Para1Thomas Dekker’s last lord mayor’s show London’s Tempe (1629) was performed for the lord mayor of the year, Sir James Cambell. It constitutes what this edition characterizes as a complex example of civic pageantry.¹ Although London’s Tempe does not appear to offer anything particularly unique, as it follows traditional conventions, the show nevertheless utilizes this repetitive framework to advance civic enterprise’s view of itself and the present state of English politics. While attention is drawn to military affairs and trade, the focus of the show remains on the lord mayor and his livery company, the Ironmongers, with more subtle references to iron’s role in supplying arms for conflicts abroad or in maintaining the East India Company with which Cambell was affiliated. This concentration on the livery company and mayor speaks to Tracey Hill’s claim that although London’s Tempe refers more overtly to the East India Company with its sea lion than other mayoral shows, Dekker’s entertainment still remains focused upon promoting the livery company, in this case the Ironmongers, which were facing diminishing prowess (Hill 17-18). Nevertheless, the show contains topical content and references that signal Dekker’s investment in recent affairs. Allusions to failures in naval combat have gone relatively unnoticed in the show, despite Dekker’s pamphlet Warres, Warres, Warres of the previous year. This critical introduction therefore seeks to redress this past oversight by elucidating Dekker’s thematic attention to establishing dominance at home rather than abroad. These patterns at times promote what Kim F. Hall identifies as an early form of what is most accurately termed white supremacy in early modern literature (Hall 265). The exoticization and objectification of figures like the Indian boy in the show is a result of the livery company bolstering itself due to the city’s fragile image in relation to other European countries during the early years of the Caroline era. This critical introduction therefore seeks to explore the political ramifications of Dekker’s show that have gone largely unnoticed in previous scholarship.

Para2In 1843, the first known editor of the show, Frederick William Fairholt, remarks that the pageant this year produced by Dekker is much inferior to that for 1612 (Fairholt 35). With little to draw upon other than James Peller Malcolm’s even more distasteful remarks from volume two of his Londinium Redivivum, it is perhaps not surprising that Fairholt came to such a conclusion (Malcolm). Fairholt states that Malcolm sees London’s Tempe as merely a quibble upon the name of the mayor, Cambell, reversed into the French words le bell or beau-champ, a beautiful field or country; to which were invited, and hither came Titan, Flora, Ceres, Pomona, Ver, and Estas, from their blissful fields, to ride through the dirty streets, and a crowd who knew them not (Fairholt 35). In addition to lacking a nuanced critical history on the show, Fairholt was unaware that Dekker’s Britannia’s Honor (1628) had in fact survived in one extant copy, leading him to draw a comparison only between the 1612 and 1629 shows. What remains surprising is that, with a few exceptions, such an attitude toward London’s Tempe has remained mostly unchallenged for more than one and a half centuries.

Para3In his note on the text preceding the only other edition of the show, Fredson Bowers has little to say aside from commentary on the extant copies of the printed book and a brief mention that Bentley (Jacobean and Caroline Stage, III, 256) has a note on the little that is known of this pageant (Bowers 99). Aside from the details already provided by Malcolm and Fairholt, Bentley’s commentary merely states that the pageant is in no way remarkable (Bentley 256). Cyrus Hoy, however, subsequently extends Bowers’s The Dramatic Works of Thomas Dekker (1961) with his Introductions, Notes, and Commentaries to texts in The Dramatic Works of Thomas Dekker (1980). Contrary to Bowers, Hoy notes that an unusual amount of documentary material has survived concerning London’s Tempe (Hoy 45). Hoy is referring to the Malone Society Collections III and V, which Bowers was not aware of when he was working on his edition. Hoy, however, simply regards this information as additional data on the show rather than critically relevant information. This oversight is quite evident when he later adopts a similar attitude to Malcolm’s initial disregard, but Hoy’s rationale for disparaging the show is that it is a derivative work or a hodgepodge of previous pageantry and themes (Hoy 47).

Para4This view of Dekker’s work seems to influence critical approaches to London’s Tempe in more recent years. In his revised edition of English Civic Pageantry, 1558-1642, David M. Bergeron provides an overview of the show, mentioning the Malone Society records and indicating that particular pageants in the show were possibly influenced by Anthony Munday’s Camp-bell or The Ironmongers Faire Field (1609) and Sidero-thriambos (1618), both of which were mayoral shows written in celebration of mayors affiliated with the Ironmongers (Bergeron 176).² Bergeron perceives these repetitions as straining continuity to the point of duplication (Bergeron 177). It is perhaps this repetitive content which leads him to conclude that London’s Tempe suffers from its lack of unity, either thematic or dramatic and offers no coherent, cohesive theme to bind together the disparate parts (Bergeron 177). Bergeron nevertheless champions London’s Tempe and Britannia’s Honor for their rich spectacles despite his aesthetic judgments that they contain little dramatic ‘soulʼ and should perhaps be viewed as Dekker’s ‘dotagesʼ (Bergeron 177). However, as an early original study in civic pageantry, Bergeron focuses primarily upon the medieval moral dimensions of these texts, something that London’s Tempe does not readily adhere to in its structure. His reason for privileging Dekker’s Troia-Nova Triumphans, then, has a much stronger basis than Hoy’s, Bentley’s, Fairholt’s, and Malcolm’s dismissals, for he couches it in his thematic argument concerning the genre of mayoral shows. This distinction is likely why Bergeron understandably values Troia-Nova Triumphans more so than Dekker’s later two mayoral shows.

Para5Bergeron’s concentration on moral themes leads him to remark most favourably on London’s Tempe’s Lemnian Forge pageant featuring Jove, Cupid, and the Cyclopes, which has resulted in this segment receiving the most consistent critical attention. He points out that Jove reminds us that the struggle between the forces of good and evil continues, requiring the active support of the company in behalf of virtue (Bergeron 177). The more complex psychomachia of this drama is later appreciated for its aesthetic achievement as well. Hoy feels that the Lemnian Forge performance highlights his greatest dramatic achievement of this year: Such life as the work contains resides in the jolly clatter of the smiths’ song, and in the spirited dialogue between Jove and Vulcan. Here, at any rate, iron seems to have made itself […] vivid to Dekker’s imagination (Hoy 47). Although Hoy’s interpretation is primarily grounded in subjective aesthetic evaluation, it does, when paired alongside Bergeron’s similar remarks, illuminate the attractive nature of this particular pageant. The pageant’s verse signals a shift from the previous ones that have either followed the typical iambic pentameter of Stuart mayoral shows or served as silent spectacle both by utilizing song and afterward dialogue. The allure of this pageant is likely the result of its highly dramatic structure and dialogue, which is reminiscent of the theatre.

Para6This particular pageant, however, is not only noteworthy but also notorious. As Kara Northway elucidates, the song that the Cyclopes sing takes on greater complexity when we explore its relation to Richard Stanyhurst’s terrible translation of The Aeneid, particularly the often remarked upon thwick-a-thwack (Northway 181). Northway suggests that Dekker is subtly indicating that this poor model should not be followed, and that the pageant functions as an inverse of adroit governance. She continues by providing historical context on Cambell’s father who also served as lord mayor of London. Thomas Cambell, however, was not only remembered for his unkind words but also for needing a substantial number of nominations: While most Lord Mayors went through four nominations before they won election to the Court of Aldermen, the prerequisites for the mayoralty, Thomas Cambell required nineteen (Northway 182). From this sordid history, Northway derives that James Cambell’s father was far from an ideal model to emulate, so Dekker devises this pageant to dissuade James Cambell from following in his father’s footsteps (which he was retracing as mayor that day). Like this poor poetry of Londoners’ past, Cambell’s previous legacy should not be repeated (Northway 183-184). Tracey Hill supports Northway’s reading, but offers the caveat that Dekker does not in any way criticise the City itself (Hill 320). Hill’s clarification allows us to understand that Dekker’s recycling of previous years’ pageants provides lessons in governance that stress continuity but pair that legacy with a critical eye that is aware of past political failures as well as the ongoing moral dilemma that Bergeron identifies.

Para7The show as a whole alludes to Cambell’s father’s lord mayor’s show, written by Munday, Camp-bell or The Ironmongers’ Faire Field (1609).³ Cambell followed in his father’s footsteps as mayor. Sir Thomas Cambell was knighted in 1603,⁴ elected lord mayor in 1609, and made the second governor of the East India Company in 1602. Although Dekker is typically taken to be an adamant proponent of nationalism and duty, his works have previously offered subtle criticisms of leaders’ politics.⁵ In her article on The Shoemaker’s Holiday, for example, Marta Straznicky observes a subtle criticism of the recent contemporary Lord Mayor, Sir John Spencer, whose recent fiasco concerning his daughter’s dowry mirrors the circumstances of Dekker’s characterization of Sir Roger Oatley (Straznicky 365).⁶ This pageant’s shift from speeches to song stresses that something has changed and that perhaps things are out of joint. The deliberately bad poetry of this pageantry likely suggests musical accompaniment that is comically pleasurable but not in accordance with early modern ideal standards of music, particularly with three Cyclopes banging on an anvil. When contrasted with later musical pageantry in the same show, it is possible to appreciate the distinction between the Cyclopes’ song and other pageants further. Jennifer Linhart Wood’s identification that Apollo plays a lute rather than his typical emblematic harp reflects a shift in prioritising a desirable musical performance (Wood 123). This change of instrument is likely effected to stress the movement away from Vulcan’s forge, especially given the mention in the dedicatory epistle of string music in the mayor’s bosom. Given that the offensive translation of Virgil derives from a segment in which the Cyclopes forge Aeneas’s shield, Dekker’s decision to halt this action and then move toward the titular pageant featuring Titan (who later becomes Apollo in the next pageant) emphasizes the need to redirect Londoners’ attention away from wars and toward defending itself, and Dekker rhetorically accomplishes this feat by shifting from bombastic hammering to melodic string music. This topical change is particularly important given that the Ironmongers would have manufactured such militaristic arms. Although Dekker might have had a zealous flair for militant Protestantism, he also had a keen eye for civic history and the interests of that nation in not committing the same errors.

Para8Repetition, then, should not necessarily characterize Dekker as a hack writer. Instead, his attention to form and history can be appreciated when understood as deliberately repetitive, a habit that I have pointed out elsewhere is common in mayoral shows (Kaethler 66-68).⁷ London’s Tempe is part of the continually changing conception of pageantry that Lawrence Manley identifies. While he notes that there is a focus in early modern civic pageantry on connecting the immediate show with a long history of civic leadership,⁸ he also points out that annual variations in an ever-widening repertoire of myths, motifs, and ideas reinforced a sense that history, the community, and its values were all human productions, arising from an ongoing civilizing process (Manley 215). In other words, the London of 1612 that witnessed what Bergeron deems the ideal moral show was not the same London of 1629. Dekker knew this, and we should examine the show for what it reveals about London at that point in history. In what follows, I therefore add to the critical conversation on London’s Tempe by analyzing the show in relation to England’s political, national climate, attending to the pageant book’s account of the day, other records, and the particulars of Cambell’s Lord Mayor’s Day to elucidate the previously unremarked features of this remarkable show.

Para9London’s Tempe is a conflicted text that advances militaristic action and peaceful harmony simultaneously. Although critics have previously characterized Dekker’s writing as advocating a militant Protestantism zeal (Gasper 15), scholars in recent years have argued against this outlook in favour of a more nuanced perspective on Dekker’s writing that examines the topical circumstances and allusions of his drama more closely. London’s Tempe offers a rich opportunity to further this revisiting of Dekker’s canon, as it corresponds to England’s recent peace treaty with France while still drawing attention to ongoing combat in the Netherlands. As Hill states, warfare is undeniably a present—and geographically close—reality for Dekker (Hill 287). The emphasis on peace appears to correspond with the lord mayor’s role in maintaining a prosperous and safe metropolis at home while supplying armaments to troops overseas who are engaging in conflicts that had an effect on trade—something the lord mayor was also deeply involved with as a member of the East India Company. Dekker’s seemingly contradictory show, therefore, actually communicates and justifies the lord mayor’s paradoxical portrait in London’s Tempe as a peaceful leader at home and supplier to the military engine abroad. Disunity, then, rather than structural or thematic cohesion appears to be the point of Dekker’s final show.

Para10England, however, was not at peace with every nation. Spain was still a prominent threat to the country, and Charles I still had a negative outlook on the country after his failed attempts to court Maria Anna in 1623. The Dutch, however, had far more pressing concerns with the Spanish. They were fending off Spanish assaults in Holland, where we also know English soldiers fought alongside the Dutch thanks to Samuel Bachiler’s sermon The Campe, which was printed in both Amsterdam and London in 1629.⁹ The title page addresses both the Dutch and the honourable officers, and all honest souldiers of the English Nation residing in the Netherlands (Bachiler sig. A1r). Furthermore, Bachiler recognizes that his printed sermon might not seem pertinent to Londoners, so he includes a piece to convince people that maintaining a campe in the larger sense of the word was of equal importance. Bachiler’s more encompassing definition included the city and the world as camps is summarized in the prefatory dedication by Thomas Scot, Minister to the English in Vtrecht (Bachiler sig. B1v):

The Campe’s a Theater, where men truly die,

What others wonder at to see in show,

Where some doe act braue deeds, that others may

Live afterwards, by acting them in a play.

The Campe’s a Cittie, Discipline the law,

Which doth incourage Grace, keepes vice in awe.

Where order rules within, and round about

The armed – living walls keepe danger out.

The Campe’s a world, where men at once may see

With little travel, what varieties be

In severall countries, and with easie toyle

Fetch home the golden glories of each soyle.

(Bachiler sig. B1r)

The theatrical qualities of the pamphlet likely attracted the attention of Dekker, but in the civic pageantry, it is the focus on the city as a camp that keepes vice in awe that speaks most readily to Gail Kern Paster’s Augustinian notion of the ideal city of God in mayoral shows (Paster 152). While current military affairs and trade networks to which the mayor was tied inform its content, the show primarily attends to London and the Ironmongers. Given how Dekker’s show as well as Bachiler’s sermon and its paratexts were printed in the same year, it is safe to assume that the militaristic concern over maintaining a campe is prominent cultural currency at the time, regardless of whether Dekker read the pamphlet or not. London becomes a symbolic military camp the mayor must guard. Campe-bell must remain glorious through the righteous actions of its metaphorical general, Cambell.¹⁰

Para11As aforementioned, the play on words also alludes to Cambell’s father’s lord mayor’s show, written by Munday, Camp-bell or The Ironmongers’ Faire Field (1609). The decision to mark this fair field the French champ beau but to spell Cambell as Campe-bell instead of Camp-bell signals a change that connotes the military affairs both through peace with France and a military camp at home rather than abroad. While the Lemnian Forge pageant suggests an underlying message for Cambell not to model himself after his father, as Northway claims (Northway 181-182), it also counsels against military conquest. Given that the offensive translation of Virgil derives from a segment in which the Cyclopes forge Aeneid’s shield, Dekker’s decision to halt this action and then move toward the titular pageant featuring Apollo emphasizes the need to redirect Londoners’ attention away from wars and toward itself. This topical change is particularly important given that the Ironmongers would manufacture such items that might instead be sold to the Dutch who were in attendance. Although Dekker upheld the mayor, city, and country, he also had a keen eye for history so as to guide the mayor, city, and country not to repeat past errors. James Cambell was thus guided to govern with the people’s interests in mind so as to secure his and his family’s honour and memory, but Dekker also counselled him on matters abroad.

Para12The references to trade and military affairs appear to be deliberately obtuse in London’s Tempe in order to retain its central attention on the mayor and livery company, but gestures toward these issues are occasionally made for political reasons. The motives for why they are indirect have to do with London economics. As Julia Schleck and Amrita Sen historicize in the introduction to their special issue of Journal of Early Modern Culture on the East India Company, the establishment of the company marks the early capitalistic transformations that accompanied the emergence of early modern globalization (Schleck and Sen 1). This shift meant that commerce expanded and was no longer as localized as before. Tracey Hill notes the ways in which, even when their mayors have affiliations with the East India Company, mayoral shows do not blatantly celebrate this and other trade networks, for they threaten the autonomy of London’s livery companies (Hill 27). What ultimately results from this loss of power is an anxiety that manifests as an early white supremacist agenda to reinforce authority. Sen elsewhere identifies that these economic changes rendered strangers […] into commodities who were sold as slaves or exhibited as curiosities (Sen 43). She illuminates that in mayoral shows this means turning the Indian into objects of fascination for London’s crowds and mayoral elite, much like animals such as the rhinoceros she examines in Heywood’s civic pageantry (Sen 40, 45). These interpretations correspond with and extend the applicable scope of Ian Smith’s indication that Moors in Elizabethan and Jacobean mayoral shows operate as commodities on display for white spectators in the crowd (Smith 218).

Para13London’s Tempe is no exception to this rhetoric of white supremacy in the mayoral shows. The characterization of these trade practices in relation to imperial supremacy has specific bearing on race in London’s Tempe. The third pageant portraying the Indian boy in a non-speaking role serves as yet another example of the commodification that compensates for a loss of mercantile power. Hill remarks that the boy’s presentation atop an ostrich with a horseshoe in the animal’s mouth establishes a symbolic representation of the Ironmongers’ prowess, given the bird’s association with iron and the company (Hill 20). The fact that the company later purchased this carving, which can still be seen today at the Ironmongers’ Hall, proves the symbolic value of the bird to the company; the fact that company records in 1609 mention another pageant (never staged) that features ostriches as well indicates how central these birds were to iron and the company (Robertson and Gordon 73-74); and the fact that the Ironmongers opted to keep the artificer’s wood carving signifies its meaning to the company. However, it also commodifies the boy as an icon of English trade, given Dekker’s explicit reference to the East India Company in the previous pageant and his labelling of the boy here as Indian.

Para14It is vital to note, however, that the Indian boy as depicted in this pageant is imagined rather than real. While the English understanding of Indian varied, the direct references earlier in the water show to the East India Company make the connection clear to readers, even if this might not have been the case for the crowd in attendance. Hall has documented the intensified trend to objectify young Black boys during the Caroline era (Hall 241-251), and Imtiaz Habib notes the presence of Indian boys in London around this time, specifically those who were violently abducted from India (Habib 246). It is therefore tempting to follow Hill’s suggestion that the Indian boy may have actually been played by an Indian boy rather than a white boy in blackface. There is the question of whether or not Black actors would be allowed to perform. If a Black child was allowed to perform, then the absence of speech could be due to the fact he could not benefit from extensive theatrical training, but it could also be done to augment the objectification that Sen and Smith identify in mayoral shows. There are also circumstances of past performance that suggest a white child in blackface is equally plausible. Dekker draws considerable inspiration from Munday’s Camp-bell (1609). The records for this show, however, indicate that the company was displeased with the performance of the child actors, in particular their delivery of speeches (Hill 143). It is reasonable to assume that Dekker had access to or gained knowledge of this company and performance history, given the repetition of the 1609 show’s namesake in London’s Tempe. The fact that not only does the Indian boy remain silent but so do Tethys, Cupid, and other figures likely played by boy actors indicates that Dekker likely had hesitations about allowing the boy actors to deliver speeches and instead composed these pageants without speech or dialogue. It is possible that the Indian boy is not a white actor in blackface, but in any potential circumstance, the staged Indian boy remains an exoticized, racist concoction of white authorities that seeks to reaffirm the company’s power by objectifying the boy.

Para15It is therefore important to view Booth’s illustration of the first land pageant as potentially skewed rather than as historical truth. Regardless of its historical accuracy, it further accentuates the exoticization of the Indian boy. By examining images of the original ostrich carving, still housed at the Ironmongers’ company hall, it is already possible to note discrepancies in the bird’s proportion and stance relative to those depicted in the drawing. Hill notes several other errors or questionable choices in Booth’s drawings, including the fact that the Indian boy on the ostrich is said by Dekker to be wearing ‘attire proper to the Countryʼ, whereas in Booth’s drawing the boy does not appear to be wearing anything (Hill 124). Booth records his impressions rather than truth. He likewise appears to conflate the Persian and Turk with the musketeer and pikeman given the two rather than four actors that accompany the boy. Scholars have previously noted the discrepancies and inaccuracies in Booth’s drawings, but given the unique nature of these illustrations as some of the only extant early modern performance records, there is a risk that they are granted an authority and validity that is unbecoming. We should therefore remember that the Indian boy is in fact the creation of a white dramatist, more than likely performed by a white boy actor in blackface, staged for the white supremacist economic anxieties of a livery company’s elite entourage, and are recorded in history through the documented impressions of a white man in attendance. Even if Booth’s illustration is of an actual Indian boy on an ostrich, it is unclear what Dekker or the company took Indian to mean. Hill remarks that Dekker has him holding a tobacco pipe and dart, which signal that by ‘Indianʼ the Americas are meant (Hill 145). The white imaginary’s conflation of various racialized stereotypes into one silent spectacle of nationalism means that the Indian boy is nevertheless the exotic fiction Habib cautious scholars to distinguish from the Black lives that populated London (Habib 7). In all these manifestations, the Indian boy continues to represent the interests and power of the English livery company and to assuage their white supremacist commercial anxieties. Although it is important to determine if possible whether or not a boy from India or the Americas performed in London’s Tempe, it is equally important to remember that the performance is one of white supremacy, as Sen and Smith have previously identified in their work on other mayoral shows.

Para16In the case of London’s Tempe there are two competing forms of power that contribute to these depictions of white supremacy: the crown and the city. While the attention to overseas trade in the show serves to mollify the Ironmongers’ and other livery companies’ loss of mercantile power, it also redirects attention away from naval failures and recent military developments toward exchange of goods and maintenance at home. Tethys’ sea lion explicitly represents the two lions on the East India Company’s crest. Since Tethys is said to represent the French Company and the sea lion she rides is associated with the larger English company, the pageant symbolizes a renewed friendship between these nations who were previously engaged in naval battles. Dekker’s choice to divide the water pageantry into two presentations that unite Oceanus and Tethys as a married couple strengthen this reading by presenting the spectacle in front of Charles and Henrietta, whose marriage also represents the bond of England and France.

Para17However, London’s Tempe is nevertheless still ridden with imagery of war. These allusions have to do with more recent military engagements between Spanish and Dutch forces, so the alignment of the mayor with the French in particular serves to shift concentration from military endeavours toward sustaining London, or London’s tempe. England and Spain were at war during 1629 and their relations had become increasingly tense ever since Charles I’s failed efforts to court Maria Anna during his travels to Spain. The duke of Buckingham, George Villiers, had accompanied him on his trip to negotiate the terms of marriage, and on 5 October 1625 he failed again by inducting Edward Cecil to take command of the great armada in a naval battle against Spain (Edmundson 93). Cecil had no naval experience, which resulted in England losing these battles. The failure rendered England’s militaristic image fragile and manifested in public hatred throughout London for Buckingham.

Para18Buckingham was assassinated in August 1628 and negotiations for a peace treaty between England and France began shortly after Charles dissolved parliament. The obvious reason for this event is that Charles lacked the funding and support to continue waging war, especially after such a tremendous defeat (Edmundson 104). The Dutch played a major role in establishing the peace,¹¹ since it was best for their economy to have England and France as allies. Such an alliance would also likely concentrate England’s military efforts on the main enemy of both nations, Spain, but England already saw Spain as its most prominent adversary. Queres vpon the Trade to the East Indies section of the The Petition and Remonstrance of the Governor And Company of Merchants of London, Trading to the East Indies (1628) makes it clear under its section entitled Safetie that investment in the East India Company will weaken the KING of SPAINE (Petition and Remonstrance sig. A3r, A3v). It is important to note, though, that these words are not the only ones entirely capitalized in the Queres section of the book. HOLLANDERS is also capitalized and also found under Safetie. Here, we find that the Dutch are perceived by Londoners as a powerful and prosperous nation, which was quite evident in the seventeenth century.¹² A significant reason for this might have been what the English regarded as immoral trading practices. The Dutch did not have a problem with continuing trade with other nations, such as Spain, despite being at war with them. In 1626-1627, England was obviously disconcerted about such practices and forbade traffic between the Dutch and the Spanish (Edmundson 94-95). When reading London’s Tempe, then, it is important to consider that this is the first show performed after London had established peaceful ties with France, reconciled relations with the Dutch, and developed a Navigation Treaty (Edmundson 95), though there was still competition between the countries for supremacy. England was prospering from trade through the East India Company, but as Bachiler’s printed sermon makes clear, the country still had troops positioned in the Netherlands. In other words, Londoners were looking to peaceful fields while still knowing that they faced obstacles.

Para19The Campe encourages Londoners to be moral, warlike citizens at home, as evidenced in the Queres section under Strength: Whether it doth not much increase the strength of this Kingdome with Marriners, Warlike-Shipping, Ammunition, and all necessarie Arts-men thereunto belonging (Bachiler sig. A3r, my emphasis). England’s image as warlike rather than at war advocates for defense rather than offense. The war-like contributions the English make are in shipping rather than combat, which is worthwhile considering in light of the fact that iron is listed as an export of the East India Company. In thinking to Oceanus’s commendation of London or New Troy as the most magnificent city and the Thames as the world’s greatest body of water, it is important to note that in the final portion of the section on Safetie the author notes the HOLLANDERS swelling greatnes by trade, which must be averted by keeping them from being absolute Lords of the Seas (Petition and Remonstrance sig. A3v). The document conveys that the Dutch gain where other nations falter, so they aim to weaken English traffic. The English are thus their Corriuals, who are able to keepe the Dutch from the absolute Dominion of the Seas (D4r). This competition is likely why Oceanus is chosen for the water pageant. He represents the confluence of all oceans and bodies of water, and he presents a case for London’s Thames being the most superior body of water in the world. London’s Tempe communicates this message loud and clear given Abram Booth’s account that Oceanus’s pageant indicates that the English nation wanted to be the Lords of the Ocean (Lusardi and Gras 22). The fact that this god delivers the goodnight speech to Cambell on land at the conclusion of the show stresses that London will retain this prowess through trading in armaments rather than supplying fighters.

Para20When we consider these representations of competing supremacy for the seas, it is vital to acknowledge the racialized depictions that determine this competition for power and inform its spiritual characterization. Trade is perceived as a very religious activity at which England excelled above other countries in performing righteously. Ania Loomba illuminates how English religious ideological practice meant retaining a pure, Christian identity in commerce rather than allowing one’s desire for the exotic to run rampant (Loomba 1715-1716). This ideology sets a counterpoint to their Dutch allies’ common practice of dealing with their enemies when they are at war, which signals corrupt practices and greed rather than what the English conveniently defined as virtuous exchange instead of white supremacy. The Dutch did not trade according to the English’s codes of honour. If the Dutch were at war with Spain, it did not stop them from trading with the Spanish. England obviously had a problem with what they considered loose morality at best; however, the spiritual ideology functions as a means to distract from the underlying issue with such trade, namely that it deters from English profit. In strengthening both enemies and allies, Dutch and Spanish trade makes England less wealthy and thus less powerful in comparison. These trade networks and wars suggest competition for supremacy that fosters a scale of virtue that privileges the English at the top with the Spanish below them and the Dutch in the middle, all while utilizing and exoticizing persons, such as the Indian boy, as objects to quell anxieties. The rhetoric of Dekker’s show serves to convey that England will maintain this stance by profitting from the war, thereby supplying the Dutch with arms rather than armies.

Para21Dekker’s show has been understood and appreciated gradually as an example of complex pageantry, particularly through Hill’s historical insights on Dekker’s texts and its surrounding records as well as Northway’s critical analysis of the show’s dramatic counsel. This edition has drawn upon this scholarship as well as the important work of Habib, Hall, Hill, Schleck, Sen, and Smith to draw attention to the white supremacist rhetoric that informed the anxieties of livery company officials, which in turn led to Dekker’s show’s exoticization and localism. Although London’s Tempe reinforces a white supremacist image of civic power and identity, the show likewise exemplifies the ways in which London faced significant competition with the Dutch and the Spanish at this time, thereby compelling them to mend their naval relations with the French and to rely upon trade networks in order to promote their superiority. In this manner, while the show promotes English nationalism, its need to reassert this propaganda through repeating previous tropes in civic pageantry exposes the cracks in its foundational image. Although Dekker chiefly celebrates iron and the Ironmongers’ Company as London’s ambition and acme in 1629, he simultaneously points to recent failures and complications linked to that image of success that compromise the company’s intrinsic merit and self-sufficiency. The show is therefore far more remarkable and nuanced than has been previously imagined, and its failings are not aesthetic in nature but rather the ways in which it contributed to a nascent British empire that would have a horrific colonial legacy.