Gianoutsos-Dissertation-2014
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GENDER, TYRANNY AND REPUBLICANISM IN ENGLAND, 1603-1660 by Jamie A. Gianoutsos A dissertation submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Baltimore, Maryland August, 2014 © 2014 Jamie A. Gianoutsos All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT This dissertation examines how classical history and gendered conceptions of masculine governance and misgovernance shaped the political culture of seventeenth-century England, the distinctive character of English republican thought, and the cultural and intellectual origins of the English Revolution. By attending to a series of classical stories about lustful and incestuous tyrants, republican revolution, matricide, and Christian persecution, which were appropriated through imaginative literature and discourse, this dissertation argues that Englishmen developed a significant ethical and political vocabulary of tyranny that imagined and condemned misgovernance in highly gendered terms, characterizing the tyrant as effeminate, uxorious, idolatrous, violent, and enslaved. The following chapters maintain that this classical and gendered understanding of tyranny greatly affected English perceptions and public criticisms of King James and King Charles. Through an examination especially of John Milton’s writings, it further maintains that this discourse shaped the burgeoning republican vocabulary of seventeenth-century England, for conceptions of gender played a central and primary role in republican discourses of virtue, liberty, citizenship, and good governance, and marriage was envisioned as a significant republican institution. The study concludes by demonstrating the importance of classical and gendered conceptions of governance during the Interregnum, arguing that the grammar of tyranny developed in the Stuart period became a central criterion whereby republican writers understood, defended and criticized Oliver Cromwell and his government. Readers: John W. Marshall (advisor), Gabrielle Spiegel, J. G. A. Pocock, Mary E. Fissell, Sharon Achinstein ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In creating and completing this project, I have benefited from the generosity and friendship of a number of individuals and institutions, for which I am very grateful. I feel privileged to have such a committee of scholars reading and commenting on my work, including John W. Marshall, Gabrielle Spiegel, J. G. A. Pocock, Mary E. Fissell, and Sharon Achinstein, and I appreciate the time and energy that Gabrielle Spiegel, Richard Kagan, and David Bell gave to my formation at Johns Hopkins University. I am especially thankful for the supervision, dedication, friendship, and patience of John Marshall. I arrived at Hopkins with a diverse academic background, and it was John who made me a historian. This dissertation reflects many excellent discussions and seminars within the Hopkins community, including the European Seminar, Gender Seminar, and Philological Society, and the encouragement and support of a number of graduate students and peers: Amanda Herbert, Kenneth Shepard, Timothy Phin, Andrew Devereux, David Cassazza, Jessica Walker, Will Brown, Katie Hemphill, Heather Stein, Adam Bisno, Jessica Keene, Denis Robichaud, Nathan Daniels, and Neil Weijer. A special debt of gratitude is owed to Carolyn Salomons for her unwavering friendship and willingness to read and edit the entire dissertation draft. The support of scholars and institutions outside of Hopkins has been invaluable. I appreciate Quentin Skinner, Nigel Smith, Peter Lake, Clare Jackson, Thomas Cogswell, Aysha Pollnitz, Heather Wolfe, Rei Kanemura, Amy Blakeway, and Darcy Kern for guidance, conversations, and constructive feedback on earlier drafts of this work. I am iii also grateful for my colleagues at Mount Saint Mary’s University, especially Gregory Murry, and the enduring friendship of Marianna Stell and other individuals from Baylor University. Research for this project was made possible through the financial support of the Folger Shakespeare Library, Institute of Historical Research, Huntington Library, National Humanities Center, and Singleton Center, and I remain indebted to the Marshall Scholarship Commission for providing generous funds to begin my graduate education in the United Kingdom. The friends I made while pursuing graduate study in Belfast and Cambridge, including Lettie Ransley, Elaine Farrell, and Siobhan Connolly, have not only encouraged me but helped me discover and appreciate the peculiarities of English and Irish language and culture. I regularly take my work home, as I have been blessed with a husband who shares a love of learning, language, philosophy, and the intellectual past. This dissertation was only completed because of his support through conversation, reading, and exchange, and his daily willingness to share the responsibilities of household and parenthood. Thank you, Jessy. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 1. A Chaste Virginia: Tyranny and the Corruption of Law in 27 Jacobean England 2. “And thus did the wicked sonne murther his wicked mother”: 86 Nero and the Tyranny of Household and Gender in Late Jacobean England 3. The Neronian Charles 150 4. John Milton on Domestic Virtue, Public Liberty, and the 207 Failure of the Royal Marriage 5. “So much power and piety in one”: Oliver Cromwell in 251 Republican History Bibliography 307 Curriculum Vitae 341 v Introduction “IMP. IACOBVS MAX. CÆSAR AVG. P. P. PACE POPVULO BRITANNICO TERRA MARIQVE PARTA IANVM CLVSIT. S. C.”1 In his magnificent entrance to London on the Ides of March 1603/4, King James was hailed and celebrated as a new Caesar Augustus, ushering in “those golden times...returned again,” as Ben Jonson described through the words of Virgil, “wherein Peace was with vs so aduannced, Rest receaued, Libertie restored, Safetie assured, and all Blessednesse appearing in euery of these vertues her perticular Triumphe ouer her opposite euill.”2 Amongst the classical arches and scenes erected for the King’s entertainment and celebration, processors dramatically enacted the Virgilian prophecy of a peaceful empire by closing the gate of a reconstructed Temple of Janus upon which the words were inscribed: “James the greatest emperor, Caesar Augustus the Father of his Country, as peace has been brought forth for the British people on land and sea, a decree of the Senate has closed the gate.” By resurrecting “these dead rites” on British soil, Jonson fashioned James’s great procession as a triumphal entry of peace rather than war and his new King as possessing “strong and potent vertues” beyond those of Mars.3 These intricate devices, comprised of speeches, interludes, costumes, pageantry, and 1 Ben Jonson, His Part of King James his Royall and Magnificent Entertainment through his Honorable Cittie of London, Thurseday the 15. of March 1603 (London: 1604), sig. D1v. Jonson designed the first and last devices of the entertainment. 2 Ibid., sig. C2v. 3 Ibid., sig. Dv-D2r. See Stephen Orgel, James I and the Politics of Literature: Jonson, Shakespeare, Donne, and their Contemporaries (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1983), 28-54; Lawrence Manley, “Scripts for the Pageant: the Ceremonies of London,” in Literature and Culture in Early Modern London (Cambridge and NY: Cambridge UP, 1995), 212-93; David M. Bergeron, English Civic Pageantry, 1558- 1642, rev. ed. (Tempe, Ariz: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2003). 1 architectural staging, served as much more than amusement, festivity or flattery. They publicly legitimized a new sovereign upon his accession, establishing his nobility, virtue, power, and authority. Simultaneously, these devices, crafted through historical and mythical exempla, presented idealized political expectations for the King and Stuart family, qualities that the sovereign should possess and practice publicly and privately. Historical models of kingship such as these significantly shaped how Englishmen understood good governance and tyranny; by closely examining the vocabularies and ideas statesmen drew from the classical past, this dissertation will show the centrality of both historical and gendered conceptions of politics for Englishmen criticizing and challenging their monarch in the seventeenth century. As we will see, through classical stories of lustful tyrants, republican revolution, incestuous royalty, and persecution, Englishmen adopted a significant political and ethical vocabulary of monarchy and tyranny which condemned misgovernance in highly personal and gendered terms, casting the tyrant as effeminate, uxorious, idolatrous, and enslaved by vicious passions, mistresses, and false religion. The following study maintains that this conception of tyranny, which was developed principally through imaginative literature, significantly shaped the political and intellectual culture of England before, during and after the English Revolution and likewise shaped the character of English republican thought. Classical history and gendered conceptions of masculine governance and misgovernance, therefore, should be counted as part of the cultural and intellectual origins of the English Revolution and a significant contributor to its character. Early modern Englishmen made grand claims concerning the craft of history and its role in producing political knowledge. In the first English translation of Tacitus’s 2 Annals (1598), Richard Greneway characterized history as “the treasure of times past, and as well a guide, as image of mans present estate, a true and liuely pattern of things to come, and as some