Titus Andronicus: The Debate Over George Peele's Co-Authorship
For centuries, scholars have debated whether William Shakespeare was the sole author of Titus Andronicus. While the First Folio attributes the play to him, the presence of distinct linguistic patterns, rhetorical quirks, and structural anomalies has led many experts to propose that George Peele, a contemporary dramatist, served as a co-author.
The argument for co-authorship generally centers on the idea that the play is a hybrid work, with certain sections—most notably Act 1—exhibiting a style far more aligned with Peele than with Shakespeare's established canon.
Key Facts
- Primary Candidate: George Peele is the most frequently cited co-author for Titus Andronicus.
- Contested Sections: Act 1, Scene 2.1, and Scene 4.1 are the parts most often attributed to Peele.
- Linguistic Markers: The use of the rare word "palliament" and a high frequency of the words "and" and "with" are key pieces of evidence.
- Stylistic Differences: Peele is associated with high-flown rhetoric and frequent alliteration, while Shakespeare is noted for greater economy and expressive power in his rhetorical devices.
- Modern Consensus: While some still argue for sole authorship, many modern scholars, including Brian Vickers and Jonathan Bate, accept the evidence for Peele's involvement.
The Case for George Peele
The theory that George Peele contributed to the play is based on several layers of evidence, ranging from specific vocabulary to broad stylistic habits.
Vocabulary and Rare Words
Early researchers identified specific words that appeared to be "fingerprints" of Peele. For instance, the word palliament (meaning robe) appears in Titus Andronicus and only one other known work: Peele's poem The Honour of the Garter (1593). Similarly, the word "architect" appears four times in Peele's work but only once in all of Shakespeare's plays.
MacDonald P. Jackson later utilized a "rare word test," discovering that rare vocabulary occurs much less frequently in Act 1, 2.1, and 4.1 than in the rest of the play. This distribution closely mirrors the vocabulary patterns found in Peele's independent plays.
Rhetorical and Metrical Analysis
R.F. Hill's analysis of rhetorical devices revealed that Act 1 is anomalous within the Shakespearean canon, featuring an unusually high rate of alliteration and a lack of sustained metaphors. Later, Marina Tarlinskaja used quantitative stress profiles of iambic pentameter to divide the play into two parts: "Part A" (Act 1, 2.1, 4.1) and "Part B" (the remainder). She concluded that Part A matched Peele's later drama, while Part B matched Shakespeare's early work.
Brian Boyd further highlighted the repetitive use of the word "Rome" and the preference for "brethren" over "brother" in Act 1, a linguistic habit common to Peele but rare for Shakespeare.
The Case for Sole Authorship
Not all scholars agree with the co-authorship theory. Some argue that the perceived inconsistencies are simply the result of a young Shakespeare experimenting with his craft.
Inexperience and Influence
Eugene M. Waith suggested that Titus Andronicus was Shakespeare's first attempt at tragedy, and any lapses in quality or style were due to inexperience. Alan Hughes proposed that Shakespeare may have written an early draft while heavily influenced by Peele's style, later revising the play but leaving Act 1 largely untouched.
Construction and Unity
Arthur M. Sampley and Hereward Thimbleby Price argued that the construction—the overall planning and structural unity of the work—is far too tight to be Peele's. They noted that Peele's solo plays often suffer from a lack of unity and extraneous dialogue, whereas Act 1 of Titus is meticulously structured to set up the subsequent plot.
Comparative Analysis of Authorship Evidence
| Feature | Peele's Typical Style | Shakespeare's Typical Style | Observation in Titus (Act 1) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alliteration | High Frequency | Moderate/Low | Very High |
| Vocabulary | Preference for "brethren" | Preference for "brother" | High use of "brethren" |
| Function Words | Frequent "and" / "with" | Less frequent | High frequency (every 12.7 lines) |
| Rhetoric | High-flown, symmetrical | Economical, functional | Stiff, formal classicism |
The Comprehensive View of Brian Vickers
In 2002, Brian Vickers provided one of the most extensive arguments for co-authorship. He argued that collaboration was the norm in Elizabethan theatre, making it unlikely that Shakespeare worked entirely alone. Vickers employed three specific tests:
- Polysyllabic Words: Words of three or more syllables occur every 2.8 lines in the "Peele sections," matching Peele's average, compared to 3.3 lines in the rest of the play.
- Alliteration Rates: Act 1 shows alliteration once every 2.7 lines (Peele's rate), while the rest of the play shows it every 4.3 lines (Shakespeare's rate).
- Vocatives: The rate of vocatives (direct addresses) in Act 1 is once every 4.2 lines, nearly identical to Peele's Edward I (4.3), and significantly higher than Shakespeare's usual minimum of 6.3.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which parts of the play are most likely written by George Peele?
Most scholars who support the co-authorship theory point to Act 1, Scene 2.1, and Scene 4.1 as the sections most likely written by Peele.
What is the "rare word test"?
The rare word test is a method of authorship attribution that analyzes the frequency and distribution of uncommon vocabulary. In Titus Andronicus, the distribution of rare words in Act 1 aligns more closely with Peele's plays than with Shakespeare's.
Why do some scholars still believe Shakespeare wrote it alone?
Some argue that the stylistic differences are due to Shakespeare's youth and inexperience in writing tragedy, or that he was simply imitating Peele's style during his early career.
What is the significance of the word "palliament"?
The word "palliament" is considered a strong piece of evidence because it appears in Titus Andronicus and only one other known work from the period, George Peele's The Honour of the Garter.
How does the use of "and" and "with" help identify the author?
Metrical analysis shows that in Act 1, these function words appear every 12.7 lines, which matches the frequency found in Peele's plays (8.3 to 13.6). In the rest of Titus and other Shakespeare plays, these words appear much less frequently.