The Authorship Question
Shakespeare’s authorship of Titus has been greatly disputed. His authorship has primarily been questioned because the poetic style and material of Titus Andronicus seem unworthy of William Shakespeare. However, throughout the centuries is debate there has never been solid evidence that suggests Shakespeare did not write most of Titus himself.
The first person to question Shakespeare’s authorship was Edward Ravenscroft, who adapted Titus Andronicus during the Restoration. His main argument was that Titus was terrible, and since Shakespeare is not a terrible writer, he therefore could not have written Titus. Ravenscroft’s argument was shaky (to say the least) but he opened the door for a never-ending debate over Titus’ authorship.
In the eighteenth century, the main argument against Shakespeare’s authorship was that Titus is too violent to be Shakespeare and also that Titus featured “uninspired” verse. It is important to note that Titus is not Shakespeare’s most violent play. More characters die in Richard III, which has been almost unarguably Shakespeare’s. As Shakespeare’s existence and authorship continued to be questioned through the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, books were published claiming Shakespeare either did not write any of Shakespeare or that he didn’t write certain plays-- these collections always included Titus.
The twentieth century saw the emergence of a new theory, this one stating that Titus was co-written or at least heavily edited by Shakespeare and someone else. A popular theory has been that much of the play was written by George Peele, a playwright whose style more consistently matches what is presented in Titus. In 1931, Philip Timberlake built on previous research and paid particular attention to feminine endings, which Shakespeare usually uses evenly throughout his plays while Peele would use much less of. Timberlake concluded that feminine endings composed 8.4% of the entire play, with Act I only 2.7%, and both 2.1 and 4.1 only 2.4% each. Other parts of the play had substantially more, such as 5.1 for example, which had 20.2%, or 3.2 which had 12.6%. In a comparative analysis, Timberlake discovered that Peele 1.5-2.8%, with Shakespeare averaging 8.2-16.8%. These figures led Timberlake to conclude that Peele wrote Act 1, 2.1 and 4.1, whereas the rest of the play was by Shakespeare. Also in support of Peele, are certain cliches and other linguistic characteristics which are extremely typical of Peele rather than Shakespeare. In particular, the words “palliament” (I.i.182) and “architect” were words which Peele probably coined and used frequently in his works while Shakespeare does not use these words in his other plays.
While a compelling argument is made for Peele’s co-authorship, there is still not enough evidence that Shakespeare did not write Titus. Shakespeare and Peele were both writers of the same era, so it makes sense that their writing styles are similar. Additionally, Titus is often dated as one of Shakespeare’s earlier works, so the less sophisticated writing style is accounted for in this way. And while certain words and tricks sound more like Peele than Shakespeare, when the whole play is taken into consideration (rather than just details) it is more similar to Shakespeare than to Peele. Overall, Titus is most similar to King Lear, as has often been compared to it in reviews of productions. Titus’ bloody subject matter is similar to what is found in Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece, so Titus is not as out-of-left-field as some critics have believed. As previously mentioned, Titus is not even Shakespeare’s most violent play. Shakespeare would have had to have been a versatile writer to gain the acclaim he did in his day, his plays’ subject-matters are greatly varied from A Midsummer Nights’ Dream to Measure for Measure to Henry V to Titus Andronicus.
The first person to question Shakespeare’s authorship was Edward Ravenscroft, who adapted Titus Andronicus during the Restoration. His main argument was that Titus was terrible, and since Shakespeare is not a terrible writer, he therefore could not have written Titus. Ravenscroft’s argument was shaky (to say the least) but he opened the door for a never-ending debate over Titus’ authorship.
In the eighteenth century, the main argument against Shakespeare’s authorship was that Titus is too violent to be Shakespeare and also that Titus featured “uninspired” verse. It is important to note that Titus is not Shakespeare’s most violent play. More characters die in Richard III, which has been almost unarguably Shakespeare’s. As Shakespeare’s existence and authorship continued to be questioned through the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, books were published claiming Shakespeare either did not write any of Shakespeare or that he didn’t write certain plays-- these collections always included Titus.
The twentieth century saw the emergence of a new theory, this one stating that Titus was co-written or at least heavily edited by Shakespeare and someone else. A popular theory has been that much of the play was written by George Peele, a playwright whose style more consistently matches what is presented in Titus. In 1931, Philip Timberlake built on previous research and paid particular attention to feminine endings, which Shakespeare usually uses evenly throughout his plays while Peele would use much less of. Timberlake concluded that feminine endings composed 8.4% of the entire play, with Act I only 2.7%, and both 2.1 and 4.1 only 2.4% each. Other parts of the play had substantially more, such as 5.1 for example, which had 20.2%, or 3.2 which had 12.6%. In a comparative analysis, Timberlake discovered that Peele 1.5-2.8%, with Shakespeare averaging 8.2-16.8%. These figures led Timberlake to conclude that Peele wrote Act 1, 2.1 and 4.1, whereas the rest of the play was by Shakespeare. Also in support of Peele, are certain cliches and other linguistic characteristics which are extremely typical of Peele rather than Shakespeare. In particular, the words “palliament” (I.i.182) and “architect” were words which Peele probably coined and used frequently in his works while Shakespeare does not use these words in his other plays.
While a compelling argument is made for Peele’s co-authorship, there is still not enough evidence that Shakespeare did not write Titus. Shakespeare and Peele were both writers of the same era, so it makes sense that their writing styles are similar. Additionally, Titus is often dated as one of Shakespeare’s earlier works, so the less sophisticated writing style is accounted for in this way. And while certain words and tricks sound more like Peele than Shakespeare, when the whole play is taken into consideration (rather than just details) it is more similar to Shakespeare than to Peele. Overall, Titus is most similar to King Lear, as has often been compared to it in reviews of productions. Titus’ bloody subject matter is similar to what is found in Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece, so Titus is not as out-of-left-field as some critics have believed. As previously mentioned, Titus is not even Shakespeare’s most violent play. Shakespeare would have had to have been a versatile writer to gain the acclaim he did in his day, his plays’ subject-matters are greatly varied from A Midsummer Nights’ Dream to Measure for Measure to Henry V to Titus Andronicus.