Arden of Faversham (13 - End)

I expected everyone to die at the end of this tragedy because it is a tragedy, even if it does have some characteristics of a comedy. I was of course not surprised when the mayor sentenced Alice to be "burnt". This is the most likely punishment for murderous women of the period. What interests me most though is this: Whose tragedy is this?
We spent some time in class discussing the fact that although Alice would likely be found out and face death, the tragedy is not named for her. This interested me most before I finished the play, because I viewed the tragedy to be Alice's tragedy. I felt that the entire story was about her actions, her mistakes, and finally her death which was meant to be a direct result of her deeds. In other tragedies this is usually how it works. After finishing the play though, I can see how this tragedy is Arden's. In the Epilogue Franklin states: "But this above the rest is to be noted: / Arden lay murdered in that plot of ground / Which he by force and violence held from Reede, / And in the grass his body's print was seen / Two years and more after the deed was done. (9-13). This statement makes me believe that not only is this Arden's tragedy, but it is his actions that we must analyze more closely to see where he went wrong along the way. I have been focusing all of my energy on Alice because I felt sure that the play would focus on her mistakes and she would die as a result of her terrible behavior. I now think that the play is meant to demonstrate where Arden went wrong. Even though Alice's stereotypical mood swings and contemptible actions are obvious throughout the play, there are also many times within the play that Arden is portrayed as a greedy man who thinks that since he belongs to a higher class, everything within his reach is his for the taking. We also get several glimpses into his life with Alice that, although they are somewhat typical for the time period, allow us to see his tyrannical nature. Even if his words seem to belong to a man who is dominated by his wife, his actions demonstrate something quite different. Either way I certainly believe that this play deserves a closer look.

Domestic Violence in Early Modern England

While preparing for a presentation on Domestic Violence for my Renaissance Literature class, I found some really interesting information that I thought I should share. When I first began to look for sources I was having a really hard time because the term 'domestic violence' didn't even exist in Early Modern England. Instead, women who rebelled within the home were called home rebels, house traitors, or shrews. I found it extremely interesting that these women were thought to be the problem within the household, while the abuse they endured at the hands of their husbands was justified as a way to maintain order. I found some really great sources though and this helped tremendously. Susan Dwyer Amussen and Frances E. Dolan have produced a couple of texts that discuss this matter thoroughly and even provide examples of the many acts of domestic violence and domestic murder that occurred during the period. I also found some really interesting texts on Early English Books Online. This is a top notch site that allows you to view texts that would otherwise be off limits because they were printed so long ago. I found a couple of texts from the period, which expressed differing opinions about the treatment of women by their husbands. Richard Steele was a minister who compiled an entire handbook for husbands entitled The Husbandman's Calling and it doesn't even discuss the treatment of the wife. It does however, mention the treatment of cattle, the land, children, and servants. I also found a book by William Heale entitled An Apologie for Women which was printed in 1609 and which argues that it is not lawful for a husband to beat his wife. The differing opinions within these texts demonstrates how the issue was being addressed by the church and community, rather than by the law. While all of this information is quite interesting I certainly do not want to bore my Professor who has already heard an entire presentation on my findings. However, I really wanted to post this for those who might be interested in obtaining more information on this topic. I also found a couple of other books that proved to be interesting. One was written by Elizabeth Foyster and entitled Marital Violence: An English History, 1660-1857, and the other was written by Sara M. Butler and entitled The Language of Abuse: Marital Violence in Later Medieval England. Both of these books were also very helpful and interesting.

Arden of Faversham (Scene 4-12)

I know that I should be making some brilliant insight into how this play is constantly using stereotypes to peg Alice as a monstrous woman in practically every scene, and I have every intention of doing that soon enough. For now though, I just can't seem to quit laughing at how Shakebag and Black Will keep bumbling around like complete idiots. I find this play completely hilarious. I have decided that if Arden ever dies it will be by mistake. One of these silly characters will fall on him with a knife or accidentally drop a rock on his head. It really is just too funny to take serious at the moment with Shakebag and Black Will fighting one another over honor, falling into ditches, and missing their chance to kill Arden at every turn.
However, I have found that there are lots of passages within this one play that should be approached seriously. I also think that there are enough passages that are relevant to my topic to keep me writing for weeks. So, I've decided that I will approach them slowly and write a little bit about each one as I have time between readings. For anyone out there who might be reading this (it appears as if I'm speaking only to myself and my Professor), I may not approach these passages in any specific order, but I do plan to cover most of them. Even if I have to do this scene by scene.

Arden of Faversham (Scene 1-3)

Upon reading the first three Scenes of this play it became obvious that poor Alice has no hope of being seen as an average woman. Although this play is based on a true story in which a wife murdered her husband, it is apparently an embellished version with the wife portrayed as the murderous villain. The common fear of the period, that women might rebel against the authority of their husbands and seek retribution against them for any little transgression, is brought to life in this tale of a woman who does exactly that. Anyone reading this play will be able to see that Alice is meant to be the monstrous adulterer and wanton woman. She is portrayed as a deceitful woman whose moods and desires change as easily and quickly as hurricane force winds, raging in all directions and destroying everything. There is little hope for Alice to be seen as a women who is simply unhappy with her greedy husband, a man who is disliked within the community and known for his ruthless greed in his quest to own everything. Rather he is portrayed as a man who is concerned about his wife, who he knows is having an affair, and as a man who is making every effort to save his marriage which he believes is only being compromised by another man. He doesn't for an instance entertain the idea that he may not be making his wife happy.
The opening of the play is obviously meant to set the tone, with Franklin commenting on the true ways of women. He states that "It is not strange / That women will be false and wavering" (20). This conversation which takes place between Franklin and Arden is meant to display to the audience that Arden is aware of his wife's affair and he wishes to fix things between them, however it also serves to demonstrate the obvious stereotypes surrounding women of the period. It makes it clear that female sexuality was an unknown and was to be feared, and women who rebelled against their husbands were also to be feared. Rebellion against authority was seen as a crime that must be deterred within the household as well as within government. The fear was that this rebellion might spread outside of the house and in some way affect the monarchy. For this reason women who murdered their husbands were charged with Petty Treason and were often burned at the stake for such rebellion.
Although the play does portray Alice as the murdering wife, it also allows the reader a less obvious insight in to why Alice might not be happy with her husband. Even other people in the community dislike Arden for his ruthless attempts to obtain land, and his ignorance of what his wife needs or wants is also displayed throughout the play, though these hints toward Alice's unhappiness aren't nearly as obvious as those that comment on her "false and wavering" nature.

Tamburlaine The Great - Part One

Upon finishing the play I must admit my opinion of Zenocrate has not changed. I did begin to worry a little when she first admitted to Agydas that her passion for the villain had grown into what sounded a bit like love. I thought that her love for Tamburlaine might cloud her vision and that her opinion could no longer be trusted. Of course it works out well since she voices her concerns about war and death despite the fact that she is in love. Although she does not tell Tamburlaine how she feels about his conquests she does allow the reader to know how she truly feels. In Act five she says, "Those that are proud of fickle empery / And place their chiefest good in earthly pomp / Behold the Turk and his great emperess! / Ah, Tamburlaine, my love, sweet Tamburlaine / That fights for scepters and for slippery crowns / Behold the Turk and his great emperess!" (352). Although she still loves Tamburlaine, she is also capable of seeing what ruthless greed and the need for selfish gain can do to those who encounter it.
It does make me wonder though, if she is truly in love with the devilish Tamburlaine or if she is only trying to prolong her life by siding with the winner. It would certainly be to her benefit to play along as long as it was necessary, considering that women were viewed as extensions of the men to whom they belonged. In this case, as long as she can maintain the love of the man in charge she will certainly live a better life, not to mention a longer one.

Tamburlaine The Great - Part 1

Act One and Two
Although I haven't read far enough into the play to have formed a serious opinion, there are a few points that struck me as odd. To begin with Zenocrate, the central female character, is the only character within the first two acts of the play who does not seem to want to join Tamburlaine. Her decision to join Tamburlaine is more of a coerced decision, with slavery as her only other option. Of course who could turn down the chance to be this man's most prized possession. As he is trying to persuade her to join him, he tells her that she is of more "worth" to him "than the possession of the Persian crown" (90). She still isn't convinced and responds to his invitation to stay willingly or become his slave with the statement: "I must be pleased perforce. Wretched Zenocrate!" (259). I must say that I like her style.
Although Zenocrate doesn't speak at all throughout Act Two, I feel certain that her opinion and perspective will be of much value to the reader later in the play. She seems to be waiting patiently in the background for an opportunity to present itself. Of course I've learned to be patient myself and to not allow my hopes to get too high, because generally the female characters within literature from this period are not allowed to accomplish very much. After all, if Zenocrate were the hero the play would be entitled "Zenocrate The Great" (or maybe not!).

The fair maiden

This female archetypal character can be found throughout literature including most fairytales, although the real meaning is often trivialized in most fairytale readings. The fair maiden is strongly represented within the literature of Early Modern England as a precious, innocent who must be protected from men, by other men. In Shakespeare's The Rape of Lucrece, the title character's chastity and integrity come under close scrutiny when she is raped. The fact that she is a chaste woman who has never been unfaithful to her husband is of no consequence to the public, who will now view her as a wanton woman. Lucrece eventually commits suicide upon realizing the bleak future that she will likely face. This was the case for most women during the Early Modern period. Rape ruined a woman, there was no question about it. It sullied her reputation and could even make her husband doubt her loyalty.
This weeks assignment included a ballad entitled "The Lady and the Blackamoor", which was meant to demonstrate the stereotypes associated with Africans during the early modern period. Of course it also blatantly demonstrated the stereotypes associated with the women of the period as well. The ballad tells the tale of an African servant who rapes the lady of the house and murders the entire family as an act of revenge on the man of the house for his tyranny.
The lady of the house is of course constructed as a helpless chaste woman. The ballad states that she was "a virgin of great fame" prior to marrying her "noble" husband. This ballad ends with the murder of all involved and the suicide of the perpetrator, conveniently leaving no loose ends. Most cases from the period would not have ended so conveniently. The woman had she lived, would have faced a much more brutal inspection by those who would insist that rape must be proven. She would have been expected to run through the town publicizing the event and allowing herself to be inspected by those who would want to see her wounds. She also would likely face the threat of the man who committed the crime, and his accusations of her lustful nature. Regardless of the outcome of any trial (if the case was ever heard), the raped woman's reputation would never be clear, and there would always be doubt surrounding the circumstances.

The Popish Asse

This monster who according to Philip Melancthon is representative of the Catholic Church, is meant to be one of many signs or warnings of God's wrath. The story of the Popish Asse and another story of a Moonkish Calfe by Martin Luther are translated out of French and into English by John Brooke and are obviously religious writings meant to cast doubt on the works and traditions of the Catholic Church and its members. My first glance at the title of this piece left me wondering if I would be able to incorporate it into my blog. Upon reading it though I realized that I had little to worry about. Even in these types of religious writings women are present. Notice that the belly and chest of this monster is that of a pregnant woman. This portion of the beast is meant to signify the body of the Pope and all of the officials of the church who "feede and pamper their paunches with delycious wynes and delycate dishes" and "seeke their ease and all the allurements and entisements to whoredom" (Brooke 5). This combination of feminine and maternal characteristics is meant to signify the lustful, wanton ways of women and at the same time speak out about the way the Catholic Church idolized the Virgin Mary. John Melancthon writes that "....without any shame his belly of a woeman, naked and bare: even to these, without any shame, doe lead a dissolute and wanton lyfe, full of all filthinesse and wickednesse" (Brooke 5). So even in these religous writings, the obvious stereotypical female of Early Modern England is presented to the modern world. Once again, I'm not at all surprised.

Quoted from: Of Two Woonderful Popish Monsters, translated by John Brooke

Found on EEBO (Early English Books Online)