And if he had, why should he have been killed for it when he could have been brought to law? If he had been brought to law for blasphemy, heresy and free-thinking, his accusers would surely have added unnatural practices if they had evidence? But if it is the King’s thinking that Christopher was killed to stop him talking, then please beg His Majesty’s mercy and say I can help no more, alas.
And yet, and yet. I have heard that his plays touch upon love between men. And if it is also true, as I have also heard that the King himself has favourites, could it be that—?
Of course, sir, of course. I have uttered no such thing, nor would I.
But please remember, sir, that I began this account by saying I could not promise to decipher Christopher Marlowe for you. The Devil alone knoweth the heart of man, a learned judge once wrote.
What I can say is that a man is more than his proclivities. Christopher had hot blood and a fearless mind. He walked where the rest of us fear to tread and he dissolved my faith in the life to come. Yet he sought not to destroy, but to be true. His bequest to me was honest doubt. That is what I believe is important about him, more than his plays or his verses, of which I know sadly little. His life showed that the courage to be honest is the best exemplar of whatever life might be to come. If there is one. And if there is no life to come, only nothingness, then being honest about that and living fully in the face of nothing is an even greater virtue, the very best we can do. And that surely is deserving of something.
POSTSCRIPT
Extract from letter dated 16 February 1626 from Sir Edward Conway, Gent., to the Duke of Buckingham, counsellor to King James I and King Charles I.
…Further to which, Your Grace will be familiar with the desire of His late Majesty, King James of blessed memory, to know the circumstances of the death of the poet Christopher Marlowe in 1593 during the reign of Queen Elizabeth. Although I know not whether King Charles hath inherited his father’s interest, nonetheless I humbly submit the last of my reports on this matter. It is the account given me by Thomas Phelippes, the famed man of ciphers who dwelt in the world of those who witnessed the death of the poet, and who did know them all. I questioned him in the King’s Bench prison where, at Your Grace’s order, he was granted his own more commodious cell and adequate supplies. The account is in his words, so far as I could render them.
Phelippes spoke not knowing the reason for King James’s interest until near the end of my questioning when I described it in as few words as Your Grace was pleased to use with me, at the behest of the King. Your Grace having been intimate with King James’s desires in this matter, I take the liberty of assuming that Your Grace has a like intimacy now with King Charles which will guide Your Grace in deciding whether to show this report to His Majesty. There is much in it to offend any good Christian and I beg Your Grace please to assure His Majesty that not a word of what Thomas Phelippes said shall be bruited abroad. Besides, the man is dead.
It was thanks to Your Grace’s intervention that Phelippes’s last months in prison were considerably eased. There were divers reasons why he spent his old age in and out – indeed, more in than out – of gaol. He was much troubled by litigation concerning an estate he bought at Kirkby Misperton in Yorkshire, his feud with Sir Anthony Ashley lasted above fifteen years and an old quarrel between him and one Tyttyn saw him returned to gaol some years ago. For all his genius with number and cipher, and his skill as an intelligencer, he was not apt at handling his own affairs. His earlier years in confinement arose from his mishandling of his customs dues, as you may see from his account. He earned thereby the wrath of Queen Elizabeth herself and the ill opinion of Lord Burlegh.
Further, when certain treasonous gentlemen attempted to murder King James and his ministers in Parliament in 1605 he was released from prison to help catch the plotters, as he tells us. But afterwards he was confined forthwith to the Tower for more than four years. This was because of his correspondence with Hugh Owen, one of the Duke of Parma’s intelligencers in Brussels who was aiding the Spanish cause and whose evil doings were known to King James. Phelippes protested that he had maintained this correspondence since the old Queen’s time but always using other names. At different times and with various men he was known as Peter Halins, John Morice, Henry Willsdon or John Wystand, and no doubt he used others too. His purpose was to draw out Owen, who thought he was dealing with sympathisers. Nobody, not even Sir Robert Cecil himself, could determine the truth of this and he was eventually freed. But by then prison had damaged him in body and mind. I examined his seized papers myself, after questioning him, and although I could reach no firm conclusion I believe his intention was as he described. He was no traitor.
He fell into trouble again more recently when the Venetian ambassador sent to him to test the Venetian ciphers. They thought him unequalled in deciphering, as he indeed he was, but this time their ciphers defeated him, a defeat he attributed to his near-blindness and his long disuse of the Italian language. Also, he was denied access in prison to his records, in absence of which he revealed the cipher key to another prisoner sent to read for him. The ambassador protested and it was determined he should remain in prison, despite the ambassador later saying he had dealt sincerely with them and should have been paid for his services. He did similar work for us, of course, but never was he paid.
Following my questioning of him, as Your Grace will know from previous correspondence, I petitioned for his release on the ground that the laws did not allow his close confinement any longer. My efforts carried little weight but when Your Grace saw fit to endorse the petition it was graciously granted by His Majesty, though not until this year. It is with sadness that I confess I do not yet know whether he lived to be released into the arms of his good wife. To be sure, if he was released, he did not live long. His widow, Mary, is a worthy woman who for many years worked hard to sustain their affairs. She is a loyal subject, of good faith, and now she has none to support her. Your Grace will I hope permit me to petition for a small pension for her in hopes that His Majesty, counselled by Your Grace, will look upon it with favour. His faults notwithstanding, Thomas Phelippes did the state some service.
I am, Sir, Your Obedient servant…
More from the Author
Accidental Agent
Shakespeare's Sword
Slipstream
Short of Glory
Tango
Also by Alan Judd
FICTION
A Breed of Heroes
Short of Glory
The Noonday Devil
Tango
The Devil’s Own Work
Legacy
The Kaiser’s Last Kiss
Dancing with Eva
Uncommon Enemy
Inside Enemy
Slipstream
Shakespeare’s Sword
Accidental Agent
NON-FICTION
Ford Madox Ford (biography)
The Quest for C: Mansfield Cumming and
the Founding of the Secret Service (biography)
First World War Poets (with David Crane)
We hope you enjoyed reading this Simon & Schuster ebook.
Join our mailing list to get updates on new releases, deals, recommended reads, and more from Simon & Schuster.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP
Already a subscriber? Provide your email again so we can register this ebook and send you more of what you like to read. You will continue to receive exclusive offers in your inbox.
First published in Great Britain by Simon & Schuster UK Ltd, 2021
Copyright © Alan Judd, 2021
The right of Alan Judd to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.
Simon & Schuster UK Ltd
1st Floor
London WC1X 8HB
Simon & Schuster Australia, Sydney
Simon & Schuster India, New Delhi
www.simonandschuster.co.uk
www.simonandschuster.com.au
www.simonandschuster.co.in
A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Hardback ISBN: 978-1-4711-8021-7
eBook ISBN: 978-1-4711-8023-1
Audio ISBN: 978-1-4711-8162-7
This book is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places and incidents are either a product of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual people living or dead, events or locales is entirely coincidental.