CHAPTER TWO

SOCIETY AND POLITICS DURING THE

ELIZABETHAN AND JACOBEAN ERAS

In this chapter, the researcher attempts to arrive at a clear image of the

Elizabethan and Jacobean contexts, especially in relation to the major institutions and

forces at work. The underlying political framework, the role of religion in the

formation of the general mindset of the period, scope and nature of education and

economic conditions are aspects of current inquiry into the questions of this epoch.

Moreover, this chapter offers an overall view of the literary scene in the Elizabethan

and Jacobean eras, with special light on drama and dramaturgy.

2.1. Cultural Landscape

The notion of dominant culture during the Elizabethan and Jacobean era

relates to the conceptual structures of the social matrix—political, religious, and the

academic institutions of the period: the court, Inns of Court, the parliament, churches

and universities. The cultural mindset of the Renaissance period was influenced by a

host of different factors. The term political theory explores the way in which ideas of

hierarchy and sovereignty were seen to organize society. People used to express a

feeling of belonging in terms of family, community and religion in which they

believed and worked.

As a prominent cultural materialist critic Fredric Jameson describes religion

as: “a master code of pre-capitalist society” (Ferguson 2008: 293). The total neglect of

46
society’s religious aspects in favor of political ones and the reaction against the

theological biases of earlier renaissance criticism produced in recent literary

scholarship, a curiously distorted picture of the period. Nevertheless, there is no

denying that the dominant culture of the renaissance was religious. The relation

between religion and culture needs careful explication if religion is not to be narrowed

down into sheer theology. Religion is, first and foremost, not simply politics in

disguise. The Renaissance religious discourse supplied the primary language analysis.

It was the cultural matrix for explorations of virtually every topic: kingship,

patriotism, nationality, language, selfhood, marriage and ethics. Such subjects were

not masked by religious discourse but articulated through it. They were considered in

relation to God and the human soul. That was what it meant to say that the English

Renaissance was essentially a religious culture, a traditionally rooted society where

the religious code was fundamental to the various walks of life.

Nevertheless, the epoch was a byproduct of the Renaissance as an intellectual

rebirth of a new life. The Renaissance colored the thoughts and ideas of the people of

the Elizabethan age. Under the influence of the Renaissance, Elizabethan people made

efforts to free themselves from the rigid institutions of the middle ages, feudalism and

the churches. They started to assert their right to think and to live. According to J.

Symonds (2006) Renaissance denotes transition from the middle ages to the modern

world. M. Sichel has also remarked, “It was a movement, a revival of man’s power, a

re-awakening of consciousness of himself and of the universe” (2004: 328). W.

Tillyard stated: “The Renaissance was the manifestation of new life, an outburst of

virtuous floridity after the cramping restraints and withering asceticisms of the middle

ages.” (1952: 10)

47
 The rediscovery and re-interpretation of antiquity gave birth to a new cultural

horizon, that is of Humanism. Like its inspiration, it was basically ethnical and its

ideal was the scholar, solider, and gentleman rather than the simple Christian.

Humanist ideals advance the image of the human being as the centre of the attention

of the whole universe. Everything is created only in the service of the human being;

he is the representative of God on earth, and hence is worthy of all attention and

effort. This emphatic stress on the human being strikes the keynote of the humanist

thought in the Renaissance. In this way all acts of literary and artistic productions

revolve around the various incidents and situations that the human being is expected

to go through or encounter along his residence on earth.

Thereupon, the cultural horizon of the period is one of changes across the

board. In addition to the challenges at the economic and political levels, the socio-

historical ties and relations of the nation were going through a great deal of strain and

pressure owing to many a factor, especially the dawn of the Renaissance—shift from

medievalism to the new world. Such cataclysmic changes in a traditional society are

not easy to sink in the brains of the populace. This perhaps explains to us the roots

and meanings of the prevalent threats.

2.2. Political Considerations

The following sections investigate the politically related institutions such as

religious centers of power and Elizabethan and Jacobean governments, and shed a

flood of light on certain important moments of political instability in terms of

conspiracies to the throne of England from within as well as without. How politics

plays a crucial role in the orientation of literary production is also addressed below.

48
2.2.1. Religious Forces

The interrelation of the political and the religious in the Elizabethan context is

so vivid that one finds most of the walks of life and various institutions at work then

were politically or religiously motivated in their conduct of affairs. The dominance of

the religious discourse is beyond dispute has had political implications and as a result,

requires fuller analysis as follows.

Prior to the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, England had undergone massive

religious changes. The break with Rome and the establishment of the Church of

England by her father led to massive changes in Elizabethan daily life. This major

event occurred in 1531 when the Commons acknowledged the king as their “only and

supreme lord and, as far as the law of Christ allows, even supreme head”. In the Act

of Supremacy of 1534, the caveat “as far as the law of Christ allows” was deleted.

England no longer answered to the Pope in Rome. The dissolution of the monasteries

by King Henry VIII followed between 1536 and 1540 put vast sums of money into the

royal coffers and saw monks and nuns homeless and many poor people without a

place of refuge. These events had a profound effect on Elizabethan daily life. Due to

the reign of monarch, religion changed from 1531 onwards.

The following information highlights the swift changes in religion which were

dictated by the Kings and Queens of England prior to the reign of Queen Elizabeth I:

During the period between1509-1547 King Henry VIII established the Church of

England in 1531 adhering to many Protestant doctrines. In the years between 1547-

1553, Henry’s son, King Edward VI, adhered to the Protestant religion. Edward died

young and was succeeded by his Protestant cousin Lady Jane. In the year 1553-

Queen Jane reigned only for nine days and was replaced by Edward’s sister Mary I.
49
Queen Mary I (1553-1558) was a staunch Catholic and was called ‘Bloody Mary’ for

her persecution of Protestants. Queen Elizabeth I succeeded Mary I. She adhered to

the Protestant religion but was tolerant to Catholic. (McEachern 2002: 88-90)

Queen Mary had always wanted coordination with Rome against which her

father and Edward VI was. She and her husband wanted England to reconcile with the

Protestant Rome. Philip of Spain (her husband) wanted English church to follow

Roman laws and jurisdiction and he persuaded it in Parliament. During the reign of

the Queen Mary I, many Protestants were executed. Many rich Protestants chose exile

and some of them left the country.

The reign of Queen Elizabeth I extended from the accession of Queen

Elizabeth in 1558 to the death of James I in 1625. It was an era of political peace and

stability. When the Queen Elizabeth (the last Tudor monarch) acceded to the throne

after the death of her half-sister Mary in 1558, the whole nation was divided into

different religious sects; the north was largely catholic and the south largely

protestant. Scotland followed the reformation and Ireland zealously pursued its old

religious traditions. Queen Elizabeth favored both religious sects, i.e., Protestant and

Catholic and to this policy they also together acted as followers of the Queen. She

offered people full religious freedom and made the Anglican Church and Anglicanism

to come into existence which was a kind of coalition between Protestantism and

Catholicism. Thus, under the rule of Queen Elizabeth I, all the people were united and

displayed magnificent national enthusiasm and the minds of people were free from

religious fears and persecutions. Interestingly enough, the environment of religious

peace gave a great stimulus to literary activities which made this age as a golden age

of literature. (Nayar 2009:18-21)

50
 It was an age of intense religious passions, which Queen Elizabeth I managed

to tone down in contrast to previous and succeeding eras of religious violence. Queen

Elizabeth said: “I have no desire to make windows into men’s souls”. Her desire to

moderate the religious persecutions of previous Tudor reigns — the persecution of

Catholics under Edward VI and of Protestants under Mary I had a moderating effect

on the English society. Queen Elizabeth reinstated the Protestant Bible and English

mass, yet for a number of years refrained from persecuting Catholics.

The reign of Queen Elizabeth I offered the prospect of conciliation and

stability. She proved to be a vigilant and effective political leader who could bring

together popular support when necessary in a more successful manner than any of her

Tudor predecessors. This was her remarkable achievement during her reign. Queen

Elizabeth did not practice religious heretics executed as Mary had done with

Protestants.

When James I succeeded to the English throne, he was impressed by the

church system he found there, which was still then adhered to an Episcopal manner

and supported the monarch’s position as the head of the church. On the other hand,

there were many more Roman Catholics in England than in Scotland, and James I

inherited a set of penal laws which he constantly exhorted to enforce against them.

James I practiced a degree of religious tolerance until the Gunpowder Plot of 1605,

after which he reinforced strict penalties against Catholics. Later on he returned to a

tolerant approach to religious conformity. (Krugler 2004: 24)

During the reign of James I, a mixture of religious and political grievances

arose. Religious men, politicians and secularists found that they had to combine their

efforts in the fight against the corruption in the society. So the issues were spread
51
among the people who had been enraged and their anger and revolution was only

cooled by the constitution. The Elizabethan compromise was opposed by Protestants.

James’ tolerance and leniency over matters was met with difficulty because of fear

from conspiracies by the Catholics, Increase of opponents and reinforcement of penal

laws resulted in gunpowder plot. The people who were affected by these elements

took this as a warning of the political danger of the Pope and the church.

Thus, the political and religious problems gave rise to complications and also

caused economic difficulties. Peter Chamberlain said in his book The Poor Man’s

Advocate (1649): “[N]one more found of a king than the English, yet they departed

from him to ease their purses, and their consciences”. Thus, even the English people

get rid of their King in order to discharge their consciences. The people who

complained against the arbitrary taxation of their properties raised their cases to the

Parliament. In 1629, these people kept raising their issues against such illegal

taxation. In case they did not find remedy to their complaints, they sent petitions and

used unions in secular and religious groups, like communists who fought for

economic and social justice and other circles of the society. In the seventeenth

century, after 1640, the ways were paved for rebuilding the society and for the

realization of lasting dreams of Christian communism.

From a religious point of view, two great intellects whose influences on the

European thinking have been profound are Dutch scholars- Erasmus and Martin

Luther. Erasmus rejected catholic monasticism and condemned the corruption of the

catholic churches. According to him the only solution was to return to the habits of

early Christian church. Martin Luther condemned the corruption of the catholic

churches and refused to accept the Pope’s authority. Consequently, Protestantism

52
became a crucial political movement in England with the Puritan Commonwealth

under Cromwell. This fact is clearly stated in the following lines:

There had been a religious conflict between Charles with other “High”

Anglicans and the more extreme Protestants within the Church of England

(the Puritans). The religious tension between a court with ‘Papist’

elements and a Parliament where the Puritans were strong was one of the

major factors behind the English Civil War, in which almost all Catholics

supported the King. The victory of the Parliamentarians meant a strongly

Protestant, anti-Catholic (and, incidentally, anti-Anglican) regime under

Oliver and Richard Cromwell. (Grell 2002: 64-65)

The events showed that the nation was not prepared for the establishment of a

republic and it actually did not build it. If Cromwell had been able to fulfill his aims

then the protectorate would have been a happier era than it was. Although he was in

power for only a period of few years and he was put under pressure of conflicting

political forces. He was able to gain respect outside his country and create order and

stability in the country. He followed the foreign policy of his country in some aspects

depending on his purpose of fulfilling a combination of commercial, religious, and

imperialist motives and domestic order. According to indications, his policy was not

based on beneficent and liberal reform. There were many elements which could

assure that the system he built was not a free republic but a military dictatorship.

The restoration of the monarchy under Charles II (1660–85) also saw the

restoration of a Catholic-influenced court like his father’s. However, although Charles

himself had Catholic leanings, he was first and foremost a pragmatist and realized that

the vast majority of public opinion in England was strongly anti-Catholic. He married

53
a Catholic, Catherine of Braganza and he would become Catholic. James II was the

last Catholic to reign as monarch of England. Charles’ brother and heir, James, Duke

of York (later James II) converted to Catholicism during 1668–1669. When Titus

Oates in 1678 alleged a (totally imaginary) ‘Popish Plot’ to assassinate Charles and

put James in his place, he unleashed a wave of Parliamentary and public hysteria

which led to anti-Catholic purges, and another wave of sectarian persecution, which

Charles was either unable or unwilling to prevent. Throughout the early 1680s, the

Whig element in Parliament attempted to remove James as successor to the throne.

But James II became king in 1685; he was Britain’s Catholic monarch. He promised

religious tolerance for Catholics and Protestants on an equal footing, but it was in

doubt whether he did this to gain support from Dissenters or whether he was truly

committed to tolerance. Contemporary Catholic regimes in Spain and Italy, for

example, were hardly tolerant of Protestantism, while those in France and Poland had

practiced forms of toleration.

Thereupon, it is quite obvious that the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods were

beset by a great deal of conflict between different affiliations on the political and

religious counts. The choppy sea of the times, however, found other less tense

moments, wherein a considerable level of stability and prosperity was flourishing.

Moments of tolerance and economic boom were conducive to the blooming

conditions of life in that era. The overall image one can obtain is one of a society in

transition, a society torn between affiliations and aspirations. Such insights can

demonstrate more lucidly if one plunges into the cultural landscape of the age in

question.

54
2.2.2. Politicizing the Religious

England remained a Catholic country until 1534. It officially separated from

Rome during the reign of King Henry VIII. In response to the Pope’s refusal to

Henry’s marriage to Catherine of Aragon, Parliament denied the Pope’s authority over

the English Church and made the King Head of the Church in England. It dissolved

the monasteries and religious orders in England. Henry did not himself accept

Protestant innovations in doctrine, but he extended toleration and even promotion to

clergy with Protestant sympathies in return for support for his break with Rome. On

the other hand, failure to accept this break, particularly by prominent persons in

church and state, was regarded by Henry as treason, resulting in the execution of Saint

Thomas More, former Lord Chancellor, and Saint John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester.

During 1547 to 1553 reign of the King Edward VI, the Church of England became

more influenced by Protestantism in its faith and worship, with the Latin replaced by

the English Book of Common Prayer. Representational art and statues in church

buildings were destroyed, and Catholic practices were checked which had survived

during Henry’s reign. The institutional Church in England briefly acquiesced to

Catholic practice during the reign of the Catholic Queen Mary I from 1553 to 1558.

Queen Mary wanted to bring back the whole of England to the Catholic faith. This

aim was not necessarily at odds with the feeling of a large section of the populace;

Edward’s Protestant reformation had not been well received everywhere, and there

was ambiguity in the responses of the parishes.

When Queen Mary I died and Elizabeth I became the Queen in 1558, the

religious condition in England was confusing. Throughout the see-sawing religious

landscape of the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Queen Mary I, a significant
55
proportion of the population (especially in the rural and outlying areas of the country)

were likely to have continued to hold Catholic views, at least in private. By the end

of Elizabeth’s reign, however, England was clearly a Protestant country, and

Catholics were in minority. Queen Elizabeth I’s first act was to reverse her sister’s re-

establishment of Catholicism. In the beginning of Queen Elizabeth’s reign, there was

relative leniency towards Catholics who were willing to keep their religion private.

They were allowed to continue to attend their parish churches.

When the Queen Elizabeth I reinstated the protestant Bible, the Pope in 1570

declared Elizabeth a heretic who was not the legitimate Queen and her subjects no

longer owed her obedience. The Pope sent Jesuits and seminarians secretly to

evangelize and support Catholics. After several plots to overthrow Queen Elizabeth,

Catholic clergies were mostly considered to be traitors, and were pursued aggressively

in England. Priests were often tortured or executed after capture unless they

cooperated with the English authorities. Persons who publicly supported Catholicism

were excluded from the professions; sometimes they were fined or imprisoned. (Black

1959: 166)

Queen Elizabeth I became the supreme governor of the church and the church

settlement had a cautious compromise in which Calvinist and Catholic elements were

blended. The common prayer book was introduced which all clergy had to accept.

The Calvinistic system had penetrated with completeness into the minds of the great

majority of English Protestants. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, there

was no such thing as a puritan party. There were Presbyterians and Disciplinarians. In

1579 when the leader of Presbyterians discovered that the Anglican Church didn’t

accord with the principals of the primitive Christian church, he urged that the bishops
56
should be deprived of power. The independents were of the opinion that the civil

magistrates should not have the power at all in the religious matters. In each parish,

the pastor must be chosen by his own parishioners. Another sect of puritan was the

rising of the Baptists, and these puritan sects threatened the whole Elizabethan church

settlement. In 1593 the parliament passed a statute against the one who harms the

settlement. The statute was against puritans and there was an increase in the

persecution of them. The leaders of puritans were arrested and many of them migrated

to Holland.

In the situation of England’s wars with Catholic powers such as France and

Spain in1588, the Pope unleashed a nationalistic feeling which equated Protestantism

with loyalty to a highly popular monarch. The Catholic was treated as a potential

traitor, even in the eyes of those who were not extremely Protestants. The

Throckmorton plot and the Babington plot, together with other subversive activities of

supporters of Mary, Queen of Scots, all reinforced the association of Catholicism and

treachery in the popular mind. Queen Elizabeth’s government declared all Catholic

priests and all those who sheltered them, to be guilty of treason. Queen Elizabeth did

not believe that her anti-Catholic policies constituted religious persecution, finding it

hard to distinguish between those Catholics engaged in conflict with her from those

Catholics with no such involvements.

Because of the persecution in England, Catholic priests were trained abroad at

the English College in Rome, Douai, Valladolid in Spain, and in Seville. Douai was

located in the Spanish Netherlands which was the part of Elizabethan England’s

greatest enemy. Valladolid and Seville in Spain were also viewed with political as

well as religious subversion. It was the combination of nationalistic public opinion,

57
sustained persecution, and the rise of a new generation which could not remember

pre-Reformation times and had no pre-established loyalty to Catholicism, that reduced

the number of Catholics in England during this period. (Turner, D. 2005:13)

The Elizabethan and Jacobean ages are fraught with political in-fighting and

conspiratorial acts of all kinds, often involving the highest levels of the society. High

officials in Madrid, Paris and Rome sought to kill the Protestant Queen Elizabeth, and

replace her with Mary the Catholic Queen of Scots. In 1570, the plot of Ridolfi was

thwarted. In 1584, another plot of Throckmorton was discovered. Francis

Throckmorton confessed his involvement in a plot to oust the Queen for restoring the

Catholic Church in England. Another major conspiracy was the Babington Plot- the

event which most directly led to the execution of Queen Mary of Scots.

In 1601 supporters of the Earl of Essex arranged the performance of Richard II

at the Globe Theatre with the goal of stirring public ill-will towards the monarch. In

what became known as the Bye Plot of 1603. Two catholic priests William Watson

and William Clark planned to kidnap King James and hold him in the Tower of

London; they wanted King James I to be more tolerant with Catholics. The king

agreed for it. This is known as the Bye Plot of 1603. In 1605, the Gunpowder Plot to

blow up the House of Lords during the State Opening of Parliament was exposed. In

1606, eight conspirators were convicted and sentenced to be hanged.

The reign of James I (1603-1625) was marked by a measure of tolerance

towards Catholics in spite of the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot conspiracy of a

small group of Catholic conspirators who wanted to kill the King and destroy the

Parliament and establish a Catholic monarchy.

58
 When James I succeeded the throne of England in 1603, he met with a group of

Puritan clergy who presented him with a petition in which he was asked to change

various things in the Church of England. The petitioners asked the King that certain

ceremonies should be left out of the church services and that only educated men

competent to preach should be henceforth ministers. They also asked the King that

bishops should not be “pluralists”. King James I feared to grant the Puritans more

rights. He called for a conference in Hampton Court and declared that he would not

give the Puritans the right to censure him and his council. He threatened to “hurry

them out of the land” if they did not support him. Some of the Puritans went to

Holland and later sailed to America in 1620. The uncompromising spirit of the puritan

party spread steadily among the middle class during the reign of James I. During the

period of Charles I, Puritanism was a great national power. A combination of causes

and the fast growing flippancy and profligacy of the upper class led to its practical

success. Puritanism became a political as well as moral and religious force.

2.2.3. Elizabethan and Jacobean Governments

The Elizabethan government was a complex one, divided into national bodies

which were further divided into regional bodies. And then there were the community

bodies and the court system. The role of the court was of decision-making in the

realm of politics. It was also a central arena for ceremonial, literary production and

entertainment. The functioning of courts was at the great houses of courtiers and

eminent servants of the Crown, away from the capital. The court used to be torn

between bitter rivalries and this situation used to be made worse by the fondness of

monarchs such as Henry VIII, Elizabeth I and James1 for favorites (relatives).

However, people could fall from high positions of power in violent ways, like
59
Thomas More and Thomas Cromwell during the reign of Henry VIII; and Robert

Devereux, Earl of Essex, during the reign of Elizabeth in 1601. In general, the court

was frequently associated with human vices. Throughout the Tudor and Early Stuart

reign there was an enduring concern (particularly in prose and drama) with court

corruption and the positions held by self-seeking flatters. As a consequence, much

attention was devoted to the role of the good courtiers as a potential source of wise

advice, loyalty, and knowledge about the needs of the larger nation.

The government during the Elizabethan time was ruled and headed by the

Monarch. The government was considered as a personal monarchy with ministers

since the head selected the ministers that she or he wanted. The Monarch’s personality

determined the style of governance beside the intensity and the efficiency of the

government. The Monarch’s personality in the government was further enhanced by

the concept of the ‘Divine Right of King’ which gave the Queen or the King the status

of a ‘semi-god’. The Monarch was the ruler of the era and the ultimate decider of the

issues and in order to dispense the right decisions on various matters, the monarch

was aided by various counselors on many subjects and issues. Laws used to be passed

by Monarch’s consent. But the Monarch has no sole authority to pass a law all by

him. In order to pass one, he needed to draw a Bill and it was to be forwarded to the

Parliament. Still the Monarch during those times had the power to make laws called

the Royal Proclamations, without the need for the consent of the Parliament.

The Privy Council worked for the Monarch during the Elizabethan era. The

Council was a group of advisers that aided the Monarch on many issues. Council used

to handle routine administration regarding matters related to religion, security,

economics, the welfare of the people and national interests. The Privy Council was
60
advisory in nature; as it only advised the Monarch on most of the matters. The

composition of the Council was the choice of the Monarch.

The Parliament was another note-worthy feature of the Elizabethan

government. It was divided into the House of Lords that consisted of aristocrats and

bishops, and the House of Commons. The Parliament during the era was given the

task to deal with financial matters like taxes and so on. In general, the Elizabethan

government was much more concerned with the threat of political dissent than with

the private devotions of subjects. Queen Elizabeth like her father lack political

influence, but she never lost sight of the fact during her reign that her own authority

often depended upon maintaining a balance of power between factions at home and

abroad.

According to the Act of Supremacy in 1559, the Parliament was called to

create a new Church of England as Queen Elizabeth I cut off the ties with the Roman

Catholic Church through the Reformation Bill. This bill gave full authority of the

Church of England to the reigning monarch, thus overpowering the Pope in Rome.

Queen Elizabeth I also declared an Oath of Supremacy, instructing those in church

office to swear to acknowledge the Monarch as head of both Church and State.

The Act of Supremacy confirmed Elizabeth as the Supreme Governor of the

Church of England. Supreme Governor was a suitably equivocal title that made

Queen Elizabeth head of the Church. This satisfied those who felt that a woman could

not rule the church, and it acted in a conciliatory way toward English Catholics.

(Haigh 1993: 244)

61
 Queen Elizabeth I’s government inherited a virtually bankrupt state from

previous reigns. Her frugal policies restored fiscal responsibility. Her fiscal restraint

cleared the regime of debt by 1574. The Crown, ten years later enjoyed a surplus of

£300,000. Economically, Sir Thomas Gresham’s founding of the Royal Exchange

(1565) was the first stock exchange in England and one of the earliest in Europe. It

was the first important economic development of England. With taxes lower than

other European countries of the period, the economy expanded. The financial

condition at the end of Elizabeth’s reign was better than before. (Cook 1981: 49, 96)

After the demise of Queen Elizabeth I, James VI of Scotland was crowned as

king of England (James I). He was the first male to wear the English crown in fifty

years who had responsibility for three separate kingdoms (England with Wales,

Scotland and Ireland), each with their own Parliaments and codes of law. James I

inherited a history of hostilities with Spain, ongoing financial difficulties for the

administration and social and religious tensions. Besides, James’s reign was not

stable. Parliament challenged the royal authority and claimed the right to advise the

king on foreign affairs. King James I always faced political and financial conflicts

with the Parliament. He attempted to rule without Parliament since the “Addled

Parliament” of 1614, which he dissolved after eight weeks when it proved reluctant

to grant him money. The leaders of the Church of England and the puritans demanded

reforms and objected to the church rituals and the prayer book. Many ministers and

officers were impeached for corruption. James I reign had a great social mobility.

Merchants and lawyers acquired property. The competition between them and the

upper classes started. They stood against the ruling classes. The tense society of that

period defined the literature. Thomas Elyot, in his book entitled The Governor, stated:

62
“The wealth was not enough to make a man a ruler or a statesman” (1962:159).

Merchants had wealth but not all of them had the ability, education and manner to be

rulers.

King James I’s government faced growing financial pressures. Some of those

resulted from creeping inflation and the decreasing purchasing power of the royal

income, but James’s profligacy and financial incompetence substantially contributed

to the mounting debt. Despite his lack of enthusiasm for the finer details of

government, James was shrewd enough to draw talented political servants to steer the

administration. It was only in the final years of his reign from 1618 onwards, when

the continental powers were drawn into the thirty years’ war that his control on

political events grew progressively weaker. With the help of the Privy Council,

Salisbury as a Lord Treasurer introduced a programme of economic reforms in 1608

which steadily drove down the deficit. In an attempt to convince James I to reduce his

extravagance, he wrote a series of frank notes on the matter and tried to induce the

King to grant limited pensions to his courtiers, rather than showering them with

random gifts.

Being a believer in the necessity of parliamentary contribution to the

government, Salisbury proposed to the Commons an ambitious financial scheme in

1610. This scheme was known as The Great Contract, whereby Parliament would

grant a lump sum of £600,000 to pay off the king’s debts and an annual grant of

£200,000. Though the Commons agreed to the annual grant, the negotiations over the

lump sum made the parliament to refuse the sum that made James I eventually lose

patience and dismissed the Parliament at the end of 1610.The King James I said to

Salisbury: “Your greatest error hath been that ye ever expected to draw honey out of
63
gall”. Salisbury, however, made it clear that without parliamentary subsidies; he

cannot manage the Crown’s financial crisis. (Croft 2003: 61, 81)

During the time of Queen Elizabeth I and James I, people lived for the

political, religious and economic even the philosophic causes. Political and religious

conflicts were marked by the Stuart theory of state and church. The conception of

sovereignty had become more legalistic because of the structure of society and the

temper of the nation and the parliament had been changed. The Tudors were lucky

and they did not have to face the burning problems and the open conflict. Different

mistakes by the Queen Elizabeth’s earlier years made the Queen to bow to a

refractory parliament and, among them was the execution of Essex which made the

patron and many young literary men with patriotic zeal to welcome the king James I.

The people rejoiced during his reign because he kept the country out of futile and

unnecessary wars. The domestic problems he inherited were far beyond the grasp of

domestic academic theories. All classes alike, except the orthodox clergy, resented the

King’s extravagance, his attachment to unworthy favorites, and the moral and

financial corruption of the court circle. King James I was wise in his desire for union

with Scotland and for more liberal treatment of catholic and his foreign policy.

The seventeenth century inherited the related evils of expulsion,

unemployment, poverty and vagrancy. The accelerated change in the economic

structure of society was the root cause for troubles. There was a large scale of

economic production followed by the division between employers and employees,

resulting in economic confusion, depression, much occupational and social

disturbance and widespread distress. Fluctuations in national and international trades

affected the masses that were dependent totally on trades. The poor grew poorer while
64
the rich richer, which made the economic writers to be more concerned about the

people’s perplexed condition.

2.3. Education and Economy

In Elizabethan England, education used to begin at home, where children were

taught the basic etiquettes of proper behavior. Girls were taught school manners and

respect for others. It was also necessary for boys but they were rarely allowed to take

it in any place of education other than petty schools and then only with a restricted

curriculum. Boys who were aged from five to seven were sent to what was then

referred to as a “petty school” or a “dame school”. These schools were in fact not

actual schools but the house of a well-schooled housewife who taught children in

exchange for small fees. In these “petty schools” children were taught how to read

and write using English. They were also to learn principles of a Christian religion

through catechism as well as lessons on proper behavior. These things were

considered to be the most important foundations in education and it should be taught

during childhood. Education was highly influenced by the ruling monarch of the time

and its style also reflects the religious belief of the ruling King or Queen. This

constant changing of belief might have considerable amount of confusion mainly due

to the fanaticism of the devout followers of the two dominant religions of the time-

the Catholics and the Protestants.

“Petty schools” were for all children aged from five to seven years. Only the

wealthiest people allowed their daughters to be taught at home. During this time,

endowed schooling became available. This meant that boys of even very poor families

were able to attend schools if they were not needed to work at home. The localities

65
provide them support as well as the necessary educational scholarship. (Simon,

J.1966: 373)

Educational choices were often dictated by the financial circumstances and

geographical location of the parents. However, the rich families look for more formal

education for their offspring. There were endowed grammar schools in the large

towns and cities. From the middle of sixteenth century onwards, more and more

grammar schools were being founded across the country, often supported by funds

donated by local clerics and civic corporations. The study, translation and

memorization of Latin texts occupied the vast majority of the school days of boys.

This study was supplemented by some learning of prayers, the catechism and so on.

As the sixteenth century progressed, the increased population of educated students

from the growing number of grammar schools paved the way to the founding of new

colleges at Oxford and Cambridge. Despite the fact that women often played a

striking role in the educational, intellectual and religious life of their societies,

grammar school and university were reserved for males only.

Due to the development in printing, more books and cheap pamphlets were

produced which were in the reach of most Englishmen. Between 1550 and 1570 many

of England’s famous schools and colleges were founded. Classic Elizabethan

Education could only be provided at universities. These universities had many

faculties. In Arts faculties Philosophy, Poetics, Rhetorics as well as Natural History

among others used to be taught. The University faculties of Liberal Arts might have

Grammar, Music, Logic, Arithmetic and Geometry as well as Astronomy education.

There was also the University faculty of Theology which imparted religious

education. The University faculty of Medicine included the study of Hippocrates,

66
Galen, as well as Jewish and Arabic medical texts. In addition to the education that

could be learned in the universities, many of the privileged class also traveled around

Europe to learn even more. But during the age of Elizabethan England, travelling was

difficult. There were laws that prevented people from travelling. Travelling also

meant getting the permission from the monarch and as such only the nobility had the

opportunity to travel abroad. Lower class people have the chance to travel if they take

up a military career or become sailors. For the privileged, it was easier to continue

their formal education in Elizabethan times through travelling (Arthur 2002: 23-26).

The Elizabethan Age inspired international expansion and naval triumph over the

hated Spanish foe. It was an age of exploration and expansion abroad, while back at

home, the Protestant Reformation became more acceptable to the people. It was also

the end of the period when England was a separate realm before its royal union with

Scotland.

Queen Elizabeth I followed the policy of stability at home and outside the

country. She established a peaceful relationship with Scotland in traditionally

disturbed border areas. The age of Queen Elizabeth was the age of social contentment,

rising commerce and trade that significantly encouraged the economic system and

enriched the country. The growth of industrial movement reduced the number of idles

and helped the people to find different job opportunities. The Queen enacted good

taxation laws and levied taxes on the rich to support the poor.

The majority of the British population was engaged in small-scale agriculture.

The southern countries were engaged in arable farming while elsewhere the dominant

job was pastoral agriculture supplemented by spinning and the preparation of wool for

67
sale. Wool being the major export in demand in Europe, constituted about three-

quarters of England’s foreign trade. Fishing and its related treads dominated coastal

area. Great landowners used to increase profit by renting lands to tenant farmers.

Potentially lucrative business of sheep farming encouraged many land owners to

abandon arable farming leading to great loss of employment especially among lower

classes.

In the English Renaissance, there had been enormous economic transition

from feudal economies based on land ownership to a structure involving private

ownership and investment, competition and credit system which came to be known as

capitalism. People from the highest social elite bought land and cleared villages for

the purposes of private estates. The more urban societies constituted the markets for

agricultural labour and the scale of produce. It was in the towns that wealth was spent.

Economic problems were associated with inadequate political responses to

demographic growth, unemployment and vagrancy, disease, harvest failure, and price

inflection, etc. In the beginning of the seventeenth century the price of corn increased

more than doubled, the monarch find that the possible way is to encourage the

economy by stimulating the overseas trade by granting different companies privileges

of trading.

This was the most remarkable epoch for the expansion of both intellectual

abilities and geographical horizons. It was an age of great thought and great action. It

is an age which appeals to the eye, the imagination and the intellect. New knowledge

was pouring in from all directions. The great voyagers like Hawkins, Frobisher,

Raleigh and Drake brought home both material and intellectual treasures from the

East and the West. The spirit of adventure and exploration fired the imagination of
68
writers. The spirit of action and adventure paved the way for the illustrious

development of dramatic literature. Drama progressed in an era of action and not of

speculation. It has rightly been called the age of the discovery of the new world.

Overseas business flourished and gave a boost to the revenue of the

government. A society of middle class bourgeois started to emerge with a variety of

merchandises and different economic plans, signaling a slow transformation in the

social structure and orientation. The society changed their outlook about life and

started to think for themselves. Totally dissatisfied with the feudal system, the new

classes sought various tracks to establish businesses that went on accelerating both in

scope and variety. As the early hours of capitalism, this widening in economic activity

and flourishing in economic prosperity went hand in hand with development and

progress across the board.

The economic boom was then reflected in the various walks of life, particularly

education. The Elizabethan period, as discussed earlier, was so fertile that the

considerable stability in the political arena, the monarchical auspices of arts and

artists, the pervasive religious tolerance among the different sects, and the deep

interest of the vast majority of the English society to make a bit of headway in their

medieval lifestyle contributed significantly to launching new economic enterprises

within and without the state. There were great changes and improvements taking

place in material surroundings and comforts. Commerce was making very

considerable progress. Fresh means of wealth were being initially developed.

Elizabethan London can perhaps be best divided into three groups. At the top

of the social ladder was the aristocracy like professional men, and officials. At the

base of the societal hierarchy is the group about which the least is known. Composed
69
of discharged soldiers, peddlers, paupers and vagrants, scholars estimate that this

group also made up as much as ten percent of the people living in London. The vast

majority of the population was made up of artisans and those who depended on them.

The biggest section of this group consisted of the craftsmen, button makers,

carpenters, masons, blacksmiths, cobblers, etc. Apprenticeship was the means by

which one entered the field. An apprentice lived with his master who provided food,

sometimes education and obviously, training in a specific and potentially profitable

trade.

The material prosperity of the age is important to understand part of the big

picture of the period in terms of ambitions and promises as well as challenges and

threats. The rise of the economy and the gradual diversity in modes of trade must have

pulled the attention of foes both inside and outside to seize the chance to get at the

ruling system, to topple it, and usurp the system. Implicated here is a sense of an

impending crisis that the state apparatuses are supposed to pre-empt and counteract.

2.4. Gender Roles during the Elizabethan and Jacobean Eras

During the 16th and early 17th century, the state was headed by a monarch

assisted by aristocrats, and served by the people. In the family, the man was the head

of the house, and was assisted by his wife. Both of them had a control over their

children and servants. It was a natural law for the people; the husband used to control

his wife and family while kings used to rule over the people. It was the responsibility

of people to preserve these rules and apply it in social relationships. Elizabethan and

Jacobean society was a patriarchal society, i.e., the father or the husband was at the

top of the hierarchy in the structure of the family. Women were instructed that

70
everything rested in their practice of chastity. Virgins and wives were to maintain

silence in the public spheres and widows had some scope for making their own

decisions. The duty, in general, for women was to nurse their children and to

understand their needs and to take care of their family in every way. The marital

status of the monarch was a major political and diplomatic topic. It also entered into

the popular culture. Queen Elizabeth’s unmarried status inspired a cult of virginity. In

poetry and portraiture, she was depicted as a virgin or a goddess or both, and not as a

normal woman.

Queen Elizabeth made a virtue of her virginity in 1559, she told the

Commons, “And, in the end, this shall be for me sufficient, that a marble stone shall

declare that a queen, having reigned such a time, lived and died a virgin.” (Susan,
1T 1T2

D.1995: 257)

The English Renaissance was a patriarchal society because fatherhood came to

symbolize an ideal of domestic, political, and religious order. The ideal was not

unrelated to actual behavior, but it was the normative and symbolic value of

fatherhood during this period and its significance that designated the culture as

patriarchal. It followed that patriarchy, principally, referred to the relationship

between father and child, not husband and wife. The relationship between husband

and wife rarely provided a model for other social relations. Patriarchy, therefore,

could not be equated with male dominance over women.

C. Coach (1996) argues that Queen Elizabeth’s figurative motherhood played

a central role in her complex self-representation, shaping and legitimating the

personal rule of a divinely appointed female prince. In contrast to her father’s

71
emphasis on masculinity and physical ability, Queen Elizabeth emphasized the

maternal theme, saying often that she was married to her kingdom and subjects. She

explained “I keep the good will of all my husbands, my good people, for if they did

not rest assured of my special love towards them, they would not readily yield me

such good obedience,” and declared in 1563 that they would never have a more

natural mother than her.

According to the Bible and many texts (mostly male – authored) from the

period frequently testify to the fact that, women were considered as ‘the weaker

vessel’, even though Queen Elizabeth, the Tudor or Mary, Queen of Scots gained

access to significant political power. They encountered opposition from rival political

factions. The influence of patriarchy was so pervasive that these female leaders often

promoted themselves in terms of their ‘masculine’ strengths and virtues.

D. Norbrook made the observation that Queen Elizabeth did not attempt to

undermine the insecure political position to challenge the patriarchal order. She rather

took no action to change the position of women and she did not encourage female

education. In her appearance, under the pervasive influence of patriarchy, she

presented herself as an exception to the general rule about male superiority. “I know I

have the body of weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king,

and of a king of England too” (1950:113-14). She declared that, the traditional kingly

virtues are four- justice, temperance, prudence and magnanimity; the last two could be

exercised only by men.

The role of women in society was, for the historical era, relatively

unconstrained. Spanish and Italian visitors to England commented regularly and

sometimes sarcastically on the freedom that women enjoyed in England, in contrast to

72
their home cultures. England had more well-educated upper class women than was

common anywhere in Europe.

Tudor and Stuart eras presented an abundance of material on the women of the

nobility, especially royal wives and queens. Historians recovered weak documentation

about the average lives of women. However there had been extensive statistical

analysis of demographic and population data which includes women, especially in

their childbearing roles. The Elizabethan period in England had a daily life based on

social order; the monarch as the highest, the nobility as the second rank, the gentry as

the third, merchants as the fourth, and laborers as the fifth. The monarch was believed

to be God’s representative on earth. The Elizabethans had a high regard for family in

a community. They believed that families were role models for the community. They

were united and followed a deep respect for the importance of hierarchy. They had

customary rulings for the behavior of children that were taken from Bible instructions.

The instructions were explanations on the duty of parents raising their children

properly and guide them to respect and obey people.

One of the remarkable features of Renaissance society was that the strong

relationship was firmly patriarchal in nature. This was a social vision in which it was

perceived as ‘natural’ and commonplace that men (as fathers, employers, monarchs)

should control the dominant position of power. In his speech to the commons at the

palace of Whitehall in 1609, James1 insisted that “a father may be dispose of his

Inheritance to his children, at this pleasure; yea, even disinherit the eldest upon just

occasions, and prefer the youngest ,according to his liking…so may the king deal with

his subjects”.

73
 Male domination was viewed as patriarchy authoritarian as in Tyndale’s

Obedience of a Christian Man, Perkin’s Christian Economy and Filmer’s Patriarcha,

for example, understood ‘fathers’ in terms of hierarchical authority and control over

their household and it was, by analogy, of the king’s authority over his subjects.

(Shuger 1990: 220)

Women voiced opinions publicly and sought political rights in the middle of

the seventeenth century. Renaissance England also saw an increase in the number of

women between1500 – 1640. More than 100 works were translated and composed by

women in different fields, such as poetry, prose, narratives and essays. Most of the

published works of the English women in the Renaissance period were religious.

As the researcher moves through these sections, he is gathering insights into

the very nature of the Elizabethan and Jacobean society as being essentially

traditional. The social strata and the various structures of the community testify to the

high influence that the medieval conceptions had on this society, despite the storming

voices of the early modern age. The residual power of the times still held a grip on

peoples’ ways of seeing and thinking. Nevertheless, the emerging calls for

transformation were making their way through hard lines across the board.

2.5. Literary Efflorescence

The literary decline after the sad demise of Geoffrey Chaucer was due in

considerable measure because of political reasons. The dispute over the throne, which

eventuated in the War of Roses, used up the resources of the country and ultimately

destroyed in large measure the noble families. However, a powerful monarchical

ruling system was established by Henry VII, who restored political and social order

74
and curtailed the powers and privileges of the barons and patronized the new rich

class. Significant and meaningful changes took place during the reign of King Henry

VIII who acceded to the throne of England in 1509. The court became a great patron

of learning literature and arts, and this reign was marked as stable in the national

power in the country and abroad. Then Edward VI acceded to the throne and reigned

from 1547 to 1553, during which Protestantism became the official religion of

England. The reign of Queen Mary I from 1553-1558 faced a religious conflict

between Protestants and Roman Catholics. Creative activity was arrested during her

reign which was followed by the reign of Queen Elizabeth I from 1558-1603.

The Elizabethan Age is viewed favourably because of the periods before and

after it. It was a brief period of internal peace between the English Reformation and

the battles between Protestants and Catholics and the battles between parliament and

the monarchy that engulfed the seventeenth century. The Protestant-Catholic division

was settled, for a time, by the Elizabethan Religious Settlement, and parliament was

not yet strong enough to challenge royal absolutism. In terms of the entire century,

John Guy argues: “England was economically healthier, more expansive, and more

optimistic under the Tudors’ than at any time in a thousand years.” (1988: 32)

In the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, English poetry and drama reached to the

highest peak of excellence. Elizabethan’s was the rich of English Renaissance. The

Renaissance spirit was fully displayed in the Elizabethan literature. Sir Thomas

More’s “Utopia” was the “true prologue to the Renaissance”. Sir Francis Bacon’s

essays were the fullest and finest expression of practical wisdom. Sir Thomas Wyatt

and Henry Howard were the pioneers of the new poetry in England. These two

diplomats brought with them the new spirit of the Renaissance from Italy and
75
breathed it in “Tottle’s Micellany” which is recognized as one of the landmarks of

English literature. In Edmund Spenser, we have fine expression of Renaissance ideal

of adventure and active life which is expressed in “The Fairie Queen”. It is a

remarkable outline history of the Reformation of England in the form of an allegory

which recounts the conflict going on between two groups. Protestant England was

headed by Queen Elizabeth, while the Catholic forces were represented by the Queen

of Scots. Spenser had great abhorrence for the Catholic religion and thus his work

showed the same influence.

This era is also most famous for theatre, as William Shakespeare and many

others composed plays that broke out England’s past style of theatre. While

Shakespeare got a lot of appreciation, and he was worthy of it as well, there were

other writers and their literature that the people were enjoying. People like Edmund

Spenser and others were writing popular literature during this time. Moreover, the

drama of the university Wits bubbled with the spirit of the Renaissance. Marlowe’s

plays epitomize what the Renaissance people felt and lived. The drama reached to the

splendid consummation in the hands of Shakespeare and Ben Jonson. Immense songs,

lyrics and sonnets were produced.

The Renaissance was the spirit and motive power behind the Reformation, the

growth of the nationalism and the exploration of the world. The religious- minded

men criticized the faith of the church by the light of their new reading of the Christian

scriptures. And so, during the great period of Elizabethan literature, readers see in

Spenser’s work the effect of the Reformation of poetry.

Shakespeare’s royal patrons were Queen Elizabeth I and King James I. Both

of them loved drama and dramaturgy. The virgin Queen devoted herself to the study
76
of the ancient classical period and used her influence in the progress of the English

drama, and fostered the inimitable genius of Shakespeare. Shakespeare was ardently

attracted to Elizabeth and her court. The evidence of this fact lies in his fine eulogy of

the virgin Queen in early sweet political drama titled as, A Midsummer- Night’s

Dream.

In the Elizabethan period, writers frequently dedicated their literary production

to eminent aristocrats in the hope of gaining favour. Pastorals, romances and erotic

lyrics and translations from classical and living European languages were displaying

the taste of courtly audiences. For example, Sidney’s pastoral “The Lady of May” or

the formal masque texts written for the Early Stuart courts by Samuel Daniel, Ben

Jonson and Thomas Carew are indicative of such a fact.

The period which began about the fourth quarter of the sixteenth century and

continued to the mid of the seventeenth century saw the movements of the previous

period. Poetry was developed in the work of Spenser and his fellow poets. The non-

dramatic poems of Shakespeare assisted in this process. Drama found its

consummation in Shakespeare and prose–writing steadily rose in importance.

Furthermore, the literature during Elizabethan-Jacobean times was not only loved and

appreciated by the upper class but the lower class equally appreciated William

Shakespeare’s literature. The former plays and literature prior to the Elizabethan era

were very much religiously influenced. In fact, almost all of them had something to

do with morality or mystery.

The Renaissance gave birth to individualism and universality. These were the

same ingredients in the classical Greek literature which attracted people to the

Renaissance. The result of individualism was that the Renaissance men did not care
77
for authority; they were free in expressing their own decision, right or wrong. “With

the limitation of the power of the church”, says Philip Henderson “the Elizabethan

intellectual had indeed more freedom than in the middle ages and he could write more

or less what he liked ,as long as he said nothing against the government, for then he

would be liable to the charge of treason”. (Mundra 2007:138)

The main theme of Jacobean royalism referred to ‘the king’ as ‘the image of

God’ or as ‘God on earth’, and his authority was not derived from the people but

directly from God. A true king was a hereditary one and not an elective monarch.

Hence royal power did not simply inhere a divinely sanctioned social role. But the

king was a sacred person in a real sense and he was the king of men not of bodies

only but of their souls too. (Goldberg 1983: 214)

The monarch had a series of praises and comments given by different writers

like Davenant, Waller, Cowley, Dryden, and Charles Cotton and so on. Each of them

had his own way of presenting poems or verses with different contents. They aimed at

urging for freeing England from slavery and for healing its old wounds, for restoration

of order and authority and to express the willingness of the people towards the

monarch. They were looking for the prosperity and greatness of the country under the

rule of the monarch:

And now times whiter series is begun

Which in soft centuries shall smoothly run;

Those clouds that overcast your morn shall fly

Dispelled to farthest corners of the sky

Our nation with united int’rest blest

Not now content to poize, shall sway the rest.

78
 (Sutherland 1969: 4)

Dryden predicted that the empire would be extended and grew further, and that

the English trade would further develop, and the people who had been discontented

would be happy with the return of the King Charles II. The literature even pointed

heroic characteristics and qualities of the young king and his suffering in exile for his

people, the martyrdom of his royal father, and his divine right to the throne.

Throughout the reign of Charles II and the brief reign of his brother James II, the

loyalty to kingship remained a constant theme of the Tory Poets.

In the Renaissance literature, two things were of crucial importance-the ruling

aristocracy of protestant faith seeking absolute power over state and religion, and the

emphasis on classical education. The education and learning were the mark of ruling

class. The arrival of printing press to England changed the English society. Literacy

began to grow among both genders-male and female.

To retain their authority, the upper class literature and arts needed to convey

images and ideas about the rulers in the language of the common people. The Latin

language was not understandable by common people. The people should understand

the language to accept the rule of the king. Therefore the playwrights adapted their

ideas in terms of social entertainment and not in Latin. Elizabethan drama used

everyday speech and community events made sense to the people. Ideas about

monarch, religion and absolute kingship started to be conveyed through common

speech.

Sir Philip Sidney had written that there had never been a good government in

the world which did not contain three simple species of monarchy, aristocracy, and

79
democracy. But Sidney had looked at monarchy as a good ruling system when it was

based on elected rulers such as Roman consuls or the Doge of Venice rather than on

hereditary foundation. He was also in favour of establishing a sort of aristocratic

republican system. He disliked kings, their servile ministers, their parasites and pimps

and mistresses and the political corruption that went with them.

Premised on Shakespeare’s own political context, political concerns of

sovereignty and state and political rebellion, one cannot afford to lose sight of an

alternative history. “A counter discourse of popular protest and dissent is often written

in the margins of the official history or excluded altogether. It is now something of a

commonplace to note that Shakespeare’s drama emerged at a moment of acute

political turbulence; a period of social upheaval often shorthanded by cultural

historians as the crisis of 1590, a decade which encompassed a series of catastrophic

events including, plague, rapid population expansion, inflation, unemployment,

increased immigration and vagrancy of attendants, attacks on aliens, apprentice riots

and a host of other problems.” Several essays in the different current collection

explore the relationship between social and political change. (Alexander 2004: 7)

In its ultimate analysis, it is useful to briefly recapitulate the major insights

into the Elizabethan and Jacobean contexts vis-à-vis the larger cultural landscape of

the eras.

1. The wider cultural scene is one of transition from medieval to the early

hours of the modern world: from the narrow medieval conceptions to the

broad ideals of the Renaissance. The transition from two categorically

different world-pictures implicates complexities across the board. Yet, no

radical transformation takes place.

80
 2. As a manifestation of the emergence of the Renaissance ideals, the

absolutism of the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods is challenged by the new

forces of democracy and secular bent.

3. The political arena is, by and large, characterized by in-fighting and

external challenges; yet, the Elizabethan period embraced moments of

stability and tolerance.

4. Religion stands as a primary force for much of the conflict between

different sects (Catholics and Protestants), each attempting to reign supreme

over the other. The Reformation calls into question deeply ingrained

orthodoxies of the time, thus rising as a new force in the social and political

arena.

5. Material prosperity and educational advance start to materialize and to bring

about relative changes at the grassroots levels, signaling the demise of the

feudal system and the emergence of the middle class bourgeois as a new social

and political force in the Elizabethan and Jacobean eras.

6. Aristocratic patronage of artists, especially dramatists like Shakespeare,

gives significant boost to literary production. As a result, artists started

responding to the generous hands of the ruling class by singing their praises.

Thus, artists became themselves a social and political force of significance in

shaping the subjectivities of the audience of the time.

Having thus made these observations, the researcher needs to proceed further

to attempt critical explorations of Hamlet and The Merchant of Venice with a view to

bringing out the major social and political forces at work in the Elizabethan and

81
Jacobean contexts as reflected, implicitly or otherwise, in these dramatic

masterpieces.

82