholic who had suppressed his public views in the mid 15th century as a town bailiff and alderman under the rule of Elizabeth. William Shakespeare the son seemed more neutral and had always lived with the continuous anti-Catholic intimidation factor of heads stuck on spikes, including many Catholic martyrs, as he walked back and forth across the bridge to London from the south bank, so I see nothing really dramatic here to cause a sudden change forcing him out of the theatre. Also, that chapter has just a few references beyond Ben Johnson.

In summary, this is a quick and entertaining read about Shakespeare with some speculation, and it merits at least 4 stars. I enjoyed the book but was not totally convinced. She needs more specific references to back up her points - in my opinion. Still it is a good 4 star read.