Of Chastity and Rape: Edmund Spenser Confronts Elizabeth I in The Faerie Queene

  • Susan Frye
Part of the The New Middle Ages book series (TNMA)


By the end of the sixteenth century, the predominant meaning of the word chastity was exactly as the Oxford English Dictionary defines it today, “purity from unlawful intercourse.” “Unlawful intercourse” means sexual intercourse outside of marriage, and in the sixteenth century specifically meant a wife’s intercourse with someone other than the husband who legally possessed her body Thus, chastity rests on the assumption that women exist as the possessions of men. Within this definition a woman can only be virtuous when acting as male property, a position that ostensibly allows her only limited forms of choice—unless that woman is an unmarried and aging queen. As Elizabeth Robertson and Christine Rose discuss in their introduction to this volume, the degree to which women are perceived as consenting to rape “crystallizes … each era’s particular understanding of female subjectivity.” Within each era, too, issues of women’s consent to the passive definitions offered by rape may alter in the case of privileged women, and especially in the case of Elizabeth I. Yet her desire to define herself within definitions of the feminine that allowed her a choice of husband and finally the choice to remain single was perpetually contested by the men who surrounded her—in many cases, by the same men, like the poet Edmund Spenser, who also worked to create her image as a semi-divine virgin. It is not surprising, then, that the language such men used in their attempts to contest and contain the queen is often the discourse of rape, a discourse that groups the queen with other women, and then articulates the limited choices all women supposedly experienced within the legal definition of chastity.


Sixteenth Century Foster Child Female Figure Court Spectacle Male Threat 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Phillip Sidney, The Countess of Pembroke’s Arcadia (The Old Arcadia), ed. Jean Robertson (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), p. 238.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    On the operation of rape to assert and enforce patriarchy at all levels of society, Susan Brownmiller’s work was germinal (Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1975). See also Terry Castle’s analysis of Lovelace’s rape of Clarissa for its discussion of rape as patriarchal: “The quintessential act of violence against women, it is that hidden physical threat held over the woman who tries, wittingly or unwittingly, to overstep any of the fundamental restrictions on her power—in any area” (see Clarissa’s Ciphers: Meaning and Disruption in Richardson’s “Clarissa” (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1982), p. 117, and on Clarissa’s rape, pp. 108–35. The most recent sociological studies on the subject of rape acknowledge this feminist argument (see Larry Baron and Murray A. Straus, Four Theories of Rape in American Society: A State-Level Analysis [New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989], pp. 61–94; and Linda Brookover Bourque, Defining Rape [Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1989], pp. 14–58).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Edmund Spenser, Edmund Spenser: “The Faerie Queene,” ed. Thomas P. Roche, Jr. (1590, rpt. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1981).Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    Frances Teague, “Marriage Speech,” in Women Writers of the Renaissance and Reformation, ed. Katharina M. Wilson (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1987), p. 538.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    See John N. King, “Queen Elizabeth I: Representations of the Virgin Queen,” Renaissance Quarterly 43 (1990): 30–74 for a different argument. Although I have not discussed the differences among the sieve pictures, in fact they differ from one another in fascinating ways. The most elaborate of them, the Siena Portrait, forms a complex allegory that, while retaining Elizabeth at the center holding a sieve, includes a variety of figures and enigmatic words that have been interpreted as both upholding and undermining Elizabeth’s claims to power through her chastity. See Roy Strong, Gloriana: The Portraits of Queen Elizabeth I (New York: Thames and Hudson, 1987), pp. 101–3; Constance Jordan, “Representing Political Androgyny: More on the Siena Portrait of Queen Elizabeth I,” in The Renaissance Englishwoman in Print: Counterbalancing the Canon, ed. Anne M. Haselkorn and Betty S. Travitsky (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1990), pp. 157–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 7.
    Louis Montrose, “The Elizabethan Subject and the Spenserian Text,” in Literary Theory/Renaissance Texts, ed. Patricia Parker and David Quint (Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press, 1986), p. 315.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    For another reading of the composition of the portrait that argues that the queens sexuality is subdued “in order to proclaim her power,” see Andrew Belsey and Catherine Belsey, “Icons of Divinity: Portraits of Elizabeth I,” in Renaissance Bodies: The Human Figure in English Culture c. 1540–1660, ed. Luce Gent and Nigel Llewellyn (London: Reaktion Books, 1990), p. 18. See also Roy Strong, Gloriana: The Portraits of Queen Elizabeth I, pp. 131–33.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    See Ann Rosalind Jones, The Currency of Eros: Women’s Love Lyric in Europe, 1540–1620 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990), pp. 11–35.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    Maureen Quilligan, Milton’s Spencer: The Politics of Reading (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1983), p. 177. My discussion is indebted to the passage quoted and to the section of Quilligan’s “Book III and the Gender of the Reader” (Milton’s Spencer, pp. 185–208).Google Scholar
  10. 11.
    See Julia Kristeva, Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection, trans. Leon S. Roudiez (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982) on the relation between codes and the feminine. On the relation between the heterosexual order and its enforcement through “its inquisitions, its courts, its tribunals, its body of laws, its terrors, its tortures, its mutilations, its executions, its police,” see Monique Wittig, “On the Social Contract,” Feminist Issues 9 (1989): 11.Google Scholar
  11. 13.
    Desiderius Erasmus, A ryght frutefull Epystle by the moste excellent clerke Erasmus in laude and prayse of matrymony, trans. Rychard Tauernour (London, 1532); Desiderius Erasmus, “Courtship,” in The Colloquies of Erasmus, trans. Craig R. Thompson (1450, rpt. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965).Google Scholar
  12. 14.
    Margo Todd, Christian Humanism and Puritan Social Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987); Valerie Wayne, “Introduction,” in Edmund Tilney, “The Flower of Friendshippe”: A Renaissance Dialogue Contesting Marriage, ed. Valerie Wayne (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992). Valerie Wayne pointed out to me that Erasmus’s colloquies on marriage formed a crucial part of the humanist curriculum in England throughout the sixteenth century and graciously allowed me to see her work in manuscript (“Introduction”).Google Scholar
  13. 16.
    Edmund Spenser, The Yale Edition of the Shorter Poems of Edmund Spenser, ed. William A. Oram et al. (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989), pp. 639–40, lines 5–8.Google Scholar
  14. 17.
    William Byrd, ed., Psalms, Sonnets, and Songs of Sadness and Piety, in An English Garner, ed. Edward Arber (1588, rpt. Westminster: Constable, 1905), vol. 4, p. 85.Google Scholar
  15. 18.
    John Nichols, ed., The Progresses and Public Processions of Queen Elizabeth, 3 vols. (1823, rpt. London: Nichols, 1966), vol. 1, pp. 485–523.Google Scholar
  16. 19.
    Nichols, The Progresses of Elizabeth, 1: 499. For a discussion of this spectacle as Elizabeth’s rewriting of Gascoigne’s planned staging of masculinist power in the context of the English intervention in the Netherlands, see Susan Frye, Elizabeth I: The Competition for Representation (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), chapter 2, pp. 56–96.Google Scholar
  17. 20.
    Edmund Spenser, Spenser’s Minor Poems, ed. Ernest de Selincourt (1595, rpt. Oxford: Clarendon, 1910), pp. 40 and 44.Google Scholar
  18. 26.
    Eric Mallin, “Emulous Factions and the Collapse of Chivalry: Troilus and Cressida,” Representations 29 (1990): 165–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 29.
    For a careful account of Britomart’s narrative as implying “a serious criticism of the Elizabethan cult,” see Philippa Berry, Of Chastity and Power: Elizabethan Literature and the Unmarried Queen (London: Routledge, 1989), p. 163. Thickstun also notes, of Britomart’s eventual marriage, that “such an ending retrospectively redefines female independence by encoding it within the scripts of lawful heterosexual generation” (Margaret Olafson Thickstun, Fictions of the Feminine: Puritan Doctrine and the Representation of Women [Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1988], p. 43).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 32.
    Nina Auerbach, Romantic Imprisonment: Women and Other Glorified Outcasts (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985), p. 10.Google Scholar
  21. 34.
    Paul Alpers, “Narration in The Faerie Queene,” ELH 44 (1977): 21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 35.
    Lynn A. Higgins and Brenda R. Silver, Rape and Representation (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), p. 2.Google Scholar
  23. 36.
    Compare Stephanie Jed’s discussion of Lucretia’s rape as the heart of the mythic narrative of humanism and republicanism because it is the necessary prelude to the overthrow of Tarquin (Stephanie Jed, Chaste Thinking: The Rape of Lucretia and the Birth of Humanism [Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989]). Rape stands at the center of the companionate marriage as well, as a form of possession when all others fail.Google Scholar
  24. 37.
    See Thomas P. Roche, Jr., “The Challenge to Chastity: Britomart in the House of Busirane,” in Essential Articles for the Study of Edmund Spenser, ed. A. C. Hamilton (Hamden, CT: Archon, 1972), pp. 189–98; Maurice Evans, Spencer’s Anatomy of Heroism: A Commentary on “The Faerie Queene” (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970); Harry Berger, Jr., “Busirane and the War between the Sexes: An Interpretation of The Faerie Queene,” English Literary Renaissance 1 (1971): 99–121; Robin Wells, Spenser’s Faerie Queene and the Cult of Elizabeth (Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield, 1980); Sean Kane, Spenser’s Moral Allegory (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989), p. 100.Google Scholar
  25. 42.
    See Maureen Quilligan, The Language of Allegory: Defining the Genre; Joseph Loewenstein, “Echo’s Ring: Orpheus and Spenser’s Career,” English Literary Renaissance 16 (1986): 287–302; Lauren Silberman, “Unsung Heroines: Androgynous Discourse in Book 3 of The Faerie Queene,” in Rewriting the Renaissance: The Discourses of Sexual Difference in Early Modern Europe, ed. Margaret W. Ferguson, Maureen Quilligan, and Nancy J. Vickers (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986): pp. 259–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 47.
    Jacques Derrida, Of Grammatology, trans. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press, 1976), p. 112.Google Scholar
  27. 50.
    Desiderius Erasmus, A right frutfull Epystle by the moste excellent clerke Erasmus in laude and prayse of matrymony, trans. Rychard Tauernour (London: 1532), C6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Elizabeth Robertson and Christine M. Rose 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan Frye

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations