At the beginning of 1593, London was hit by a plague epidemic. All those who had the opportunity retreated onto countryside. So did Marlowe, who went to Scadbury to Thomas Walsingham. The outbreak of the plague always meant massive economic changes as well. The affluent customers had left the city, demand fell and so did turnover. This was compounded by bad weather, rumours of another Spanish invasion, increased persecution of schismatics and rising unemployment.1 On 31 March 1593, Parliament allowed an extension of privileges for foreign merchants, despite opposition from Walter Raleigh and others. The war in the Netherlands and the religious conflicts in France ensured a steady flow of immigrants to England’s capital – absolutely not to the delight of Londoners, who were known for their xenophobic attitudes. In mid-April, a placard appeared announcing that London’s rowdy apprentices would soon be taking on the foreigners. The Privy Council responded with a letter to the Lord Mayor expressing its concern. In the coming days, more pamphlets appeared, mainly directed against Dutch immigrants. By order of the Queen, a special commission was therefore set up to track down the authors of these vituperative pamphlets by any means necessary. In fact, including children and servants, there were 4,300 immigrants living in London at the time, which made up a little over two per cent of the total population.2
On the night of 15 May, an unknown person posted a libel on the wall of the Dutch Church cemetery on Broad Street. Already with the title there was a confusion A Libell, fixte vpon the French Church Wall, in London Ann.o 1593o. Edward VI allowed refugees from France and the Netherlands to practise their religion openly in 1550, for which selected places of worship were allocated to them. The French were given the former chapel of the Hospital of St Anthony in Threadneedle Street. It burnt down during the Great Fire of London. The Huguenot community built a new church, which was demolished in 1841 to make way for the Royal Exchange. The Dutch community met in the former church of the Augustinian monks in Broad Street. The present building stands on the same site, but dates from 1950, as the old church was destroyed during a German bombing raid in 1940. Both churches were only about 120 m apart and were often confused with each other.
The so-called Dutch Church Libel exists only as a copy from around 1600.3 It is a ballad in blank verse, consisting of fifty-three lines, divided into four stanzas, and surpassing all previous pamphlets in hatred, malice and brutality. In addition to the usual stereotypes – infiltration of society, politics and religion – the foreigners are mainly accused of economic offences such as usury, rent increases, market manipulation or reduction of jobs.4 Apart from the fact that the piece of work is signed "Tamburlaine", there are some, at best, discreet allusions in it to The Jew of Malta and The Massacre at Paris. Marlowe is out of the question as an author for several reasons. First of all, the quality of the verses is far below his. Although the general public or even the authorities most likely did not know Marlowe as the author of Tamburlaine,5 to fill such a provocative writing with references to one’s own identity in view of the tense situation would have been extremely absurd. In addition, Marlowe was not in London at the time. Last but not least, the authorities did not react as if they knew the author. On the contrary, the Privy Council ordered extensive house searches and authorised arrests and interrogations even under torture. The reason for these rigid measures was presumably that the London City Council had in the past taken rather half-hearted action against the rioters during xenophobic riots.6 In the course of the investigation, Thomas Kyd was arrested. It is possible that he worked as a scribe for a time and came under suspicion because of this, not because he wrote for the theatre.7 A suspicious three-page manuscript on Arianism was found among his papers, which Kyd claimed was by Marlowe.8
The Dutch Church Libel affair is considered significant to Marlowe’s biography only insofar as it may have led to Kyd’s arrest and subsequently to the discovery of the manuscript and Kyd’s letters. Marlowe was never seriously considered as the author of the pamphlet.
