The author of this text explores how Shakespeare, through his romances, contributed to the cultural debates over the nature of monarchy in Jacobean England. Stressing the differences between absolutist and constitutionalist principles of rule, Jordan demonstrates Shakespeare's investment in the idea that a head of state should be responsive to law and not be governed by his own unbridled will. Conflicts within royal courts which occur in the romances show wives, daughters and servants resisting tyrannical husbands, fathers, ...
Read More
The author of this text explores how Shakespeare, through his romances, contributed to the cultural debates over the nature of monarchy in Jacobean England. Stressing the differences between absolutist and constitutionalist principles of rule, Jordan demonstrates Shakespeare's investment in the idea that a head of state should be responsive to law and not be governed by his own unbridled will. Conflicts within royal courts which occur in the romances show wives, daughters and servants resisting tyrannical husbands, fathers, masters and monarchs by relying on the authority of conscience. Jordan asserts that these loyal subjects demonstrated to Shakespeare's diverse audiences that the vitality of the body politic, its dynastic future and its material productivity depend on a co-operative union of ruler and subject. Drawing on representations of servitude and slavery in the humanist and political literature of the period, the author shows that Shakespeare's abusive rulers suffer as much as they impose on their subjects. The text recognizes the romances as politically inflected texts and confirms Shakespeare's involvement in the public discourse of the period.
Read Less
