Skip Navigation

The Review of English Studies 2003 54(213):27-51; doi:10.1093/res/54.213.27
© 2003 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Go, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The Bawdy ‘Talent’ to ‘Occupy’ in Cymbeline, the Complaint of Rosamond, and the Elizabethan Homily for Rogation Week

Kenji Go1

1 Teikyo University, Japan

Recently Gordon Williams has uncovered the ‘widespread’ bawdy usage of the word ‘talent’ in seventeenth-century literary texts. This article first discusses an intriguing use of the word in Cymbeline and then examines its earlier instance in Samuel Daniel's The Complaint of Rosamond (1592) within the original socioreligious context where every reader was familiar with Anglican liturgical discourse. It demonstrates that the Anglican homily for the days of Rogation week provides a fortuitous and yet potentially irresistible ground for Daniel's contemporaries to associate the ‘talent’ in the parable of the talents with the human procreative organ, showing how the matron in the poem cunningly appropriates the voice of an Anglican preacher and presents an ingenious parody of this homily and suggesting that her cryptic use of the word ‘talent’ uttered in this context is very likely to have been understood by early readers as a double entendre for Rosamond's pudenda. Finally, a telling piece of circumstantial evidence found in contemporary English bibles is presented to corroborate the view that the bawdy sense of ‘talent’ as the sexual organ of either sex was already widely known in literary circles by the time the Authorized Version was being prepared for publication in 1611.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.