The Brazen Head in Alphonsus King of Aragon and Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay



In George Méliès’s silent French fantasy film of 1902 L’homme à la tête en caoutchouc (The man with the rubber head), a scientist, played by Méliès, removes a severed head from a box and places it on a table (Illustration 5).1 The head is alive; it speaks and looks around the room anxiously. The scientist removes his head scarf: it is George Méliès. Through a series of gestures, he demonstrates that his head is identical to that on the table. Using a pair of bellows, the scientist inflates and then shrinks the head, to the head’s apparent horror. Assuming control of the experiment, Méliès’s assistant gets carried away and over-inflates the head until it explodes in a puff of smoke. Furious, Méliès kicks his incompetent assistant out of the room before bursting into tears.


Title Page Early Modern Period Greek Mythology Religious Devotion Stage Direction 
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.
    L’homme à la tête en caoutchouc (George Méliès, 1902); Elizabeth Ezra, George Méliès: The Birth of the Auteur (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000)Google Scholar
  2. Ian Christie, The Last Machine: Early Cinema and the Birth of the Modern World (London: BFI, 1984)Google Scholar
  3. John Frazer, Artificially Arranged Scenes: The Films of George Méliès (Boston: G. K. Hall, 1979)Google Scholar
  4. Pierre Jenn, George Méliès Cinéaste (Paris: Albatros, 1984).Google Scholar
  5. 2.
    Richard Rickitt, Special Effects (London: Aurum, 2006), p. 14.Google Scholar
  6. 3.
    Noël Burch, The Life to Those Shadows (trans. Ben Brewster) (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), p. 26.Google Scholar
  7. 4.
    George Demeny, ‘Les Photographie parlantes’, La Nature, 20ème année no. 985, 16 April 1892, p. 315, cited in George Sadoul, L’Invention du Cinéma 1832–1897 (Paris: Denoël, 1973), pp. 169–70.Google Scholar
  8. 5.
    George Pearson, Flashback: Autobiography of a British Film-maker (London: Allen & Unwin, 1957), p. 14Google Scholar
  9. Jean Renoir, My Life and My Films (London: Collins, 1974), pp. 17–18.Google Scholar
  10. 6.
    R. A. Foakes (ed.), Henslowe’s Diary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 291–4.Google Scholar
  11. 7.
    George Peele, Farewell to Sir John Norris and Sir Francis Drake [...], in Alexander Dyce (ed.), The Works of George Peele (London: William Pickering, 1829), pp. 165–90.Google Scholar
  12. 8.
    George Peele, The Old Wifes’ Tale (ed. Patricia Binnie) (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1980), lines 663–74, pp. 74–5Google Scholar
  13. Thomas Dekker, If this be not a good play, the devil is in it (1611), in Fredson Bowers (ed.), The Dramatic Works of Thomas Dekker, vol. III (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958), p. 161.Google Scholar
  14. 9.
    Kevin LaGrandeur, ‘The Talking Brass Head as a Symbol of Dangerous Knowledge in Friar Bacon and in Alphonsus King of Aragon’, English Studies, 80 (1999), p. 408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 11.
    David Hawkes, Idols of the Marketplace: Idolatry and Commodity Fetishism in English Literature, 1580–1680 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001), p. 85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 13.
    Richard F. Hardin, Civil Idolatry: Desacralizing and Monarchy in Spenser, Shakespeare and Milton (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  17. 14.
    Frederick Gard Fleay, A Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama 1559–1642, vol. 1 (London: Reeves and Turner, 1891), pp. 264–5.Google Scholar
  18. 15.
    Scott McMillin and Sally-Beth MacLean, The Queen’s Men and their Plays (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 90.Google Scholar
  19. 18.
    Gabriel Harvey, Letter-Book of Gabriel Harvey, A.D. 1573–1580 (ed. Edward John Long Scott) (London: Camden Society, 1884)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    G. K. Hunter, English Drama, 1586–1642: The Age of Shakespeare (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), p. 25.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alexander Barclay (trans.), The Ship of Fools (Edinburgh: W. Paterson, 1874).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sebastian Brant, Das Narrenschiff (Basel, 1494); Jeff Morris, The Ship of Fools to 1500 (Eastford, CT: Martino, 2005).Google Scholar
  23. 25.
    J. A. Lavin (ed.), Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay (London: New Mermaids, 1969), p. xivGoogle Scholar
  24. Waldo F. McNeir, ‘Traditional Elements in the Character of Greene’s Friar Bacon’, Studies in Philology, 45 (1948), p. 172, n. 1.Google Scholar
  25. 28.
    Euclid, The elements of geometrie of the most auncient philosopher Euclide of Megara [...] (London, 1570), sig. Aja-Aija; William H. Sherman, John Dee: The Politics of Reading and Writing in the English Renaissance (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1995).Google Scholar
  26. 30.
    Warren Boutcher, ‘“Rationall Knowledges” and “Knowledges... drenched in flesh and blood”: Fulke Greville, Francis Bacon and Institutions of Humane Learning in Tudor and Stuart England’, Sidney Journal, 19 (2001), p. 15.Google Scholar
  27. 31.
    A. W. Ward (ed.), Marlowe: Tragical History of Dr. Faustus; Greene: Honourable History of Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1901), p. xxi.Google Scholar
  28. 33.
    David Coleman, Drama and the Sacraments in Sixteenth-Century England (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), p. 96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 34.
    Marlowe, The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus, in David Bevington and Eric Rasmussen (eds.), Oxford English Drama: Christopher Marlowe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998)Google Scholar
  30. 35.
    Nicholas Tyacke (ed.), The History of Oxford University, Vol. IV: Seventeenth-Century Oxford (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 303.Google Scholar
  31. 36.
    John Guy, Tudor England (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), p. 343.Google Scholar
  32. 37.
    Bryan Reynolds and Henry Turner, ‘Performative Transversations: Collaborations Through and Beyond Greene’s Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay’, in Bryan Reynolds (ed.), Transversal Enterprises in the Drama of Shakespeare and his Contemporaries (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), p. 245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 38.
    Alan C. Dessen, ‘Robert Greene and the Theatrical Vocabulary of the Early 1590s’, in Kirk Melnikoff and Edward Gieskes (eds.), Writing Robert Greene: Essays on England’s First Notorious Professional Writer (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008), p. 34Google Scholar
  34. Deanne Williams, ‘Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay and the Rhetoric of Temporality’, in Gordon McMullan and David Matthews (eds.), Reading the Medieval in Early Modern England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 32.Google Scholar
  35. 39.
    Mark Dahlquist, ‘Love and Technological Iconoclasm in Robert Greene’s Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay’, English Literary History, 78 (2011), p. 52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 41.
    Margaret Aston, England’s Iconoclasts, Volume 1: Laws Against Images (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), pp. 10Google Scholar
  37. 43.
    Martin Luther, Lectures on Deuteronomy, in Conrad Bergendoff (ed.), Works, vol. IX (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1958), pp. 80–1.Google Scholar
  38. 44.
    Ellen Spolsky, Word vs. Image: Cognitive Hunger in Shakespeare’s England (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), p. 58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 45.
    John Donne, Satyre III, in C. A. Patrides (ed.), John Donne: Complete English Poems (London: Everyman, 2001), lines 76–7, p. 162.Google Scholar
  40. 48.
    J. Churton Collins (ed.), The Plays and Poems of Robert Greene, vol. 1 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905), p. 70.Google Scholar
  41. 49.
    For further discussion of a possible link between Greene and Creede, see G. M. Pinciss, ‘Thomas Creede and the Repertory of the Queen’s Men, 1583–1592’, Modern Philology, 67 (1970), pp. 321–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 51.
    Christopher Marlowe, The Jew of Malta, ed. T. W. Craik (London: Ernest Benn, 1966), I.i, p. 11Google Scholar
  43. Andrew Gurr, The Shakespearean Stage, 1574–1642, 3rd edition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), p. 151.Google Scholar
  44. 55.
    For further discussion of Hermione’s statue in The Winter’s Tale, see Michael O’Connell, The Idolatrous Eye: Iconoclasm and Theater in Early Modern England (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 142.Google Scholar
  45. 56.
    James Simeon, Shakespearean Iconoclasm (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), pp. 19–20.Google Scholar
  46. 58.
    Jonathan V. Crewe, ‘The Theatre of the Idols’, in David Scott Kastan and Peter Stallybrass (eds.), Staging the Renaissance: Reinterpretations of Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama (London: Routledge, 1991), p. 53.Google Scholar
  47. 60.
    Jonas Barish, The Anti-Theatrical Prejudice (Berkeley: University of California, 1981), p. 80.Google Scholar
  48. 61.
    Moshe Halbertal and Avishai Margalit, Idolatry (trans. Naomi Goldblum) (London: Harvard University Press, 1992), p. 3.Google Scholar
  49. 62.
    Michel Foucault, The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences (London: Routledge, 2004), p. 347.Google Scholar
  50. 64.
    John Rainolds, Th’overthrow of stage-playes (London, 1599), p. 161; Michael O’Connell, ‘The Idolatrous Eye: Iconoclasm, Anti-Theatricalism and the Image of the Elizabethan Theatre’, English Literary History, 52 (1985), p. 279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 66.
    Jean Elizabeth Howard, The Stage and Social Struggle in Early Modern England (London: Routledge, 1994), p. 28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Alison Shell, Shakespeare and Religion (London: Methuen Drama, 2010), p. 40.Google Scholar
  53. 68.
    Ernest B. Gilman, Iconoclasm and Poetry in the English Reformation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986), p. 1.Google Scholar
  54. 70.
    Martin Butler (ed.), The Selected Plays of Ben Jonson, vol. II (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 286–90Google Scholar
  55. Clifford Davidson, ‘Judgement, Iconoclasm, and Anti-Theatricalism in Jonson’s Bartholomew Fair’, Papers on Language and Literature, 25 (1989), pp. 349–63.Google Scholar
  56. 71.
    Martin Luther, Table Talk, cited in Kenneth M. Setton, ‘Lutheranism and the Turkish Peril’, Balkan Studies, 3 (1945), p. 151Google Scholar
  57. 72.
    Stephen Schmuck, ‘The “Turk”, Antichrist and Elizabeth I: Reformation Politics and “The Turkes Storye” from John Foxe’s Acts and Monuments (1570)’, Reformation, 10 (2005), p. 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 76.
    Matthew Dimmock, New Turkes: Dramatizing Islam and the Ottomans in Early Modern England (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), p. 180.Google Scholar
  59. 79.
    All quotations are derived from J. S. Cunningham’s edition: Christopher Marlowe, Tamburlaine the Great (ed. J. S. Cunningham) (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1981).Google Scholar
  60. 81.
    William Empson, Some Versions of Pastoral (London: Chatto & Windus, 1935), p. 31Google Scholar
  61. Barbara Traister, Heavenly Necromancers: The Magician in English Renaissance Drama (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1984), pp. 67–87.Google Scholar
  62. 82.
    Catherine Bates, The Rhetoric of Courtship in Elizabethan Language and Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), pp. 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 84.
    Douglas Bruster, Drama and the Market in the Age of Shakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), p. 99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Heather James, Shakespeare’s Troy: Drama, Politics, and the Translation of Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), pp. 13–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 85.
    Brian Walsh, ‘“Deep Prescience”: Succession and the Politics of Prophecy in Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay’, Medieval and Renaissance Drama in England, 23 (2010), p. 64Google Scholar
  66. Ian McAdam, ‘Masculinity and Magic in Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay’, Research Opportunities in Renaissance Drama, 37 (1998), pp. 42–3Google Scholar
  67. Frank Ardolino, ‘“Thus Glories England Over All the West”: Setting as National Encomium in Robert Greene’s Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay’, Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 9 (1988), pp. 218–22.Google Scholar
  68. 87.
    Ernst Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981), p. 206Google Scholar
  69. Marie Axton, The Queen’s Two Bodies: Drama and the Elizabethan Succession (London: Royal Historical Society, 1977)Google Scholar
  70. Albert Rolls, The Theory of the King’s Two Bodies in the Age of Shakespeare (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 2000).Google Scholar
  71. 88.
    John Bossy, Christianity in the West: 1400–1700 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), p. 145.Google Scholar
  72. 89.
    Richard C. McCoy, Alterations of State: Sacred Kingship in the English Reformation (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), p. x.Google Scholar
  73. 90.
    Tom Gunning, ‘“Now You See It, Now You Don’t”: The Temporality of the Cinema of Attractions’, in Richard Abel (ed.), Silent Film (London: Athlone, 1996), p. 72.Google Scholar
  74. 91.
    Tom Gunning, ‘The Cinema of Attraction[s]: Early Film, Its Spectator and the Avant-Garde’, in Wanda Strauven (ed.), The Cinema of Attractions: Reloaded (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2000), p. 384.Google Scholar
  75. 92.
    Christian Metz, Film Language: A Semiotics of the Cinema (New York: Oxford University Press, 1974), pp. 44–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Jenny Sager 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of NottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations