Donohue

Jamie DonohueEnglish 310, Loxterman17 November 2006

Eve’s Accountability

John Milton’s epic poem “Paradise Lost” (1674) and Aemilia Lanyer’s poem “Eve’s

Apology in Defense of Women” (1611) both examine the Biblical story, found in Genesis, of the

Fall of Man. While Milton chose to focus his work largely on the human condition, Lanyer

instead focused her work on the sin of Pontius Pilate and how it related to Eve committing

Original Sin.1

Milton has taken the Biblical creation story found in the Book of Genesis,2 and filled in the

details of the relationship between the first married couple as well as Satan and God, by

“portraying the moral and intellectual engagement with a vast range of situations.”3 Book IX is

the climax of Milton’s work, in which Adam and Eve eat of the Tree of Knowledge and commit

Original Sin. While there has been a lot of debate between literary critics as to who is directly to

blame for man’s fall, over time, Eve has generally been credited as bearing the most

responsibility.

Lanyer’s much shorter poem, “Eve’s Apology in Defense of Women,” explores the New

Testament passage wherein Pilate’s wife tells Pilate, “Have thou nothing to do with that juste

man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dreame by reason of him.”4 Pilate’s wife

compares Pilate’s sin to Eve’s, saying that the sin Pilate is about to commit is much worse than

1 Greenblatt, Stephen, et al. “Introduction to Paradise Lost.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006. 1830. 2 The Geneva Bible, 1560 Edition. The Digital Christian Library. http://www.thedcl.org/bible/gb/index.html. 10 November 2006. [NB: This site provides a digital facsimile of the original 1560 edition.]. Book of Genesis.3 Lim, Walter S.H. “Adam, Eve, and Biblical Analogy in Paradise Lost.” Studies inEnglish Literature, 1500-1900. 30:1, The English Renaissance (Winter, 1990), 115-131. JSTOR. University of Richmond Libraries, Richmond VA, 11 November 2006. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0039-3657%28199024%2930%3A1%3C115%3AAEABAI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T 4 The Geneva Bible, Matthew 27:19.

1

Donohue

the sin of Eve. Lanyer even goes so far as to say that Eve’s act was not really a sin, but a desire

for knowledge, and to give that knowledge to her husband. Lanyer takes a different approach to

the creation story, blaming Adam and God for man’s fall while saying that Eve “was simply

good.”5

After examining the two separate works, it appears that the fall of man was a joint venture

between Adam and Eve, both committing the same sin, but under different circumstances. Using

the Geneva Bible as the authoritative text and account of man’s creation, Lanyer has presented

evidence that does not follow, while Milton’s story plausibly fills in details of Eden, God, and

man.

Milton, in “Paradise Lost,” seeks to “prove that Satan is responsible for the introduction

of evil into the world and that he is hateful because he is evil.”6 The work, as a whole,

documents the emergence of evil into the world via Satan, a fallen angel. Satan becomes jealous

of the world God has created, and in an effort to disrupt its harmony, seeks the downfall of man.

By the start of Book IX, Adam and Eve have both been created and placed into the Garden of

Eden, where they tend to the plants and animals that God has given them.

Milton, in following the epic tradition, begins Book IX with a story of the nightly visits

of his Muse, who he believed gave him the words which he was to write.7 After this semi-

invocation, the scene shifts back to the Garden of Eden. Satan has snuck past the sentries posted

by God, disguised as a serpent, the “subtlest beast of all the field.”8

5 Lanyer, Aemilia. “Eve’s Apology in Defense of Women.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006. 1317.6 Diekhoff, John S. Milton’s Paradise Lost: A Commentary on the Argument. New York: Humanities Press, 1963. 28.7 Milton, John. “Paradise Lost, Book IX.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt, et al. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006. Lines 21-23.8 Ibid., 86. Also the description used in Genesis 3:1.

2

Donohue

Satan laments that God has created the earth and all its creatures to be more beautiful

than heaven and he is jealous of Adam and Eve’s place in Paradise. Because he has fallen, Satan

knows that he can never “hope to be myself less miserable,” but that his only comfort will come

in man’s destruction, “for only in destroying I find ease.”9

Book IX then shifts to a scene of Adam and Eve deciding how to divide the day’s labor.

Eve believes that if she and Adam work separately, they will accomplish more work. Adam

wishes that he and Eve remain side by side throughout the day, “lest harm/Befall thee severed

from me.”10 Eve, believing herself to be strong enough to resist any harm, tells Adam that her

faith and love cannot, “by his fraud be shaken or seduced.”11 Adam tries again to persuade Eve

to remain with him for the day, but Eve persists and goes off to work alone.

Before approaching Eve, Satan reasserts his desire to destroy man, “to intercept thy way,

or send thee back/Despoiled of innocence, of faith, of bliss.”12 He hopes to come upon Eve

alone, whom he admires for her innocence, and to corrupt her through temptation. By

comparison, Satan’s speech to Eve is much shorter than Adam’s attempt to convince Eve not to

work alone, yet Satan’s words “into the heart of Eve…made way.”13 Because Eve is so easily

tempted, a question arises as to Milton’s thoughts on the inherent weakness of women to

temptation. One critic cites Milton’s relationship with his wife, Mary Powell (who died during

childbirth in 1652) as an underlying reason for Milton’s apparent distrust for women.14 In fact,

Eve is more impressed by the ability of the serpent to speak than she is concerned by a creature

she knows to be the “subtlest beast of all the field.”15 Satan, through the serpent, explains that he

9 Milton, 126 and 129.10 Ibid., 251-52.11 Ibid., 287.12 Ibid., 410-11.13 Ibid., 550.14 Diekhoff, 50.15 Milton, 559.

3

Donohue

gained his speech by eating of a certain fruit “of fairest colors mixed/Ruddy and gold.”16 He then

entices Eve, through a use of Petrarchan courtship, to follow him to this tree so that she might

taste the fruit and gain the knowledge of the serpent.

When they arrive at the tree, Eve recognizes it to be the forbidden tree, which she “may

not taste nor touch…lest ye die.”17 This speech of Eve’s is significant in that it establishes the

fact of her understanding God’s command to not eat of the Tree of Knowledge (“ye shall not eate

of it, neither shall ye touche it, lest ye die”).18 When she tells Satan of this command, Satan

attempts to convince her to eat, saying “will God incense his ire/For such a petty trespass, and

not praise/Rather your dauntless virtue…achieving what might lead/To happier life, knowledge

of good and evil; Of Good, how just? Of evil, what is evil/Be real, why not known, since easier

shunned?”19 Again, Eve is easily tempted, and desirous when “into her heart too easy entrance

won: Fixed on the fruit she gazed, which to behold/Might tempt alone, and in her ears the

sound/Yet rung of his persuasive words, impregned/with reason, to her seeming, and with

truth.”20 Satan’s words have already “impregned,” or impregnated, Eve, implying that at this

point, even though she has not yet physically eaten of the tree, she has lost her virginal innocence

due to her temptation. Eve’s choice demands that she believe Satan before God, though she may

not recognize the serpent to be Satan.21 Eve seeks to gain knowledge so that she can be on a

level with God, “vanity is part of her weakness,” and she reasons that God would not forbid the

fruit unless it were powerful, and so she eats, reaching forth with a rash hand.22

16 Ibid., 577-78.17 Ibid., 650-663.18 The Geneva Bible, Genesis 3:3.19 Milton, 692-99.20 Ibid., 734-38.21 Diekhoff, 109.22 Ibid., 71 and Milton, 780-82.

4

Donohue

The words Milton chooses to describe Eve’s actions in this section are heavily loaded

with negative connotations: rash, fancied, greedily. All imply that Eve was committing a sin of

impetuosity and carelessness, weaknesses later ascribed to women throughout history. As soon

as Eve commits the act, the “Earth felt the wound, and nature from her seat/Sighing through all

her works gave signs of woe,” yet Eve continued to eat “engorged without restraint,” it is with

this act that man has fallen.23

Knowing she has done wrong, Eve debates how she will present herself to Adam. Eve

first wonders whether she should share Satan’s “gift” with Adam, or if she should “keep the odds

of knowledge in my power…to add what wants/In female sex…and render me more equal.”24

She then decides that her love for Adam is so strong that she cannot keep the fruit to herself, and

must share it with Adam. This section serves two purposes. First, it builds on what has been

called a “love story” between Adam and Eve; Eve’s love for Adam is so strong that she cannot

bear to have an advantage over him. Second, it sets up Milton’s overall argument that Eve knew

what she had done to be wrong, otherwise, why would she seek to appear to Adam in some

guise? Eve knows she has sinned, therefore her act is not entirely genuine—she does not want to

live without Adam.

Meanwhile, Adam had fashioned a garland for Eve while waiting for her return. Eve

arrives and tells Adam what has happened, expecting for him to be happy. Instead, “all his joints

relaxed/From his slack hand the garland wreathed for Eve/Down dropped, and all the faded roses

shed,” a symbolic gesture of man’s fall.25

Despite knowing that Eve is doomed for her actions, Adam also knows that he cannot

live without her. Adam says, “How can I live without thee…Should God create another Eve,

23 Milton, 782-91.24 Ibid., 816-22.25 Ibid., 892-93.

5

Donohue

and I/Another rib afford, yet loss of thee/Would never from my heart; no no, I feel/The link of

nature draw me: flesh of flesh/Bone of my bone thou art, and from thy state/Mine never shall be

parted.”26 This was a common sentiment expressed in many works of the time. For example, at

the beginning of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, Romeo is in love with Rosaline, who

does not return his affections, and he tells his friends that he would rather die than live without

her. Eve, not wanting for Adam to find another woman, persuades Adam to the same fate, “to

undergo with me one guilt, one crime/If any be, of tasting this fair fruit.” Knowing he cannot

live without Eve, Adam “with liberal hand…fondly overcome with female charm” eats the

fruit.27 It is important that Milton says Adam ate the fruit, not because his knowledge was

deceived, but because he cannot accept the loss of Eve, “Adam places his love of Eve above his

love of God.”28

After eating the fruit, Adam comments, “Much pleasure we have lost, while we

abstained/From this delightful fruit,” and in a surge of newly found love for Eve, the couple go

into the woods where “they their fill of love and love’s disport/Took largely, of their mutual guilt

the seal/The solace of their sin.”29

When Adam and Eve awake, they realize the full transgression that they have committed

against God, finding “their eyes how opened, and their minds/How darkened; innocence, that as

a veil/Had shadowed them from knowing ill, was gone…left to guilty shame.”30 The couple

proceeds to argue, Adam blaming Eve and visa versa. Interestingly, neither blames the other for

actually having eaten the fruit, but rather for their agreement to not work together the preceding

morning. Adam blames Eve, telling her that if she had remained with him, and not been tempted

26 Ibid., 901 and 911-17.27 Ibid., 997-99.28 Diekhoff, 49 and 73.29 Milton, 1022-23 and 1042-44.30 Ibid., 1053-58.

6

Donohue

to wander, they would still have been “happy, not as now, despoiled/Of all our good.”31 Eve

counters Adam by saying that it was his responsibility, as the dominant male, to protect her, and

that it was with Adam’s permission that she was able to wander.32 “Thus they in mutual

accusation spent/The fruitless hours, but neither self-condemning/And of their vain contest

appeared no end.”33

There is a great deal of debate amongst critics as to whom Milton blames for man’s fall.

Some, believing that since Adam was the voice of responsibility, while Eve represented passion,

argue that Adam failed in his duty as the patriarch to stop Eve from working alone.34 Others

argue that neither Adam nor Eve is solely responsible, but that the guilt is shared because, “as

creatures made with free choice, they had the option to either stand or fall.”35 However, God is

not responsible for man’s fall, as Lanyer implies in her poem “Eve’s Apology in Defense of

Women.” God makes it clear in Book III that man possessed the ability to freely choose, and

that “there was nothing in his predestined nature or in the force of circumstance that ‘made’ him

fall.”36 While God is not physically present in Book IX, both Adam and Eve are aware of his

forbiddance of the Tree of Knowledge. In the end, they are both responsible. Eve, failing in

submission to Adam, the patriarch, is exposed to Satan alone. Adam, failing in his masculine

duties, has exposed Eve.37

31 Revard, Stella P. “Eve and the Doctrine of Responsibility in Paradise Lost.” PMLA. 88:1 (January, 1973), 69-78. JSTOR. University of Richmond Libraries, Richmond VA, 9 November 2006. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-8129%28197301%2988%3A1%3C69%3AEATDOR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W, 70. And Milton, 1134-1139.32 Revard, 70.33 Milton, 1187-89.34 Bowers, Fredson. “Adam, Eve, and the Fall in ‘Paradise Lost.’” PMLA. 84:2 (March, 1969), 264-273. JSTOR. University of Richmond Libraries, Richmond VA, 11 November 2006. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-8129%28196903%2984%3A2%3C264%3AAEATFI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-E. 35 Revard, 70, et passim.36 Ibid., 69-70.37 Diekhoff, 54.

7

Donohue

In Genesis, when God punishes Adam and Eve separately, God tells Adam “Because

thou hast obeyed the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, cursed is the earth for thy sake:

in sorowe shalt thou eate of it all the dayes of thy life.”38 It seems that God’s punishment of

Adam is less for eating from the Tree of Knowledge, and more for having listened to his wife.

Eve’s Biblical punishment also absolves Adam for having let Eve work alone, that woman’s

“desire shall be subject to thine husbande, and he shall rule over thee,” the Biblical establishment

of a patriarchal society.39

Aemilia Lanyer’s poem “Eve’s Apology in Defense of Women” is at first a simple filling in

of details left out of Matthew 27:19: “Also when he was set downe upon the judgment seat, his

wife sent to him, saying, ‘Have thou nothing to do with that juste man: for I have suffered many

things this day in a dreame by reason of him.’”40 But, at the poem’s heart, is a drive towards

dismantling the patriarchal society of which Lanyer was a part. “She acknowledges that men got

power over women from the Fall of Adam and Eve…If men commit the far worse sin of killing

Christ, their doing so sets women free from men’s rule.”41 Set within the context of Pilate’s wife

telling him not to kill Christ, Lanyer tells the story of the Fall of Man from an entirely different

perspective than that used by Milton or the Bible.

Pilate’s wife makes the argument that, while Eve did sin, her actions were “simply good.”42

Eve “by cunning was deceived” by the serpent and if she had known the ramifications of her

actions, Eve would not have listened to the serpent.43 This argument fails to stand up to the

Biblical story because in Genesis, Eve tells the serpent that God has forbidden them to eat from

38 The Geneva Bible, Genesis 3:17.39 Ibid., Genesis 3:16.40 Ibid., Matthew 27:19. This is the only reference to this anecdote found in the New Testament.41 Mueller, Janel. “The Feminist Poetics of Salve Deus Rex Judaeorum.” Aemilia Lanyer: Gender, Genre, and the Canon. Ed. Marshall Grossman. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998. 99-127.42 Lanyer, 21.43 Ibid., 25-29.

8

Donohue

the Tree of Knowledge. Lanyer even acknowledges this point by saying that Eve “alleged God’s

word, which he [the serpent] denies.”44

The blame is then shifted to Adam, who “cannot be excused.”45 Adam, according to Lanyer,

“was most to blame” because God had set him as the patriarch of earth.46 If Adam had been with

Eve when the serpent tempted her, then he would have been able to resist the temptation that Eve

was too weak to stand up against. Lanyer says that Adam knew God’s command not to eat, he

knew the punishment was death, and yet he ate the fruit anyways. Lanyer believes that this

absolves Eve entirely, though the logic does not follow; Eve was also aware of “God’s strait

command” and she was the first to eat from the Tree of Knowledge.47

The only “fault” Lanyer gives to Eve is a desire for Knowledge, and to give that knowledge

to her husband. Lanyer makes Eve “virtually guiltless by comparison with Adam and Pilate,”

she, “ascribes to Eve only loving intentions in offering the apple to Adam, and identifies woman

as, through that gift, the source of men’s knowledge.”48 Adam, who was not persuaded by the

serpent, ate the fruit for being fair.49 Lanyer represents Eve as “accepting the fruit from the

serpent ‘for knowledge sake,’ while Adam was simply beguiled by its ‘faire’ appearance.”50 In

addition to Eve’s desire for knowledge was her fault of simply loving Adam too much.51 Lanyer

says that men owe their knowledge to Eve (i.e. women), yet they will never acknowledge this

fact.52

44 Ibid., 31.45 Ibid., 33.46 Ibid., 34.47 Ibid., 43.48 Lewalski, Barbara K. “Seizing Discourses and Reinventing Genres.” Aemilia Lanyer: Gender, Genre, and the Canon. Ed. Marshall Grossman. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998. 53.49 Lanyer, 54-55, and Mueller, 119.50 Miller, Naomi J. “(M)other Tongues: Maternity and Subjectivity.” Aemilia Lanyer: Gender, Genre, and the Canon. Ed. Marshall Grossman. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998. 158.51 Lanyer, 57.52 Ibid., 63-64.

9

Donohue

Lanyer then goes on to assert that if anything motivating Eve was evil, then it was surely

Adam’s fault, because Eve was made from Adam.53 Of all Lanyer’s assertions, this logic is most

difficult to credit because it denies the existence of free will in man. If Eve’s actions were

indeed evil, and came from Adam, this would imply that Eve’s sin was predetermined and not a

choice she made of her own volition. The serpent (Satan), both Milton and Lanyer agree, had

premeditated man’s fall, and was purely evil; it does not follow that Lanyer blames Adam, who

came from God, the just ruler.54

Pilate’s wife’s argument then shifts back to Pilate, who is about to commit a sin worse than

Eve’s because, unlike Eve who listened to the serpent out of weakness, Pilate’s sin of killing

Christ would be out of malice, “her sin was small to what you do commit.”55 Lanyer’s argument

ignores the fact that if Pilate did not crucify Christ, salvation, and absolution from Original Sin,

would be impossible. Furthermore, she seems to ignore that if Eve had not eaten of the Tree of

Knowledge to begin with, man would still be in Paradise and God would not have had to send

Christ to save man.

In the penultimate stanza, Lanyer gives her most “shocking” lines, in which she argues that,

because Pilate’s sin is worse that Eve’s sin, which had been used as justification for the

subjugation of women, then men should not have a problem with women being their equals.

Lanyer sets up an “inverse typology between Eve and the exclusively male perpetrators of the

Crucifixion. As Christ’s sacrifice makes good Adam’s sin, the sin of Christ’s male crucifiers

makes good Eve’s fall: by it men forfeit dominion over women.”56 Here, Lanyer trivializes

53 Ibid., 66.54 Ibid., 24 and Diekhoff, 98.55 Lanyer, 71-74.56 Grossman, Marshall. “Introduction.” Aemilia Lanyer: Gender, Genre, and the Canon. Ed. Marshall Grossman. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998. 3.

10

Donohue

Eve’s sin, saying Eve “simply did offend,” ignoring the fact that Eve’s sin, shared with Adam,

led to man’s expulsion from Paradise and to his perpetual suffering on earth.57

Today, Milton is still widely read, while Lanyer is far less well known. This could be

attributed to the fact that in Milton, the blame is never clearly placed on Adam or Eve. Milton

acknowledges that they both sinned and the details of their separate sins are argued over, but at

its conclusion, “Paradise Lost” indicates that man’s fall was equally the fault of Adam and Eve.

Conversely, Lanyer’s poem places the blame on Adam and God, accusing Adam of not having

stayed with Eve and protected her. If this is to be believed, then Lanyer is acknowledging

herself that woman is weaker than man, thus her call to “being your [man’s] equals” is

unattainable from the very assertion of Eve’s “weakness.”58

Works Cited:Bowers, Fredson. “Adam, Eve, and the Fall in ‘Paradise Lost.’” PMLA. 84:2 (March,

57 Lanyer, 87.58 Ibid., 86 and 61.

11

Donohue

1969), 264-273. JSTOR. University of Richmond Libraries, Richmond VA, 11 November 2006. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-8129%28196903%2984%3A2%3C264%3AAEATFI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-E

Diekhoff, John S. Milton’s Paradise Lost: A Commentary on the Argument. New York: Humanities Press, 1963.

The Geneva Bible, 1560 Edition. The Digital Christian Library. http://www.thedcl.org/bible/gb/index.html. 10 November 2006. [NB: This site provides a digital facsimile of the original 1560 edition.]

Greenblatt, Stephen, et al. “Introduction to Paradise Lost.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006. 1830-31.

Grossman, Marshall. “Introduction.” Aemilia Lanyer: Gender, Genre, and the Canon. Ed. Marshall Grossman. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998. 1-9.

Lanyer, Aemilia. “Eve’s Apology in Defense of Women” from Salve Deus Rex Judaeorum. The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt, et al. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006. 1317-1319.

Lewalski, Barbara K. “Seizing Discourses and Reinventing Genres.” Aemilia Lanyer: Gender, Genre, and the Canon. Ed. Marshall Grossman. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998. 49-59.

Lim, Walter S.H. “Adam, Eve, and Biblical Analogy in Paradise Lost.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900. 30:1, The English Renaissance (Winter, 1990), 115-131. JSTOR. University of Richmond Libraries, Richmond VA, 11 November 2006. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0039-3657%28199024%2930%3A1%3C115%3AAEABAI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T

Miller, Naomi J. “(M)other Tongues: Maternity and Subjectivity.” Aemilia Lanyer: Gender, Genre, and the Canon. Ed. Marshall Grossman. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998. 143-166.

Milton, John. “Paradise Lost, Book IX.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt, et al. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006. 1973-1998.

Revard, Stella P. “Eve and the Doctrine of Responsibility in Paradise Lost.” PMLA. 88:1 (January, 1973), 69-78. JSTOR. University of Richmond Libraries, Richmond VA, 9 November 2006. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-8129%28197301%2988%3A1%3C69%3AEATDOR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W

Mueller, Janel. “The Feminist Poetics of Salve Deus Rex Judaeorum.” Aemilia Lanyer:

12

Donohue

Gender, Genre, and the Canon. Ed. Marshall Grossman. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998. 99-127.

Works Consulted:Bennett, Lyn. Women Writing of Divinest Things: Rhetoric and the Poetry of Pembroke,

Wroth and Lanyer. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 2004.

The Bible and Western Culture. Dir. Michael Sugrue, et al. 3: 19 Milton, Paradise Lost. Chantilly, VA: Teaching Company, 2001.

Daehler, Albert H. “Adam’s Motive.” Modern Language Notes. 31:3 (March, 1916), 187-88. JSTOR. University of Richmond Libraries, Richmond VA, 10 November 2006. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0149-6611%28191603%2931%3A3%3C187%3AAM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C

The King James Bible. Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia. http://etext.virginia.edu/kjv.browse.html. 10 November 2006.

Langford, Larry L. “Adam and the Subversion of Paradise.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900. 34:1, The English Renaissance (Winter, 1994): 119-134. JSTOR. University of Richmond Libraries, Richmond VA. 10 November 2006. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0039-3657%28199424%2934%3A1%3C119%3AAATSOP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-R

McColgan, Kristin Pruitt. “Abundant Gifts: Hierarchy and Reciprocity in ‘Paradise Lost.’” South Central Review. 11:1 (Spring, 1994), 75-86. JSTOR. University of Richmond Libraries, Richmond VA, 9 November 2006. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0743-6831%28199421%2911%3A1%3C75%3AAGHARI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X

Woods, Susanne. Lanyer: A Renaissance Woman Poet. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

I pledge that I have neither received nor given unauthorized assistance during the completion of this work.

______________________________ JAMES G. DONOHUE

13