Reyes 1

Fabian Reyes

AP Lit and Comp

Ms. White

10 March, 2022

Analysis

Henry David Thoreau once said, “Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me

truth.” In the play, The tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, Shakespear also seems to be in

the pursuit of truth. Exploring topics like love, greed, insanity and many more he searches for the

cause and what it says about us as people in a society. Shakespear puts an emphasis on Hamlet's

internal struggle between getting vengeance for the murder of his father, the idea of life and

death, or his experince with love and loss. Hamlet’s path begins when his fathers ghost appears

before him and tells him how his uncle had so harshly betrayed him. This is where his desire for

vengeance against his uncle begins, however through the process he destroys the relationships

and the people most dear to him. He begins to act rash and shuts everyone out which further adds

to the belief that he is insane. Clauidus takes notice of this and uses it against Hamlet in an effort

to get rid of him while his mother unknowingly plays along with Clauidus, her new husband.

Polonius then forces Ophelia to stop seeing Hamlet out of fear from his madness which Hamlet

claims to be faking but somewhere along the way he may have very well lost himself. This idea

is further supported when he slays Polonius, the father of the woman he claims to love dearly.

Hamlet eventually kills Claudius in the end but at the cost of his own life and the lives of those

around him. In this story of tragedy, Shakespear reveals that the pursuit for revenge or power

will do nothing except corrupt and destroy oneself as well as those around you. It will leave one's

life empty whether they obtain these things or not. One must cherish love and nourish
 Reyes 2

relationships

to avoid resentment and create understanding. I will be going in depth on how Shakespear’s

Hamlet reveals this universal truth through three body paragraphs. The first paragraph consists of

characterization, focusing on the role of Claudius and what his actions say about his value and

belief system. The second paragraph focuses on a big idea present in the play which in this paper

it will be power and Shakespear’s argument about this idea. The final paragraph will be focused

around the use of symbolism in Hamlet, and how it ties in to the overall theme and message

Shakespear is trying to convey.

To begin, this paragraph will explore the role of Claudius in the play and examine his

actions to better understand his character and how it contributes to the overall message. As some

background, Claudius is the uncle of Prince Hamlet and brothers with, the now deceased, King

Hamlet. Clauidus then married his brother's wife, queen Gertrude which leads to the first

example. In the first act, Claudius, the current king of Denmark is introduced when he is

speaking to an audience, including the prince, queen, and other members of the court. Claudius is

referring to the tragic death of his brother and the newly formed marriage between him and the

queen when he says:

Th’ imperial jointress to this warlike state,

have we, as’twere with a defeated joy,

with an auspicious and a dropping eye,

with mirth in funeral and with dirge in marriage,

In equal scale weighing delight and dole.

(2.1.9-12)
 Reyes 3

Claudius appears to be speaking about the death of his brother with sincerity when he says ‘with

a defeated joy’ which sounds like an oxymoron however its purpose is to convey the

contradicting emotions felt during this time where Gertrude and Claudius are getting married

despite the very recent death of his brother. This idea is further supported later when Claudius

states, ‘mirth in funeral’ and ‘dirge in marriage.’ Mirth is defined as, amusement/laughter and

dirge as, a mournful song or poem which is a very strange way to describe a funeral, a sad and

mournful event, and also a marriage which tends to be a celebration. He again uses contradicting

words to represent the situation towards the end when he says they will hold delight and dole,

which is defined as sorrow or sadness, to an equal weight. In other words they are equally as

delighted about the marriage than they are upset about the death of King Hamlet. However, as

stated previously, this is done on purpose to reinforce the conflicting feelings that Claudius could

be feeling and at first it comes off as a genuine remark yet when he begins his speech to the royal

court he refers to the queen as the ‘imperial jointress.’ Jointress is defined as a widow who has a

lifetime right to a property after her husband dies. Imperial is related to an empire, so when these

words are put together it means as a widow Gertrude has the lifetime right to Denmark.This can

lead one to believe that marrying the queen would allow Claudius to inherit this right and

therefore claim king of Denmark. These are Claudius’ true intentions behind marrying Gertrude

so shortly after his brother's death. At first it might seem like a heartfelt declaration mourning his

the loss of his brother but this observation shows just the beginning of what Claudius really

values which is not his wife or family but gaining power through any means necessary even if

that means murdering his own brother. It suggests that Clauidus was not happy enough with

merely being the brother to the king, which surely comes with plenty of rights and privileges, but

rather wanted absolute power. Power that could only be held by an heir to the throne or the very
 Reyes 4

king of Denmark himself. Claudius’ character is further revealed in the third act. He shows little

to no remorse for his actions even in regards to killing his brother until later when he is left alone

in a room of the castle. He begins to think to about how he murdered his brother and begins to

questions his crime:

My fault is passed. But, O, what form of prayer

can serve me now? Forgive me my foul murder?

That cannot be: since I am still possessed

of those effects for which I did the murder,

my crown, mine own ambition and my queen.

(3.3.51-55)

He questions whether what he did was worth it and has a desire to repent when he asks himself

‘what form of prayer can serve me now.’ He specifically refers to prayer to serve him because

he wants to know if any prayer will be enough to forgive him and allow him into heaven. Yes he

wants to be forgiven for the murder of his brother but not neccessarly becasue he regrets it but

because he knows if he is not forgiven he will g to hell. He does not truly regret murdering his

brother but rather wants to save himself from damnation. It is clear when he is questioning his

crimes he says, ‘my crown’ and ‘my queen’, explicitly still claiming them and unwilling to give

up what he wrongfully took as if it were his right or had belonged to him in any way. Although

he knows what he did was wrong he would rather keep the crown and the queen than have to

give them up in order to truly repent and be forgiven. His words and actions reveal that he places

more value on the power, that he has gained from murder, than on forgivenes. He cares little

about family, honor, and even his religion but rather himself and his ambition which is what

causes him to forsake any morality that he had left. Not only does Claudius’ lust for power end
 Reyes 5

up being the cause for his own demise it also ends up causing Laretes to go down a path that

leads to his self destruction which starts in act four. Laertes has come to Denmark to demand the

king but Claudius manages to reason with him and explains that Hamlet has slain his father and

in doing so Claudius begins to use Laertes to his advantage by telling him,” Revenge should

have no bound. But, good Laertes, / Will you do this, keep close within your chamber. / Hamlet

return’d shall know you are come home” (4.7.129-32). Claudius tries to appear as his friend and

even calls him ‘good Laertes.’ Whether Claudius says this to try and appeal to Laertes by

praising him, despite Laertes planning a murder, or use flattery to gain his trust, he is simply

manipulating Laertes. Claudius realizes how vulnerable Laertes is in this fit of rage and rather

than calming him and helping him grieve the death of his father, he redirects this rage towards

Hamlet. He goes as far as to say ‘revenge should have no bounds,’ bounds referring to

boundaries or limits. Which means Clauiud tells Laretes he should do whatever it takes to get his

revenge at all costs which is a dangerous thing to tell a very emotional person because they lack

clear thinking and could lead them to make decisions that would ultimately hurt themselves. This

is a reflection of Claudius’ true character because even after all the pain has caused Hamlet, the

queen, and Laertes he continues to put himself and his own interest above everything else, even

willing to kill his own family once again to consolidate his power. The actions Laertes took after

he was further persuaded by Claudius, relates back to the idea that a desire for revenge or power

leads to nothing except destruction, and despite him not getting the revenge he had imagined,

this exactly what happens to Laeretes as well as Ophelia and Gertrude who simply by being

around them, became casualties.

 Reyes 6

The use of power is also prevalent throughout Hamlet. Whether it be legitimate power,

coercive power, or familial power. Shakespear explores this idea by possibly suggesting an

adverse correlation between the pursuit of power itself and the effects on the person pursuing it.

This adverse effect can be seen in the first act when the ghost appears in front of Hamlet to tell

him how he was murdered by Claudius and after Hmalet exalims the ghost continues and says:

Ay, that incestuous, that adulterate beast,

With witchcraft of his wits, with traitorous gifts—

O wicked wit and gifts, that have the power

So to seduce!—won to his shameful lust

The will of my most seeming-virtuous queen.

(1.5.49-53)

The Ghost is using the power that he has as a father to a son in order to use

Hamlet to kill Claudius. The ghost, Hamlet's father, knows that if he tells his son of the crimes

committed against him by his uncle that he will want to seek revenge and the ghost even

encourages Hamlet to do so. He uses strong descriptive language like, ‘adulterate beast’

‘traitorous gifts’ and ‘wicked wits’ to evoke emotion of anger and betrayal out of Hamlet so that

he is easier to convince in pursuing vengeance against his uncle. Not only will this be a poor

outcome for Claudius because that is who he is trying to hurt, but it is a selfish thing to ask of a

son and an abuse of power over him. Rather than making amends with his son after his sudden

passing or offering him fatherly advice he uses the power he has over Hamlet as a father which

inevitably affects him and leads to rage and conflict within Hamlet. This event between father

and son causes a domino effect that leads to the downfall and destruction of many people who

would have ultimately continued with their lives if the ghost had not corrupted Hamlet in order
 Reyes 7

to seek revenge. This is not the only time where family relationships are used to gain power over

someone. Hamlet does this to his mother as well. This can be seen right after Hamlet confronts

his mother and ends up killing Polonius. Hamlet then goes on to finally express the feeling he

has towards his mother with no show of restraint or regards for her feelings. Gertrude then

questions why he is saying all these things to her and Hamlet replies:

Such an act

that blurs the grace and blush of modesty,

Calls virtue hypocrite, takes off the rose

From the fair forehead of an innocent love

And sets a blister there, makes marriage vows

As false as dicers’ oaths.

(3.4.49-52)

Hamlet knew he would be able to use the power he had as a son over his mother to, in a way, get

back at her for marrying his uncle which has caused him to resent her. Hamlet has lost his father,

and anyone who he truly cared about, which is precisely the reason he has all the power, because

he no longer has anything to lose. He starts by saying, ‘calls virtue hypocrite’ which is

essentially saying that she is pretending to be virtuous mean while she married the man who

murdered her husband which makes her a hypocite. By him saying this, it doesn't just reveal the

animosity held against Gertrude but it begins to illustrate just how far Hamlet has been pushed

by this constant desire for vengeance. Hamlet then says that she took off a rose from ‘the fair

forehead of an innocent love and set a blister there’ which is a representation of what Hamlet

feels she did when she married Claudius. He feels that she abandoned the marriage she had and

in its place married Claudius which to Hamlet feels wrong and displeasing so he makes the
 Reyes 8

comparison to a blister. In this deranged state, Hamlet is set on vengeance with no regard for the

life of others or his own which makes him dangerous. Even to his own mother which he verbally

attacks by saying she's a hypocrite and her marriage vows false. This power that he has over his

mother which Hamlet uses not just to explain his frustration but enough to cause her fear and

internal pain. Pain caused from hearing her son speak to her in such a foul way.

There are also examples of how power held over someone can have such a poor effect and how a

lack of power over themselves can be just as detrimental. This can be observed later on in act

five when Ophelia is talking with Laerets or rather singing when she mentions her father and

continues to sing:

And will he not come again?

And will he not come again?

No, no, he is dead.

Go to thy deathbed.

He never will come again.

(4.5.213-17)

Ophelia is clearly distressed when she continues to ask ‘and will he not come’, almost as if in

disbelief that her father is dead. However, there is a deeper reason than just because of the death

of her father. Her entire life she always had to listen to her father and what others told her.

Throughout the play the role of a woman is made clear especially for Ophelia whenever she was

with Hamlet or her father and brother were telling her how to behave. She had little to no power

over her life and even now after her father, Polonius, was slain she still has no say over her fate.

One could argue that Polonius had a sort of coercive power over his daughter; however rather

than using force to influence her he used his love or approval. Essentially using conditional love
 Reyes 9

based on her obedience to further his control and power over Ophelia. This had a damaging

effect on her because even though Ophelia loved her father and she loved Hamlet, at least at one

point, she was essentially being forced to spy on Hamlet and ignore her feelings towards him.

Then her father who had control over her for most of her life was killed by the very man who

supposedly loved her. She was a casualty of a power struggle because she never had any to

begin with which is why she killed herself. Not because her father was dead but because she

simply had no control over her life anymore. The story of Ophelia’s character in this play

displays just how harmful an abuse of power can be and how it does not just hurt a single person

but has secondary effects on relationships with others.

The use of symbolism is commonly used throughout the play to convey ideas or concepts

that might either need more thought, or perhaps are up to the reader for interpretation. This idea

is clear towards the end of the play where Horatio and Hamlet are spying on a grave digger who

is burying Ophelia after her suicide, however it is unknown to Hamlet at this time, and he is

holding a skull the grave digger showed him. The grave digger then tells him it was the skull of a

jester and Hamlet realizes he knew the man whose skull he held:

Alas, poor

Yorick! I knew him, Horatio—a fellow of infinite

jest, of most excellent fancy. He hath bore me on his

back a thousand times, and now how abhorred in

my imagination it is! My gorge rises at it. Here hung

those lips that I have kissed I know not how oft.

Where be your gibes now? your gambols? Your songs.

 Reyes 10

(5.1.190-97)

The skull is meant to symbolize not just death but the idea of nothingness. The idea that after

death there will be a void where we once existed and that life will have had no meaning or

purpose. Once Hamlet realizes who the man is he begins to remember his qualities, his ‘infinite

jest’. Jest referring to acting or speaking in a joking manner. Hamlet then asks, ’where be your

gibes now? Your gambols? Your songs.’ Gibes is defined as mocking remarks and gambols are

running/jumping playfully. Although Hamlet is addressing Yorick by saying ‘your’ songs and

‘your’ gambols, he is not directly asking Yorick’s skull, Hamlet says this because he is reflecting

on all the things Yorick used to be. He is thinking of the songs he sang and the jokes or taunts he

made yet he is asking where they are now that Yorick is dead. It ties back into the idea that after

death there is nothing because when Yorick dies the only thing that is left are his bones and the

memory others have of him which will both fade away with time until there is nothing to prove

that a man like Yorick even existed in the first place. This causes Hamlet to contemplate the

point of Yorick’s life now that he is gone and there is nothing left of who he was besides what

few memories Hamlet has of him which strengthens the meaning of the skull being a

reminder/symbol of this concept. This is not the first time Hamlet has come to a similar

conclusion or at least thought about his existence. This next quote supports the claims of the

symbolic meaning of the skull made in the previous. In act three Hamlet enters into one of the

many rooms of the castle alone where first begins to ponder about what the point of his life is

when he says to himself:

To be or not to be—that is the question:

Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer

The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,

 Reyes 11

Or to take arms against a sea of troubles

And, by opposing, end them. To die, to sleep—

No more—and by a sleep to say we end

The heartache and the thousand natural shocks

That flesh is heir to.

(3.1.64-71)

One of the most infamous soliloquies of all time, ‘to be or not to be’ or in other words to live or

not to live. In this monologue, Hamlet is asking what the point of life is. He asks whether it is

nobler ‘to suffer’ and essentially endure the agony that comes with living or to ‘take arms against

a sea of trouble’ which he equates to dying or just not living. Hamlet continuously struggles to

understand the purpose of life and one of the reasons for this could be because of how he is

living his. He is set on vengeance which has led him to take actions that have hurt so many of the

people around him including the ones he claims to love. He also says that ‘the flesh is heir to’

heartache and ‘thousand natural shocks.’ The most basic definition of heir is one who will

receive or is entitled to property from an ancestor. Hamlet is essentially saying that as human

beings, heartache and the suffering that comes with being alive is one's natural birthright or

inheritance. In other words, to live is to suffer which connects to the previous idea of the skull. If

there is nothing after we die then what is the point of living in the first place and enduring

needless suffering? This is what Hamlet contemplates now and when he was holding the skull of

an old friend in his hands. However Hamlet is not the only one that deals with suffering and loss

in the play. Ophelia also suffers the loss of her father who, ironically, was killed by Hamlet

during his effort to avenge his own fathers death. The effect of Polonius' murder is clear when

Ophelia, whos is visually distressed, is speaking with Laertes about their father while she is
 Reyes 12

handing him flowers. During this she goes on to say, “ I would give you some violets, but they

withered all when my father died. They say he made a good end” (4.5.207-09). Violets are often

used to symbolize true and everlasting love. So in this case when Ohpelia says that she would

give her brother some violets but they ‘withered all when my father died’ she is insinuating that

when Polinus died so did any love she had felt. Almost as if a part of her died with him which

could be the case if one looks at the relationship they had. Their relationship was often shaky and

based on conditional love, whether Ophelia obeyed her father or not. She loved him in and he

loved her but they never had the relationship Ophelia wanted to have or shared the closeness that

most daughters and fathers share. Ophelia says the violets withered all away because now any

chance she had to create true everlasting love was gone and it is a representation of what could

have been but now, never will be. She also states, ‘they say he had a good death’ as in other

people say he died an honorable man or in an honorable way. She is acknowledging what others

say about her fathers death but there is a reason she does not say this herself. She says this is

what others say because she doesn’t believe he had an honorable death. She feels a great loss not

just because her father died but because she suffered the loss of love and to put it simply is death

was not honorable, it was a tragedy.

Throughout the story of Hamlet one can see the struggles every person faces in their

lifetime Whether that be Hamlet struggling to grieve the death of his father and Ophelia or his

struggle to understand the purpose of living despite the inevitability of death. Regardless of the

various issues and topics addressed in Shakespeare's play a common trend can be seen which is a

reflection of the mistakes one should avoid as social creatures. As creatures who cannot live

without interaction and forming relationships with others. The story of Hamlet is a story of
 Reyes 13

tragedy after all yet it is also a learning experience on how one should live their lives. The

pursuit of anything that destroys oneself, others, or causes injustices should be avoided at all cost

and if one truly wishes to enjoy a life worth living understanding, and sympathy should be

practiced. Whether that be with friends, family, or and especially ones enemies. There are no

happy endings in life but these are some ways to, at the very least, avoid a tragic life.
 Reyes 14

Social Issue

Throughout Wiliam Shakespear’s plays there are many instances where he makes

commentary on social issues important to his time period. He subtly inserts them in his plays and

poetry disguised as stories of love, tragedy, and conflict. One of the many social issues he

addresses in his work is the idea of social hierarchy which is broadly defined as, a system of

organization in which some individuals enjoy a higher social status than others. These groups are

often based on one's race, gender, occupation, or wealth. Shakespear connects the idea of a social

hierarchy in Hamlet in many ways. Whether that be through gender roles and the power men had

over women, or the existence of monarchs and nobility which are titles like king, queen, and

prince.

The concept that all men are created equal was an idea from the age of enlightenment

which came long after the Elizabethan era. A time of monarchies and royal families which

influenced every aspect of society, including the social structure. During this time period there

were two things that defined your place in the social hierarchy. The amount of wealth or land

owned and one’s birth into royalty. In regards to the hierarchy, Vivenza states, “so long as

everybody keeps his place in the social (and economic) hierarchy, justice is preserved” (516).

This was often the case during Shakespeare's time and it is evident in his play The Tragedy of

Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. The audience can see that because of Hamlet's social status as

prince of Denmark his actions were tolerated to a greater extent. Whether that was his acts of

madness, the murder of Polonius, or the power he held over Ophelia and even his own mother.

This idea that because one belongs to a certain social class they are held to a different standard is

apparent in not just Hamlet but in many works that reflect the culture of this time period. It

suggests that justice is preserved as long as the social hierarchy is not questioned and there is no
 Reyes 15

attempt made in upward social mobility. Which simply means ,stay in your palace or else. In

modern day society one would like to believe there is no social hierarchy or at least a very

limited one an alothougth there is some degree of truth in that, a social structure has always been

part of society. Yes, the time of Monarchs is over for the majority of the world and replaced by a

more representative form of government. Social status is not as important as it once was and the

difference between the haves and have not has shrunk but there is still a major social hierarchy

decided by race, gender, sexual orientation, and most importalty our income. Low, middle, and

high class tend to be major factors in deciding one's social status so it is clear that the social caste

system never left it simply moved from monarchies to oligarchies. The social hierarchy is not

just applicable from an economic perspective but also form a political one which leads to the

second point.

Some form of government or bureaucracy has been around since the beginning of

recorded time which is essentially a mutually agreed upon social class system. A system where

one is given power over the many and the ruled are subjected to their will. Kuschel stated that

there is an idea that the people will submit to the will of a favorable ruler which then in turn that

ruler will receive sovereignty from the people. He then states that,” Only then would justice be

feasible. In other words, justice can only materialize thanks to the ruler’s wisdom. The multitude

could never in and of itself generate or guarantee a just order” (Kuschel 43). In essence, saying

that only when people submit themselves to a ruler or government, therefore becoming subjects,

can justice be possible. If this is true, it strengthens the idea of a social hierarchy because it states

that the world order, or in other words ‘justice’, can only be achieved as long as the social

hierarchy exists. This is contradictory considering the very existence of this social system is what
 Reyes 16

creates social injustices. During the Elizabethan period ordinary people subjected themselves to

the monarchy of England and despite this, the number of poor people increased while ‘Poor

Laws’ were passed resulting in punishment for the simple fact of living in poverty. This reality

of injustice resulting from the social hierarchy is reflected in Shakespeare's work. In Hamlet for

example Polonius and Gertrude submitted themselves to the will of king Claudius by following

his orders in regards to spying on Hamlet, and trying to control him. This is what resulted in the

death of Polonius because he submitted himself to the social order, and not just by following the

will of Claudius but also by not holding Hamlet accountable due to his title as prince of

Denmark. There are examples of how royalty were able to abuse their powers such as the

example previously provided however there were also women who were subjected to the will of

men. Such as Ophelia with Hamlet and her father, or Gertrude with Clauidus. In the modern age

people are much less tolerant of injustice that results from this social hierarchy however this does

not stop the system that has been in place for years. There are examples of police brutality,

government invasion of privacy or violation of civil liberties, and many other abuses of power

resulting from this hierarchy.

William Shakespear’s work is not just a collection of plays or sonnets, it is a statement on

the cultural, social, and political atmosphere of his time period. Yet the ideas Shakespear

discusses, specifically in Hamlet, are not only applicable to the Elizabethan era but in modern

times as well. The concept of social hierarchy can still be seen today and it is a reality many

people would choose to ignore however this concept must not be forgotten. The injustices of this

system are still occurring and the ripple effect of it can be seen today. For this reason

Shakespeare's work, and more importantly, his opinion on these issues are still relevant to this
 Reyes 17

day. His observations on things like loss, love, greed and many other topics, are important not

just because it gives a first hand account from this era but because they are universal experiences

that extend beyond time.

 Reyes 18

Work Cited

Shakespear, William. The tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Edited by Barbara A.

Mowat and Paul, Werstine, Folger Shakespeare Library,

https://shakespeare.folger.edu/downloads/pdf/hamlet_PDF_FolgerShakespeare.pdf.

Accessed 25 February 2022.

“Henry David Thoreau Quotes.” BrainyQuote, Xplore,

https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/henry_david_thoreau_122861. Accessed 28

February 2022.

Kuschel, Gonzalo Bustamantee. “Seneca’s De Clementia. An Overlooked Chapter in

The Genealogies of Representation and Sovereignty.” Politicka Misao: Croatian

Political Science Review, vol. 55, no. 4, Oct. 2018, pp. 36–58. Academic Search Premier,

https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.02. Accessed 24 February 2022.

MacConochie, Alex. “‘Spurns Her’: Violence and Hierarchy in A Yorkshire Tragedy.” Medieval

& Renaissance Drama in England, vol. 33, Jan. 2020, pp. 144–66. Advanced Placement

Source,https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=aqh&AN=145886115&site=ehost-live. Accessed 24 February 2022.

Sakellariou, Eleni. “Royal Justice in the Aragonese Kingdom of Naples: Theory and the

Realities of Power.” Mediterranean Historical Review, vol. 26, no. 1, June 2011, pp. 31–

50. Advanced Placement Source, https://doi.org/10.1080/09518967.2010.540422.

Accessed 23 February 2022.

“Violet Flower (Viola) - Interesting Facts, Meaning and Symbolism.” A To Z

Flowers, 29 Jan. 2022, https://www.atozflowers.com/flower/violas/. Accessed 19

February 2022.
 Reyes 19

Vivenza, Gloria. “Renaissance Cicero. The ‘Economic’ Virtues of De Officiis I, 22 in Some

Sixteenth Century Commentaries.” European Journal of the History of Economic

Thought, vol. 11, no. 4, Dec. 2004, pp. 507–23.Advanced Placement Source,

https://doi.org/10.1080/0967256042000292088. Accessed 25 February 2022.

 Reyes 20

Annotated Bibliography

Kuschel, Gonzalo Bustamantee. “Seneca’s De Clementia. An Overlooked Chapter in

The Genealogies of Representation and Sovereignty.” Politicka Misao: Croatian

Political Science Review, vol. 55, no. 4, Oct. 2018, pp. 36–58. Academic Search Premier,

https://doi.org/10.20901/pm.55.4.02.

In the article, Seneca's figure is used in understanding the emergence of sovereignty and

modern representation.. During the Renaissance, De Clementia promoted monarchical forms. In

De Clementia, this Stoic philosopher presents Nero in a depersonalized form. He is not only the

sovereign capable of shaping and representing but also one who secures peace and rules with

justice. In Seneca, one can form a theory of sovereignty and representation, with decisionism as

its result.

I used the source as evidence of how the very idea of giving someone sovereignty has

been a concept that has existed for centuries and the way we have interpreted and how the

concept has changed over time has shaped our modern age and periods like the Elizabethen era.

The idea of sovereignty and representation contributes to the not just the existence of a social

hierarchy but the necessity of a social hierarchy for our government to work.

MacConochie, Alex. “‘Spurns Her’: Violence and Hierarchy in A Yorkshire Tragedy.” Medieval

& Renaissance Drama in England, vol. 33, Jan. 2020, pp. 144–66. Advanced Placement

Source,https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=aqh&AN=145886115&site=ehost-live.

Violence and Hierarchy in A Yorkshire Tragedy are discussed in this article. Topics

include the social and symbolic resonances of kicking, spurning, and similar forms of domestic
 Reyes 21

abuse, and dramatizes a sensational true-life crime: the murder of two of his sons and attempted

murder of his wife by the decayed aristocrat Walter Calverley, and with an unexpected number

of social and theatrical meanings for such a blunt instrument of hierarchical violence.

I was going to use it primarily because it is related to Hamlet since this is also a play

regarding tragedy but specifically because it has the family aspect in it. I was going to relate it to

the idea of social hierarchy in the family which was definitely evident in Hamlet with his mother

and Claudius, or with Polonius and his daughter Ophelia. I was also going to use it because it

was similar in the aspect where there was murder in the family.

Sakellariou, Eleni. “Royal Justice in the Aragonese Kingdom of Naples: Theory and the

Realities of Power.” Mediterranean Historical Review, vol. 26, no. 1, June 2011, pp. 31–

50. Advanced Placement Source, https://doi.org/10.1080/09518967.2010.540422.

In this paper it is argued that the kingdom's Aragonese rulers had a concrete policy as

regards the interaction between royal and baronial justice. This policy was linked to their effort

to expand royal authority, and to the late medieval and Renaissance political theory of

sovereignty. Three issues are assessed: royal efforts to limit baronial jurisdiction, extend state

prerogative and foster a mode of co-existence between royal and baronial officials; the writings

of leading fifteenth-century Neapolitan jurists on justice; and lastly, the way in which the

kingdom's tribunals, royal or feudal, operated and interacted with each other.

I did not use this source but if I were to, I would have used it to support the social

hierarchy from the perspective of the government or rather the ruler and the ruled. The idea that

in order for there to be justice in the world there had to be people who ruled and those who were

ruled over and subjected because the source related to the hierarchy of the kings and queens and
 Reyes 22

barons which were lower members of the nobility.

Vivenza, Gloria. “Renaissance Cicero. The ‘Economic’ Virtues of De Officiis I, 22 in Some

Sixteenth Century Commentaries.” European Journal of the History of Economic

Thought, vol. 11, no. 4, Dec. 2004, pp. 507–23.Advanced Placement Source,

https://doi.org/10.1080/0967256042000292088.

The article concentrates on some commentaries on Cicero's passage of De Officiis I: 22.

Cicero stresses its utilitarian aspects, illustrating the idea of mutual advantage provided by

collaboration and exchange of goods and services. The Italian commentators give special

emphasis to an economic interpretation of this passage, in the light of some Aristotelian concepts

about money and exchange. According to whether utilities or benefits are concerned, a double

interpretation of exchange emerges, connected with the concept of distributive justice.

I was going to use it to connect it in a manner that could possibly be used as a counter

argument or to counter the idea that Shakespear was making about social hierarchy which is that

the very existence of a social hierarchy causes injustice however it is a necessary evil for the idea

of justice to even be feasible.