The Machiavellian villain has long been the subject of discussion among critics of the Elizabethan drama. This essay attempts to analyse with some precision evidence from history and the drama of the relationship of the literary to the real political figure. It attempts to indicate the answer to the questions: In what way does the sinister stage personality symbolize the real experience of the Elizabethans ? What is the relationship of this character to that of the prince delineated by Machiavelli ? Niccolo Machiavelli, whose name has been attached to the typical sixteenth century unscrupulous and diabolically cunning cloak and dagger murderer and politician was in fact the founder of modern political science. He was a responsible and esteemed servant of the foremost city state of his time in Italy, and his theses on princely rule and on the principles underlying republican government have established themselves as texts in the courses of universities. It would appear, then, that the Machiavellian of the Elizabethan stage requires some explaining. An examination of the history of English government during the late fifteenth and the sixteenth centuries reveals that the practice of the kings and chief ministers of England was governed by the precepts on power that Machiavelli so brilliantly set forth in his writings; and investigation of the popular reaction to the practices he exposed makes clear that it took a sharp turn toward the close of the sixteenth century, when the bogey of Machiavellian villainy asserted Itself in England, appearing in its most spectacular form in the plays of the last two decades of that century and the first decade of the seventeenth. It becomes apparent from a consideration of the facts of history and of the record of public opinion that the Machiavellian villain epitomized the fear of the ambitious Individual experienced by a despotism faced on two sides by a threat to its claim to absolute power; and that the menace that threatened the Tudors from the reactionary nobility on the one hand and from the upstart merchant aristocracy on the other found dramatic expression in the extravagant, ruthless, self-seeking villain who inevitably was characterized by the name of the theoretician of that absolute princely rule by which alone the confusions of the end of the medieval era could be resolved into a new and more advanced order of society. Such paradoxes are not unknown in history. The great dramas of Elizabethan England present not only the Machiavellian Barabas, the prototype for all subsequent villains in the cloak and dagger tradition, they present al so such figures as Richard, Duke of York, Henry IV, Henry V and the brilliant dialogue of Volumnia In Coriolanus, proofs, every one of them, that the sound political science of Machiavelli upon which the Tudor monarchs built their institutions and formulated their laws also reached the people through the stage, although these latter characterizations were not associated with the name of Machiavelli. The conclusion arrived at from a careful examination of a selected number of plays by Marlowe, Jonson and Shakespeare is that the true Machiavellian prince was most effectively represented in drama by the great princes in the historical plays of Shakespeare, and particularly in the figure of Henry V in the play of that name; and that the essence of the Machiavellian thesis on The Prince was poetically most succinctly and explicitly phrased in the dialogue of Volumnla in Coriolanus. / Arts, Faculty of / English, Department of / Graduate

This essay deals with the London citizen in Elizabethan drama from 1590-1620. In it I have tried to give a picture of the citizen's possession, habits and beliefs as they appear in the plays of the period. In the introduction I defined the terms I used, defended the limits of the essay,and discussed the sources. I set forth, also, the method that I followed in arranging the material. I divided the essay into two sections. In the first I gave the background for the plays by describing,in-chapter one, the development of the citizen class; In chapter two, the appearance of London; In chapter three, the ideals of the sixteenth century citizen. In the second section I discussed various portions of the citizen's life and supported my conclusions by many references to the drama. The second section was based almost directly on the plays. The fourth chapter was the one exception. In it I discussed the playwrights' contribution to the middle class drama and their attitudes towards the citizens. The fifth chapter illustrated the third one and, on the whole, followed the same plan. I included in it, however, references to the vices into which the citizen was led by two, eager a pursuit of his ideals. Chapter six dealt with Elizabethan business management and chapter seven with the position of the citizen's womenfolk. Under business management, I considered the merchant adventurer, the loan merchant or usurer, the craftsman and the apprentice. In the following chapter I examined the citizen's attitude towards women and its reflection in the drama. The houses and gardens, food and drink, jewels and clothing of the London citizen were the subjects of chapter eight. Religion and superstition was the heading for chapter nine and Morals and Mores for chapter ten. In the former I gave illustrations of the Londoner 's attitude towards Puritans and Roman Catholics and examples of blue citizen's amazing belief in all forms of magic. The tenth chapter contained references to theft, murder,and adultery as well as to smoking, swearing, drinking and playgolng. The succeeding two chapters were concerned,firstly, with the Londoner's opinion of social welfare and, secondly, with his concept of the state. Under these headings I discussed laws against vagrants; imprisonment for debt, insanity or immorality, and references to the citizen's ideal state. In the thirteenth chapter I listed the amusements of the middle class and examined the citizen's response to the theatre, plays, books, games, puppet shows, dances,and songs. In the second last chapter I attempted to define the conventional Elizabethan opinion of various trades and professions. In my conclusion I recapitulated the points that I had made throughout the essay. I drew attention to the constant appearance of two attitudes towards the citizen, mentioned again the reasons that I gave for them, and stated,once more, my opinion of their respective truths. I repeated that I thought a middle course had to be taken between the two attitudes. Then, I discussed briefly the artistic value of the middle class drama and concluded that it it possessed little, if any, literary merit and contained, few memorable figures. I spoke, finally, of the plays'value as social documents. I said that they contained much information on details of food and drink, but added that only in the early part of the period could they be said to reflect the citizen's ethos completely. From 1610 on the drama seemed to me to be too one-sided to be very reliable or of much value in helping one form a balanced picture of the London citizen's attitude of mind. / Arts, Faculty of / English, Department of / Graduate

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Inaug.-diss.--Giessen. / Lebenslauf.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 1987.

Thesis--University of Delhi. / Bibliography: p. [343]-348.

Inaug.-diss.--Giessen. / Lebenslauf.

Thesis--University of Delhi. / Bibliography: p. [343]-348.