A Comparative Analysis of the Role of the Woman in Spanish and English Renaissance Society, and its Literary Reflection in William Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew and Much Ado About Nothing, and Miguel de Cervantes' Don Quijote

Diplomarbeit

zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades einer Magistra der Philosophie

an der Geisteswissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz

Vorgelegt von Tanya RIDOUT

Am Institut für Anglistik Begutachter: Ao.Univ.-Prof. Mag. Dr.phil. Maria Löschnigg

Graz, November 2012

Acknowledgements

I would like to dedicate my diploma thesis to my Oma, Dr. phil Gertrude Haidmayer, who sadly passed away two years ago. Thank you for inspiring me with you passion for English literature, and for being such an amazing woman. You will never be forgotten.

A huge thank you also goes to my wonderful parents, Eva and Kelvin, who no matter what, are always there for me, offering me loving support and encouragement. Without you both, I would never have come this far.

Thank you also to my long-suffering boyfriend Florian, and my best friend Sara, for both your patience and for always believing in me.

Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 1 1. Social and Historical Background ...... 4 1.1 Women in Renaissance England and the Spanish Golden Age ...... 4 1.1.1 The Role of the Woman in English and Spanish Society ...... 5 1.1.2 Virginity, Chastity and the Double Standard ...... 6 1.1.3 Wives, Mothers and Unmarried Women ...... 9 1.1.4 Conduct Books ...... 13 1.1.5 Beauty ...... 16 1.1.6 Queen Elizabeth I ...... 17 1.2 European Humanism ...... 21 1.2.1 Women and Education ...... 21 1.3 Religion and the Treatment of Women ...... 25 1.3.1 The Church of England ...... 26 1.3.2 Spanish Catholicism...... 27 1.3.3 Islam in Spain ...... 29 2. The Writers ...... 32 2.1 William Shakespeare ...... 32 2.1.1 Brief Biography ...... 32 2.1.2 Women in the Life of Shakespeare ...... 34 2.1.3 Feminist and Anti-feminist Views on Shakespeare ...... 36 2.2 Miguel de Cervantes ...... 37 2.2.1 Brief Biography ...... 37 2.2.2 Women in the Life of Cervantes ...... 38 2.2.3 Feminist and Anti-feminist Views on Cervantes ...... 39 3. Textual Analysis ...... 42 3.1 Theory Behind the Analysis...... 42 3.2 The Taming of the Shrew ...... 43 3.2.1 Introduction to the Play ...... 43 3.2.2 Plot Summary...... 46 3.2.3 Analysis of the Female Characters in The Taming of the Shrew ...... 47 3.2.3.1 Katherina ...... 47 3.2.3.2 Bianca ...... 58 3.3 Much Ado About Nothing...... 63 3.3.1 Introduction to the Play ...... 63 3.3.2 Plot Summary...... 64

3.3.3 Analysis of the Female Characters in Much Ado About Nothing ...... 65 3.3.3.1 Beatrice ...... 65 3.3.3.2 Hero...... 74 3.3.3.3 Margaret ...... 81 3.4 Don Quijote ...... 84 3.4.1 Introduction to the Novel ...... 84 3.4.2 The Narrative Structure of Don Quijote ...... 85 3.4.3 Plot Summary of Part One and Part Two of Don Quijote ...... 87 3.4.4 Analysis of the Female Characters in Don Quijote ...... 89 3.4.4.1 Dulcinea ...... 89 3.4.4.2 Marcela ...... 93 3.4.4.3 Dorotea ...... 101 3.4.4.4 Teresa Panza ...... 107 3.4.4.5 Zoraida ...... 112 3.4.4.6 Camila ...... 118 3.4.4.7 La Duquesa ...... 123 3.4.4.8 Further Female Characters of Interest ...... 129 4. Conclusion ...... 135 5. Works Cited ...... 141

Introduction

During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, women throughout Europe were expected to be obedient, virtuous and silent. Without a doubt, they were second-class citizens in highly misogynistic societies, thoroughly dominated by men. Through the eyes of an authentic, real-life author, literature which dates back to the European Renaissance offers the modern-day reader an invaluable account of what life was really like for women, well before the feminist movement began. This thesis will compare and contrast sixteenth and seventeenth century women living in Spain, with those who lived in England, by analysing the main female literary characters which appear in the literary works of two different men who both bore witness to this period. These chosen writers are William Shakespeare and Miguel de Cervantes. William Shakespeare, the most famous playwright that ever lived, and Miguel de Cervantes, the creator of the modern novel and one of literature's most loveable and comical figures: Don Quijote. Two men from different countries, cultures and religions: one an English Protestant, the other a Spanish Catholic. However, both men share a common factor: they lived during the same period, in societies which were shaped by the European Renaissance and by the philosophical movement humanism, which played a key part in women's education. A further shared similarity is that both Shakespeare and Cervantes include a large number of female characters in their writings, many of which play a significant role in the text. Much research has been conducted on these women, as well as on Cervantes' and Shakespeare's personal feminist or misogynistic tendencies. However, up until now, there has been no study which directly compares and contrasts both writers' female figures with one another, in order to discover which of the two men was more radical or modern when it came to women's rights. Nor have comparisons been made between the English and the Spanish woman living during the Renaissance, based on the female characters which appear in Cervantes' and Shakespeare's literary masterpieces. This thesis will analyse the main female figures present in two of Shakespeare's plays, and contrast them with those which appear in Cervantes' classic novel, Don Quijote. Shakespeare's comedies The Taming of the Shrew and Much Ado About Nothing have been chosen, due to their shared theme of the 'battle of the sexes', the presence of dominant, strong-minded young women, as well as their inclusion of 1 women from different social ranks and marital statuses. Although Cervantes also wrote various plays and short stories, his most famous novel, Don Quijote, will be the focus of this thesis. The number of different female characters from varying backgrounds and ranks in society which appear in this novel is staggering. As a consequence, only those women who can be considered significantly important to the main storyline will be taken into account. The textual analysis of the plays and the novel will focus on the actual text, that is to say, the performance of Shakespeare's plays will not be taken into consideration, rather the written text itself. Likewise, the analysis will steer away from purely concentrating on feminist opinions, as this tends to give a one-sided view. Instead, an unbiased text-based analysis will be undertaken. The first part of this thesis will give an overview of the historical and social background of both Renaissance England and Spain. This is the prerequisite to ascertaining whether the writers' depiction of women offers an accurate account of real Renaissance women, or whether their characters represent more modern creations, which may have been considered revolutionary for sixteenth and seventeenth century readers and theatre audiences. Firstly, women in Renaissance England and the Spanish Golden Age will be investigated, along with their role in both societies. Next, the topics virginity, chastity and the double standard will be covered, as each of these subjects formed an important part of everyday life for Renaissance society, and can likewise be found in both Cervantes' and Shakespeare's texts. The following section will give a brief overview of the Renaissance concept of female beauty, in order to be able to evaluate whether the writers' physical descriptions of their female literary characters are typical of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and thus reflect these ideals. The chapter on wives, widows and unmarried women will describe the fate which awaited each of these different women, and the subsequent chapter on conduct books, will cover the constraints and restrictions they were faced with. One of England's most influential and powerful women, Queen Elizabeth I, is the focus of the next section, as she clearly rose above the naturally submissive fate assigned to Elizabethan women. The final two chapters will first cover humanism and female education, and second, religion. At first glance, religion was the main factor separating Protestant England from Catholic Spain, and must therefore be considered as a possible cause for potential differences arising between the two writers.

2

Part two of this thesis will begin with an overview of William Shakespeare and Miguel de Cervantes. Their personal backgrounds will be investigated, along with the role which women played in their lives. Finally, a summary of the main feminist and anti-feminist views concerning both Shakespeare and Cervantes will be given, as these have been at the centre of many heated debates regarding the writers' attitudes to women. The final and most ample part of this thesis will be dedicated to the textual analysis. Before beginning with the text, however, a brief overview to the theory behind the analysis will be given. As part of the textual analysis of the two Shakespearian plays, different techniques of characterisation will be explored in order to obtain a full picture of the female figures. In Cervantes' novel, the various narrative techniques will be investigated, as the narrator plays a key part in describing the female characters. The first text to be analysed will be The Taming of the Shrew, followed by Much Ado About Nothing. The final text to be analysed will be both parts of Don Quijote. At the start of each text, a short summary of the plot will be given, in case the reader is not familiar with the plays or the novel. The conclusion of this thesis aims to answer the following questions: were sixteenth and seventeenth century women treated and viewed the same in both Spain and England, despite different religions and cultures? Does the difference in Shakespeare's and Cervantes' nationalities and religious beliefs lead to contrasting female characters in their texts, or do both writers share similar views of women? Which of the writers can be considered more liberal, which more conservative? Can either writer be viewed as an early feminist? Or do their female characters comply with the traditional, restricted role prescribed to Renaissance women?

3

1. Social and Historical Background

1.1 Women in Renaissance England and the Spanish Golden Age

Many of the sexist opinions of women in Elizabethan England and Spain during the Golden Age were based on doubts originally articulated by Pluton, which questioned whether a woman could be considered a reasoning creature, or even whether she possessed a soul. Some, such as the seventeenth century English historian Thomas Fuller, believed that women were of a 'servile' nature and could be improved through beating, although he advised against it. Others, such as the playwright George Wilkins, advised that women should not be married, as they were not to be trusted and only brought misfortune. (cf. Stone 1977: 196-197) Such was the general mistrust of women in England and in Spain, that despite the high infant mortality rate, the birth of a girl was almost always regarded as a disgrace, the birth of a male child however, as a blessing. (cf. Fernández Álvarez 1974: 172) The following sections discuss the role of the woman in Renaissance England and Spain during the Golden Age, in an attempt to set the social and historical context for the content of Cervantes' novel and Shakespeare's two plays. The Spanish Golden Age refers to the period which began with the discovery of Latin America by Christopher Columbus in 1492, and lasted until 1659. This was an era during which Spain flourished in the arts, literature and political power. (cf. donquijote: online) The sections on virginity, chastity, beauty, marriage and conduct books seek to describe the lives which normal women faced in England and in Spain between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and the expectations they were forced to conform to, if they wanted to lead honest and virtuous lives. The final subchapter gives an overview of Queen Elizabeth's long reign and describes some of the obstacles she faced as a female monarch.

4

1.1.1 The Role of the Woman in English and Spanish Society

In Elizabethan England, there existed the widespread view that women were unsuited to wield power over men. Many men regarded women unable to think rationally and assumed they were solely governed by their passions. Women were therefore deemed fit only for housekeeping. (cf. Greenblatt et. al 2006: 493) This historical opinion of women is supported by the contemporary English historian Lawrence Stone, who writes that the ideal woman of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was "[…] weak, submissive, charitable, virtuous and modest […], [whose] function was housekeeping, and the breeding and rearing of children. In her behaviour she was silent in church and in the home, and at all times submissive to men." (Stone 1977: 198) This quote demonstrates the limited role women had in Renaissance England, and also indicates the barriers women had to overcome if they wanted to achieve more in life than motherhood and housewifery. Many of the views held during this period were enforced through the Church, as Renaissance orthodoxy viewed women as timid, passive, and tender of heart. Women demonstrating a courageous spirit, aggressiveness or tough-mindedness, were typically regarded as unnatural and not feminine. (cf. Woodbridge 1984: 214) Even Queen Elizabeth, a strong-minded and powerful woman, was not immune to the sexist scrutiny of her male advisors. Sir Thomas Smith, a professor of Law at Cambridge University and Elizabeth's own ambassador to France, held a highly critical view of women and did not consider them capable for higher matters. In his texts, Smith advises women to stay at home in order to "[…] nourish their familie [!] and children, and not to meddle in matters abroade, nor to beare office in a citie or a common wealth no more than children and infants." (Smith 1982: 64) Historical sources originating from Spain during the Golden Age evidently mimic Elizabethan England, as women likewise had an extremely restricted role in society. In his book which gives a historical and structural overview of the context in which Don Quijote was written, Xosé Estévez explains that: "La mujer tenía tres funciones: ordenar el trabajo doméstico, perpetuar la especie humana y satisfacer al varón." (The woman had three functions: to do the housework, to perpetuate the human race and to satisfy her husband. [This translation from Spanish into English, as well as all translations that follow, are my own.]) (Estévez 2005: 93) This is supported by the contemporary Spanish philologist Victoriano Santana Sanjurjo, who claims

5 that the role of the woman was so limited in Spanish society, that there were only four different categories available to women at this time: "Ser mujer es, en los tiempos que nos ocupan, ser doncella, casada, viuda o monja. Cualquier otro estado era inadecuado e indigno." (To be a woman during the period which we are concerned with, is to be a virgin, wife, widow or nun. Any other state was inadequate and dishonourable.) (Sanjurjo 2008: online) The categories mentioned by Sanjurjo subjected women to male control and oppression, and forced them to fulfil a certain role in order to remain honourable. They were therefore severely restricted in their behaviour, and had to surrender and conform to whatever was expected of them. (cf. Cruz 1996: 47)

1.1.2 Virginity, Chastity and the Double Standard

Lawrence Stone claims that the importance of virginity in the English woman between the fourteenth and seventeenth centuries may be explained by the fact that women were considered the sexual property of men, and the general view of property is that its value diminishes if it has been used or is being used by anyone other than its legal owner. (cf. Stone 1977: 503) Virginity is also discussed in Shakespeare and the Nature of Women by Juliet Dusinberre, who writes that virginity, which had its origin in orthodox Catholic theology, was a class ideal related to property. In other words, virginity was more cherished among people belonging to the upper class, who had more property to dispose of. Furthermore, Dusinberre argues that it was common for a woman who lost her virginity before she married to be denied her inheritance, and thus lose her financial value. (cf. Dusinberre 1975: 51-52) It was therefore vital for every woman to be a virgin at the time of marriage, providing she wanted to maintain her worth, honour and reputation. Although virginity was a requirement for all middle and upper-class women who wanted to marry, the same cannot be said for men. In the Early Modern Period, a 'double standard' of sexual behaviour prevailed in England. Whereas a husband was permitted to gain some sexual experience before entering into marriage, his wife was expected to remain untouched until her wedding night. It was claimed that an experienced man would make a better husband, however, an experienced woman was

6 by no means considered to make a virtuous wife, and would instead find herself shunned as a whore. (cf. Dusinberre 1975: 56) Unfaithfulness in marriage also raised double standards. It was advised that any infidelities committed by the husband after the wedding should be overlooked by his wife, who herself was obligated to remain chaste and faithful at all times. (cf. Stone 1977: 501) Valerie Traub defines chastity as "[…] virginity for an unmarried woman, and monogamous fidelity for a married woman […]." (Traub 2001: 130) The following quote by Dusinberre offers an insight into the serious issue of an Elizabethan woman's chastity: "A man who is unchaste loses nothing in the eyes of the world. A woman who is unchaste is nothing." (Dusinberre 1975: 53) The woman's commitment to chastity in the sixteenth century is where the great difference between the male and the female concept of honour lies. A man would immediately lose his honour if he lied or was dishonest to another man. In contrast, the greatest error a woman could commit, and that which would lead to her dishonour, was unfaithfulness to her husband. Thus, a woman's honour and good reputation fully depended upon her chastity. (cf. Stone 1977: 503) The double standard was strengthened by humanists throughout Europe. Juan Luis Vives, one of the most widely read humanist authors of the sixteenth century, was as popular in Spain as he was in England. In his famous book Instruction of a Christen Woman, he is highly critical of female infidelity and labels an adulteress as the ultimate sinner and the reason for a husband to leave his wife and end their marriage. In his texts, Vives never considers the implications an unfaithful husband may have on his marriage, nor does he see it as a reason for a woman to reject her husband. Different morals for men and women were also part of every-day life in Renaissance Spain. Whilst family honour was judged by a woman's purity, a man was able to have adventures with other women without this affecting his honour. Spanish men were seen to have two contrasting roles, on the one hand, that of defending their family's honour by ensuring that their wives were faithful and chaste, and on the other hand, that of assuming a 'Don Juan' role of courting other women whilst being married, something which no wife had the right to deny them. (cf. Fernández Álvarez 1974: 161) Indeed, female sexuality was solely considered male property and every husband enjoyed full rights over the sexual services of his wife. Petra Dodell notes that a father owned his daughter's virginity until she was married, upon which her 7 chastity became the property of her husband, something that she herself had not direct control over. (cf. Dodell 2005: 59) Along with carrying out domestic chores and bearing children, women were also obliged to defend their honour. In sixteenth and seventeenth century Spain, a woman was only considered honourable if she remained a virgin until she married: "[...] su única virtud, al menos su virtud fundamental, era la castidad. La Edad Media había proclamado el celibato y la abstinencia sexual como una ventaja y un mérito." (Her only virtue, apart from her basic virtue, was chastity. The Middle Ages had proclaimed celibacy and sexual abstinence as an advantage and a merit.) (cf. Ureña 1985: 20) Estévez also highlights that 'honestidad' (honesty), 'castidad' (chastity), 'virtud' (virtue) and 'honradez' (honour) were all attributes expected of women during this era. (cf. Estévez 2005: 94). A further quote which demonstrates the importance given to a woman's honour is the following: "[…] con la deshonra de una mujer se deshonran todos los varones de la familia, y por ello estarán obligados, por medio del honor, a defender su propia honra depositada en la mujer." (With the dishonour of a woman, all the men in her family likewise became disgraced and were therefore responsible for defending their own honour which lay within the woman.) (cf. Sánchez Lora 1988: 51-52) The responsibility each woman had for keeping the honour of her family thus justifies the strict guidelines which she had to abide to. If a Spanish woman was dishonoured before marriage, in other words, if it was proven that she was not a virgin, her parents had the duty of quickly finding a husband for their daughter, who did not have much choice in the matter. Her parents would arrange the marriage, often having to choose an old man, as younger men would refuse to marry an impure woman. Other women were sent to convents, far away from their families, in an attempt to erase the shame brought to them by their daughters. (cf. Fernández Álvarez 1974: 171) In most cases, a woman who lost her virginity before marriage was still able to find a husband who would support her financially. Not all women, however, were so lucky. Often, women fell pregnant out of wedlock, regardless of whether by choice or not. These unfortunate women immediately lost their honour and suffered harsh consequences. If they failed to marry before giving birth, they were left with only two choices: to abort the unborn child which came at a considerable risk to the mother, or to secretly give birth and abandon the newly born baby. Many women chose the latter, which almost always ended in the

8 child's death, unless it was adopted by kind people with enough financial resources. (cf. Fernández Álvarez 1974: 163) José Calvo claims that the high number of abandoned new-born babies in Spain was not the result of pre-marital sex, but of extramarital affairs many women engaged in. (cf. Calvo 1989: 52-53) This claim questions whether Spanish women really obeyed the rules and regulations they were subjected to, or whether they chose to ignore them. Petra Dodell challenges this image of unfaithful Spanish women by referring to Juan Luis Vives' Formación, a manual which instructed women on how to behave. In this manual, the famous Spanish humanist claims that: "A la adúltera se le aplica el máximo castigo que la ley permita." (An adulteress should receive the highest possible punishment allowed by law.) (cf. Dodell 2005: 60) The threat of severe punishment served as an earnest warning to women considering unfaithfulness to their husbands, and it was thought that the fear of punishment would make them reconsider any rash decisions.

1.1.3 Wives, Mothers and Unmarried Women

In Renaissance England, there was a general distrust towards unmarried women, pressurising them into marriage and into assuming the role of a passive wife and dutiful mother. Upon marriage, women were expected to comply with their husbands' wishes, take care of the household, and bear as many male children as possible. They had little or no say in any matters of importance, which went beyond the confinements of their home. In the seventeenth century, the scientific explanation which served to justify women's 'natural' inferiority to men was taken from Aristotle's writings. In these, the celebrated philosopher writes that although women and men have a soul and are made in the image of God, women are inferior to men as they were created from man and after man, and therefore need to be guided by their husbands and willingly submit to authority. (cf. Jardine 1989: 40) Women were constantly reminded of their inferiority which began as soon as they were born, for it was expected that a woman should learn to be submissive and obedient to her father in her family home whilst growing up, as this obedience would later be necessary in marriage. (cf. Morant 2005: 44)

9

There is a lot of evidence showing the general consensus about the female subordinate role with regard to the husband. The sixteenth century scholar Sir Thomas Smith, who in his texts discusses the role of women as wives, states that women are always under the power of their husbands. He describes the event of marriage as an exchange of goods, where fathers in effect 'sell' their daughters for gold and silver. He also comments upon the loss of a woman's property which immediately becomes her husband's upon marriage. (cf. Smith 1982: 130-132) This is supported by Stone, who claims that through marriage, husband and wife became one person by law, and all of a woman's personal property became her husband's, which he had a right to sell whenever he chose to. (cf. Stone 1977: 195) This demonstrates the complete lack of a woman's basic rights, even regarding her own property and finances which were legally taken from her and handed over to her husband as soon as the transaction of marriage was sealed. In England, in the early sixteenth century, marriage was predominantly seen as a means of procreation, as the high adult mortality rate often did not allow for companionship to develop. Indeed, there was less than a fifty-fifty chance that husband and wife would both live to see their eldest child leave home. (cf. Stone 1977: 103) Childbirth was a very dangerous experience and one of the main factors responsible for the untimely death of women, especially as the majority of midwives were untrained and ignorant. Furthermore, due to a general lack of hygiene, many women sustained a fever after giving birth, which in the majority of cases proved fatal. From the sixteenth to the nineteenth century, three out of four first marriages ended due to the death of the wife, during or shortly after childbirth. (cf. Stone 1977: 79-80) An extremely high mortality rate for women was likewise found in sixteenth and seventeenth century Spain, as noted by Lidia Falcón: "[…] la mortalidad materna era tan alta en aquellos siglos que […] prácticamente ninguna [mujer] llegaba a ver a todos sus hijos adultos." (The death rate for mothers was so high in those centuries that practically no woman lived to see all her children reach adulthood.) (cf. Falcón 1997: 73) This sad fact is reflected in Don Quijote, as the majority of young female characters, for example, Marcela, Dorotea, Zoraida and Diego de la Llana's daughter, are all motherless. Certainly, the mothers who do appear in the novel, such as Teresa Panza, are far less common than those women who have no children. Anne J. Cruz argues that the marked absence of mother figures in Golden Age literature, is not only 10 an indication for the high mortality rate, but also demonstrates the general low value given to mothers in society. Those works which do include a mother figure usually attribute negative features to her maternal character. (cf. Cruz 1996: 45) Literature of the time thus not only reflects, but also perpetuates the stereotype about mothers and women in general, namely, that they should remain at home or locked in convents, as they had no right to a life outside these confined spaces. (cf. Cruz 1996: 61) As so many women died during childbirth, it was not uncommon for men to marry again, having two or three wives during their lifetime. (cf. Estévez 2005: 93) In a country where food was scarce and illness and disease an everyday threat, it is not surprising that many men also died young, leaving their widowed wives solely in charge of the family. In Spain during the Middle Ages, prostitution was legally controlled by authorities. Women whose husbands had died or had left them, young orphaned girls, victims of violence, as well as other vulnerable women, often saw prostitution as the only way to escape a life of poverty and desperation. Any woman wanting to work as a prostitute had to be over the age of twelve and had to have already lost her virginity. By working as prostitutes, these women, who were without male protectors, lost their honour and were marginalised by the rest of society. However, as the majority of women had already lost their honour and good reputation prior to selling their bodies, many felt that they had nothing more left to lose. (cf. Monzón 2005: 380; 383) In rich or noble English families of the sixteenth century, relations between the married couple were often remote, as both had their own chambers and attendants, and socialising was always separate as men met in alehouses and women met at each other's houses. Consequently, there was little time left to spend with one another, often resulting in a lack of love and affection between husband and wife. (cf. Stone 1977: 102) Frequently, a strong bond was not even allowed to form between mother and child, as most babies born to upper-class English women were given to wet- nurses to be taken care of until they were weaned. (cf. Hays 1983: 83) Thus, many noble English households during the Renaissance were places where love and strong emotional bonds between family members were rare occurrences. Marriages within wealthy English families were commonly arranged by the parents as a form of transaction, with the aim of an economic deal or political alliance between the two families. The majority of young women accepted without question the husbands their parents chose for them. Occasionally however, women would run 11 away from home and marry in secret. Indeed, this occurs in Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew, where Bianca elopes with Lucentio and gets married without her father's knowledge. (cf. V.i.103) Through arranged marriages, the bride and groom often did not know each other until their wedding day. Therefore, the emotional bond between them was left to develop with time. If an emotional tie never emerged between husband and wife, the husband was permitted to find sexual gratification elsewhere, by means of a mistress or through casual liaisons. (cf. Stone 1977: 102) Needless to say, the same did not apply to the woman, thus resulting in a 'double standard' (see chapter 1.1.2 'Virginity, Chastity and the Double Standard). Although there were strict rules about remaining a virgin until marriage, many women in Elizabethan England found themselves pregnant before, like, for instance, Ann Hathaway, William Shakespeare's wife. The contemporary English historian Peter Laslett, who compared the register of Renaissance marriages with that of christenings in the same parishes, was surprised to find that many children were christened within the first nine months of marriage, proving that they had been conceived outside of wedlock. (cf. Greer 2007: 122) This was not always seen as a disgrace, providing the woman was engaged to the father of the unborn child and could quickly be married, as was the case with the Shakespeares. Many children, however, were not lucky enough to be born to married parents, as even after promises of marriage, it was always possible for men to break off an engagement and desert their often already pregnant partners. Germaine Greer describes the sad cases of the fatherless children during Shakespeare's time, who were brought each year to the Holy Trinity Church in Stratford-upon-Avon to be christened. Next to these children's names, the words 'bastard' or in Latin 'northa' or 'northus' are recorded. Pregnant women would often have to be tortured so that they would reveal the identity of the father of their unborn child. Women were frequently refused help during childbirth until the child's father was named. Once the father of the child was officially recognised, he would be expected to offer financial support. The new-born baby would usually be left with the mother until it was weaned, before being transferred to the custody of its father's household. After giving birth, many women would leave their home and child behind, in order to seek their fortune elsewhere, as they would often find themselves ostracised by their community. (cf. Greer 2007: 78-79)

12

In Renaissance Spain, unmarried women faced similar prospects to those in England. Women who remained single and did not marry were frowned upon and regarded with suspicion, except for those who entered convents and became nuns. Single women with children who had been consummated outside wedlock were marginalised by catholic society. (cf. Ortega 2005: 330) Young, unmarried ladies of the middle or upper classes faced strong confinements in their daily lives. These women were known as 'doncellas', a term used to refer to a girl from the onset of puberty to the age she was married. Whenever a 'doncella' wished to leave the house, she had to be under the constant supervision and accompaniment of her mother or of an older woman. (cf. Ortega 2005: 331) Outside her home, she was discouraged from lifting her gaze, especially at men, and instead encouraged to stay silent and invisible. Juan Luis Vives was of the opinion that staying at home was more convenient for a young woman, as this would prevent her from talking to and getting to know new people who could lead her astray and endanger her purity. (cf. Cacho 1995: 195) Although these strict rules served the purpose of guarding a girl's virginity and preventing her from being corrupted, the constant vigilance severely restricted privacy outside the home until marriage. Compared to English or French women, the majority of Spanish women married young, aged between nineteen and twenty-one. (cf. Calvo 1989: 56) The reason for this may have been to escape the strict confinements forced upon them as young, unmarried women.

1.1.4 Conduct Books

Conduct books which provided women with advice on how to behave, were bestsellers during the Renaissance in Spain, as well as in England. There were conduct books on marriage, housekeeping, and on general behaviour for daily life. These conduct books came in different forms, either as manuals, dialogues, or as commentaries. Their readers were women who sought guidance on how to lead an honest and godly life, and on ways of self-improvement. The conduct books which appeared between 1500 and 1700 can be said to correspond to the modern self-help books which prove just as popular with twenty-first century female readers. (cf. Wayne 1996: 56)

13

In Renaissance England, books which gave advice on marriage were among the more popular and widely read conduct books. They were called 'marriage manuals' and consisted of essays written by Protestants in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and functioned as the basis for a happy marriage. Marriage manuals insisted on the power of marriage to ensure the prosperity and health of mankind. Although love was a key component for a successful marriage, Margaret Lael Mikesell points out that this 'love' "[…] was however based upon strict observance of hierarchy within the household." (Mikesell 2002:107) For many writers of Renaissance conduct books, the contrasting duties of husbands and wives can be summarised as follows: "[…] a man's authority is vested through love, and a woman's love through her obedience." (Mikesell 2002: 107) In early marriage manuals, English women were organised into the following three categories: maid, wife and widow (it should be noted that the previously mentioned categories in chapter 1.1.1 for Spanish women of the Renaissance differ to those for English women, as in Protestant England, the fourth category 'nun' was not available.). Of these three categories of women, 'wife' was considered to be the ideal. In early modern drama, the topic of transforming defective maids and independent widows into well-behaved wives was a popular theme. This theme also served as inspiration for comic plays on unruly wives and incompetent husbands, such as Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew. (cf. McNeill 2007: 1) In Renaissance Spain, marriage was a woman's main preoccupation, which led many to consult marriage manuals for advice on how to become virtuous and obedient wives. (cf. Calvo 1989: 54-55) One of the most famous marriage manuals ever written was by the Spanish theologian and scholar, fray Luis de León. In his book La perfecta casada (The Perfect Wife), published in 1583, he advises women on their duties as wives and encourages them to stay silent and ignorant, as they were not created for studying sciences but rather for housekeeping. (cf. Sanjurjo 2008: online) A Spanish family's objective was to teach their daughters obedience and passivity rather than education and knowledge, the latter not being considered appropriate for young women. In La perfecta casada, Luis de León justifies the unequal status of women by explaining that women were purely created to take care of the household, which causes them to be silent and passive. They were not made to be educated in the sciences, or to worry about complicated matters. According to Luis de León's manual, women merely serve a domestic purpose, which in turn limits their understanding and 14 restricts their intelligence. (cf. Dodell 2005: 73) This and other literary sources of the Renaissance demonstrate the shared belief that women were intellectually, morally and physically inferior to men, making them the lesser sex and therefore justifying their subordinate position in society. In 1531, Juan Luis Vives published The Instruction of a Christen Woman. This conduct book became famous throughout Europe and was translated into various different languages, also into Spanish, as it was hoped that a wider audience would thus be reached. The original version was dedicated to Catherine of Aragon, who served as an inspiration for Vives on how an ideal woman should behave. (cf. Morant 2005: 32-35) This book had the function of moulding wives, widows and single women of all ages into what men considered perfect. In the text, Vives instructs men to use correction to govern women, and urges women to obey men by letting themselves be governed. He considers correction to consist of two contradictory impulses: ruling or governing an individual, and teaching the subject how to rule itself. For Vives, discipline was fundamental in both marriage and government. (cf. McNeill 2007: 174) María Teresa Cacho quotes Vives who, like Luis de León, also advises women to stay silent when in the company of others:

El mejor consejo que les podemos dar es rogarles que se callen, y ya que son poco sabias, se esfuercen en ser mucho calladas [...] porque en todas es, no solo condición agradable, sino virtud debida, el silencio y el hablar poco. (The best advice that we can give them is to be silent because they are not very intelligent, so it is best they remain silent as silence is not only a pleasant state, but also a required virtue.) (Cacho 1995: 192)

According to The Instruction of a Christen Woman, eloquence is a skill that women do not require, as it is something they do not need. Vives argues that silence is the most important skill a woman should have: she is expected to blush with unease when asked to directly address male company, and this is what makes her truly eloquent. (cf. Dodell 2005: 58) There is a clear different between the works of fray Luis de León and Juan Luis Vives, as Vives wrote from England, focussing on an urban population of intellectuals, while Luis de León wrote from Spain, describing a rural population made up of the working class. However, both texts focus on female perfection, something which was virtually impossible for a real woman to acquire. The examples

15 given of perfect women seem to be only of the elite and superior, something any normal woman could never reach. (cf. Morant 2005: 55-56) Cacho also holds the view that the feminine image encouraged by the humanist educators had little in common with the real, average woman at that time. Humanists wrote how women should be and not how they actually were and therefore, as Cacho calls it, assumed the role of a modern-day 'Pygmalion'. As a consequence, Cacho concludes that texts such as conduct books functioned as models for unrealistic female perfection from a male point of view. (cf. Cacho 1995: 177-178) Thus, they can be considered sexist and at times even misogynistic, brainwashing many women who were avid readers of such conduct books into taking their inferiority and imperfection for granted.

1.1.5 Beauty

During the Renaissance period in England and in Spain, like in many other European countries, there were very strict guidelines on what was considered a beautiful woman. According to the sixteenth century French philosopher Pierre Charron, aesthetically pleasing women had the following well-proportioned facial features: thin eyebrows, bright eyes, thin noses, small, delicate mouths, ruby red lips, dimples in their delicate chins, high cheekbones and round ears. In contrast, women with dark skin tones, fat lips, large, flat noses, large, hanging ears and low foreheads were considered ugly. (cf. Biewer 2006: 154). It was believed that physical appearance reflected the person's character. Thus, a beautiful woman displayed a good character and an ugly woman, one who did not dispose of said features, a bad and evil character. The use of ugliness as an insult to someone's personality is often demonstrated in Shakespeare's plays. For example, in Act I of Much Ado About Nothing, Benedick and Beatrice offend each other by commenting on their ugly faces as a way of insulting each other's characters. (I.i.99-102) (cf. Biewer 2006: 154) Women with a naturally dark complexion, such as the majority of Spanish women, could only achieve the Renaissance beauty ideal by altering their natural features. Consequently, the use of make-up and other cosmetics was incredibly popular with Spanish women living during the Golden Age. Indeed, heavily made-up women were often commented on by foreigners who were surprised by their

16 exaggerated use of cosmetics. Based on the unnatural idea of beauty as proposed by the fourteenth century Italian Francesco Petrarch, Spanish women of all social classes would whiten their faces to make themselves as pale as possible, and paint their lips and their cheeks red, in order to accentuate these features. Their eyebrows and eyes were also carefully highlighted to make them stand out. (cf. Calvo 1989: 40) As will be demonstrated later on in this thesis, the female character Dulcinea, the imaginary woman who Don Quijote worships, is the exact image of the Petrarchan ideal of beauty. The contemporary Spanish author Lidia Falcón points out the absurd and unrealistic descriptions of beautiful women by Spanish authors at that time:

Damas de belleza extraordinaria, de cabellos de oro y ojos verde esmeralda […] en tiempos en que ni los cuidados de salud ni los inventos en cosmética permitían desarrollar ni mantener hermosuras muy admirables. (Women of extraordinary beauty, with golden hair and emerald green eyes, at a time where neither health care nor cosmetic inventions allowed for them to display or maintain such remarkable beauty.) (Falcón 1997: 24)

This argument demonstrates that the model for physical perfection which was expected of women during the Renaissance was unrealistic and ridiculous, and something which probably only the rich and elite, with access to luxury and cosmetics, had any chance of fulfilling. It can therefore be presumed that the Renaissance ideal of beauty was similar to the advice on female perfection presented in conduct books, as both can be considered unrealistic and responsible for pressurising women to conform to standards which were largely unattainable.

1.1.6 Queen Elizabeth I

Previous to England's infamous Queen Elizabeth I, Spain had also had its fair share of female monarchs, including Isabella la Católica (Isabel the Catholic), who reigned in the fifteenth century. At the young age of seventeen, Isabella came to the throne after the death of her brother Alfonso in 1468. Her role as queen was to be a loving wife to her husband, and to provide her country with a male heir to guarantee the succession of the Spanish dynasty. (cf. Pérez Samper 2005: 409) In accordance to her mother's

17 wishes, Isabella received a wide-ranging, solid education which was remarkable even for a queen. Isabella owned a library with over two hundred books (a rarity in those days), and also made sure that all her children received an excellent education. (cf. Dodell 2005: 44) Catalina, the youngest surviving daughter of Isabella and her husband Ferdinand, was sent to England in 1501 to marry Arthur, son of King Henry VII. This political move served to link both countries through the same royal bloodline of monarchs, thus strengthening the bond between England and Spain. (cf. Eakins: online) Upon arriving in England, Catalina, more widely known by the name of Catherine of Aragon, was to become one of the most cultivated women Britain had ever seen. (cf. Cacho 1995: 203) When Henry VII's eldest son Arthur unexpectedly died in 1502, his younger son Henry took Arthur's place as next in line to the English throne. Not only did Henry VIII become King of England in 1509, but he was also married to his brother's widow, the Spanish Catherine of Aragon, as Catherine's marriage to Arthur had supposedly never been consummated. (cf. Strong 1998: 159) In spring 1527, Henry blamed the marriage to his brother's widow, something explicitly forbidden in the Bible and therefore sinful in the eyes of God, as the reason behind their unfruitful marriage: his forty-year-old Queen, who was already past child-bearing age, had failed to provide him with a male heir. The King accepted the absence of a son as punishment for having sinned, and decided he must divorce his wife if he ever wanted to father a son and secure the Tudor line of succession. (cf. Strong 1998: 167) Without the Catholic Church's consent, Henry divorced Catherine in 1534 and married Anne Boleyn, a maid of honour to Margaret of Austria. After entering the Tudor court and playing the game of courtly love with her many admirers, Anne Boleyn succeeded in catching the King's attention. Henry's passions for Anne Boleyn led him to divorce his wife, although the official argument remained that he was compelled to divorce Catherine because it was his role as king to father a male heir. (cf. Schama 2002: film) As a consequence of the divorce, all previous ties to Rome were severed and a year later, Henry VIII declared himself 'Supreme Head of the Church of England'. Hereby, he became a more powerful leader than the Pope had ever been who, with his seat in distant Rome, had no direct control over the lives of the English people. (cf. Greenblatt et. al 2006: 491) Although now officially broken away from the Roman Catholic Church at a time when the Reformation was going on in the rest of Europe, England remained 18 largely the same, and was in essence still Catholic. (cf. Strong 1998: 167) The only real change that occurred was that Henry had made himself head of the Church, and that the churches themselves were stripped from their former pomp and splendour. After Henry's death in 1547, England underwent a series of major religious changes. Henry's successor, his nine-year-old son Edward who was shaped by his strong Protestant upbringing, brutally destroyed everything that had remained from the old, Catholic traditions. (cf. Schama 2002: film) Following his short reign, Roman Catholicism was briefly restored by Edward's half-sister Mary (more commonly known as 'Bloody Mary' due to her religious fanaticism which had strongly been influenced by her Catholic mother, Catherine of Aragon.). It was Elizabeth, Henry's daughter from his second marriage to Anne Boleyn, who once again broke away from Catholicism and made the Anglican Church of England the state religion, which, like her father before her, she became head of. (cf. Lewes 1895: 4-7) Nonetheless, her succession was by no means assured, as Catholics throughout Europe considered her to be illegitimate, as she was the product of Henry's unlawful marriage to Anne Boleyn. (cf. Greenblatt et. al 2006: 492) According to the contemporary historian Simon Schama, twenty-five-year-old Elizabeth lacked the religious fanaticism which her two siblings before her had shown. She was intent on returning things to the way they had been at her father's death. Due to this desire of reviving the past, right from the very start of her reign, she was regarded by the people as a true patriot, a true English queen. Although some people considered it to be a misfortune to have yet another woman on the throne, from early on, Elizabeth proved capable of 'manly authority'. She came across as frightening and majestic, and did everything women of the sixteenth century were not supposed to do: she looked men straight in the eyes and spoke out of turn. (cf. Schama 2002: film) Roger Ascobme was Elizabeth's tutor and taught her the art of rhetoric, which was to become her strongest political weapon. Physically, she was described as a "tall young woman of commanding presence, with auburn hair and piercing grey- black eyes." (Schama 2002: film) She had a sound judgement when it came to selecting officials for her court, a high intellect and the quality of evasiveness, which often allowed her to escape from a tight political corner. (cf. Strong 1998: 191) The historian and Renaissance expert Lisa Jardine supports these claims in the following citation:

19

There is no doubt that Elizabeth I was sharp-witted and intelligent, and that this made her a surprisingly active and astute politician (surprising for a Renaissance monarch, male or female). She also benefited from a humanistic education of exceptionally high quality. (Jardine 1989: 170)

In 1588, Elizabeth gave a famous speech ahead of a fierce battle between her English soldiers and the great Spanish Armada, which was sent to England to dethrone the Queen and re-establish Catholicism. Elizabeth, wearing a breastplate, viewed her army of seventeen thousand troops and gave the greatest speech of her reign, which not only demonstrates her courage, power, and brilliant mastery of rhetorical language, but also her ability to acknowledge the weakness of her sex and her wish to be treated as though she were a man:

[…] I come amongst you…being resolved in the midst and heat of battle to live or die amongst you all. To lay down for God and for my kingdom and for my people my honour and my blood even in the dust. I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England too […]. (cf. Strong 1998: 203)

After many years on the throne, Elizabeth continued to avoid marriage as she always found something wrong with each of her many different suitors. (cf. Schama 2002: film) Elizabeth's long reign and her refusal to marry, continuously called into question and challenged the patriarchal subordination of women, as she so purposefully strove against what was considered natural for the weaker sex. (cf. Suzuki 2000: 121) During her reign, rumours often circulated concerning liaisons and illegitimate births, tainting her image as the 'Virgin Queen'. Interestingly, this malicious gossip was frequently initiated by women, demonstrating that even they felt threatened by Elizabeth who, instead of conforming to gender norms, remained unmarried and childless. (cf. Suzuki 2000: 122) When Elizabeth died in 1603, she left England without an heir. Some argued that she had not fulfilled her purpose as a woman, as she never married and failed to give her country posterity. Nonetheless, the vast majority of the population was shocked at her death and mourned their Queen with unprecedented grief. After all, she had been England's sole ruling monarch for over forty years and was therefore a trusted patriotic figure. (cf. Thomas 2012: online) After her death, her Scottish nephew, James I, took her place on the English throne, ending the line of the Tudors and starting the new Stuart dynasty. (cf. Schama 2002: film) 20

1.2 European Humanism

Humanism was a philosophical movement which began in fourteenth century Italy, then spread to Spain, and finally reached England two hundred years later. In England, this educational movement flourished from 1515 to 1550 and continued to have a significant influence from the late sixteenth century onwards. (cf. Smith 1996: 9-11) During this period, humanists studied the works of Greek and Roman antiquity, in an attempt to restore corrupted or lost texts. By studying these ancient sources, humanists aimed to recover lost ideas and knowledge, and to establish a pure writing style. (cf. Strong 1998: 175) Education was a key feature of humanism and proved fundamental in widening women's spectrums and giving them a greater purpose in life than that of mere housewives. But did humanism really offer a significant change for women in Renaissance England and Spain? Or did they remain excluded from yet another male-dominated movement?

1.2.1 Women and Education

During the Renaissance, there was a brief period (between 1520 and 1560) when as a result of the endeavours of English humanist scholars, a handful of educated aristocratic women appeared in society, proving to be just as capable in the classic languages as men. Education for women was predominantly aimed at the upper class. Vives was of the opinion that due to their domestic duties, middle and lower-class women did not have time for education, and only needed to understand religion and home management. However, as aristocratic women had servants in charge of the household and were thus exempt from housewifely duties, they were able to receive a proper education as they had more time available. (cf. Dusinberre 1975: 210) Richard Mulcaster, another English humanist, distinguished between the various needs for women's education, based on their future vocation. He argued that those women who would become wives, should be trained in obedience and housewifery, whilst those

21 who had to make a living by themselves, should receive instruction in a particular trade. He concluded that women of the highest rank and at the top of the social scale should receive the highest education. (cf. Smith 1996: 20) Queen Elizabeth, who was fluent in Latin, Greek, French and Italian, is an example of a woman who was a direct product of Renaissance education. (cf. Stone 1977: 203) This education was encouraged by humanists such as Juan Luis Vives, Sir Thomas More, Erasmus of Rotterdam, and even by Catherine of Aragon, Henry VIII's first wife. Indeed, Catherine of Aragon was responsible for bringing the Spanish humanist Vives to England in order to educate her daughter Mary. Catherine was highly respected by humanists and was regarded as a scholar. (cf. Dusinberre 1975: 200-201) The extent of these two noble women's education however, cannot be generalised to the majority of upper-class women, as only those of royalty were educated to such a high standard. Despite the fact that education was promoted by humanists, women continued to be denied access to grammar schools, universities or the Inns of Court, and instead received their education at home. Although they were generally taught how to read as a result of the Protestant emphasis on the reading of the Scripture, girls were rarely taught how to write, as this was viewed as a useless or even a dangerous skill for women to possess. (cf. Greenblatt et. al 2006: 500) There were, however, divided opinions within the moralists regarding reading. On the one hand, some believed reading was a dangerous skill to teach women, as it would disrupt the natural balance of motherhood and housewifery. Literate women would be able to access books containing contrasting opinions and ideas to those of their husbands, which may result in a rebellion. Reading could also distract women from their domestic duties and tempt them into adultery by giving them the needed skill to be able to write letters to their lovers. On the other hand, only by teaching them to read, would it be possible for women to access the conduct books which directly addressed them and informed them of their inferior status and on how they could improve themselves and become better wives and mothers. (cf. Cacho 1995: 203-204) Sir Thomas More, England's most famous humanist, was born in London and grew up during the period when the great cultural revival of the Renaissance finally came to England. (cf. Strong 1998: 175) Evidence for Sir Thomas More's liberal thinking can be seen by the fact that he made certain that his daughters, not just his son, received a solid education and were schooled in both the arts and the classics. By 22 her early twenties, More's daughter Margaret was easily able to translate works by Erasmus, correct the Latin of church fathers, and write her own original religious essays in English, later translating them into Latin. However, regardless of having encouraged Margaret's learning, her father failed to draw attention to his daughter's intelligence and instead favoured a limited life for her, which demonstrates the futility of a woman receiving such a brilliant education. (cf. Smith 1996: 26) Although Sir Thomas More did not consider women to be intellectually equal to men, he still believed they should not be denied an education, as educated women would have the practical advantage of being able to teach their children to read, as well as being able to offer their husbands intellectual companionship. (cf. Dusinberre 1975: 203-204) This was the general view held by humanists, who were strong believers that an educated woman made a better wife than an uneducated one. (cf. Dusinberre 1975: 112) John Bean writes that humanists attacked medieval notions about women and matrimony, and considered themselves to be marriage reformers campaigning for companionship between husband and wife and an end to male tyranny and the belief that the woman was some kind of servant, whose sole purpose in marriage was housework and domestic chores. (cf. Bean 1983: 69) Like in England, female education in Spain was also very much a matter of class and limited in its quality. Fray Martín de Córdoba, a Spanish Agustin, was of the opinion that only privileged upper-class women should receive an education. He was also a firm believer that women were able to overcome the physical and mental weaknesses they were born with, in their quest for knowledge. (cf. Dodell 2005: 50- 51) Other Spanish humanists were not so optimistic in their views on female education. José Luis Sánchez Lora quotes the sixteenth century Spanish physician Huarte de San Juan, who, in Examen de ingenious para las ciencias, claims that anyone wishing to educate their children in humanities should hope for a son, as due to their indifference and insensibility, girls can never be successful in this field. Furthermore, he argues that women are only able to discuss simple subjects using basic, common terms, and once immersed in humanities, are only capable of learning a little Latin by using their memory and not their skills and knowledge. (cf. Sánchez Lora 1988: 49) Juan Luis Vives' Instruction of a Christen Woman, which devotes nine pages to the subject of women's education, was exclusively directed at aristocratic families, therefore remaining inaccessible to the majority of Spanish women at that time. Thus, 23 he only succeeded in encouraging education in the upper classes. (cf. Smith 1996: 16) In his famous text, Vives stresses the importance of obedience and respect towards the husband, and advises women's education to be strictly monitored and supervised by men, in order to prevent them from raising questions beyond their capabilities or breaking out of the confinement of their homes and entering public discourse. (cf. Smith 1996: 17) Moreover, Juan Luis Vives warns that women are incapable of reading by themselves and always need a man to guide them and help them understand the more complicated subject matters. This once again demonstrates inequality between the two sexes and allows the man to become the instructor, forcing the woman to assume the passive role of the one receiving instruction, thus hindering any active and critical participation in a topic. (cf. Dodell 2005: 61) To conclude, whilst humanist authors in England and in Spain viewed education as fundamental to improving society, they only partly included women in their ideas. Although women were not completely excluded from the humanist movement, they remained on the periphery, as humanist education was situated in universities which women were denied access to. Additionally, humanism was aimed at the head of the family and dealt with governance and responsibility, two areas within which women had no say. However, women's learning was encouraged by humanists such as Erasmus, Vives and More, although the level of such an education was never allowed to reach the same status as that of gentlemen, as it was considered dangerous to allow women to become as highly educated as male scholars. The large majority of humanists believed women capable of learning, but at the same time, feared that knowledge and education would interfere with their more important duties as wives and mothers. (cf. Smith 1996: 9-11) Furthermore, it can be argued that More and other humanists were in favour of educating women not in order to give them more rights, but for the practical purpose of shaping them into better wives and companions, which ultimately benefited men. In England, the humanist influence on female education was short-lived. By 1560, new ideas had begun to flourish which encouraged women to focus on more social and 'feminine' qualities such as music, painting, dancing and needlework, which conformed to the Protestant and Puritan ideal of the woman as a docile housewife. As a result, the rise of Protestantism brought an end to the learned and educated lady, and instead promoted the image of the subservient wife, obliged to carry out her childbearing role. (cf. Stone 1977: 203-204) 24

1.3 Religion and the Treatment of Women

Up until the sixteenth century, Catholicism was the main religion in both Spain and England. As a consequence of Henry VIII's divorce from his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, England sought religious independence from Rome and the King became the head of a church which would survive until today: the Church of England. Spain, however, remained unaffected by the Protestant Reformation which had caused rifts to appear throughout Europe and conflicts between countries which had once shared the same beliefs. Spain continued as a strong Catholic country which proved to be intolerant of people with different beliefs and traditions, especially of the Jewish and Muslim population. Due to the opposing religious beliefs present in Spain and England during the time in question, it is highly relevant to investigate the differences which existed in the way women were viewed and treated, on the one hand, by Catholicism, and on the other hand, by the Church of England. Sir Thomas Smith makes a direct comparison between women in England and women in Spain, and states that English wives were not kept under such strict constraints as they were in Spain or in Italy. He rather compares them to women in France, as they had "for the most part all the charge of the house and houshoulde [!]" and were not subjected to the 'legal prerogative' which husbands held over them. (Smith 1982: 132-133) Was religion possibly responsible for creating a more liberal society in England, in which women had more rights compared to those in Spain? Or could religion be the cause for potential differences between Shakespeare's and Cervantes' main female characters? As far as Spain is concerned, Islam also needs to be considered. One of the female characters in Don Quijote is the Muslim Zoraida, a woman with religious beliefs which do not follow the Christian doctrine. Zoraida is a Moor, and, compared to the other female characters in the novel, belongs to an exotic and foreign culture. The term 'Moor' refers to people of Muslim faith from Northern Africa, of Berber and Arab descent, who before being expelled from Spain, had spent centuries living side by side with the Spanish Catholics. (cf. Encyclopaedia Britannica: online) Zoraida offers an insight into how Muslim women were treated by the Spanish at a time when

25 they were about to be forcibly removed from the country. In order to fully understand the significance of her character and the extent of how she reflects the role of the Muslim woman in Spain during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, a general overview of Moors and their position in Spanish society needs to be given.

1.3.1 The Church of England

The reasons which caused the religious change in England have been discussed in the previous section on Queen Elizabeth (see chapter 1.1.6). Lisa Jardine notes that the Protestant Reform had the direct consequence of disadvantaging and further restricting women. Before the Reformation, women in England had the choice as to whether they married and had children, or pursued religious life as a nun, thus conforming to life-long celibacy. When Henry VIII put an end to Catholicism, convents for nuns and priests were forced to close. (cf. Jardine 1989: 50) With the breaking of the ties to Rome, the female religious cult of the Virgin Mary was eliminated and the celibate priests, who had been supportive of women in their domestic difficulties through the confession box, disappeared. (cf. Stone 1977: 202) The Protestants felt threatened by the idea of nunneries regaining popularity and many conduct books therefore served the purpose of ending the attraction of a celibate life for women. In his preface to the sixteenth century Swiss reformer Heinrich Bullinger's treatise on marriage, Thomas Becon claims that marriage and celibacy are complete opposite ways of life, with "[…] celibacy leading to whoredom and the decay of society, and marriage ensuring personal virtue and a flourishing state." (Mikesell 2002: 120) This belief gave marriage a superior status compared to celibacy, which was viewed as sinful and responsible for corrupting mankind. Consequently, the only option offered to young women by Protestant conduct books was marriage, whilst a religious life of celibacy was not even mentioned. (cf. Mikesell 2002: 120) With the abolition of convents, women were denied the right to live a life of seclusion and independence, and were thus prevented from escaping the bonds of family life. As a Protestant country, family was now the only system of support for women. Additionally to the closing of convents, Protestantism enforced the general Christian belief which classified women as the 'weaker sex', due to their association

26 with Eve. Thus Christianity, Catholicism as well as Protestantism, provided the ideological basis for a patriarchal system which placed the man at the head of his family and justified female subjection and subordination. Women remained silent as the Virgin Mary, who was not only a role model for Catholics but was also employed by Protestants, was used to demonstrate the quality of silence in women, as she was most highly praised for the control of her tongue. (cf. Trill 1996: 31-32) One way of demoralising women and enforcing their inferiority was achieved by the reading from the sermon 'Homily of Marriage' by parsons every Sunday in church, from 1562 onwards. This left churchgoers in no doubt as to the low social status of women, as the 'weakness' of a woman's character and mind was highlighted, along with the 'vainness' of her fantasies and opinions. (cf. Stone 1977: 198) Furthermore, women were advised to religiously obey their husbands because "[…] the husband is the head of the woman, as Christ is the head of the Church." (Stone 1977: 198) Protestants also strongly believed that a woman should love and cherish her husband, as this was her duty. As a result of what was preached about women in church and of the Protestant view of love, women began to fully internalise their inferior status to men and did not question their husbands' natural authority and power over them. (cf. Stone 1977: 202)

1.3.2 Spanish Catholicism

In Spain, convents were very popular and allowed many women to live their lives as nuns, never marrying or having children. Petra Dodell writes that women who chose not to marry often embraced the opportunity of entering a convent as it was in this environment where they experienced more freedom and were also able to educate themselves. (cf. Dodell 2005: 42) However, Sánchez Lora paints a very different picture of what life was like for women living in convents in early modern Spain. He claims that a large proportion of these women were there against their will, for purposes other than religious devotion. The main reasons for women to enter a convent were for refusing to marry or for not being found an adequate husband. (cf. Sánchez Lora 2005: 131) A woman without a husband or other male protector in her life only had one choice in life if she wanted to keep her honour and not raise

27 suspicion: to enter a convent and live a life of celibacy. A convent offered women a place to stay, food and, most importantly, the chance to salvage their honour in the eyes of the rest of the community. (cf. Sánchez Lora 2005: 136) Women living in convents were not only educated in religious matters, they were also taught how to behave in the socially correct fashion, to be docile, humble and above all, obedient to their father's and husband's demands. (cf. Sánchez Lora 2005: 133) Although most of the time in a convent was spent performing religious duties, some nuns found time to write autobiographies or other testimonies of their life spent in strict confinement. According to Sánchez Lora, many women wrote highly creative and exaggerated fictional stories of their encounters with certain religious figures, in an attempt to escape a life of strict rules and monotony. (cf. Sánchez Lora 2005: 143) A type of double standard also existed in Spanish convents, as was the case with other areas of society. Male convents differed from female convents as men were able to leave and enter the building when they chose to, whereas women had to remain locked inside permanently, and were never allowed visitors. (cf. Sánchez Lora 2005: 136) Sánchez Lora concludes that convents were not spaces where women could live their lives unaffected by misogynist doctrines, as many modern historians claim to be the case. Instead, they still had to abide to male rules and regulations as the religious figures in power were obviously all male. Furthermore, once a year all female convents were visited by men belonging to a type of religious inquisition. These men inspected the convents and interviewed each nun separately, in order to ascertain whether rules were being followed and the women were behaving in the correct fashion. Following these visits, changes and modifications were made to the way the convents were run, because ultimately, men remained in charge and always had the final say in matters. (cf. Sánchez Lora 2005: 151-152) Women who did not live in convents and instead became wives and mothers, still had strict rules to follow and obey which were justified by religion. Sánchez Lora quotes Hernando de Zárate, a writer during sixteenth century Spain, who comments that men are the head of women, like Christ is the head of the church, and that any woman who attempts to make herself the head of her home does so by shaming and dishonouring her husband. (cf. Sánchez Lora 1988: 47) This patriarchy is identical to that which English women were likewise subjected to through Protestantism. Fray Cristóbal de Fonseca is also quoted for claiming that Spanish women must always 28 comply with their husbands' demands. He also states that a similarity consists only between men and God, and not between God and women. This is why a woman must cover her head when in church, as she bares no similarity to God. Due to this closeness between men and God, men are to be obeyed by women. (cf. Sánchez Lora 1988: 48) The misogynistic beliefs held by Renaissance men in power were always justified through religion, which demonstrates the power religion had over women's rights.

1.3.3 Islam in Spain

The last Moorish king of Granada surrendered to Spanish forces on January 2nd, 1492. After the remaining Moorish population revolted in 1499 against Christian missionaries, they were compelled to either leave Granada or convert to Christianity. In 1525, Carlos V declared that all Muslims living in Spain had one of two choices: either to convert to Christianity and give up their religion, traditions and beliefs, or to leave the country. The majority of the Muslim population converted and became 'moriscos' (Muslim converts). These conversions were very often insincere and purely superficial, as behind closed doors, moriscos continued to speak Arabic, dress in Moorish fashion, bathe publicly, abstain from eating pork, and secretively practise Islam. By 1526, Moorish children were sent to Spanish schools where they were instructed in Christian beliefs and customs, with the purpose of erasing their own traditions. They were also forced to attend Catholic religious festivals. Strict laws prohibited more than one Moorish family from living under the same roof, and any servant they kept had to be a 'cristiano viejo', someone without Jewish or Muslim ancestry. Laws were also in place to forbid Moors from attending universities or following certain career paths, as they were not considered to have pure Spanish blood. Officials from the Inquisition were always allowed to search the home of a Moorish family in order to check for confiscated items which would indicate the keeping up of traditions and beliefs, such as books written in Arabic, traditional musical instruments, or even exotic food. (cf. Perry 1996: 68-69; Pierson 1999: 52) The oppression felt by Muslims living in Spain caused another rebellion which began in Alpujarra in 1568, and affected the whole of southern Spain. After two years

29 of fierce fighting and horrific losses on both sides, the Catholics were able to supress the rebels and even harsher sanctions were placed upon the Moors. Many of those who survived the fighting were sold as slaves or forced to leave Granada. Due to the fact that so many men died in battle, a large number of women had to assume sole responsibility for their families and took on very masculine roles, financially supporting their children and maintaining their culture, language and traditions. (cf. Perry 1996: 70-73) Many women who were widowed through the conflict and unable to provide for their children were forced into prostitution, as this was their only chance for survival. It was generally believed that Moorish women were more sensual and sexual than Spanish women, and had less morality. Furthermore, Spanish men often considered them more sexually appealing, due to their exotic appearance, songs and dances. (cf. Perry 1996: 76) At the beginning of the seventeenth century and under King Felipe III, the by then highly unpopular Moors were expelled from Spain. In April 1609, the deportation officially began in Valencia, affecting more than 100,000 Moors living in that region. In the following years, the expulsion spread to other parts of the Iberian Peninsula, forcing thousands of people to leave Spain, which for many had been their homeland for generations. They were shipped out of the country to Africa, where they were forced to make a new life for themselves. The expulsion of the Moors from Spain had the consequence of showing the rest of Europe that Spain was exclusively Catholic and unwilling to tolerate other religions and cultures. Many of those forced into exile inhabited old cities in northern Africa. Others who were unable or reluctant to accept their fate as exiles secretly returned to Spain, risking terrible punishments if caught. Those who returned to Spain or never left in the first place, had to give up their religion and culture in order to integrate themselves into Christian society. (cf. Fernández Álvarez 1974: 236-242) Later, the Spanish Inquisition, which was established by Queen Isabella, hunted down and arrested individuals who continued to practice Islam, Judaism or other religions, and refused to conform to their new Catholic identities. The punishments faced by these people were harsh and brutal, and many were condemned to being burnt alive at the stake. (cf. Pierson 1999: 50-51) Not much is known about the female Moors in Spain as these women faced two severe disadvantages: being female in a male dominated world, and being Muslim in a strict Catholic country. Therefore, Moorish women were generally silent and invisible. There are two types of documents from which more can be learnt about 30 the Spanish Moors during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Firstly, there are documents which registered those Moors (including women) arrested by the Spanish Inquisition, where much is written about their exotic culture and customs. Secondly, their voices can be heard in 'aljamiada' literature, which is a collection of Arabic traditions such as songs, readings from the Koran, poems and legends, written in the Spanish language using the Arabic script. However, the voice of Moorish women is only heard through male language, as the majority of women were illiterate and therefore unable to contribute directly to this form of written literature. (cf. Perry 1996: 66-67) Behind their veil of silence, Moorish women were incredibly versatile and strong, as even when faced with a ban on their culture, they maintained the responsibility of teaching their children about Arabic traditions as they stayed at home whilst their husbands worked. Before they were forced to attend Catholic schools, in the majority of cases, Moorish children received instruction in the Arabic language and were taught traditional songs, dances, fashion and prayers. (cf. Perry 1996: 74) Despite the harsh rules and regulations faced by the Moors, Islamic culture continued to be carried out in secret and was unwittingly allowed to thrive, something which women clearly played a key part in.

31

2. The Writers

William Shakespeare and Miguel de Cervantes both lived during the same period and even died in the same year, in 1616. One was an English dramatist, the other a Spanish novelist. Despite these obvious differences however, they both have one key factor in common, namely, the lack of information concerning their lives and personal backgrounds. Much of what is thought to be true about both writers is actually a matter of unconfirmed legends. Both writers came from humble backgrounds and worked their way upwards to become two of the most celebrated and well-known writers in the world. Even though almost four hundred years have passed since their deaths, their popularity continues as Cervantes' Don Quijote keeps selling, and Shakespeare's plays keep being performed in front of modern audiences. When analysing the role of the woman in Shakespeare's plays and Cervantes' novel, it is fundamental to take a look at the biographies and personal experiences both writers had with women, in order to ascertain whether these can be said to have influenced their representation of women in their writings.

2.1 William Shakespeare

2.1.1 Brief Biography

William Shakespeare's father, John Shakespeare, was a successful glove maker, landowner, money-lender and dealer in agricultural commodities, and was elected to several important posts in the local government. Upon marrying Mary Arden, the daughter of a wealthy and noble family, he was given land and property. Later in life however, he suffered a social and financial backslide, possibly due to his loyalty to the Catholic faith. (cf. Greenblatt et. al 2006: 1058) William Shakespeare was born in the small market town of Stratford-upon- Avon. Although the exact date of his birth is uncertain, the majority of sources agree on April 23rd, 1564. William was the eldest of eight children. He received a humble education at the local free grammar school, although no details are known as to the

32 extent of his schooling. It is however known that England's most famous playwright did not attend Oxford or Cambridge University. Some critics argue that Shakespeare must have been uneducated, due to the number of errors found in his plays. Geographical errors can be found, for example, in The Winter's Tale, where he gives Bohemia a coast. In other plays, historical inaccuracies can be found. The majority of critics agree however, that despite these so-called errors (which some, on the other hand, regard as intentional comic devices), Shakespeare was a very well-educated man for his time, which is supported by the diverse subjects he writes about and his excellent knowledge of law, history and other branches of learning. (cf. Lewes 1895: 54-56) William Shakespeare's parents made no attempts at finding suitable wives and husbands for any of their children, something which many historians regard as peculiar for the Elizabethan era. (cf. Greer 2007: 40) In November 1582, Shakespeare, aged only eighteen, married Ann Hathaway. At the wedding, she was already pregnant with their first child Susanna, and was eight years his senior. There are no indications that their marriage was any more than a formality, brought about by the unplanned pregnancy. (cf. Strong 1998: 216-217) Judging from what is known about their marriage, it seems that William and Ann Shakespeare were an unhappy couple. Despite having three children (Susanna, born in 1583 and twins Hamnet and Judith, born two years later), Shakespeare left his wife and family four years after the wedding and went to London, where he gradually rose to fame. He joined a professional acting company, which was later to be known as the 'King's Men', and not only acted, but also became a leading shareholder and the principle playwright. In 1599, Shakespeare's company began to perform at the Globe Theatre and also frequently in court. (cf. Greenblatt et. al 2006: 1058) Between 1590 and 1613, Shakespeare wrote a total of 36 plays. (cf. Lewes 1895: 62) However, he rarely invented the plots for his plays, and he preferred to work closely with stories he found in history, novellas, narrative poems or other plays. (cf. Greenblatt et. al 2006: 1059) With the huge success he gained through the countless performances of his plays, Shakespeare quickly became wealthy and attained a respectable social position, living among a brilliant literary circle in London. Through his newly acquired wealth, Shakespeare's father was granted a coat of arms, which transformed both men into gentlemen and entitled them to be addressed as 'Mr'. When William Shakespeare left London, he bought the second largest house in his native town and later went on to 33 purchase more land in the area. He also had shares in the Globe Theatre which had previously opened in 1598. (cf. Strong 1998: 216-217) In 1614 he finally returned home to Stratford, where he intended to spend the remaining years of his life in peace. Unfortunately, he died only two years later. The reason for his death remains unknown. (cf. Lewes 1895: 63) In his will, he left his entire fortune to his eldest and favourite daughter Susanna. His only son, Hamnet, had died in 1596, leaving him without a male heir. To his wife of thirty-four years, he left his 'second best bed'. (cf. Greenblatt et. al 2006: 1058) It is thought that Shakespeare left all his wealth to his eldest daughter, as his second daughter had made a bad marriage. (cf. Strong 1998: 218)

2.1.2 Women in the Life of Shakespeare

Not much is known about Mary Arden of Wilmcote, Shakespeare's mother, apart from the fact that she belonged to a family who could trace its ancestry back to before the Norman Conquest. Upon marrying John Shakespeare, Mary Arden brought her new husband an inheritance which quickly enhanced his status from a glover also dealing in wool, to the borough chamberlain and later, the town's bailiff or mayor. (cf. Strong 1998: 216) It was William Shakespeare's mother who was responsible for teaching her children the English language as she stayed at home whilst her husband went to work. (cf. Greer 2007: 27) Ernst Honigmann suggests that Shakespeare's parents may have helped him financially at the start of his career, and that his mother might have even acted as his business manager in Stratford after 1601. (cf. Honigmann 2001: 7) A lot has been speculated about William Shakespeare's wife, Ann Hathaway, as few facts remain from that period. It has been assumed, that Ann Hathaway was unaware of the brilliance of her husband and of his success in London. Due to the high rate of illiteracy amongst Elizabethan women, it is highly probable that Ann was unable to read or write, and therefore never read a word her husband wrote. However, as Ann was brought up in a strict Protestant family, she may have been taught to read in order to be able to study her Bible. Even so, in early modern England, most of the people who could read were unable to write as reading was seen as essential in

34 following the daily devotions to God, whereas writing was considered a dangerous skill for women to possess (see chapter 1.2.1 'Women and Education'). (cf. Greer 2007: 52) Throughout her book dedicated to the life of Ann Shakespeare, Germaine Greer argues that there is no evidence which proves that Shakespeare supported his family whilst he was in London. This leads to the belief that Ann may have been financially independent from her husband, something quite unusual for that time. (cf. Greer 2007: 322) Not much is known about Shakespeare's children either, apart from the death of his only son Hamnet, and the marriages of his two daughters, Susanna and Judith. By the time Susanna married in 1607, she had been provided with some education which allowed her to read and write in a neat hand. She married the strict Puritan doctor John Hall, who had graduated from Queen's College Cambridge. Due to Hall's high social rank as a physician and Shakespeare as a gentleman of means, Susanna was made the sole heiress of her father's estate for the purpose of this match. The advantageous marriage of his eldest daughter severely damaged the prospects of a good marriage for his younger daughter, Judith. (cf. Greer 2007: 238; 240) It is believed that the reason Judith Shakespeare inherited virtually nothing from her father, was due to her unfortunate marriage to Thomas Quiney. Although her parents initially approved of her marriage, this quickly changed with the discovery that Quiney had made another girl pregnant. Nonetheless, the wedding to Judith went ahead, despite Quiney not having applied for the special licence needed as it was the time of Lent. This resulted in both him and Judith being excommunicated by the Church and shortly after, Quiney was prosecuted for 'carnal copulation' with a woman named Margaret Wheeler. Although Quiney received a lenient sentence, the scandal left its mark. In 1616, a few months after the wedding, William Shakespeare changed his will, leaving his entire fortune to Judith's sister. (cf. william-shakespeare: online) Another woman of importance in Shakespeare's life is the famous 'Dark Lady', a female figure who continuously appears in his sonnets and poems and who, as the majority of historians agree, is definitely not his wife. Many have suspected her to be his mistress in London whilst he was away from his family. It appears the identity of the 'Dark Lady', however, will forever remain a complete mystery, despite the fact that many scholars have attempted to unlock the secret. (cf. Strong 1998: 216-217)

35

2.1.3 Feminist and Anti-feminist Views on Shakespeare

Opinions differ considerably regarding Shakespeare's attitude towards women, and are still the cause for many heated debates. Some critics consider Shakespeare to be a clear feminist with liberal views on the way women should be treated, others argue that his plays reflect his own misogynistic opinion of women and that he most certainly cannot be considered a feminist. Philip Kolin notes that: "Shakespeare has been claimed as a feminist, a protofeminist, a cryptofeminist, and an antifeminist." (Kolin 1991: 8) Linda Bamber is hesitant to call Shakespeare a feminist, but she agrees that he is "[…] consistently an author whose response to the feminine is central to the general significance of his works." (Bamber 1982: 4) According to Linda Bamber, there is a significant difference between Shakespeare's comedies and tragedies, as far as the depiction of female characters is concerned. She claims that Shakespeare takes the woman's part and may even be seen as a feminist in his comedies, as the women are often more brilliant than the men. Indeed, she describes them as "[…] more aware of themselves and their world, saner, livelier, more gay." (Bamber 1982: 2) In the tragedies however, Shakespeare creates very different female characters which are described by Linda Bamber as dark, evil, ugly and nightmarish, such as, for example, the murderous Lady Macbeth or the ugly bearded witches in Macbeth. (cf. Bamber 1982: 2) This view is also confirmed by Paula Berggren, who states that the heroine dominates in Shakespeare's comedies, but most certainly does not in his tragedies. She divides the female figures in his tragedies into two basic types: 'victims or monsters', 'good or evil'. (cf. Berggren 1983: 18) Some feminists take the fact that the majority of Shakespeare's heroes and heroines are motherless as a sign of anti-feminist attitudes. Those mothers who do appear in his plays are anything but motherly and sometimes even quite terrifying, such as the cannibal mother Tamora in Titus Andronicus, or the murderous and cruel Lady Macbeth. (cf. Greer 2007: 41) For many feminists, Shakespeare is said to have been ahead of his time, as a large proportion of his female characters do not conform to the models in place for women in Renaissance England. (cf. Kolin 1991: 8) In this vein, Juliet Dusinberre notes:

36

Shakespeare saw men and women as equal in a world which declared them unequal. He did not divide human nature into the masculine and the feminine, but observed in the individual woman or man an infinite variety of union between opposing impulses. (Dusinberre 1975: 308)

Some feminists explain Shakespeare's glorification of women, especially of the daughters of the romances, as a reflection of his own fate as "[…] a man who had to depend on his daughter for the succession of his line." (Kolin 1991: 10) Shakespeare's modern treatment of women is reflected in the dramas of other English playwrights during this period such as Middleton, Decker, Webster and Massinger. (cf. Dusinberre 1975: 5)

2.2 Miguel de Cervantes

2.2.1 Brief Biography

Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra was born in Alcalá de Henares, a small university town near Madrid, on the 29th of September in 1547. Cervantes was the fourth of seven children, an untypically large family for those times. His father Rodrigo was born deaf, a handicap which influenced his character, making him sad and withdrawn. (cf. Trapiello 2001: 21-27) Although Rodrigo was a doctor, he earned a very poor salary, forcing Miguel and his family to live in virtual poverty as the following quote confirms: "Die Familie des Miguel de Cervantes war ein heruntergekommenes Hidalgogeschlecht." (Krauss 1966: 15) Similar to Shakespeare, not much is known about the education Cervantes received. It is thought however, that Miguel de Cervantes attended two grammar courses in Cordoba, where he lived with his family after moving there from Valladolid. In 1563, he moved to Seville where he continued studying grammar with the fathers of the 'Compañía'. In 1566, the family moved to Madrid and there Cervantes began to study grammar in earnest and was tutored by the humanist Juan López de Hoyos. (cf. Ministerio de educación: online) In 1569, Cervantes travelled to Italy where he served an Italian nobleman. A year later, he joined the Spanish military

37 and fought against the Turks in the Battle of Lepanto. (cf. donquijote: online) It was during this battle that he received a serious injury to his left hand which left him with a permanent handicap. Following his injury, he was captured by Algerian corsairs and kept as their slave for five years, whilst they waited for his ransom to be paid. When he was finally freed, he returned to Spain deep in debt and in order to make ends meet, began writing plays which failed to gain success. (cf. Pierson 1999: 68) In December 1584, Cervantes married a woman named Doña Catalina de Palacios who was almost twenty years his junior. Promptly after the wedding, he began work as a government official collecting taxes for the Armada in southern Spain, leaving his young wife behind in Madrid. He was arrested twice in Seville for having taken possession of merchandise not belonging to him. It is thought that part one of Don Quijote was composed whilst he was in jail. Due to the fact that he was already aged fifty-seven when part one of Don Quijote was first published, many consider the novel to be a reflection of his entire life. (cf. donquijote: online)

2.2.2 Women in the Life of Cervantes

Whilst little is known about Cervantes' father, his mother's name, Leonor de Cortinas, repeatedly appears in the family records. Leonor de Cortinas raised the money to pay for both her sons' release from captivity in Algiers. Due to his physical incapacity, it is highly improbable that Rodrigo de Cervantes had a part in his children's education or influenced Miguel de Cervantes' academic development. (cf. Krauss 1966: 16) As was the case with William Shakespeare, it was supposedly his mother who taught Miguel de Cervantes to read and write, as it was up to her to look after the children, and she herself was literate, a rarity in Spanish women during the Golden Age. (cf. Sanjurjo 2008: online) Apart from his mother, who can be regarded as having a positive influence on her son's academic life, the other women in his family cannot be considered such strong female figures, but rather assume more passive and negative roles. According to Andrés Trapiello, "Las mujeres en la vida de Cervantes son personajes a menudo tristes, oscuros, desdibujados." (The women in the life of Cervantes are often sad, dark and faded figures.) (Trapiello 2001: 39) Cervantes had an especially close

38 relationship with his two older sisters, Andrea and Luisa. Andrea unfortunately belonged to the category of women who were seduced by men with the promise of marriage, only to end up being deserted and no longer a virgin. His other sister, Luisa, decided early on in life that she wanted to become a nun and therefore joined the convent 'La Concepción de las Carmelitas' at the age of only seventeen. She remained in the convent until she died aged seventy, never having married or having had children. (cf. Trapiello 2001: 40) In this way, she conforms to Sanjurjo's categorisation of women as quoted in chapter 1.1.1, 'The Role of the Woman in English and Spanish Society'. Miguel de Cervantes himself did not conform to what was typically expected of men during the Spanish Golden Age. Before publishing the pastoral novel La Galatea in 1585, he had a love affair with a married woman, Ana Franca de Rojas. It is said that they had a daughter together, Isabel de Saavedra, although some historians claim that this child was actually the illegitimate daughter of another of his sisters, Magdalena, whom Cervantes took charge of, in order to save his sister from dishonour. After Anna Franca de Rojas unexpectedly died, Cervantes married Catalina de Palacios to put an end to the rumours and accusations which had started to circulate, due to his already advanced age of thirty-seven. (cf. Sanjurjo 2008: online) The different female figures in his life, from his mother and sisters, to his mistress and wife, undoubtedly gave Cervantes access to many different types of women, each with different roles in society. His sister Andrea may be considered as the inspiration behind the female character Dorotea from Don Quijote, as they both share the unfortunate fate of being tricked and deserted by men, under very similar circumstances. His mother, who played an important part in Miguel de Cervantes' upbringing, may be seen as being the inspiration for Teresa Panza, one of the only mother figures to appear in Don Quijote.

2.2.3 Feminist and Anti-feminist Views on Cervantes

Any reader of Don Quijote, one of the most well-known and widely read books ever written, will agree on the huge variety of women present in Cervantes' masterpiece. Although the two main characters are both male, women undoubtedly play an

39 important role in the story and can often be seen as the driving force behind many of Don Quijote's and Sancho Panza's actions. Lidia Falcón, a well-known Spanish feminist, believes Cervantes can be considered a feminist due to the powerful role which women play in Don Quijote:

Pero ¿es Cervantes feminista? Para su época sí. Es compasivo con las mujeres, comprensivo de sus problemas, respetuoso con las madres y con las esposas, solidario de los problemas que sufren las jóvenes seducidas, las casadas abandonadas, las viudas sin protección. Generoso hasta con las prostitutas. (But, is Cervantes a feminist? For his era, yes. He is compassionate towards women, sympathetic to their problems, respectful of mothers and wives, expresses solidarity with young women who have been misled by men, as well as with abandoned wives and widows without protection. He is even considerate of prostitutes.) (Falcón 1997: 12)

As with Shakespeare, opinions on Cervantes' feminist or anti-feminist nature differ greatly. By the majority of critics however, Cervantes is considered as being sympathetic towards women, due to the huge number of female characters he includes in Don Quijote, many of whom have strong personalities. Despite this fact however, the debate as to whether Cervantes can be labelled a feminist or not, is still a popular topic with critics, and continues to receive attention. In 2005 at the Complutense University of Madrid, a group of women studying Don Quijote found proof for Cervantes having held feminist views in a male- dominated world, where it would take another two hundred years before any type of serious feminism would gain momentum. Teresa Langele, one of the women responsible for these claims, believes that Cervantes' sympathies for women may have been due to the liberal beliefs held by humanists of the sixteenth century. She holds humanism responsible for influencing Cervantes' view on women and the reason why he includes thirty-nine different female characters in parts one and two of Don Quijote, many of which reflect women of very different social classes and backgrounds. (cf. Universia México: online) In her article on Cervantes' own femininity, Isabel Navas Ocaña summarises the extreme thoughts held by Rosa Rossi, who puts forward the theory that Cervantes may actually have been a woman hiding behind a male identity. Rossi argues that Cervantes did not study and was lacking in the basic knowledge that most authors during his time had, such as being competent in Latin. This, she writes, might be an indication that he was in fact a woman who was denied the right to a thorough 40 education. She supports these beliefs by drawing attention to Cervantes' fictional female characters who are often strong-minded individuals and thus demonstrate that the author had strong sympathies with the female sex and may have been a woman. (cf. Navas Ocaña 2006: 348-349) A contrasting view to this theory is held by Rainer Rutkowski who, in his paper on misogyny, lists many examples of misogynistic comments and statements made by various characters in Don Quijote including the hero, Don Quijote himself. He believes that these are direct reflections of Cervantes' own views on the subject, and therefore concludes that Cervantes is an anti-feminist with the same dislike for women which the majority of men held between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. (cf. Rutowski 1986: 55-62) This view is partly supported by Edith Trachman who, in her book on the women of Cervantes, writes that Cervantes' thoughts on women are in absolute concordance with the general anti-feministic beliefs during that time. According to Trachman, Cervantes views women as weak and fragile and in need of male protection, which is often demonstrated through Don Quijote who feels it is his duty to protect vulnerable women. (cf. Trachman 1932: 15) Trachman does however go on to write that although she does not consider him a feminist, she believes that Cervantes was in favour of basic women's rights, such as the right not to be forced into marriage by parents. She concludes that the majority of Cervantes' ideas, however, are traditional and conservative, and greatly influenced by the misogynistic writers of the Renaissance. (cf. Trachman 1932: 37)

41

3. Textual Analysis

3.1 Theory Behind the Analysis

The textual analysis in this thesis is concerned with the comparison and the contrast of the main female characters from two of Shakespeare's plays, namely, The Taming of the Shrew and Much Ado About Nothing, with those from Cervantes' novel, Don Quijote. In both cases, the text itself forms the main basis for the in-depth analysis. As a result, the performances of Shakespeare's two plays will not be discussed. The reason for this is that there are too many interpretations available concerning how a text should be performed in the theatre, which is why the plays will be treated the same as Cervantes' novel, namely, as written texts. Nonetheless, one must always bear in mind that Shakespeare's plays were created for the theatre, to be performed in front of an Elizabethan audience, whereas Cervantes' novel was written and published in the form of a book to be read. Part of the analysis of the female characters in Shakespeare's plays will be based on Manfred Pfister's theory on techniques of characterisation. (cf. Pfister 1994: 250-264) The various techniques of characterisation proposed by Pfister allow different perspectives of a character to be taken into account, which gives the analysis greater depth and authenticity, compared to only using a one-sided view. Therefore, not only the part of the female character will be analysed, but also how other characters in the play react to her and describe her in her presence of her absence. This is known as figural characterisation. Whereas drama almost exclusively relies on figural characterisation due to the lack of a narrator, in narrative texts such as Don Quijote, authorial characterisation is an important element. The narrator is often able to powerfully influence the reader through descriptions regarding a particular character. Furthermore, characters may implicitly characterise themselves through non-verbal behaviour which is also described in the text through narrative comments such as, for example, an emotional outburst followed by tears, or certain facial expressions. How the female characters present in Don Quijote are treated by other characters, especially by the protagonists Don Quijote and Sancho Panza, will also be the focus of this analysis. By including figural characterisation as well as authorial characterisation, a wider picture can be

42 obtained regarding the true nature of the female characters' purpose in the text, and what they ultimately stand for. A further aspect which will be taken into account during the analysis of both the plays and the novel is character conception. Here, the extent to which a character may have changed from the play's or the novel's beginning to the end will be considered (static vs. dynamic). (cf. Nünning 2007: 95) This needs to be reflected on, as a dynamic character who has significantly changed from start to finish is more interesting and may play a more important role in the story compared to a static character, who has remained the same throughout. In the majority of character analysis and interpretations, characters which appear in a text are treated as real and existing individuals, with the main emphasis being placed on the psychology of the character and his or her relationship to others in the text. This type of analysis is known as a 'mimetic' approach as it treats fictional and literary characters as 'true to life' people. The mimetic approach stands in contrast to that of structural theories which stress the functions of the characters and treat them as 'actants' in the plot, rather than 'psychological entities'. (cf. Nünning 2007: 92) For the analysis in this paper, a mimetic approach will be undertaken where each character is discussed as a real-life person belonging to Renaissance society. Thus, the literary characters will be able to give vital information on real women living in sixteenth and seventeenth century Spain and England, enabling conclusions to be drawn regarding differences and similarities between the role of the woman in both countries.

3.2 The Taming of the Shrew

3.2.1 Introduction to the Play

For the analysis of this play, the names 'Kate' and 'Katherina' both refer to the main female character, namely, 'The Shrew', and are therefore used as synonyms. It is thought that the first audience to see a performance of The Taming of the Shrew was in 1594, the exact date however, is uncertain. The Taming of the Shrew belongs to Shakespeare's earlier plays and since its very first performance, has elicited

43 hearty support, ethical unease and altogether disgusted responses to its 'taming' and treatment of shrewish Kate. (cf. Aspinall 2002: 3) Many feminists regard The Taming of the Shrew as Shakespeare's most controversial play, and differ greatly in the interpretation of Kate's famous final speech. Much of the recent criticism of this play can be divided into two camps which differ in the way they interpret Katherina's final speech. On the one hand, the revisionists have argued that the speech is ironic and that Kate retains her psychological independence from Petruchio, remaining untamed from the beginning to the end of the play. The revisionists regard The Taming of the Shrew as a social comedy. The anti-revisionists, on the other hand, interpret the speech as being historically accurate, and that Kate is 'tamed' by Petruchio who acts like an animal trainer and employs "[…] reductive procedures of rollicking, old-fashioned farce." (Bean 1983: 65) Some feminists understand Kate's speech as an extreme violation of women's rights. For example, George Bernard Shaw, a supporter of women's rights, encouraged audiences to boycott performances of the play because he felt that Shakespeare treated women like property. (cf. Kolin 1991: 38-39) The theme of shrew-taming was not invented by Shakespeare. Preceding The Taming of the Shrew, there was already a well-developed medieval and Renaissance oral tradition of folk tales on this topic, which Shakespeare clearly took as inspiration. In his essay on The Taming of the Shrew, John Bean refers to Jan H. Brunvand who studied shrew-taming folk tales and listed dozens of similarities between Shakespeare's play and the older more traditional stories, such as the following: a father character with two daughters, one shrewish and one younger and more modest; a young wooer who undertakes the 'taming'; a farcical wedding scene; a journey to a country house; dialogues where the woman is forced to call the sun the moon; and finally, a concluding scene where the husbands boast about who has the most obedient wife. In the folk tales, the husbands dominate their wives by threatening them with violence and often psychologically reducing the wife to the status of an animal. (cf Bean 1983: 66-67) Many historians have come to recognise the period from 1560 until the English Civil War as a 'crisis of order'. During this time, there was a widespread fear that women would rebel against their traditional submissive roles. In some sense this fear was justified, as there were reported cases of rebellious wives dominating, or even beating their husbands. (cf. Newman 1991: 44-45) As a consequence, there was a general literary preoccupation with rebellions and independence which will also 44 have caused Shakespeare to explore the topic and take inspiration from previous medieval and Renaissance folk tales. However, Shakespeare's play differs to these tales as it is wittier and the process of taming is more civilised and less offensive than earlier shrew-taming tales. There is no extreme physical brutality and instead, humiliation, domination, bullying and deprivation are used as ways of taming the unruly Kate. (cf. Woodbridge 1984: 206) Despite much feminist criticism, The Taming of the Shrew remains one of Shakespeare's most popular plays and continues to attract large audiences to the theatre, even four hundred years after the very first performance. Penny Gay suggests that the play's consistent popularity is due to its reinforcement of the profoundly-held belief of its audience, namely, the patriarchal system of male domination which has continued to remain the same. (cf. Gay 1994: 86) In other words, audiences are still able to relate to the play's main theme: the fight for power between men and women. Before commencing with an analysis of the play's main female characters, it is important to mention the main dramatic technique present in The Taming of the Shrew. The Taming of the Shrew is a play-within-a-play, as the story of the taming of Katherina by Petruchio is in actual fact a play staged for the drunkard Christopher Sly, a character who appears in the play's induction. Kate and Petruchio are fictional players who entertain the beggar and drunkard Christopher Sly. The taming of Kate is an illusion, as is Christopher Sly's transformation into a powerful lord. It can therefore be argued that the Katherina-Petruchio plot cannot be taken seriously, as it serves only as entertainment and is, from the outset, a stage production and cannot therefore be assigned a deeper meaning. However, due to the many different interpretations given by countless critics and the fact that this play continues to appear in university courses throughout the world, the play's relevance and importance is indisputable and will therefore be taken seriously in this analysis. Like with many of Shakespeare's plays, The Taming of the Shrew is set in Italy, not in England. Despite this foreign setting however, "[…] society [is] structured very like the Elizabethan one which first witnessed it, in which the niceties of interpersonal behaviour are directed by accepted rules." (Gay 1994: 143) Moreover, the characters' sometimes English names, as well as the English traditions and customs, all give the play the feel that it is set in England, rather than continental Italy. This is why conclusions about the role of the woman in Elizabethan society can be drawn from both plays, regardless of their foreign setting. 45

In addition to the play's apparent unrealistic nature as a play-within-a-play, as well as its foreign setting, a further aspect which must be considered is the fact that on the Elizabethan and Jacobean stage, female characters were played by male actors. This, according to Karen Newman, gives The Taming of the Shrew a certain artifice due to the play's theme of the battle of the sexes. (cf. Newman 1991: 52-53) However, this is not relevant for this thesis as the play's text and not the actual performance will be analysed, thus, the female characters in The Taming of the Shrew and in Much Ado About Nothing are all treated as actual women rather than female parts intended for male actors.

3.2.2 Plot Summary

The play begins with Christopher Sly, a drunken tinker who lies unconscious in a country alehouse. He is found by a lord and his attendants who decide to play a trick on him. They transport Sly to the Lord's finest chambers, clothe him in fine robes and when he awakes, make him believe that he is in fact the lordship of the manor. To further convince Sly of his high status, the Lord orders players to perform a comedy for Sly's entertainment. The play is called The Taming of the Shrew. The play-within-a-play is set in Padua, Italy, and tells the story of Baptista Minola, a wealthy citizen of Padua, and his two daughters, Bianca and Katherina. Bianca is forbidden to marry any of her many suitors until her older sister Katherina finds a husband. Kate is a wilful young woman with a notorious temper and unruly personality, and has therefore been unable to find a man willing to take her as his wife. Petruchio, a young gentleman from Verona who has travelled to Padua in search of fortune, decides he will marry Katherina to benefit from her riches. The young couple become engaged and after a rather farcical wedding, Petruchio carries Katherina home to 'tame' her and transform her from a 'shrew' into an obedient wife. Meanwhile, Bianca elopes with Lucentio, one of her suitors, and the pair is secretly married. During the banquet in the final scene of the play, the husbands argue about who is married to the most obedient wife. Petruchio wins the bet with Kate, as she is the only wife to appear on command, and follows by lecturing the other two not so compliant wives on why they should obey their husbands. The play ends with the

46 other husbands congratulating Petruchio for successfully taming his once so shrewish wife.

3.2.3 Analysis of the Female Characters in The Taming of the Shrew

3.2.3.1 Katherina

The first time we hear Katherina speak, her father has just told Lucentio and Tranio, two of Bianca's suitors, that he will only allow his younger daughter to marry once he has a husband for Katherina. Should one of Bianca's two suitors love Katherina, Baptista Minola gives them permission to court his eldest daughter, upon which Gremio remarks: "She is too rough for me." (I.i.55) Although Katherina is present on stage, this is the first the audience finds out about her as she has not previously been mentioned. Gremio's criticism of Kate serves as figural characterisation and seeks to warn and prepare the audience for her unruly character. Indeed, following Gremio's comment, the audience immediately gets a taste for Kate's temper. Feeling hurt and angry at Gremio's rejection, Katherina rebukes her father for his suggestion of potentially marrying one of Bianca's suitors: "I pray you, sir, is it your will / To make a stale of me amongst these mates?" (I.i.57-58) Although her comment is not directly rude, it is nonetheless a challenge to her father's authority as she directly questions his proposal of marriage, actively participating in matters which were deemed unsuitable for an unmarried lady in Elizabethan society. According to Karen Newman, "Kate's linguistic protest is against the role in patriarchal culture to which women are assigned, that of wife and object of exchange in the circulation of male desire." (Newman 1991: 44) Katherina makes it clear that she will not take anyone as her husband and reacts shrewishly towards her father and her possible suitors to make her opinion clear and to protest against the male hierarchy she is subjected to. Hortensio, another of Bianca's suitors, tells Katherina that she will never find a husband as she is of too wild a nature. Katherina violently replies that she would never consider marrying him, but that if they were to be married, she would beat him about the head with a stool and scratch his face until it was bloody:

47

I'faith, sir, you shall never need to fear. Iwis it is not halfway to her heart. But if it were, doubt not her care should be To comb your noodle with a three-legged stool, And paint your face, and use you like a fool. (I.1.61-65)

In this outburst, Katherina implicitly characterises herself as an outspoken, feisty young woman who is unwilling to be silent and has no qualms at telling men what she thinks of them. The language used in the above passage demonstrates her temper as she threatens Hortensio with violence in an attempt to show that she does not need a husband and refuses to marry for marriage's sake. She thus assumes a domineering role more suitable to men, therefore the very opposite of how she should behave. It is not surprising that Hortensio responds by calling her a devil, in an attempt to assume the upper-hand. Karen Newman draws attention to the threat which Katherina poses on the male characters:

From the outset of Shakespeare's play, Katherine's threat to male authority is posed through language; it is perceived as such by others and is linked to a claim larger than shrewishness – witchcraft – through the constant allusions to Katherine's kinship with the devil. (Newman 1991: 46)

The Renaissance was a period where accusations of witchcraft reached their peak and led to many women being publically executed. (cf. Newman 1991: 45) Hortensio's insult to Kate by comparing her to a devil is thus very serious, and demonstrates just how vexed her words make him. It seems that through her outspokenness and aggressive words, she poses a very real threat to male authority and may briefly be considered their equal, albeit verbally. This clearly contrasts with the natural role she should have as a young, unmarried woman. After Katherina, her father and her sister exit, Bianca's suitors remain on stage and continue to discuss Katherina and her sister. Through explicit figural characterisation in absentia, the audience discovers more about Katherina's strong character and also her financial situation which the characters find appealing. Gremio expresses his doubts on the possibility of Bianca ever being allowed to marry, as he believes her sister will never find a husband. Hortensio, however, is of the opinion that many will be tempted by Katherina's dowry and would therefore willingly marry her despite all her faults. Gremio regards Katherina as an obstacle standing in the way

48 of his marriage to Bianca and cannot wait to be rid of her. Hortensio decides that he and Gremio must find a husband for Katherina and Gremio agrees, exclaiming that he will find someone to "[…] thoroughly woo her, wed her, and bed her, and rid the house of her." (I.i.140-142) This sexist proverb demonstrates the usual order of how a relationship progressed in the sixteenth and seventeenth century, revealing that the woman seemingly held no active part in the process. In Act I Scene ii, Petruchio makes his first appearance. He is a gentleman from Verona who, after having solely inherited his deceased father's fortunes, has arrived in Padua to visit his friend Hortensio and: "To seek fortunes farther than at home." (I.ii.50) Hortensio immediately tells Petruchio of Katherina, a "shrewd ill-favoured wife" who, he promises, is very rich. (I.ii.59-61) Tempted by her wealth, Petruchio accepts the challenge of wooing her, despite Hortensio's warning that she is "[…] intolerable curst / And shrewd and froward so beyond all measure […]. / Renowned in Padua for her scolding tongue." (I.2.88-90) (I.2.99) During the Renaissance, the term 'shrew' was used to refer to women who were unable to keep silent and who tended toward unruly female speech. Valerie Traub points out that condemning women as 'shrews', such as in Hortensio's warning, was a tactic used by men who were wary of losing their authority over women. (cf. Traub 2001: 130) Romance is clearly not mentioned as the reason for Petruchio's desire to marry, and it seems that from the very start, he treats the wooing of Katherina as a business deal with the sole purpose of financial benefit. Thus, he fails to see Katherina as a person, regarding her instead as an object that must be pursued to achieve his goal. Act II Scene i begins with a glimpse at Katherina's and Bianca's troubled relationship. Already in the first Act, Katherina made her spite towards her sister clear by calling her a "pretty peat" (I.i.78), in other words, a spoiled brat. She also indicated that Bianca may not be as innocent as she seems, as she draws the sympathy of others by putting her finger in her eye to make herself weep. Through Kate's explicitly negative comments regarding Bianca's character, the audience may feel sceptical and distrustful towards Bianca. Now, in Act II, a frightened Bianca appears with her hands tied, whilst Katherina demands to know which of her suitors she loves the best. Upon hearing that Bianca has "never yet beheld that special face […]" (II.i.11), Katherina calls her a "minion", which once again means a spoiled brat. Bianca asks Kate whether she envies her for her rich suitor Gremio, upon which Katherina strikes her.

49

In this scene, Katherina behaves violently and viciously, abusing her sister who it seems, is nothing but sweet and kind to her. Through her harsh words and violence, it is clear that Kate is jealous of Bianca and her many suitors, as she herself continues to remain single. Thus, through her implicit self-characterisation which is verbal (the angry insults), as well as non-verbal (her violent actions), the audience gains a deeper insight into Kate's jealousy and anger issues regarding her sister. When her father enters, Katherina calls Bianca his "treasure". Undoubtedly she envies her father's obvious favouritism towards his youngest daughter. Katherina exclaims that Bianca "must have a husband" whilst she herself, who should be married first, has to "dance bare-foot on her wedding-day." (II.i.32-33) This refers to the tradition of an older un-married sister having to dance bare-footed on the wedding day of her younger sister in a demonstration of the unwanted status of an old maid. Through this humiliating ritual, the negative image of an unmarried woman was reinforced, thus further pressurising women into marriage. As Katherina and Bianca are both young women of upper-class status, their father considers it appropriate that they receive an education. The sisters are schooled in music, mathematics, Greek and Latin, therefore belonging to the privileged group of the few women who received an education during the Elizabethan period (see chapter 1.2.1 'Women and Education'). Katherina proves to be anything but a keen pupil and reacts violently to Hortensio's efforts at teaching her the lute, smashing the instrument against his head. Her father asks Hortensio: "Why then, thou canst not break her to the lute?" (II.i.47) This line is the first of many which make reference to taming Katherina like a wild animal. In this case the verb "to break" carries the connotation of "breaking in" a wild horse. Through the breaking of the lute, Kate demonstrates that she herself cannot be broken, in other words 'tamed', and herewith refuses to assume her proper place within the symbolic order of things. Although this action occurs off-stage, it is described in detail by Hortensio in absentia of Kate, and serves the purpose of further characterising Katherina as a fierce, angry and out of control young woman who does not behave as one would expect a woman of her status to. How Katherina has so far acted and how she has been characterised by others, serves as background information to explain the necessity of Petruchio's strict taming-methods that he later assumes. Before meeting Katherina for the first time, Petruchio presents himself to her father to inform him of his intention to marry his eldest daughter. Once Baptista 50 realises that Petruchio is a gentleman of means, he is only too keen for the marriage to go ahead. The two men discuss finances and settle the dowry without informing Katherina. In order to woo Katherina, Petruchio hatches the following plan:

I'll attend her here, And woo her with some spirit when she comes. Say that she rail, why then I'll tell her plain She sings as sweetly as a nightingale. Say that she frown, I'll say she looks as clear As morning roses newly washed with dew […]. (II.i.168-173)

Petruchio performs this speech alone on stage as a monologue, directly addressing the audience ahead of Katherina's entrance. He thus prepares them for his following strange behaviour and thus directly involves them in his plan to woo Kate, eliciting their sympathy and understanding. When Petruchio and Katherina meet for the first time, they exchange lively banter and each of Katherina's verbal insults is met with a witty comment from Petruchio. In one such interchange, Katherina exclaims: "Asses are made to bear, and so are you", whereupon Petruchio answers: "Women are made to bear, and so are you." (II.i.199-200) Whereas Kate's comment is rude, as she likens Petruchio to an ass capable only of carrying a heavy load, Petruchio's comment is clearly sexist, as he reduces the role of the woman to the sole purpose of childbearing. This comment is however in line with Renaissance beliefs which were that women's main function was "the breeding and rearing of children." (Stone 1977: 198) The banter continues until Katherina turns to leave and Petruchio takes her in his arms, refusing to let her go. She strikes him and he responds by promising to cuff her if she does it again. Katherina plays on his previous comment of being a gentleman as she declares that as a gentleman, he cannot strike her. This scene would have served as a warning to Elizabethan audiences. Conduct book authors were fervently against wife-beating, like Thomas Gauge, who in the 1634 edition of his popular marriage manual warned that husbands should not beat their wives. (cf. Stone 1977: 325) Petruchio therefore serves as a model for husbands, as despite being attacked by Kate, he is able to control himself and does not resort to violence. It appears that Katherina is given the upper-hand because she strikes Petruchio, whereas he is unable to use any force against her without destroying his image as a gentleman. Thus, in this episode, Katherina is more powerful than Petruchio.

51

As their exchange nears an end, the following famous statement is made by Petruchio:

Thou must be married to no man but me. For I am he am born to tame you, Kate, And bring you from a wild Kate to a Kate Conformable as other household Kates. (II.i.268-271)

In these few lines, Petruchio exerts his authority over Katherina, reducing her to a wild animal which must be tamed. As Natasha Korda notes: "[…] reduced to an object of exchange […], Kate is abruptly yanked out of circulation and sequestered within the home, literally turned into a piece of furniture or 'household stuff.'" (Korda 2002: 288) She therefore has no economic or legal rights and is little more than an object. In the above passage, Petruchio informs Katherina of his intention to mould her into a domestic, conforming wife, the role which she was born for, but which she so vehemently rejects. Katherina does not directly react to this statement and as no stage directions are given in the text, it is impossible to know exactly what she thinks of Petruchio's promise to tame her. However, the fact that she remains silent, gives the impression that she does not reject his proposal but rather quietly accepts her fate. Following Petruchio's bold statement, Baptista enters and asks his daughter whether she is upset. Katherina replies angrily that her father cannot love her if he wishes her to marry the "half lunatic" and "madcap ruffian" Petruchio. (II.i.280-281) Petruchio lies that Kate is only curst in the company of others, and that in private, she has shown him great love and affection and wants to be married just as much as he does. Baptista immediately believes Petruchio, disregarding his daughter's obvious unhappiness, and gives them his blessing, so that the date for the wedding is set for the following Sunday. Despite these arrangements being made against her will, Katherina fails to speak up and is for once silent, unable or unwilling to contradict her father and Petruchio. On the one hand, this may be due to feeling shocked by the fact that she is to be married to a man she barely knows, and whom she has failed to intimidate with her shrewishness. On the other hand, her silence might be the first sign that she is changing from an independent shrew to a passive woman who surrenders to male authority. On the day of the wedding, Petruchio fails to arrive for the wedding ceremony on time. Instead of going into one of her raging fits and tantrums, Kate appears

52 distressed and deeply hurt because she believes that Petruchio has no intention of marrying her. Although Tranio attempts to calm Kate, she remains distraught and leaves the stage, weeping. This reaction portrays Kate as the victim rather than the aggressive attacker she has so far been and is therefore the first obvious indication in the play that Petruchio's taming methods are having an effect on Katherina. Before, she refused to marry Petruchio but now, faced with the prospect of being deserted by her fiancé, she longs for Petruchio to arrive so she can marry him and maintain her honour. The fact that Kate leaves the stage weeping, demonstrates her fragile, weak nature as a woman, which stands in stark contrast to the previous episodes where she acted aggressive and tough, and thus, very unfeminine. Not only is a transformation in Katherina noticeable, her father also demonstrates a change in character. For the first time in the play, Baptista Minola reacts kindly towards his daughter as he sympathises with her anguish and declares that anyone would react in the same way, not just a shrew with an impatient nature. Baptista shows understanding for his daughter, which he demonstrates by directing kind words at her. By showing Katherina compassion, he 'rewards' her passive and weak behaviour which is what would have been expected of women in this situation. With her previous emotional and violent outbursts, Katherina failed to gain sympathy from her father and other male onlookers and instead of receiving kind and gentle words, was treated with dislike and contempt. When Petruchio finally arrives, he further vexes the waiting wedding guests by turning up wearing rags and riding a crippled, old and diseased horse. In the text, there is no indication as to how Katherina reacts at the shocking and embarrassing sight of Petruchio. The couple is married and shortly after, Petruchio declares that he must immediately leave the wedding celebrations. Katherina begs her new husband to stay until after dinner, telling him that if he loved her, he would stay. These are her first words since being married and show that she is already upset by the idea of being separated from her husband. She thus demonstrates that she feels close to Petruchio and longs for his company, despite at first openly resenting him. It seems that marriage has brought about this change in the previously fiercely independent Kate. Petruchio however ignores her pleas, and Katherina returns to her shrewish manner, angrily commanding her husband to stay. Petruchio tells the guests that Katherina must go with him and seizes her, before giving the following speech:

53

I will be master of what is mine own. She is my goods, my chattels, she is my house, My household stuff, my field, my barn, My horse, my ox, my ass, my any thing, And here she stands. (III.ii.228-232)

Here, Petruchio openly declares his ownership of Katherina, as though she were his slave, not his wife. He calls her "his own", thus reducing her to his property with which he can do as he pleases. Kate remains silent throughout his speech and once he finishes, obediently follows him off stage. From this scene, it is apparent that now that she is married, Katherina is no longer a free and independent woman, but must instead do as she is told by her husband, and has no opportunity to rebel against the new strict confinements imposed upon her as a wife. Act IV takes place at Petruchio's country house far away from Padua. In yet another monologue addressed to the audience with no other characters on stage, Petruchio explains his plan to tame Katherina into submission through starvation and sleep deprivation. He uses the metaphor of a falcon to refer to his wife, as falcons were made to obey their masters: "My falcon now is sharp and passing empty." (IV.i.176) Appealing to the audience, he justifies his cruel taming methods as follows: "This is a way to kill a wife with kindness, / And thus I'll curb her mad and headstrong humour." (IV.i.194-195) The fact that Petruchio is alone and directly involves the audience in his plan, may awaken their sympathies with his character and persuade them of the necessity of such taming methods, even though they may appear harsh and cruel at times. In another episode, Kate and Petruchio are visited by a tailor who brings with him clothes which have been made especially for Katherina. When Katherina does not accept her husband's wishes to deny her the gown she wants, she proclaims:

Why sir, I trust I may have leave to speak, And speak I will. I am no child, no babe. Your betters have endured me say my mind, And if you cannot, best stop your ears. My tongue will tell the anger of my heart […]. (IV.iii.74-78)

Although she is annoyed by Petruchio's behaviour, Katherina does not give a vicious, uncontrolled outburst, but instead, a more polite and mild speech, in which she presents solid arguments as to why she should be allowed to keep the cap and gown.

54

Judging by the above passage, it appears that the only weapon she may use against her husband is her voice, as she no longer violently lashes out with blows or scratches. However, her words are empty and powerless as they do not have their desired effect on Petruchio. Katherina is unable to assert herself and despite her arguments, she is denied the clothes she so desperately wants. Regardless of his wife's wishes, Petruchio dominates the scene and takes control, sending the tailor away with the garments and thus leaving Katherina empty handed. Through his actions and refusal to take his wife seriously, Petruchio demonstrates the futile nature of her words, as ultimately, he is the dominant male and has the final say in everything. Katherina wordlessly accepts defeat, and nothing more is said on the matter. On their way to Padua, Petruchio begins with a new strategy of taming his wife. When an elderly gentleman, who later turns out to be Lucentio's father, suddenly appears, Petruchio claims the man is a young, beautiful woman and urges Kate to do the same. Without hesitation, Kate calls the man a "[y]oung budding virgin, fair and fresh and sweet […]" (IV.v.37), upon which Petruchio exclaims: "Why, how now, Kate, I hope thou art not mad! / This is a man, old, wrinkled, faded, withered, / And not a maiden, as thou say'st he is." (IV.v.42-44) Rather than causing Katherina to become angry, Petruchio's reaction makes her feel foolish and she completely resigns, begging the old man's forgiveness and claiming that she madly mistook him for a young maiden. In these two scenarios, Petruchio entirely dominates Katherina by forcing her to admit things she knows are untrue. Furthermore, he demoralises and humiliates her in front of other people, and treats her as though she were mad, despite the fact that she has conformed to his ridiculous demands. On the surface, this absurd episode appears comical, especially when performed in theatre. However, the underlying message is that Kate has become Petruchio's 'puppet' and without hesitation, performs his every wish and demand. Before marriage, Katherina was her own person, had a strong opinion, and refused to be dominated by neither her father nor by other men. Now that she is married, it appears that she is joined to her husband and is no longer able to think or act independently, but rather carries out his every wish without second thought. Shortly before her famous final speech, Katherina and Petruchio stand alone on stage and Petruchio asks his wife to kiss him. Katherina is embarrassed by the prospect of publically showing affection, but when Petruchio threatens her, she complies and kisses him. She then urges him: "Now pray thee, love, stay." (V.i.139) 55

This line reveals the first open sign of affection towards Petruchio as she calls him "love". This proves that despite his wayward methods, Petruchio has won Katherina's heart and a close bond has formed between husband and wife. This episode demonstrates a total consensus with the idea of mutual affection and union between husband and wife, as proposed by the Protestant conduct books which were so popular during Shakespeare's time. (cf. Mikesell 2002: 107) This scene reflects an ideal Elizabethan marriage as Kate's words and actions perfectly demonstrate her affection and obedience towards her husband. In the final scene of the play, the characters assemble on stage and hold a banquet to celebrate Bianca's and Lucentio's wedding. The three newly married men, Lucentio, Petruchio and Hortensio, decide to bet on which of their wives is the most obedient. They therefore decide to call their wives and measure their obedience by which wife is quickest to arrive. Of the three wives, Katherina is the only one to come and respectfully address her husband, asking him what he wants of her. He instructs her to fetch her sister and the widow, and demands that she "[…] tell these headstrong women / What duty they owe their lords and husbands." (V.ii.129-130) In her speech, Katherina reprimands the two women for their scornful behaviour and urges them to show true love and obedience towards their husbands who are responsible for their maintenance. She directly attacks women who refuse to be submissive:

I am ashamed that women are so simple To offer war where they should kneel for peace, Or seek for rule, supremacy, and sway, When they are bound to serve, love, and obey. (V.ii.160-163)

The above words stand in stark contrast to her own behaviour at the beginning of the play. It appears that Katherina has come to realise the true role of the woman, namely, to serve her husband like a subject serves a prince. In order to support these claims, she goes on to say: "Why are our bodies soft, and weak, and smooth, / Unapt to toil and trouble in the world […]." (V.ii.146-165) She even compares women to worms, highlighting their pathetic physical weakness and thus justifying the fact that women should serve their husbands as gratitude for being looked after and protected. Her words make her appear wise and knowing, as compared to the other two women, she has been married for longer and is therefore able to give advice on how to be a good wife. She concludes her speech with the following powerful lines:

56

And place your hands below your husband's foot. In token of which duty, if he please, My hand is ready, may it do him ease. (V.ii.176-178)

Through this imagery, Katherina declares her total submission to her husband, as well as her unfaltering obedience. She stresses the subservient nature of women, and their duty to carry out their husband's wishes. Linda Bamber interprets Kate's final speech as evidence for her defeat and humiliation in her struggle for power, and Petruchio's evident victory over his wife. (cf. Bamber 1982: 33) This speech has been the cause for contradictory interpretations and many heated responses among feminists and women in general. Katherina's monologue is the longest speech of any character in the entire play, which serves as an indication of power. Furthermore, as this speech is at the end of the play and is followed only by a few comments made by the men, her words are allowed to resound over a captivated audience. Her speech is linguistically powerful and her arguments are strong and coherent and aimed at the two newly revealed shrews, namely Bianca and the widow. Additionally, she is uninterrupted, so it can be assumed that she holds her listeners' attention. However, despite these suggestions of power and verbal dominance, the content and manner of her speech demonstrate the complete opposite. Firstly, Katherina only speaks because her husband demands it of her. He seeks to make an example out of his obedient wife, in order to curve the wayward behaviour of Bianca and the widow. As demonstrated on previous occasions, Katherina is keen to obey her husband, and therefore carries out his wishes and does as he demands without hesitation. Her role can therefore be likened to that of a performing puppet, expressing her husband's beliefs using her own voice. Secondly, her message is that women must submit to their husbands' will, as this is what is expected of them. She urges her sister and the widow to be subservient and not headstrong, as a strong, dominant woman is a "[…] foul contending rebel / And graceless traitor […]." (V.ii.158-159) Her words therefore go against women's rights and justify sexist and misogynistic behaviour of women by men. Although many theatre companies decide on a sarcastic and ironic meaning of Katherina's words and performances include winks and mocking gestures from Kate, the actual text gives no indication for such an interpretation. There are no stage directions or other commentaries which indicate that Shakespeare may have intended 57 a different meaning for this speech, other than that of female subordination. Furthermore, a literal interpretation of the speech is supported by Katherina's behaviour throughout the play, as in a number of episodes, she shows her increasing mild temper and her willingness to submit to her husband and comply with his every wish. Also, the scene where she kisses him in public and openly shows him affection supports the argument that Kate has indeed undergone a complete change in character and is now the perfect, obedient and affectionate wife, and can assume the role she was born for, namely, that of submission and inferiority towards her husband. Due to these reasons, this speech is understood as a piece of misogynistic propaganda, not only with the function of warning wayward and shrewish wives, but also as justification of the subordinate position women had in Elizabethan England, thus strengthening male power. This text-based analysis of Katherina's final speech therefore supports the anti-revisionist argument of historical accuracy.

3.2.3.2 Bianca

Bianca's name is an example of implicit authorial characterisation as it refers to the Italian word for the colour white (bianco/bianca). 'White' is the universal symbol for purity and innocence and thus through her name, Bianca is immediately characterised as such. Although Bianca is Katherina's younger sister, the two women could not be more different. Margaret Maurer and Barry Gaines argue that: "Shrew's design from first to last emphasizes a contrast between the sisters, a contrast that belies a fundamental similarity in their disposition to resist what men would impose on them." (Maurer and Gaines 2010: 106) At the beginning of the play, Bianca is everything Kate is not: obedient, well-behaved, quiet, popular, and her father's favourite. She is the perfect daughter and takes delight in feminine education enjoying music, instruments and poetry. Bianca can be seen as representing the perfect Elizabethan young woman, not just in beauty, but also in character. She also has many admirers who have been prevented from marrying her, as her father decides "[…] not to bestow my youngest daughter / Before I have a husband for the elder." (I.i.50-51) As soon as he lays eyes on her, Lucentio falls in love with Bianca and is not only spellbound by her beauty, but also by her silence and mild, sober behaviour in

58 contrast to Katherina. Lucentio's love-struck outbursts seem an exaggeration of the Petrarchan idea of beauty, as the following extracts show:

Tranio, I saw her coral lips to move, And with her breath she did perfume the air. Sacred and sweet was all I saw in her. (I.i.171-173)

Tranio, be so, because Lucentio loves. And let me be a slave t'achieve that maid Whose sudden sight hath thrilled my wounded eye. (I.i.216-217)

The physical descriptions of Bianca seem highly unrealistic and exaggerated, and may therefore serve the purpose of adding comic effect to the scene. The Elizabethan audience would have been familiar with the conventions of beauty (see chapter 1.1.5 'Beauty'), hence why these descriptions may have been understood as a parody of the Petrarchan ideal. Indeed, Mikesell describes Lucentio's declarations of love as absurd and ridiculous, as the overemphasis based on Renaissance sonnets sound artificially superfluous. (cf. Mikesell 2002: 111) This would also support the interpretation that Lucentio is ironic in his declarations and purposefully exaggerates to lighten the mood and to entertain the audience. After a match is found for Katherina, Bianca's suitors Tranio and Gremio each compete for Bianca's hand in marriage. Baptista decides that the man able to provide his daughter with the greatest dowry shall become her husband. Both men give long accounts of their wealth and finances, and Baptista concludes that Tranio's offer is the best and tells him that as soon as his father can prove his wealth, "[s]he is your own" (II.i.381), in effect, selling his daughter to the highest bidder. This episode is portrayed as uneventful and matter-of-fact, and appears to be a direct reflection of the marriage arrangements present during the Renaissance. For a modern-day audience, Baptista may appear chauvinistic and heartless, auctioning his daughter for self-profit. However, an Elizabethan audience would have been familiar with such rituals in upper-class families, and therefore would not have found this episode as distressing as maybe a modern-day audience would. In the following scene, Lucentio and Hortensio, posing as schoolmasters, fight for Bianca's attention. From the very start, Bianca shows interest in Lucentio, choosing to receive his lesson first and ordering Hortensio to tune his musical instrument. Bianca displays shrewish tendencies when she announces: "I'll not be tied

59 to hours nor 'pointed times, / But learn my lessons as I please myself." (III.i.19-20) In this exclamation, she defends her right to freedom of choice and exerts control over which tutor shall give her the first lesson. As Lucentio begins to tell her the true reason for his presence, namely, to woo her, Bianca further demonstrates authority as she repeatedly sends the desperate Hortensio away. When Hortensio finally returns and gives Bianca a sheet of musical scales which cleverly incorporates his love for her, the young woman directly resists his romantic attempt, rudely telling him:

Call you this gamut? Tut, I like it not! Old fashions please me best. I am not so nice To change true rules for odd inventions. (III.i.77-79)

Her reaction is of importance as she should actually show Hortensio respect, but instead publically rebukes his advances, acting in a manner which would have been considered as very impolite. Indeed, her words seem more appropriate of her sister Katherina who similarly rudely dismissed unwanted advances by men before being 'tamed'. This is a side to Bianca which has so far remained hidden to the audience and challenges her prior image of the perfect, flawless daughter who can do no wrong. In Act IV, Bianca and Lucentio come on stage and publicly court each other, unaware that they are secretly being watched by Tranio and Hortensio. Tranio feigns disgust in order to remove Hortensio from the competition and exclaims: "See how beastly she doth court him." (IV.ii.34) The fact that Bianca unabashedly courts Lucentio in public stands in contrast to Kate's shy and embarrassed reaction when Petruchio asks her to kiss him. Bianca's behaviour is inappropriate for a lady, which is highlighted by Tranio comparing her to a beast. This is clearly an insult and challenges her virtue and honour. Hortensio likewise speaks angrily about Bianca calling her a "proud disdainful haggard." (IV.ii.39) Through this insult, the audience is able to recognise Hortensio's wounded male pride and his wish to tarnish Bianca's reputation in an act of vengeance for her refusal of him. Following this insult, Hortensio declares that he will marry a wealthy widow. Upon marrying the widow, her entire fortune will become his own, which for him is enough incentive to marry a woman who has already been married before. Therefore, Hortensio makes it clear that money is his main reason for wanting to marry and that his interests in Bianca have purely been superficial. It is also relevant to mention that after Hortensio marries the widow, she is continually only referred to as "the widow" and the audience never 60 finds out her name or her identity. She therefore falls into one of the three previously mentioned categories of women, namely a widowed wife, which consequently forms her entire identity, preventing her from assuming a more important role in the play. Bianca's following appearance occurs after her secret wedding to Lucentio which is carried out in haste to avoid her being married to one of her more richer suitors. Eloping and marrying without the father's consent is a direct breech of Elizabethan customs. After their wedding, Lucentio and Bianca bid Bianca's father pardon. Baptista responds with: "How hast thou offended?" (V.i.104), as if he could not believe that his favourite and most obedient daughter would be able to offend him. After Lucentio informs his father-in-law of their marriage, Bianca is unnerved and turns pale. Her father, however, reacts mildly and instead of showing anger towards his daughter, leaves, in order to seek revenge from those who deceived him. This is the only indication in the play of Baptista showing tolerance and lenience as so far, he has only been preoccupied with assuring a good match for his daughters. Despite Bianca's newly acquired rebellious streak and the fact that she has betrayed her father by secretly marring Lucentio, Baptista does not appear angry or upset. On the one hand, this may be because Lucentio is a wealthy man and therefore a good match for his daughter. On the other hand, there is nothing standing in the way for Bianca to be married, as Katherina has also found a husband. It can be assumed that if Bianca had married someone below her status or with little wealth, she would have been met with a very different reaction from her father and would, presumably, have been punished. In the final scene, Bianca shows more spirit than in all previous scenes of the play, despite already having rudely dismissed her suitors, publically courted Lucentio, and secretly gotten married against her father's wishes. Bianca joins in the conversation with the men who are jostling and joking, surprising Vicentio who exclaims: "Ay, mistress bride, hath that awakened you?" (V.ii.42) Maurer and Gaines interpret this comment as a sign that Bianca, who was not asleep at the table during her wedding feast, has broken her habitual silence. (cf. Maurer and Gaines 2010: 109) Vicentio is the first character who raises awareness of the change in Bianca, and his comment serves to prepare the audience for her subsequent rebellious behaviour. After Petruchio's remark that she should tell a joke, Bianca decides to leave, refusing to carry out Petruchio's wish. During the bet on which man has the most obedient wife, Lucentio is the first man to order his wife to come to him and is confident that she will do his bidding. His servant Biondello returns without Bianca 61 and informs Lucentio that his wife is busy and will not come. Shortly after, Katherina appears at her husband's command and obeys Petruchio's order to take off her cherished cap and stamp on it. This obvious submissive behaviour thoroughly shocks Bianca who, in her surprise at seeing Kate act this way exclaims: "Fie, what a foolish duty call you this?" (V.ii.124) Katherina then lectures her sister and the widow on being obedient, well-behaved wives. Compared to at the beginning of the play, Bianca has changed considerably. Whereas before she was silent and obedient to her father, she now shows spirit and wit, and refuses to obey her husband's every command. She cannot understand why her sister would act so submissively and is clearly shocked by how Petruchio treats Kate, which indicates that her own expectations of marriage are very different to her sister's. However, rather than celebrating her strong, independent streak, Shakespeare seems to criticise her dominant behaviour. Firstly, Kate's characterisation of Bianca warns of her sister's insincerity and her vainness, which immediately serves to make her unpopular and mistrusted by the audience. Secondly, Kate greatly insults and chastises Bianca and the widow in front of all the other characters for disobeying their husbands. None of the characters in the play show any support for Bianca's newly found shrewishness, and at the end of the final scene, the audience is left without a doubt that of the two sisters, Katherina is the better wife as she has learnt to comply with the standards in place for wives. Mikesell points out that Bianca assumes the role of "[…] the only rebel to patriarchy in the play." (Mikesell 2002: 111) By the end of the play therefore, it appears that Bianca has taken her sister's place as the shrew who is in need of being tamed. Both Bianca and Katherina can be considered dynamic characters. The change both sisters undergo is tremendous, and transforms the concept the audience have of them at the start of the play. Bianca and Kate are clear opposites from the start and despite the fact that both are dynamic characters, they develop in completely contrasting directions. In a way, Bianca takes Kate's place as a rebel and a shrew, and Kate takes Bianca's place as the passive, obedient sister. This idea is reinforced by Karen Newman who claims that Petruchio: "[…] makes her [Kate] a Bianca with words, shaping an identity for her which confirms the social expectations of the sex/gender system which informs the play." (Newman 1991: 48) In contrast to the two sisters, the male characters in The Taming of the Shrew are static characters who remain unchanged. Manfred Pfister argues that in comedies, the characters are 62 typically static and inflexible as this adds to the comic effect of the play. (cf. Pfister 1994: 242) Petruchio supports this theory as he remains the same domineering male from start to finish, without undergoing a single change in character.

3.3 Much Ado About Nothing

3.3.1 Introduction to the Play

Much Ado About Nothing dates from 1598 and belongs to Shakespeare's romantic comedies. Due to the popularity of theatre and therefore a high demand for new entertainment in Elizabethan society, the play was performed immediately after completion. According to David Bevington, Much Ado About Nothing shows a deliberate replay of elements that also occur in Shakespeare's earlier The Taming of the Shrew, in particular, those to do with supremacy and the battle of the sexes. Bevington believes Beatrice and Benedick, the play's protagonists, to be reincarnations of Petruchio and Kate as they are witty, strong-minded and young. Like with Katherina, Beatrice also has a reputation for being a shrewish, strong-willed woman which stands in the way of her finding a husband. (cf. Bevington 2002: 73) Alongside the Benedick and Beatrice plot, the story of Hero and Claudio is told. Janice Hays writes that this plot is one of Shakespeare's earliest treatments of a theme which he was to repeatedly examine in later plays, namely, the sexual mistrust of the woman, and her subsequent testing by men. (cf. Hays 1983: 79) Different to other plays though, Much Ado About Nothing is the only play which deliberately questions a woman's virtue. (cf. Bamber 1982: 111) As with The Taming of the Shrew, it is believed that the basis for Much Ado About Nothing was not entirely Shakespeare's own creation. It has widely been argued that fifteenth century Matteo Bandello's novella 22, "Timbrero and Fenicia" of La Prima Parte de le Novelle del Bandello, is one of the main sources for Much Ado. (cf. Hays 1983: 84) Similarities have been noted by critics in theme, characters, setting, and an especially striking parallel is evident between Bandello's and Shakespeare's topic of a persecuted female heroine who is later 'resurrected'. (cf. Mussio 2000: 211) Additionally, it is evident that Christopher Marlowe's mythological poem Hero and 63

Leander (1598), published the same year as Much Ado About Nothing, served Shakespeare as inspiration for the choice of name for his heroin, Hero. (cf. Suzuki 2000: 130)

3.3.2 Plot Summary

Like in The Taming of the Shrew and so many of Shakespeare's other plays, Much Ado About Nothing is set in Italy, in the city of Messina. The play begins with the victorious army of Don Pedro, Prince of Aragon, arriving in Messina. The army is welcomed by the governor of Messina, Leonato, and his daughter Hero and niece, Beatrice. The play is made up of two love-plots. The first involves Beatrice and Benedick, a soldier and companion of Don Pedro; the second focusses on Hero and Count Claudio, likewise a soldier and friend of Don Pedro. Throughout the play, Beatrice and Benedick continuously mock and tease each other in an attempt to hide their passion for one another, as both are fiercely independent and strongly reject marriage. In the meantime, Claudio falls in love with Hero and they agree to marry within a week. Whilst they wait for the wedding, they decide to trick Benedick and Beatrice into falling in love. As the play unfolds, Beatrice and Benedick become increasingly aware of their feelings towards each other until finally at the end of the play, they agree to marry. Meanwhile, a very different plot unfolds between Claudio and Hero. Sweet and innocent Hero is accused by Don Pedro's jealous brother, Don John, of being unfaithful to her fiancé, Claudio. On the day of the wedding, Claudio openly humiliates Hero, destroying her spotless reputation and publically dishonouring her. At first, no one believes her innocence except for her loyal cousin Beatrice and the Friar. Even Hero's father, Leonato, believes the false accusations are true, and openly wishes his daughter dead. With time however, he begins to believe she has been tricked, and swears revenge. The Friar decides Hero should fake her own death whilst her friends and family attempt to prove her innocence. Through a watchman who overhears a confession of the crime, Hero's virtue is restored and in the final reconciliation of the play, she marries Claudio who, up until then, unconcernedly believed her to be dead.

64

3.3.3 Analysis of the Female Characters in Much Ado About Nothing

3.3.3.1 Beatrice

The play begins with Leonato, Hero and Beatrice on stage, awaiting the arrival of Don Pedro, Prince of Aragon. The messenger, who has brought news of the Prince's imminent arrival, is questioned by Beatrice about Benedick, one of Don Pedro's companions and soldiers. Beatrice immediately makes her contempt clear for Benedick, as she sarcastically refers to him as 'Signor Mountanto' (a name which implies arrogance and flashy swordsmanship), and mocks his skills as a swordsman. (cf. Clamp 2002: 5) Despite Benedick's absence, Beatrice continues to verbally attack him with the following insults: "my uncle's fool" (I.i.38), "a stuffed man" (superficial and insincere) (I.i.56), as well as comparing him to a disease which makes the sufferer mad. (cf. I.i.82-86) From Beatrice's critical comments, the audience gains information about Benedick before he appears. Although Beatrice explicitly characterises Benedick, her comments cannot be taken seriously and lack truth as the messenger and her uncle, who are also familiar with Benedick, continuously deny her negative remarks and vouch for his bravery and good skills as a soldier. Through Beatrice's highly critical figural characterisation of Benedick, the audience is prepared for the ensuing battle between them, and is forewarned of Beatrice's anger towards the young soldier which in turn, serves to awaken their curiosity. In an attempt to justify his niece's harsh criticism of Benedick, Leonato explains that: "There is a kind of merry war betwixt Signor Benedick and her. They never meet but there's a skirmish of wit between them." (I.i.58-61) Wit was seen as the product of education. According to Juliet Dusinberre, the Elizabethans viewed wit as a masculine attribute, as it contradicted the male idea of a silent and submissive woman. (cf. Dusinberre 1975: 227) Later in the play, Claudio compares Beatrice and Benedick to two bears engaging in battle with one another. (cf. III.ii.72) Leonato's comment of a war of wit between them, and Claudio comparing both Beatrice and Benedick to bears, could indicate a certain amount of equality, as Beatrice is given a very masculine identity. From these comments therefore, it appears that Beatrice is

65 distanced from, and rises above the subordinate role of the silent, well-behaved woman who has no right to speak out against male authority. When Don Pedro, Claudio and Benedick finally join the other characters on stage, Beatrice continues to mock Benedick, interrupting his comment on Hero's likeness to her father by rudely telling him: "I wonder that you will still be talking, Signor Benedick; nobody marks you." (I.i.112-113) Through this verbal attack, she publicly humiliates Benedick in front of the Prince and his followers, making him appear worthless and ridiculous by devaluing his words. Benedick, however, is quick to reply with the following taunt, demonstrating that he too possesses a sharp tongue: "What, my dear Lady Disdain! Are you yet living?" (I.i.114-115) With this sarcastic remark, he pretends not to have noticed Beatrice. By not acknowledging her presence, he attempts to decrease her importance as she has so far dominated the stage with her witty remarks. In a later scene, it is revealed that Beatrice's contempt for Benedick originates from their troubled previous history. She tells Don Pedro that Benedick wooed her "with false dice", before leaving her broken hearted:

Indeed, my lord, he lent it me a while, and I gave him use for it, a double heart for his single one. Marry, once before he won it of me with false dice […]. (II.i.275-278)

Beatrice allowed her heart to be won by Benedick, who betrayed her trust and deserted her. Rather than accepting his rejection, she decides upon revenge by constantly teasing and embarrassing him in public. This demonstrates her strong character and her inability to be passive and silent. Beatrice's insults against Benedick continue, and later in the play, during the masked ball in Act II, Beatrice goes as far as to call Benedick a "very dull fool". She is, however, unaware that he is behind the mask. (cf. II.i.137) Her words greatly offend Benedick, who bitterly tells Don Pedro:

[…] she speaks poniards, and every word stabs. If her breath were as terrible as her termina- tions, there were no living near her; she would infect to the North Star. I would not marry her though she were endowed with all that Adam had left him before he transgressed. She would have made Hercules have turned spit, yea, and have cleft his club to make the

66

fire, too. (II.i.246-253)

[…] while she is here a man may live as quiet in hell as in a sanctuary, and people sin upon purpose because they would go thither. (II.i.255-258)

Although his words are clearly exaggerated, Beatrice's strong character is highlighted for the audience to appreciate. Benedick finds her words and insults so powerful, that he jokingly claims that she would even be able to intimidate Hercules and send men to hell in search of peace. Benedick makes it clear that he has no interest in marrying Beatrice as she is too loud for him, and her words are too cruel. It seems that Benedick has a very different role from Petruchio in The Taming of the Shrew. Petruchio sees Katherina as a challenge, someone he must teach to submit to his authority, whereas Benedick sees Beatrice as a threat which he would rather avoid than spend time with. Beatrice therefore immediately seems more powerful and a much stronger character compared to Katherina, who fails to intimidate Petruchio. It is clear from Benedick's negative comments about Beatrice's sharp tongue, that he believes she talks too much, something which was considered inappropriate for an Elizabethan woman. Additionally, he criticises this negative attribute in the following comment to Beatrice: "Well, you are a rare parrot-teacher." (I.i.134) Likewise, Leonato also believes Beatrice is too talkative and shows his concern that she will never marry: "By my troth, niece, thou wilt never get thee a husband if thou be so shrewd of thy tongue." (II.i.17-18) Antonio, Leonato's brother, supports this view by stating: "In faith, she's too curst." (II.i.19) In Renaissance England, being curst or ill-tempered was considered to be a strongly negative characteristic, mostly associated with shrewish women. This, along with her wit and sharp-tongue, is why Leonato and Antonio both fear that Beatrice will find no husband. These un-ladylike attributes are also reflected in Katherina from The Taming of the Shrew, who is likewise deemed unmarriageable. However, despite her similarities with Katherina, Beatrice is popular and well-liked by the majority of the characters in the play, especially by Don Pedro, who calls her a "pleasant spirited lady" (II.i.338) with a "merry heart". (II.i.310) Beatrice's uncle also states that she is never melancholy but always happy and cheerful, thus creating a positive image of Beatrice. Through this positive characterisation of Beatrice, it appears that Shakespeare intended for the audience to like her, despite her somewhat dominant and masculine character traits.

67

The fact that she is unmarried, however, causes concern for the other characters as no matter how likeable or cheerful she is, Beatrice must have a husband if she is to form a respectable part of Elizabethan society. Different to Katherina who is jealous of her younger sister's many suitors and secretly wishes she herself were married, Beatrice is adamant that she will never have a husband. In Act I, Beatrice tells Benedick: "I had rather hear my dog bark at a crow than a man swear he loves me" (I.i.127-128), thus informing Benedick that she is happily single and does not need a husband. In Act II, she strengthens this claim by telling both her uncles: "Lord, I could not endure a husband with a beard on his face. I had rather lie in the woollen." (II.i.28-30) When Leonato answers that she should choose a husband without a beard, Beatrice retorts that a man with no facial hair is not manly enough. (cf. II.i.33-40) These remarks not only reveal that Beatrice is fussy when it comes to choosing a husband, but also that with or without a beard, no man could ever please her. Thus it can be concluded that Beatrice would prefer to remain unmarried and will continue to find faults with men in order to escape from married life. Later in the play, the Prince himself asks Beatrice if she would take him as her husband, in a test to see just how unwilling she is to marry. Beatrice tells him that she would never marry him, because he would be an unsuitable husband for her as he exceeds her in rank. (cf. II.i.323-326) The fact that Beatrice is a young woman openly refusing to marry, goes against the Elizabethan ideals in place for her role in society. Beatrice rebukes all men, regardless of their social position or wealth. The men in Much Ado About Nothing fail to accept her independence and consider it their duty to find Beatrice a husband and force her into assuming the role of a wife. Her single status is therefore not tolerated as it is not something that was considered respectable or appropriate for a young woman of her status. This is why Don Pedro decides to trick Beatrice and Benedick into falling in love, as he is sure that Beatrice would make "[…] an excellent wife for Benedick." (II.i.348) In Act II after Antonio tells Hero that he hopes she is obedient to her father, Beatrice replies the following, on behalf of her cousin: "Yes, faith, it is my cousin's duty to make curtsy and say, 'Father, as it please you.'" (II.i.51-52) It is clear from Beatrice's sarcastic remark that she believes her cousin is too passive and unquestionably obeys her father's every wish. In the same episode, Beatrice urges her cousin to make sure that her future husband is handsome, before consenting to marry 68 him. With the advice she gives her cousin, Beatrice demonstrates that she is critical of Hero's passive obedience towards her father, and believes that a woman should have a say in marriage plans, even if it only entails choosing a good-looking husband. In this scene, parallels can be drawn between Much Ado About Nothing and The Taming of the Shrew. In the latter, Bianca is also critical of Katherina's stoic obedience towards Petruchio in the final scene, and calls her 'foolish' and a 'fool'. (cf. V.ii.124-128) During Act II, Don Pedro, Leonato and Claudio trick Benedick into believing that Beatrice is in love with him, so that he too will develop feelings for her and love her in return. They talk of Beatrice's affections for him, whilst Benedick listens from his hiding place. The three men describe Beatrice as incredibly lovesick which Claudio highlights in the following account: "Then down upon her knees she falls, weeps, sobs, beats her heart, tears her hair, prays, curses. 'Oh sweet Benedick! God give me patience.'" (II.iii.150-152) Claudio carries on this exaggerated lie, claiming that Beatrice will die if Benedick does not return her love for him. (cf. II.iii.175-176) Both these descriptions of Beatrice show her as an overemotional woman who has succumb to the pains of love and is no longer the strong, happily single woman she once was. Instead, she is now fully dependant on Benedick's love for her and cannot live without him. Although the men lie about Beatrice, giving an untrue figural characterisation of her, the fact that Benedick believes these claims without hesitation is of great importance. It demonstrates that men were unquestionably willing to accept the idea of a desperate, highly emotional woman pining for a man to love her, thus enforcing the idea that no woman could be happy without a man by her side. In this episode, Beatrice's virtue is also highlighted as Don Pedro declares her to be "[…] an excellent sweet lady and, out of all suspicion, she is virtuous." (II.iii.162-163) Although intellect and beauty are also characteristics admired in women, their virtue remains of upmost importance as a virtuous woman is an honourable woman. The men therefore emphasise Beatrice's virtue to further awaken Benedick's interests. In Act III, Beatrice is likewise misled into believing Benedick is in love with her. This time, Hero and Margaret stroll in the garden, discussing Benedick's passions for Beatrice, whilst Beatrice eavesdrops out of sight. Evidence for Hero's boldness can be seen as she organises and directs the scene, manipulating Beatrice into eavesdropping and therefore much resembling the resourceful males Don Pedro and Borachio. (cf. Suzuki 2000: 132) Whilst Beatrice listens from her hiding place, Hero criticises her strong personality in the proceeding description: "[…] she is too 69 disdainful. / I know her spirits are as coy and wild / As haggards of the rock." (III.i.34-36) The term 'haggard' refers to a mature, wild, female hawk. This depiction of Beatrice is therefore very similar to that of Katherina in The Taming of the Shrew, as she is also considered to be a wild, ferocious woman and is compared to a falcon which needs to be tamed. The fact that Hero is aware that Beatrice is listening to the conversation shows that her words are intended to be heard, and are an attempt to change Beatrice's ways and make her into a woman who conforms to Elizabethan norms and expectations. Hero continues to speak harshly of Beatrice in the following lines:

But nature never framed a woman's heart Of prouder stuff than that of Beatrice. Disdain and scorn ride sparkling in her eyes, Misprising what they look on, and her wit Values itself so highly that to her All matter else seems weak. She cannot love, Nor take no shape nor project of affection, She is so self-endeared. (III.i.49-56)

Hero describes Beatrice as arrogant and unwilling to love a man, as she is so full of herself. According to Carol Neely, Hero's mockery and criticism of Beatrice reveals certain resentment towards her cousin, along with her own capacity for aggressiveness, realism, and wit. (cf. Neely 1991: 147) As Hero planned, Beatrice takes the harsh criticism seriously and vows to change her ways and to love Benedick as he loves her:

Stand I condemned for pride and scorn so much? Contempt, farewell; and maiden pride, adieu. No glory lives behind the back of such. And, Benedick, love on. I will requite thee, Taming my wild heart to thy loving hand. (III.i.108-112)

As with the previous reference to the haggard, the final line in the above quotation also refers to a hawk being tamed by its master. In contrast to the taming of falcon- like Katherina however, Beatrice is aware that her wild heart must be tamed and seems all too happy to leave her scorn and pride behind and assume a more appropriate feminine nature. Therefore, unlike in The Taming of the Shrew, there is to be no battle between Beatrice and Benedick, as Beatrice voluntarily submits to her

70 role as a woman who is to be wooed and married, despite her previous declarations of independence and refusal to become any man's wife. The change in Beatrice could not be more sudden or extreme. In contrast to Katherina who changes bit by bit and over time, Beatrice immediately puts an end to her shrewish nature and decides to adapt to society's expectations and become passive and obedient. In Much Ado About Nothing, Shakespeare paints a very unromantic picture of love and marriage. Once Benedick learns of Beatrice's love for him, he rationally and with little emotion decides to love her in return and put an end to his life as a bachelor, because "[t]he world must be peopled." (II.iii.239) Valerie Traub argues that Shakespeare tends to represent marriage as a natural occurrence between men and women, and that Benedick's aforementioned comment has the force of a command. (cf. Traub 2001: 133) Benedick believes he should marry Beatrice in order to have children and consequently ensure that the world remains populated. This claim is a logical statement, a fact of life, and has little to do with romance or love. As already discussed in chapter 1.1.3 entitled 'Wives, Mothers and Unmarried Women', marriage in the sixteenth century was predominantly viewed as a means of procreation, which is supported by Benedick's statement. Later in the play, Benedick arrives at Leonato's house complaining of toothache. (cf. III.ii.21) Similarly on the morning of Hero's wedding day, Beatrice appears with a severe cold. (cf. III.iv.61) Benedick's and Beatrice's ailments express their feelings of love as in the Elizabethan Age, love was regarded as an illness, something painful and unpleasant. (cf. Biewer 2006: 35) It was also believed that the eyes played a key role when falling in love as a love-struck person was unable to see clearly. This is the reason why at the beginning of the play, both Benedick and Beatrice sing high praises for their eyesight in an attempt to show the other characters that they have not yet been blinded by the effects of love. (cf. Biewer 2006: 88-89) Benedick proclaims: "I can see yet without spectacles […]" (I.i.184) and Beatrice claims: "I have a good eye, uncle; I can see a church by daylight." (II.i.79-80) These two Elizabethan characteristics of being in love may explain why in both The Taming of the Shrew and Much Ado About Nothing, Shakespeare treats weddings as rational transactions rather than romantic declarations of love between two people who care greatly for one another. When Hero is accused of being unfaithful to Claudio, she is immediately shunned by her father and her fiancé, as neither believes her innocence. Beatrice, 71 however, never doubts her cousin, and through her unfaltering belief in Hero's virtuousness, also manages to convince Benedick that Hero has been falsely accused. Beatrice believes Claudio is to blame, and decides that he must be killed in order to re-establish Hero's honour. As a woman however, she accepts that she is physically unable to kill a grown man, and thus begs Benedick to commit the murder instead. When Benedick refuses her pleas, Beatrice speaks the following lines:

O that I were a man! What, bear her in hand until they come to take hands, and then with public accusation, uncovered slander, unmitigated ran- cour – O God that I were a man! I would eat his heart in the market place. (IV.i.303-306)

Beatrice draws attention to her inability to avenge Hero's public humiliation and is therefore very much aware of her unequal status as a woman in Renaissance England. Her words stand in contrast to Queen Elizabeth I's famous speech where she addressed her soldiers ahead of battle and highlighted her strong heart, despite having the weak body of a woman (see chapter 1.1.6 'Queen Elizabeth'). Beatrice, however, only focuses on her weakness and believes the problem would be solved if she were a man. Men are therefore once again highlighted as the stronger sex. Following Beatrice's speech, Benedick remains unconvinced that he should kill his friend Claudio. Feeling desperate and helpless, Beatrice accuses all men of cowardice, strongly criticises Benedick's inability to act, whilst at the same time she continues to despair at her own weakness:

O that I were a man for his sake! Or that I had any friend would be a man for my sake! But manhood is melted into curtsies, valour into compli- ment, and men are only turned into tongue, and trim ones, too. He is now as valiant as Hercules that only tells a lie and swears it. I cannot be a man with wishing; therefore I will die a woman with grieving. (IV.i.317-323)

Beatrice once again wishes that she were a man, so that she could save her cousin from everlasting shame and dishonour. She realises, however, that with no amount of wishing will she be able to become a man, and she thus accepts her fate as a woman, capable only of grieving. Her last line demonstrates resignation and submission to the role of a weak and helpless woman. Nonetheless, her poignant speech has an effect on 72

Benedick, who decides to go in search of Claudio and challenge him to a duel. Beatrice is unable to directly approach Claudio herself and challenge him as an equal, but through her powerful words, she is able to convince Benedick to act on her behalf. She is therefore victorious, as Benedick gives in to her demands. Valerie Traub compares Beatrice's provocation of Benedick with that of Lady Macbeth, from Shakespeare's Macbeth, who also persuades her husband to undertake an act of violence through her goading words. (cf. Traub 2001: 138) The effect Beatrice's words have on Benedick demonstrates the power of speech, the only real weapon a woman possessed, which allowed her to overcome the physical weakness of her body. Beatrice makes her final appearance in the play after Hero's honour has been restored. Before Claudio and Hero are married, Benedick asks Beatrice if she loves him. Beatrice replies that her affections for him are no greater than that for a friend, and Benedick confesses that he too does not feel passionately about her. They realise that they have been deceived by their friends. (cf. V.iv.78-79) Benedick, however, tells Beatrice that out of pity, he is willing to marry her, and Beatrice tells him that she will accept his proposal because she has been told that he is ill and she wishes to save him from death. (cf. V.iv.91-96) Carol Neely interprets these lines as Benedick's and Beatrice's mutual refusal to submit to one another and their desire that the other be subordinate. (cf. Neely 1991: 150) These lines can however also be interpreted as a comic ending, as it is clear to the audience that they do indeed love one another and make an excellent couple. (cf. Gay 1994: 144) Both Benedick and Beatrice appear proud and through their aforementioned comments, demonstrate their wish to have the upper-hand in their marriage and to maintain a feeling of power. The final line spoken by Benedick to Beatrice before he kisses her is: "Peace, I will stop your mouth." (V.iv.97) Although she remains on stage until the end of the play, nothing more is heard from Beatrice. Thus, the kiss can be interpreted as marking the beginning of inequality between the couple. (cf. Neely 1991: 151) Beatrice is clearly a dynamic character. At the beginning of the play, she is critical of men, especially of Benedick, and has no intention of marrying. She is loud, witty and shrewish, and often dominates the stage despite being in the presence of men. By the end of the play however, Beatrice has changed and assumes a weak feminine presence, typical for the Elizabethan era. It seems that the prospect of marriage transforms Beatrice from the strong, independent woman she always was, to a subordinate woman who accepts that she must conform to her future husband's 73 wishes and therefore obeys his command and speaks no more. As this is the last that is heard from Beatrice and Benedick as a couple, Benedick's command for Beatrice to be silent is significant and it seems that by taking away her voice, Beatrice is left without her most powerful weapon. This final image of the couple may have served the purpose of showing the Elizabethan audience that a silent woman is the key to a happy marriage.

3.3.3.2 Hero

Although in the first scene of the play Hero is on stage with her cousin and her father, she remains virtually silent throughout, saying only one line to the Messenger to whom she explains who Beatrice means by 'Signor Mountanto'. When Don Pedro and his followers arrive, Hero is once again silent and allows her cousin to dominate the conversation. Despite Hero's silence, she is noticed by Claudio, who asks Benedick what he thinks of her. Unimpressed, Benedick answers "[…] methinks she's too low for a high praise, too brown for a fair praise, and too little for a great praise." (I.i.166- 168) His response indicates that in his opinion, Hero is no great beauty and therefore does not deserve any attention. Claudio fails to take his friend's judgement seriously, and romantically declares: "In mine eye she is the sweetest lady that ever I looked on." (I.i.182-183) Claudio reacts similarly to Lucentio in The Taming of the Shrew, who is also struck by Bianca's beauty and sings her praises. Don Pedro enters the scene and after hearing about Claudio's interest for Hero, declares her worthy of him. (cf. I.i.164) Interestingly, the matter as to whether Claudio is worthy of Hero is not discussed, and is therefore apparently of no importance. Claudio and Don Pedro continue to talk of Hero, and Claudio asks: "Hath Leonato any son, my lord?" (I.i.283) The Prince tells him that Hero is Leonato's only child and thus the sole heir of her father's entire wealth, which strengthens Claudio's interest in her. Although Hero's wealth is not initially discussed, it is a matter of great importance as upon marriage, her entire finances will be handed over to her husband. Thus, Claudio has a great deal to gain from marrying Hero. Don Pedro decides to help his friend woo Hero and tells Claudio "[…] thou shalt have her." (I.i.299) The Prince's

74 promise strengthens the image of the Elizabethan woman as a possession which can be given away by her father and owned by her husband. At the masquerade ball, Hero shows herself to be flirtatious as she teases Don Pedro whilst they dance. (cf. II.i.84-98) Up until now, Hero has not shown any kind of personality as, unlike her talkative cousin Beatrice, she has largely remained silent and invisible. Now though, she openly flirts with the Prince who is hidden behind his mask. On the one hand, it is possible that Hero knows the identity of her masked partner. Thus, in an attempt to ensure a significant rise in society and rank by marrying a prince, she may realise that she must woo him. On the other hand, all four women who participate in the dance show spirit and confidence opposite their male partners. Mike Clamp suggests that: "It is almost as if the women are taking advantage of the masking to redress the balance of male-female power, if only for a moment." (Clamp 2002: 18) Hero's confidence and flirtatious behaviour may therefore not be an accurate reflection of her character, but rather a device used by Shakespeare to serve as entertainment for the audience, as Hero, Beatrice, Ursula and Margaret all mock and tease their partners. Upon finding out from Don John that Don Pedro has wooed Hero and claimed her for himself, Claudio immediately admits defeat and bids farewell to Hero, wishing the Prince "joy of her". (II.i.194) This phrase once again compares Hero to a possession as the wording 'joy of her' and not 'joy with her' reinforces the idea of ownership and passivity on behalf of Hero. The fact that Claudio is so quick to believe Don John and fails to ask Hero or Don Pedro whether what he has heard is true, shows that his feelings for Hero must be largely superficial. When Don Pedro finally resolves the misunderstanding, Claudio immediately forgets his jealousy and once again professes his love for Hero who is on stage with him: "Lady, as you are mine, I am yours. I give away myself for you, and dote upon the exchange." (II.i.305- 306) Within Claudio's romantic rhetoric lies the patriarchal view of Hero as an object of social exchange and possession, of which he will have ownership once they are married. (cf. Neely 1991: 143) Although Beatrice urges Hero to speak and respond to Claudio's declaration of love, she stays silent. Claudio presses Leonato for the marriage to be soon, hoping that the ceremony may take place the following day. Leonato, however, tells his future son-in-law that he must wait another week. Hero does not express her opinion or her feelings on getting married, showing neither joy nor concern. This scene is 75 similar to that in The Taming of the Shrew, when the marriage between Katherina and Petruchio is arranged without any reaction from Kate. Both these scenes suggest that during the Renaissance, women had no say in their own marriage and were expected to accept the plans made for them without question. This episode also highlights the differences between Beatrice and Hero as it appears that Hero is so well-behaved that she cannot break the barriers that force her to assume a subordinate role, and thus fails to make her voice heard. In Act III scene ii, Claudio and Don Pedro are met by the conniving Don John who lies and accuses Hero of being unfaithful: "[…] the lady is disloyal." (III.ii.98) When the disbelieving Claudio asks if he means his Hero, Don John answers: "Even she- Leonato's Hero, your Hero, every man's Hero." (III.ii.100-101) Don John then tells the two shocked men that they should look into her chamber at night, as then they will see evidence for these claims. Claudio promises to publically shame Hero if the accusations prove correct: "If I see anything tonight why I should not marry her, tomorrow, in the congregation where I should wed, there will I shame her." (III.ii.117-119) Both Claudio and Don Pedro, who vows to do the same, demonstrate the fate that awaited unchaste Elizabethan women, namely public humiliation which left them untouchable and dishonoured for the rest of their lives. On the day of the wedding, all the wedding guests and the bride and groom are congregated at church. Claudio, who is enraged at Hero's betrayal, asks Leonato if he is certain that he wants to part with his daughter. When Leonato answers in the affirmative, Claudio cries:

There, Leonato, take her back again. Give not this rotten orange to your friend! She's but the sign and semblance of her honour. Behold how like a maid she blushes here. (IV.i.31-34)

Would you not swear- All you that see her- that she were a maid, By these exterior shows? But she is none. She knows the heat of a luxurious bed. Her blush is guiltiness, not modesty. (IV.i.38-42)

In the first passage, Claudio enforces the image of Hero as damaged goods, which he is unwilling to accept and wishes to return her to the 'manufacturer', namely her father. In the second passage, Claudio publically destroys Hero's reputation by

76 claiming that although from the exterior she appears to be innocent and pure, she is in fact no virgin. The rage Claudio demonstrates in this church scene reflects the humiliation and sense of betrayal he feels. Hero supposedly having sought another man's bed in order to satisfy her sexual desire is the ultimate betrayal in a patriarchal value system which views a woman's sexuality to exclusively belong to her husband. (cf. Hays 1983: 87) At first, Leonato believes that Claudio and Hero have consummated their marriage early, something which, although not taken lightly, was a fairly common occurrence in Elizabethan England, as previously discussed in chapter 1.1.3 'Wives, Mothers and Unmarried Women'. Don Pedro then reveals that he, his brother and Claudio saw Hero talking with a man at her chamber window and confessing to the previous secret encounters they had had together. (cf. IV.i.90-94) Although Hero states her innocence: "I talked with no man at that hour […]" (IV.i.86), none of the men listen to her and she is called a "common stale" (IV.i.65), in other words, a whore. Claudio then bids her: "[…] fare thee well, most foul, most fair; farewell / Thou pure impiety and impious purity." (IV.i.102-103) Herewith, Claudio ruins Hero's spotless reputation, branding her a sinful adulteress and a slut, in front of the entire wedding congregation. In response to these accusations, Hero faints. Hero's fainting fit is similar to Katherina's strong emotional reaction when Petruchio fails to turn up to his own wedding and she leaves the stage weeping. Both these episodes can be considered examples of non-verbal characterisation and highlight women's fragile behaviour and overemotional responses, which may have served the purpose to justify their unequal status in Renaissance society. After Hero's accusers have left the stage, Leonato expresses what he believes as the only option left for his daughter, now that she has been proven to be tainted and sinful:

O Fate, take not away thy heavy hand. Death is the fairest cover for her shame That may be wished for. (IV.i.114-116)

Do not live, Hero, do not ope thine eyes; For did I think thou wouldst not quickly die, Thought I thy spirits were stronger than they shames, Myself would, on the rearward of reproaches, Strike at thy life. (IV.i.123-127)

77

Whilst his daughter lies unconscious on the ground, Leonato wishes her dead. If, he says, Hero were to survive, he would take it upon himself to kill her. Leonato thus believes that death is the only way for Hero to overcome her sullied reputation and to restore her family's honour. Hero awakens and once again declares her innocence and tells her father that if it is found to be true that she was seen last night conversing with her lover, he has the right to reject her as his daughter and torture her to death. (cf. IV.i.177-184) Friar Francis then suggests that Hero should fake her own death and go into hiding, in order provoke pity and remorse in those who have accused her. He believes that it is wiser for everyone to accept the accusations, even if they are false, and that it is not worth fighting to save her reputation. If, he tells them, Hero is not forgiven in death, she should lead a reclusive and religious life in order to salvage her family's honour, "Out of all eyes, tongues, minds and injuries." (IV.i.243) In Western society today, both Leonato's and the Friar's reactions seem extreme and harsh, and demonstrate the severity of such accusations faced by unchaste Elizabethan women. It appears that the only accepted outcome was the death of the accused woman, either as an 'honour killing' carried out by her father or other family member, a natural death, or her own suicide (such as in Ovid's Fasti and Livy's The History of Rome where the chaste and faithful Lucretia is raped by the leader of the soldiers and, in order to prove her innocence to her husband and father, commits suicide in front of them.). (cf. Diane E. Marting 2001: 224) Hero is completely powerless in deciding the outcome of her fate and unquestioningly complies with everything the men decide for her, namely, to fake her own death and if this fails, to pursue a life of religion and total seclusion. From here forth until the final scene, Hero remains silent and invisible, hiding her own feelings and emotions from the audience. As Hero does not reveal her anguish or desperation, it is difficult to feel compassion towards her character because she is so passive. Interestingly, it is her father who reveals his feelings to his brother Antonio and to the audience. Act V Scene i begins with a detailed account of Leonato's feelings at the loss of his daughter's reputation and ends in the following line: "My griefs cry louder than advertisement." (V.i.32) The fact that Hero's father's despair stands in focus, suggests that in the eyes of an Elizabethan audience, a father had more to lose by his daughter's ruined reputation than she herself did. Although Much Ado About Nothing is a romantic comedy, the love between Claudio and Hero is clearly superficial and most likely solely concerned with money 78 and rank. Evidence for this can be seen in Claudio's behaviour after hearing the accusations made against Hero. His reaction at her unfaithfulness is that of outrage and disgust, and it appears that he is only concerned with his own image and reputation, and therefore wishes to forget Hero as quickly as possible. Even when hearing about Hero's death from Leonato, he fails to show a single shred of emotion and remains unfazed, which challenges his previous declarations of undying love for his fiancée. Through his harsh reaction, it becomes apparent that Hero has no more value for Claudio than that of an object which is easily forgotten and replaced. Valerie Traub explains why Claudio has so easily been deceived by Don John: "[…] men have only women's word for the legitimacy of their children, and because patrilineal authority is necessarily transmitted through women's reproductive bodies, men are represented as particularly susceptible to female deception." (Traub 2001: 135) This claim is supported by Leonato's words at the beginning of the play where Don Pedro asks him whether Hero is his daughter and Leonato replies: "Her mother hath many times told me so." (I.i.101) Although the two men are joking and participating in harmless, friendly banter, there is an underlying seriousness to Leonato's comment which portrays men's uncertainty regarding whether they are the true fathers of their children. When Hero's innocence is finally proven with the confession of the villain Borachio, and Don John is discovered as the main perpetrator behind the false allegations, Claudio is once more quick to reinstate his love for Hero: "Sweet Hero, now thy image doth appear / In the rare semblance that I love it first." (V.i.245-246) Leonato enters the scene and keeps up the pretence that his daughter is dead. He orders Claudio to grieve at her tombstone and, in a final trick, to marry his brother's daughter who physically resembles Hero. (cf. V.i.278-286) Claudio gratefully accepts the offer, all too eager to replace Hero. It is therefore difficult to believe the sincerity of Claudio's words when he reads from the epitaph he hangs onto Hero's grave: "So the life that died with shame / Lives in death with glorious fame." (V.iii.7-8) Nor does the song which is sung by Balthasar appear particularly believable, wherein Hero is referred to as a "virgin knight." (V.iii.13) According to Mihoko Suzuki, the name 'Hero' bares strong connotations to a masculine warrior, therefore crossing the boundaries of gender. Evidence for this is reflected in the way Leonato constructs a monument in the memory of his daughter after her apparent death, and the way in which Claudio and Balthasar praise Hero 79 using the previously mentioned glorifications. (cf. Suzuki 2000: 131) However, the image of a fierce warrior is a complete paradox to the real Hero who is presented to the audience as silent, submissive and resigned to her fate with stoic acceptance. The name 'Hero' can therefore not be considered to be a 'speaking name' which would hint towards her strong character and function as authorial characterisation, like in the case of Bianca. Shakespeare's choice of name may therefore have had an ironic comic purpose, as the connotations behind Hero's name could not be further from reality. In the final Act, Hero arrives on stage wearing a mask. Leonato forbids Claudio to see the face of his new bride until he is married to her. This way, Leonato ensures that despite the previous scandal, his daughter will be married to Claudio and thus her honour will be restored. Claudio does not express significant happiness or joy when he realises that Hero is still alive and both he and his bride "[…] move mechanically back into their former roles." (Neely 1991: 150) This demonstrates that there cannot be any real love between the couple as neither appears particularly moved by their reunion. This is the final image of Hero which the audience is left with as nothing more is heard from her. Cousins Hero and Beatrice can be viewed as complete opposites. In the introduction to the Oxford World's Classics Much Ado About Nothing, Sheldon P. Zitner claims: "The Hero of Much Ado is one of Shakespeare's passive young women: obedient, unquestioning, well brought up, thoroughly conventional and rather prudish." (Zitner 1994: 19) Penny Gay attributes Hero's passive nature to the fact that she has a dominant, protective father and is therefore bound to obey him in all matters. Beatrice, however, has no living parents and is therefore freer and more independent than her cousin. (cf. Gay 1994: 144) The analysis of the female characters in Much Ado About Nothing undertaken for this thesis supports these claims as throughout the play, Hero continuously demonstrates her extreme passivity and failure to react to other characters or to take her fate into her own hands. In contrast to Beatrice, Katherina and Bianca, Hero is a static character who remains unchanged throughout the play. Furthermore, she displays few characteristics and when on stage, stays largely invisible, forced into the background by the other more dominant characters. Hero is the perfect representation of a typical young woman of the English Renaissance. She is a woman who has been brought up to silently accept her inferiority and thus unquestioningly obeys those around her.

80

3.3.3.3 Margaret

Margaret is the third and final woman from Much Ado About Nothing to be analysed as part of this thesis. She is Hero's gentlewoman and is actively involved in the plot to frame Hero as an adulteress. However, it remains uncertain as to whether she was aware of the dramatic consequences her actions would provoke. It is important to include her character in this analysis as she represents a different social class of woman compared to the usual aristocratic female characters present in Shakespeare's plays. The first time Margaret makes an appearance is during the masked ball at the beginning of the play. Here she dances with Balthasar, a singer and attendant to Don Pedro, who flirts with her as they dance. Balthasar, a man of Margaret's rank, tells Margaret he likes her but Margaret does not return his advances and boldly criticises his poor dancing skills: "God match me with a good dancer." (II.i.106) "And God keep him out of my sight when the dance is done." (II.i.108-109) With this last statement, she actively rejects Balthasar's advances although they are on the same social scale and would therefore make a respectable couple. This shows that Margaret knows what she wants and is unafraid of giving her opinion, even if this makes her appear rude. Her disinterest in Balthasar is explained later on, when it becomes clear that Margaret aspires to rise above her social rank as a maid and member of the lower class. On the morning of Hero's wedding day, Margaret assists her lady in getting dressed. Margaret demonstrates a great deal of nerve as she tells Hero that she does not like her ruff and advises her to wear a different one: "Troth, I think your other rebato were better." (III.iv.6) "By my troth, 's not so good, and I warrant your cousin will say so." (III.iv.8-9) Hero however, does not listen to her maid and rebukes her recommendations, angrily telling her: "My cousin's a fool, and thou art another; I'll wear none but this." (III.iv.10-11) The fact that Margaret dares to give her mistress fashion advice and bluntly criticises her taste, shows that she is confident in matters of fashion and considers it appropriate to give Hero guidance, even though there is a great social gap separating the two women. From this episode, it is apparent that

81

Margaret does not conform to the role of a silent, obedient and invisible maid, but instead actively participates in conversations with her mistress, as though she were Hero's equal. In the same scene, Margaret turns the conversation to sex, something which is highly embarrassing and uncomfortable for Hero, but which Margaret considers completely natural. Hero wishes for God to give her joy at wearing her wedding dress as her heart is heavy. (cf. III.iv.19) This comment may signify Hero's apprehension at the prospect of marrying Claudio. Margaret however, fails to react to Hero's unease and apprehension, and instead turns the topic to sex: "'Twill be heavier soon by the weight of a man." (III.iv.25-26) This remark is vulgar and evidently refers to sexual intercourse, something which was not spoken of by respectable Elizabethan women of the upper class. Hero immediately reprimands Margaret, but Margaret unabashedly replies that sex and marriage are honourable and that Hero is prudish. (cf. III.iv.28- 36) When Beatrice appears with a cold and complains that she is 'stuffed', she refers to her blocked nose and her inability to smell. (cf. III.iv.61) Margaret however, interprets Beatrice's comment to mean that she is pregnant, and excitedly exclaims: "A maid, and stuffed!" (III.iv.62) Despite Beatrice's obvious sign of sickness, Margaret still manages to construe a sexual meaning out of a completely harmless comment. Margaret is the only female character to talk of sex in such a direct and light manner which points towards her difference in social class. It seems that it was thought normal for those of lower class to talk more vulgarly of such matters, whilst women of the upper class, such as Hero and Beatrice, should reject such topics as inappropriate and rude. Margaret is a woman who does not conform to the typical role of a maid, as not only is she confident in the presence of her mistress, but she also demonstrates great wit and a sharp tongue. With Beatrice lovesick, Margaret seems to step in her shoes and assume her former role of making quirky comments. Beatrice replies to Margaret's comment of her being pregnant with: "O, God help me, God help me. How long have you professed apprehension?" (III.iv.64-65) Beatrice realises that Margaret has become witty and sharp and is not afraid to speak her mind. She likewise draws attention to this when she asks Margaret: "What pace is this that thy tongue keeps?" (III.iv.89) which shows her surprise at Margaret's sudden talkativeness. It is impossible to know the extent of Margaret's participation in framing Hero as an adulteress. What is known, however, is that Margaret allows herself to be 82 seduced by Borachio, one of Don John's followers. Margaret calls Borachio 'Claudio', and permits that he calls her 'Hero', which leads to the false accusations made against the real Hero. Whether Margaret acted knowingly or whether she was distracted by Borachio's higher status and therefore participated unwittingly is not known. The latter argument is however supported by the fact that at a later point in the play, Margaret voices her unhappiness at her low status: "Why, shall I always keep below stairs?" (V.ii.9-10) This comment, as well as her previous confident, self-assured behaviour in front of Hero and Beatrice and her rejection of Balthasar at the ball, all hint towards her desire to rise in society which thus serves to explain why she may have consented to being seduced by Borachio. This would prove that she had no malicious intent in hurting Hero but was instead tricked into causing the scandal through her own ambition. When confronted by Leonato, Borachio highlights Margaret's innocence in the crime, claiming that Margaret: "always hath been just and virtuous." (V.i.296) Margaret is therefore not punished and is allowed to continue working as Hero's gentlewoman. It is interesting that although she allowed herself to be seduced through her own greed and desire for power, Margaret is neither shunned nor dishonoured by the other characters. It appears that due to her low rank in society, her own honour and virtue are of little importance, compared to that belonging to someone of Hero's rank. This could explain why the topic of sex is not taboo for Margaret, as it is not something forbidden or sinful, but natural. Like Hero, Margaret is a static character who remains the same throughout the play. In comparison to her mistress Hero however, she possesses a number of different characteristics which make her an interesting and likeable figure. Sheldon P. Zitner describes Margaret as follows: "Margaret is a woman of superior intelligence and wit […] she can be frank, though at times also tasteless and ill-considered about sexual matters." (Zitner 1994: 44) Judging from this description, she does not conform to the stereotypical role of a maid, and can thus be considered a strong and spirited woman for her social class and rank. Furthermore, she is the only woman in Much Ado About Nothing who remains unmarried, and can therefore be classed as free and independent from patriarchal rule.

83

3.4 Don Quijote

3.4.1 Introduction to the Novel

Don Quijote is a novel written by the infamous Spanish author, Miguel de Cervantes, nearly four hundred years ago. With Don Quijote, Cervantes laid the foundations for the modern novel and secured himself everlasting fame in literary history. (cf. Riley 1986: 65) What sets Cervantes aside from other European authors of the Renaissance, is not only his pioneering narrative techniques which were considered highly experimental and modern for the seventeenth century, but also his supreme mastery of story-telling, which is why many regard him as the greatest novelist of all time. (cf. Murillo 1990: 4) Indeed, it can be argued that the story of Don Quijote the deranged knight, who along with his dim-witted squire, Sancho Panza, attacks windmills believing them to be giants, is as popular today, in the twenty-first century, as it has ever been. In an international book survey conducted in 2002, Don Quijote was voted best book of all time by over one hundred successful authors from 54 different countries. (cf. Chrisafis 2002: online) According to Angelique Chrisafis, an arts correspondent for the British newspaper The Guardian, "Miguel de Cervantes' tale of misguided heroism gained 50% more votes than any other book, eclipsing works by Shakespeare, Homer and Tolstoy." (Chrisafis 2002: online) The fact that Don Quijote is so popular today, despite four hundred years having passed since the book was first published, shows that modern-day readers are still able to relate to the novel in some way. Don Quijote is a long and complex novel consisting of two parts, each of which is made up of relatively short chapters which cover a huge variety of different characters who all come into contact with the knight and his squire. Part one was first published in 1605, and part two in 1615. From the start of the novel it is obvious that Don Quijote is a parody of the chivalry romances which were highly popular during the Spanish Renaissance. According to Louis Andrew Murillo, "[i]n a purely technical sense parody consists of the exaggerated, hence comical, imitation of an original, and may imply both criticism and censure." (Murillo 1990: 35) To fully appreciate the humoristic elements in Don Quijote, it is essential to be aware of this parody, as this was how Cervantes intended the novel to be enjoyed.

84

In 2003, Howard Mancing, a leading expert on Don Quijote, published an article discussing the relationship between the various different narrative voices which appear in the novel. Mancing argues that "[…] few issues in Cervantine scholarship have attracted more attention than the identification of the narrative voices in the novel and the clarification of relationships among them." (Mancing 2003: 118) Therefore, the basic narrative structure of Don Quijote will briefly be discussed in the following section, before moving on to a short summary of the novel, followed by an in-depth analysis of the most important female characters.

3.4.2 The Narrative Structure of Don Quijote

Part one of Don Quijote begins with a detailed prologue, in which the author justifies the writing of the text and introduces the novel, transmitting valuable information to the reader. Mancing draws attention to the prologue and claims that it is an important and prominent feature of Spanish Renaissance literature. (cf. Mancing 2003: 121) In the prologue, Cervantes claims to only be the 'padrastro' (stepfather) or editor of the novel, merely piecing together fragments of actual historic events. By distancing himself from the text and denying his role as sole creator of the novel, Cervantes imitates the conventions found in books of chivalry which were traditionally written in the guise of historical documents: "What this ironic posturing, intertextual allusion, and clever metatextual play does is establish the tone for the work: festive, satiric, intellectually subtle." (Mancing 2003: 126) E. C. Riley emphasises the delight which Renaissance readers of the novel would have had when recognising typical incidences common in romances of chivalry, but with an odd and comical twist. (cf. Riley 1986: 35) Howard Mancing comments on the shifts witnessed in Don Quijote between the first-person and second-person narrator. He argues that the shift in narration is an extremely common strategy in Renaissance texts and should not cause the reader confusion. (cf. Mancing 2003: 130) In chapter nine, the narrator mentions Cide Hamete Benengeli as the author of the actual text, which was apparently translated from Arabic into Spanish by an unnamed 'morisco'. Although this narrative structure may initially be confusing for the reader, Anthony Close attempts to facilitate basic

85 understanding of Don Quijote: "Officially, the narrator is the Moor Cide Hamete Benengeli (the 'first author'), whose chronicle is translated by another Moor and edited by Cervantes (the 'second author'); implicitly, as the reader perfectly well knows, the narrator is Cervantes himself." (Close 1990: 15) The official pretence that the adventures of Don Quijote are historical events captured by Benengeli in a manuscript found by Cervantes is a further parody of a literary tradition which invented long and reliable histories for the characters and plots in chivalric romances. (cf. Close 1990: 15) Having a deranged man as the central character and a Moor as the alleged author of the text, even though the reader is aware that the actual author is Cervantes himself, has the effect that the text's reliability is questioned, and doubt is cast upon the accuracy of the events. (cf. El Saffar and Zavala 1995: 303-304) From the beginning of the first chapter and throughout the entire novel, the narrator is very much present and proves to be anything but subtle. It is clear from the following passage taken from part one, chapter II, that the first person 'yo' refers to the actual author Miguel de Cervantes, the 'collector and editor' of the various historical events leading to the creation of the novel:

Autores hay que dicen que la primera aventura que le avino fue la del Puerto Lápice; otros dicen que la de los molinos de viento; pero lo que yo he podido averiguar en este caso, y lo que he hallado escrito en los anales de la Mancha es que […]. (Some writers say that the first adventure he met with was that of Puerto Lapice; others say it was that of the windmills; but what I have managed to find out, and what I have discovered written in the annuals of La Mancha, is […].) (Cervantes 2010: 36)

Although the narrator remains largely objective, mostly presenting the events that occur from a distance, he does occasionally give emotional responses to what is happening in the story, and at times even directly criticises the Arab author, like for example in the following sentence: "Si a ésta se le puede poner alguna objeción cerca de su verdad, no podrá ser otra sino haber sido su autor arábigo, siendo muy propio de los de aquella nación ser mentirosos […]." (If any objection is raised concerning its (the previous story's) valid nature, it can only be due to its author being an Arab, as lying is a common trait in their nation […].) (Cervantes 2010: 88) According to James Paar's account of the narrative structure in Don Quijote, the narrator "[…] effectively establishes within the text an ironic tone and a mocking attitude toward the knight, and a point of view toward the historicity of the account." (Paar 2005: 21) Due to this

86 tone of mockery, the reader is constantly aware of the subjective nature of the accounts and the reliability of the narrator is therefore often questioned. Even though Don Quijote is mainly a parody of chivalric literature, it is also a collection of poems, songs, literary and heroic discourses, as well as short stories known as novellas. These can be found interwoven with the narrative tales of Don Quijote and Sancho Panza, and can each be considered a story-within-a-story. One such tale appears in part one, chapter XXXIII, with the title "El curioso impertinente" (The Ill-Advised Curiosity). This tale will be analysed later in the paper due to the interesting female character it includes.

3.4.3 Plot Summary of Part One and Part Two of Don Quijote

Part one begins with the author's dedication to the Duke of Bejar and is followed by a prologue, in which Cervantes introduces the reader to the main character named Don Quijote. Cervantes claims that Don Quijote is a real-life person, whose adventures he has merely gathered and presented in the form of a novel. The story begins in a rural part of Spain called La Mancha, with the character Alonso Quijano, an eccentric middle-aged man obsessed with books of chivalry. He lives together with his niece and housekeeper. After years of reading books of chivalry and unquestioningly believing their fictitious content, he decides to become a knight-errant. He changes his name to 'Don Quijote', puts on a rusty suit of armour and takes a gaunt and crippled old horse named Rocinante as his brave and sturdy steed, in order to experience the adventures he has so often read about. However, before heading off as a knight-errant and in true chivalry fashion, he names a neighbouring farmer girl as his lady love, calling her Dulcinea and creating the perfect imaginary woman out of an ugly peasant girl who suspects nothing of his platonic love for her. Through his absurd actions, it is clear from the very beginning that Don Quijote is not completely sane. In his first adventure, he arrives at an inn which he mistakes for a castle and takes two common prostitutes he sees outside to be beautiful princesses. He is 'knighted' by the innkeeper, who he believes to be the keeper of the castle, and after staying the night, rides off in search of more adventures. He intervenes when he witnesses a young boy being beaten by a farmer, and is later badly

87 injured himself by merchants who insult his imaginary lady, Dulcinea. Don Quijote is returned home by a neighbouring peasant, and his niece, housekeeper, the parish curate and the local barber all vow to prevent him from leaving the house and, for his own safety, burn his entire collection of books of chivalry. As soon as he recovers, Don Quijote sets out on yet another adventure, this time in the company of an illiterate labourer called Sancho Panza, whom he promises to make governor of an island if he serves him as a squire. The two men participate in a number of ridiculous adventures, including Don Quijote's famous battle with the windmills which he believes to be evil giants. Many characters are met along the way, including women from varying backgrounds, each with an interesting tale to tell. After having experienced countless adventures, Don Quijote and Sancho Panza return to their home village. Part two of the novel, published ten years later, resumes the story of Don Quijote. In the second part of the novel, the already famous Don Quijote and Sancho Panza, whom many of the characters have read about in part one (here Cervantes includes the literary device known as 'metafiction'), attempt to deceive the pair of unusual heroes. For example, Don Quijote's love for Dulcinea is often ridiculed and tested by other characters, whilst Sancho Panza is tricked into believing that he is the governor of an island, which unfortunately ends in his humiliation and results in the pair deciding to return home for good. The story concludes with Don Quijote regaining his sanity and realising that he is in fact Alonso Quijano. On his deathbed, he finally acknowledges the absurdity and madness of his previous adventures and disavows all books of chivalry, swearing to disinherit his niece if she marries any man who reads heroic literature. The book ends with Don Quijote's death and some final concluding words by the Arab 'author', Cide Hamete Benengeli.

88

3.4.4 Analysis of the Female Characters in Don Quijote

3.4.4.1 Dulcinea

Dulcinea is the most important woman in Don Quijote's life and "[…] is one of the most extraordinary character conceptions in literature." (Riley 1986: 135) She is Don Quijote's lady love and the one he dedicates all his acts of chivalry to. Through Don Quijote's persistent remarks and declarations of love for her, Dulcinea is constantly present throughout the entire novel, despite never actually making an appearance. However, far from being a woman who actually exists, Dulcinea is nothing more than a fantasy, an idealised woman who has been created by Don Quijote himself, as part of his madness. Dulcinea is exclusively described by Don Quijote, and her characterisation is therefore purely figural, based on the explicit comments made by a madman. Before starting out in search of adventures, Don Quijote realises that, like all knights from his beloved books of chivalry, he too needs a woman to love in order to give his deeds a purpose. In the following passage, he declares the importance of finding such a woman: "[…] porque el caballero andante sin amores era árbol sin hojas y sin fruto y cuerpo sin alma." ([…] because a knight-errant without love was like a tree without leaves or fruit and a body without a soul.) (Cervantes 2010: 33) So, Don Quijote decides to make a village girl, with whom he was once in love (unbeknownst to her), the lady of his thoughts. He names her 'Dulcinea del Toboso' and, as the story unfolds, creates a completely different image of her, compared to the real-life simple village girl who initially inspired his imagination. From the very first time that Dulcinea is mentioned, it is clear to the reader that she does not exist and is a mere fragment of Don Quijote's imagination. Apart from the fact that Dulcinea never appears, nor do any of the other characters in the novel ever meet her, Don Quijote also admits to his squire Sancho Panza that Dulcinea is not real, but is based on the peasant girl, Aldonza Lorenzo. When Sancho, who knows the girl, shows his surprise at this revelation, Don Quijote justifies his love for his fantasy woman by telling Sancho that famous poets, authors and dramatists also invent glorified versions of women to inspire and furnish their verses.

89

Like these, he has created an image of the perfect woman who he loves and adores, as she is both beautiful and has an excellent reputation:

[...] dos cosas solas incitan a amar, más que otras, que son la mucha hermosura y la buena fama, y estas dos cosas se hallan consumadamente en Dulcinea, porque en ser hermosa, ninguna le iguala, y en la buena fama, pocas le llegan. Y para concluir con todo, yo imagino que todo lo que digo es así, sin que sobre ni falte nada, y píntola en mi imaginación como la deseo, así en la belleza como en la principalidad [...]. ([…] only two things make love possible, namely beauty and a good reputation, and both these can be found in the highest degree in Dulcinea, because no one equals her in beauty, nor do they reach her good reputation. And to conclude, I imagine that everything is as I say it is, neither more nor less, and I picture her in my imagination as I desire her to be, in beauty as well as in principle […].) (Cervantes 2010: 244)

The above quote demonstrates that like in tales of chivalry and other romantic literary traditions, Don Quijote transforms the idea of Dulcinea into an object of desire which must be worshipped and written about. (cf. El Saffar and Zavala 1995: 305) Don Quijote places the upmost importance on Dulcinea's beauty and her good reputation, meaning her chastity. María Teresa Cacho makes a direct comparison between Don Quijote's ideal imagined woman and the female perfection described by humanists in conduct books during the Renaissance (see chapter 1.1.4 'Conduct Books'). According to Cacho, both male-created images are unrealistic and so far-fetched, that no woman could ever fit into such a schema of perfection. (cf. Cacho 1995: 178) Judith Whitenack explores the parallels between Don Quijote and romances of chivalry, and claims that Dulcinea fits into the concept of a hero's lady from the chivalric novels which fire Don Quijote's imagination. (cf. Whitenack 1993: 71-72) Like with every hero's lady, Dulcinea is:

[…] an inaccessible beauty from a higher position on the social scale than the hero, so that to win her represents upward mobility for him […]. Her main functions, other than to provide inspiration for the hero, is to remain aloof during most of the narration before finally accepting his proposals, to drive him crazy with irrational jealousy at least once, and possibly to be rescued by him from capture or enchantments. (Whitenack 1993: 73-74)

In his fantasy, Don Quijote creates a woman who is so perfect that he worships her with total conviction and constantly puts himself in danger in order to defend her honour. In the novel, common chivalric deeds and incidents which are echoed in Don Quijote's own mad adventures are twisted into comic, often ridiculous episodes. Lidia 90

Falcón points out that Dulcinea is a mere parody of the women who were idealised and idolised by the knights which appear in the books of chivalry which Don Quijote allows to influence his life so much. (cf. Falcón 1997: 24) Rosario Hernández Catalán describes Cervantes' idealisation of Dulcinea as a "perversa idealización" (perverse idealisation) as it is so far from reality. (Catalán 2005: online) Physically, Dulcinea is the exact portrayal of the women who were worshipped by provincial troubadours. (cf. Strosetzki 1991: 122) According to Lisa Rabin, Don Quijote's imagined image of Dulcinea directly corresponds with the Renaissance convention known as the 'blasón', where women were described as a series of body parts which functioned as objects to be worshipped by men. The 'blasón' is also a key part of Petrarcha's lyric, as instead of giving the complete picture of a woman, only her single body parts are described. (cf. Rabin 1994: 82) Evidence for this literary tradition can be seen in Don Quijote's following physical description of Dulcinea:

[…] su nombre es Dulcinea; su patria, el Toboso, un lugar de la Mancha; su calidad por lo menos ha de ser de princesa, pues es reina y señora mía; su hermosura, sobrehumana, pues en ella se vienen a hacer verdaderos todos los imposibles y quiméricos atributos de belleza que los poetas dan a sus damas: que sus cabellos son oro, su frente campos elíseos, sus cejas arcos del cielo, sus ojos soles, sus mejillas rosas, sus labios corales, perlas sus dientes, alabastro su cuello, mármol su pecho, marfil sus manos, su blancura nieve […]. ([…] her name is Dulcinea, her homeland Toboso, somewhere in La Mancha, her rank is at least that of a princess, since she is my queen and lady; her beauty is superhuman, since all the impossible and fanciful attributes of beauty which poets apply to their ladies are verified in her: her hair is golden, her forehead Elysian fields, her eyebrows are rainbows, her eyes suns, her cheeks roses, her lips coral, her teeth pearls, her neck alabaster, her breasts marble, her hands ivory, her fairness snow […].) (Cervantes 2010: 115)

One can clearly see from the above poetic description just how unrealistic Don Quijote's image of Dulcinea is. He tells whoever will listen that she is beautiful beyond belief, with fair hair and a faultless complexion. In chapter 1.1.5 entitled 'Beauty', the Petrarchan ideal of what was considered beautiful in a woman was discussed, as well as the unrealistic and unachievable nature of this kind of beauty in the average woman of the Renaissance, especially in southern countries such as in Spain, where people tend to have a darker complexion. As noted by Lidia Falcón, "[e]n un país de iberos morenos de pelo negro, que convive y se mezcla durante ocho

91 siglos con árabes y judíos, resulta cuando menos chocante que las mujeres más admiradas sean las rubias y pálidas de ojos claros." (In a country with dark-skinned Spaniards and eight centuries of living together and mixing with Arabs and Jews, it is at the very least shocking that the most admired women are blonde, with a fair complexion and light eyes.) (Falcón 1997: 166) The physical description of Dulcinea can therefore be seen as unrepresentative of the average woman during the Spanish Golden Age, and consequently, can be considered a direct result of Don Quijote's own desires based on the Renaissance ideal of beauty. It can be argued that Don Quijote's admiration for Dulcinea would not be so high if she were a realistic woman who actually existed. Don Quijote does not wish to worship the plain and simple peasant girl Aldonza Lorenzo, as she does not compare to the fantastical image of a hero's lady. Instead, he imagines Dulcinea as a lady of upper class and high rank, who lives in a castle far away from village life. Jacqueline Ferreras Savoye describes the importance of social rank: "[…] la valoración de la mujer, como objeto potencial de amor, viene rigurosamente determinada por su estatuto social." ([…] a woman's value as a potential object of love, is rigorously determined by her social status.) (Ferreras Savoye 1995: 81) This shows that only through her high position on the social scale does Dulcinea prove herself perfect. It would therefore not be possible for a peasant girl from a far lower social status, like Aldonza Lorenzo, to be idealised by Don Quijote. Dulcinea is a static character with few characteristics, and solely exists through Don Quijote's descriptions of her physical appearance. It is obviously difficult to analyse Don Quijote's treatment towards Dulcinea, as she is a mere fragment of his imagination. As he does however take her so seriously, and she is the driving force behind all his actions, it is important to consider what he thinks of her. Don Quijote's treatment (if it can be called this!) of Dulcinea is very respectful. He obviously adores her and performs the most ridiculous and dangerous tasks, all in her name. Dulcinea is also the only woman for Don Quijote, and he never lets himself be tempted by other women or is unfaithful, even though she remains unattainable for him. He always defends her honour if she is insulted, and would happily lay his life down for Dulcinea to prove his utter devotion to her. However, Dulcinea is not a real character and cannot be seen to represent any real woman from the Spanish Renaissance. Instead, she stands for a typical idealised female figure present in romantic poetry and literature during the Golden Age, and is therefore an object to be 92 admired. Due to only existing in the fantasy of a mad man, Dulcinea cannot be directly compared to any of Shakespeare's female characters which have been analysed as part of this paper. Nonetheless, comparisons can be made between Dulcinea and the woman described in Shakespeare's 'Sonnet 130', which openly mocks the Petrarchan beauty ideal, a lot like Cervantes does by parodying an errant- knight's platonic love for a female, through Don Quijote's love for Dulcinea. It can therefore be argued that both Shakespeare and Cervantes were 'anti-blasón' and critical of the Renaissance concept of beauty, as they were aware of the fact that it could never be reached by real-life women.

3.4.4.2 Marcela

Marcela is a woman who stands apart from the majority of the female figures in Don Quijote. Her defence of equality between men and women makes her one of Cervantes' most interesting independent-minded young women. (cf. Riley 1986: 80) Marcela is introduced in chapter XII in part one of Don Quijote. Don Quijote and Sancho Panza spend the night with a group of goatherds in the open-air. Whilst they eat, drink and are merry, another goatherd enters their camp and tells them that the student Grisóstomo is dead, having died from his love for Marcela. He then proceeds to tell the tragic tale of Marcela and Grisóstomo, and the series of events which led to the young man's death. Through the shepherd's story, Marcela is described through figural characterisation before making an actual appearance in the novel. (cf. Don Quijote 2004: 103-109) Marcela's story begins much the same as that of many other women during the Spanish Golden Age. Her mother and father both died when she was still young, so she was placed in the care of her uncle, a pastor. Marcela's family background is identical to that of Beatrice from Much Ado About Nothing, as she too is an orphan, placed in the care of her uncle. The fact that both Cervantes and Shakespeare include orphaned women in their writings shows that this was a common fate for many women during this period. As Marcela grows older, her beauty also increases, and because she is also very wealthy from having inherited her parents' riches, she soon has many suitors wishing to marry her. Marcela's popularity with men can be

93 compared to that of the rich and beautiful Bianca from The Taming of the Shrew, as she also has many admirers who all wish to marry her. It appears that men are drawn to women not only by their beauty, but also by their wealth, as they gain to profit greatly from marrying a rich woman. In the tale of Marcela and Grisóstomo, men come from far and wide to ask for Marcela's hand in marriage but she refuses them all, repeating that "[…] no quería casarse y que, por ser tan muchacha, no se sentía hábil para poder llevar la carga del matrimonio." ([…] she did not want to marry, and due to her young age, she did not feel ready to carry the burden of matrimony.) (Cervantes 2010: 107) Instead of forcing his niece to marry and arranging a marriage for her, as would usually have been the case in young women who did not wish to marry, her uncle refuses to give his niece away against her own will: "Porque, decía él, y decía muy bien, no habían de dar los padres a sus hijos estado contra su voluntad." (Because, he said, and he was quite right, parents should not give their children away without their consent.) (Cervantes 2010: 107) This is clearly different to what happens in The Taming of the Shrew, where Baptista Minola arranges for his daughter Katherina to marry Petruchio, even though she clearly tells her father that she does not wish to marry him. Katherina's opinion is, however, not taken into consideration, and the marriage is arranged without her consent. Likewise, in Much Ado About Nothing, it is arranged for Hero to marry her suitor Claudio, even though she never directly agrees to the match, and even shows apprehension on her wedding day. In contrast, Marcela has an unusually lenient and understanding uncle who, for a man living in a male-dominated society, shows a great deal of compassion towards his niece and refuses to force her into marrying someone against her choice. Ruth El Saffar and Iris Zavala interpret the uncle's behaviour as a sign for his weakness and Marcela's strength: "El casto tío cura de Marcela es incapaz tanto de convencerla de que se case con alguien, o de evitar que haga exactamente su voluntad." (Marcela's honourable priest uncle is unable to convince her to marry someone, or to prevent her from doing exactly as she pleases.) (El Saffar and Zavala 1995: 318) Despite being given the right to choose whom she marries, Marcela refuses every potential suitor and instead decides to become a shepherdess in order to maintain her independence and lead an autonomous existence. Her wish for independence is confirmed by Murillo:

94

[Marcela] finds in the solitude of fields and hills the indispensable state for the preservation of her freedom and chastity. She is a woman 'liberated' from both family and Church […] in that she neither needs nor wants the care of either for the fulfilment of her womanhood. (Murillo 1990: 47-48)

Not only does she reject matrimony, she also refrains from becoming a nun and living the rest of her life in a convent. This fate, which awaited many single Spanish women, was discussed in chapter 1.3.2 'Spanish Catholicism', and was shown to be not as idyllic as many women initially expected it to be. Marcela therefore does not fit into any of the four categories (as mentioned by Victoriano Santana Sanjurjo in chapter 1.1.1) intended for women of the Spanish Golden Age. She shows strength in going against what is expected of her, namely marrying, and instead defends her right to independence. There are parallels between Marcela and Beatrice from Much Ado About Nothing, as at the start of the play, Beatrice also refuses to marry and is happy and content to live without a husband. However, as Beatrice is easily tricked into falling in love with Benedick and by the end of the play happily agrees to marry him, and Marcela remains single and chooses a life of solitude, Marcela can be considered the stronger of the two women as she never conforms to the pressures of marriage. Katherina likewise objects to marriage at the beginning of The Taming of the Shrew, but in the final scene, she demonstrates that she has embraced married life and is willing to obey her husband's commands. The majority of men present in the Marcela-Grisóstomo episode show similar behaviour to that of Petruchio in The Taming of the Shrew. Like with Katherina, the general opinion in Don Quijote is that Marcela needs to be tamed and dominated: "[…] todos los que la conocemos estamos esperando en qué ha de parar su altivez y quién ha de ser el dichoso que ha de venir a domeñar condición tan terrible y gozar de hermosura tan extremada." ([…] all of us who know her are waiting to see what will come of her haughtiness and who will be the man to succeed in taming her terrible character, so he can enjoy her extreme beauty.) (Cervantes 2010: 108) Her free and independent nature is therefore not accepted or tolerated by society, and it is considered necessary to tame her so that she conforms to the image of the Spanish Golden Age woman. Furthermore, the above quote demonstrates the male opinion that men have the right to enjoy a woman's beauty, which essentially gives her the same value as an object which is to be admired, such as in the case of Dulcinea.

95

Although as a shepherdess Marcela leads a solitary life away from people, she still manages to attract the attention of men because of her good looks and wealth. With her beauty, she bedazzles and bewitches the other shepherds roaming the hillsides, causing many to fall in love with her: "[...] nadie la miraba que no bendecía a Dios, que tan hermosa la había criado, y los más quedaban enamorados y perdidos por ella." ([…] no one looked at her without blessing God for making her so beautiful, and many fell in love with her past redemption.) (Cervantes 2010: 106) Grisóstomo is a young student who is among those who fall helplessly in love with Marcela. He therefore disguises himself as a shepherd and attempts to woo Marcela. Although Marcela never returns his affections for her, she always remains polite and friendly, unconsciously giving him false hope. As she continuously evades his advances, Grisóstomo ends his own life in a final desperate act of a love-sick romantic. Due to the fact that the young Grisóstomo was well-liked and popular, his friends and family directly blame Marcela for causing his death. In chapter XIII, Don Quijote and Sancho Panza join the shepherds and goatherds and attend Grisóstomo's funeral. Ambrosio, Grisóstomo's best friend, tells the crowd of mourners about his friend's misfortune:

Quiso bien, fue aborrecido; adoró, fue desdeñado; rogó a una fiera, importunó a un mármol, corrió tras el viento, dio voces a la soledad, sirvió a la ingratitud, de quien alcanzó por premio ser despojos de la muerte en la mitad de la carrera de su vida […]. (He loved deeply, he was hated; he adored, he was scorned; he wooed a wild beast, he pleaded with marble, he pursued the wind, he cried to the wilderness, he served her despite her ingratitude, and all he got in return for his efforts was to die in the middle of his life […].) (Cervantes 2010: 118)

In this heart-felt speech, Ambrosio presents Marcela as a cold, unfeeling woman who cruelly rejected Grisóstomo, despite his upmost efforts and love. In addition to Ambrosio's harsh depiction of Marcela are Grisóstomo's own tormented and unhappy words, which are read aloud from the last letter he ever wrote. Both these accounts describe Marcela as haughty and cruel, and give the impression that she is directly responsible for Grisóstomo's death. The hatred for Marcela felt by the male shepherds can be contributed to the fact that she never gave in to Grisóstomo's advances but instead rejected him, wounding his male pride, especially as women were always expected to embrace the opportunity of marriage. (cf. Catalán 2005: online) Indeed, evading male advances and rejecting marriage was considered unnatural behaviour for

96 a woman of the Golden Age, and was believed to be a direct rebellion "[…] against the natural order of things as decreed by God […]", which intended women to marry and have children. (McKendrick 1983: 116) Up until now, Marcela has purely been presented through negative figural characterisation in absentia, which obviously influences the reader into feeling unsympathetic towards her. Now however, she makes her first and only appearance in the novel. After receiving such harsh criticism, Marcela suddenly emerges from behind the rock where the shepherds are digging Grisóstomo's grave: "[…] tan hermosa, que pasaba a su fama su hermosura." ([…] so beautiful that her beauty exceeded its reputation.) (Cervantes 2010: 124) All except Ambrosio stop what they are doing to gaze in awe at her beauty. Ambrosio takes the opportunity to insult Marcela, calling her a "fiero basilisco" (a ferocious basilisk), arrogant, ungrateful and cruel. (cf. Cervantes 2010: 125) Marcela does not ignore these insults, nor does she walk away from the angry crowd of shepherds. Instead, she stays and gives a famous long speech which has become the most popular example for arguing that Cervantes may indeed have been a feminist. (cf. Catalán 2005: online) In the following extract, she explains and justifies her wish to be free and to be left alone and defends her honour, saying she is not to blame for Grisóstomo's death:

[…] yo no escogí la hermosura que tengo, que tal cual el cielo me la dio de gracia, sin yo pedilla ni escogella […]. Yo nací libre, y para poder vivir libre escogí la soledad de los campos: los árboles de estas montañas son mi compañía; las claras aguas de estos arroyos, mis espejos; con los árboles y con las aguas comunico mis pensamientos y hermosura […]. A los que he enamorado con la vista he desengañado con las palabras […]. Que si a Grisóstomo mató su impaciencia y arrojado deseo, ¿por qué se ha de culpar mi honesto proceder y recato? ([…] I did not choose to have this beauty that was given to me by the grace of heaven, without asking or choosing it […]. I was born free, and in order to live in freedom, I chose the solitude of the fields: the trees of these mountains are my companions; the clear waters of these brooks, my mirrors; I share my thoughts and beauty with these trees and waters […]. Those who have fallen in love with me, I have undeceived with words […]. If impatience and violent passion killed Grisóstomo, why should my honest and modest behaviour be blamed?) (Cervantes 2010: 126-127)

In her poignant speech, Marcela passionately argues that the accusations against her are unfair, as she did not choose to be beautiful or to have admirers. All she wishes is to be left alone so that she can live an honest and chaste life where she can be at one with nature. In her paper entitled 'The Pastoral Episode in Cervantes' Don Quijote', Yvonne Jehenson responds to Marcela's provocative outburst as follows: 97

Marcela refuses to be silent, refuses to be blamed for Grisóstomos suicide, and refuses to vindicate herself within the terms of the binarisms used to malign her. She simply asserts her freedom to live her life in her own way, thereby subverting the Persecutor/Victim dichotomies and undermining centuries-old normative expectations. (Jehenson 1990: 26)

The power of speech as a woman's weapon is therefore shown in this episode, just as with Shakespeare's Katherina and Beatrice who at the beginning of both plays, also refuse to be silent and use their tongues and sharp words as weapons against male oppression. Victoriano Santana Sanjurjo interprets Marcela's character as being a way for Cervantes to express his own views towards the repression of women and their right for more independence:

La respuesta de la pastora condensa todo el pensamiento fundamental de Cervantes hacia la mujer y su independencia. […]. La intervención de Marcela es, repetimos, todo un canto revolucionario a favor de las mujeres, de su derecho a elegir y de su derecho a que las dejen en paz. (The shepherdess's reply condenses all of Cervantes' fundamental views on the woman and her independence. Marcela's intervention is, we repeat, a revolutionary song in favour of women and their right to choice, as well as their right to be left in peace.) (Sanjurjo 2008: online)

According to Sanjurjo's commentary, Cervantes expresses his own revolutionary views on women through Marcela's character. This is supported by Jehenson who also argues that "[…] Marcela's plea for freedom to live her own life, reflect[s] Cervantes' discomfort with women's traditional role in literature and in life." (Jehenson 1990: 27) From both commentaries, it is clear that Marcela breaks all norms and conventions present in Renaissance society, and goes against what was expected from women at that time. During the Spanish Golden Age, the majority of women were neither free to do what they wanted, nor able to live independently without a husband or outside the boundaries of a female convent. Marcela cannot therefore be considered an accurate representation of the average Spanish woman during the Renaissance, and is therefore seen as revolutionary. In neither of the two Shakespeare plays which have been analysed, is there a female figure that expresses such a wish to freedom and independence as does Marcela. In her article on Don Quijote and feminism, Rosario Hernández Catalán claims that Marcela's virginity plays an important part in her independence. By guarding her

98 virginity and choosing a life of chastity, Marcela is able to escape from the fate of a vicious cycle of pregnancies that led to the death of so many women of the Renaissance. (cf. Catalán 2005: online) Ruth El Saffar and Iris Zavala explain Marcela's controversially independent character as follows: "[…] [es] personaje que afirma su derecho a vivir fuera de los confines de la construcción del mundo creado por las leyes del patriarcado [...]. Marcela es amada pero no ama." ([she] is a character who affirms her right to live away from the confines of a world constructed by patriarchal laws […]. Marcela is loved but she does not love in return.) (El Saffar and Zavala 1995: 323) Due to Marcela's unconventional behaviour, some critics have reacted negatively towards this strong, independent female character. Yvonne Jehenson summarises these negative opinions, claiming that on the one hand, some find it difficult to believe that Marcela could be content living without a man at a time where such importance was given to matrimony. On the other hand, however, her behaviour at the funeral has been criticised for being insensitive, as she fails to show any emotion at Grisóstomo's death, thus behaving very unladylike as women were generally considered weak and overemotional. Indeed, Marcela only appears at the funeral to give her speech and to declare her innocence. (cf. Jehenson 1990: 16-17) It can however be argued that Marcela may merely be taking advantage of the crowd of people and the sombre, quiet atmosphere in order to be heard, as she may not usually have the opportunity to speak in front of so many people in order to plead her cause. Her inappropriate behaviour at the funeral can therefore be explained as an act of desperation, as she has no other choice if she wants to be left alone and prevent people from pestering her. Marcela reveals clear parallels with Dulcinea, as both women are idealised and idolised by men. Marcela is made into an object of desire to be hunted and conquered by men like Grisóstomo, who are bewitched by her beauty and tempted by her wealth. These men want her for themselves and refuse to accept or respect the fact that she does not want to marry anyone and only wishes to be left alone. Only one character in the novel shows support for Marcela's wish for freedom and stands up for her in front of the angry crowd. This character is Don Quijote himself. After giving her speech, Marcela turns her back on the crowd of people and disappears into the thick forest. Various men intend to follow her, heedless of her previous words. Don Quijote therefore takes it upon himself to protect Marcela and gives the following warning to those who wish to pursue her: 99

Ninguna persona, de cualquier estado y condición que sea, se atreve a seguir a la hermosa Marcela, so pena de caer en la furiosa indignación mía. Ella ha mostrado con claras y suficientes razones la poca o ninguna culpa que ha tenido en la muerte de Grisóstomo [...], en lugar de ser seguida y perseguida, sea honrada y estimada de todos los buenos del mundo [...]. (No one, whatever their rank or condition, is to follow the beautiful Marcela, or they risk experiencing my furious indignation. She has shown with clear and satisfactory arguments, that she has little or no fault in causing Grisóstomo's death […], instead of following or persecuting her, she should be honoured and esteemed by all the good people of the world […].) (Cervantes 2010: 128)

In his defence of Marcela, Don Quijote shows great compassion for her, and hopes that others will listen to him and accept Marcela's innocence and honesty. However, as the others consider him to be insane, his defence of Marcela does not have any effect on their negative view of Marcela and they continue to hold her responsible for the death of their friend. For a reader of the sixteenth and seventeenth century, Don Quijote's compassion towards Marcela may also have been a sign for his madness, especially as he is the only man present to give her his support. His madness could affect the reliability of his words, producing the opposite effect in the reader who may agree with the majority that Marcela is indeed to blame for Grisóstomo's death. Furthermore, as soon as the mourners leave, Don Quijote decides he too must follow Marcela as he believes it is his duty to protect her. Indeed, "[h]e cannot recognize that Marcela is the woman and damsel who refutes his notion of defenceless feminine virtue […]" and instead assumes that she needs his help in defending her rights. (Murillo 1990: 49) Thus, not only do his previous words lose their value, but he also undermines her strong character and wish to be left alone, as he seeks to be her protector. His contradictory behaviour can be seen as a sign for his madness, or the fact that he is no different from Marcela's other male persecutors. This being said however, Don Quijote and Sancho Panza never find Marcela and nothing more is heard of her. She is therefore allowed to disappear and no one succeeds in forcing her to give up her freedom. Don Quijote may not be different to the other men who are obsessed with Marcela, but through his words of support, he provokes the reader into questioning the treatment of women and their right to lead an independent life. Due to the power of Marcela's freedom speech and the way she successfully rejects all that was expected of women during the Renaissance, Cervantes can be seen as being ahead of his time concerning women's rights as, unlike

100 with the strong women in both of Shakespeare's plays, Marcela remains unmarried and free to lead an autonomous existence.

3.4.4.3 Dorotea

The exceptionally beautiful Dorotea first appears in chapter XXVIII. The barber and the curate meet Cardenio, a half crazy, love-sick man of high rank, who tells them his story of how he lost his fiancée to Don Fernando, the son of a duke in Andalusia. Cardenio finishes his story and suddenly the group of men hear a sorrowful voice claiming misfortune. The voice belongs to a youth dressed in peasant clothes, sitting on a rock next to the stream and bathing his feet. The men immediately notice how delicate and fair the young boy's feet are. Not until the peasant removes his hat and releases a mass of long, golden hair, do they realise that the person sitting before them is in fact Dorotea, a beautiful young woman dressed in boys' clothes: "Con esto conocieron que el que parecía labrador era mujer, y delicada, y aun la más hermosa que hasta entonces los ojos de los dos habían visto […]." (And with this they knew that what had seemed at first to be a peasant, was in fact a lovely woman, and up until then, for two of them, the most beautiful that their eyes had ever beheld […].) (Cervantes 2010: 276) The narrator proceeds to give a detailed physical description of Dorotea as she jumps up in panic when she realises that she is being watched. Salvador J. Farjardo notes that "[…] Dorotea is, so far, the first beautiful woman described directly by the text, that is to say, without the intermediary of a character's language." (Farjardo 1984: 100) Up until now, the other beautiful women in Don Quijote, namely, Dulcinea and Marcela, have exclusively been described through figural characterisation. On the one hand, the authorial description of Dorotea seems more believable to the reader compared to the previous descriptions of women, as these were always subjectively viewed through the eyes of different characters such as Don Quijote, who may have been blinded by his madness. On the other hand, Dorotea's blonde hair and fair complexion seem as unbelievable as Dulcinea's beauty, as both descriptions reflect Petrarcha's unrealistic and unachievable idea of beauty for Spanish women of the Golden Age.

101

In order to explain her current situation and why she is disguised as a peasant boy, Dorotea feels compelled to tell the group of men her story. Through her sorrowful tale, she characterises herself as innocent and wronged, evoking sympathy and compassion from the reader. Dorotea begins to speak with "[…] tan suelta lengua, con voz tan suave, que no menos les admiró su discreción que su hermosura." ([…] such ease and with such a delicate, soft voice, that they admired her intelligence, as well as her beauty.) (Cervantes 2010: 277) She tells them that she comes from Andalusia, and that her parents are rich, but neither noble nor of high rank. Dorotea describes her life as that of a typical unmarried young woman of her class: she receives a basic education and is taught how to sew, use a spinning wheel, read and play the harp, all skills that were adequate and necessary for girls her age. Whenever she leaves her house to go to morning mass, she is forced to conceal herself behind a veil and is always accompanied by her mother or another woman of the household. (cf. Cervantes 2010: 279) This conforms to the image of young, unmarried middle- class women as previously discussed in chapter 1.1.3 'Wives, Mothers and Unmarried Women.' Despite Dorotea's sheltered upbringing, Don Fernando, the son of the rich duke whom her parents work for, falls in love with her and begins to pursue her. Although he sends her countless declarations of love and bribes her parents and their household staff, Dorotea suspects that Don Fernando has no intentions of marrying her and only wants her to satisfy his lust. She therefore refuses to give in to his proposals and her parents, who also distrust Don Fernando, contemplate marrying their daughter to another man, to put an end to Don Fernando's advances. One night, Don Fernando sneaks into Dorotea's locked chamber, secretly let in by her maid. Don Fernando passionately takes Dorotea into his arms but Dorotea remains strong and tells him that she will not voluntarily give herself to any man but her husband:

Tu vasalla soy, pero no tu esclava; ni tiene ni debe tener imperio la nobleza de tu sangre para deshonrar y tener en poco la humildad de la mía; y en tanto me estimo yo, villana y labradora, como tú, señor y caballero. Conmigo no han de ser de ningún efecto tus fuerzas, ni han de tener valor tus riquezas, ni tus palabras han de poder engañarme, ni tus suspiros y lágrimas enternecerme […]. Todo esto he dicho porque no es pensar que de mí alcance cosa alguna el que no fuere mi legítimo esposo. (I am your vassal, but not your slave; your noble blood does not give you the right to dishonour or degrade my humbleness; and despite being a low-born peasant, I have as much self-respect as you, a lord and gentleman. Your violence will not have any effect on me, your wealth will bear no value, your words will not 102

have the power to deceive me, your sighs and tears will not soften me […]. I have said all this in case you suppose that anyone other than my lawful husband will ever win anything of me.) (Cervantes 2010: 282)

In this speech, Dorotea declares her right to her virginity and honour, despite not being of noble birth. Her words demonstrate that she is strong and unwilling to submit to Don Fernando, regardless of his power and wealth. Don Fernando, taking advantage of her innocence and naivity, takes an oath to marry her: "[...] te doy la mano de serlo tuyo, y sean testigos de esta verdad los cielos a quien ninguna cosa se esconde, y esta imagen de Nuestra Señora que aquí tienes." ([…] I give you my hand in marriage, and let the heavens, from which nothing is hidden, and this image of Our Lady you have here, be witnesses to this pledge.) (Cervantes 2010: 282) Don Fernando repeats his oath in front of Dorotea's maid who acts as a witness, and with that, Dorotea finally submits to his demands and allows him to take her virginity. After their first night together, Don Fernando's passions for her quickly fade and it turns out that his words were but an empty promise and Dorotea finds herself alone, without a husband and no longer a virgin. Not only has she been betrayed by the man who promised to take her as his wife, but also by her maid, who allowed him to enter her chamber and made no attempt to help her mistress escape from Don Fernando's clutches. In Much Ado About Nothing, Hero is also betrayed by her maid, Margaret, who unwittingly plays a key part in framing her mistress as an adulteress. Cervantes' sister Andrea may have served as inspiration for Dorotea's character, although Cervantes would also have been familiar with other women who had been tricked by so called 'burladores' (deceivers), as this was not uncommon in those days. Robert L. Hathaway describes Dorotea's cruel fate as "[…] the familiar story of a very beautiful young woman pursued, seduced and ultimately abandoned by a lustful man of higher rank." (Hathaway 1993: 111) These unfortunate women were mostly sent to live the rest of their lives in convents, or else they became social out- casts, shunned by society and forever considered impure and unchaste. Indeed, after finding herself deserted by her fiancé and pregnant with his child, Andrea de Cervantes had no choice but to earn a living as a prostitute in order to support her daughter. In the end, like so many others before her, she too embraced religious life. (cf. Gutiérrez Sebastián and Moreno Llaneza: online) Dorotea is an interesting female figure as she does not accept the fate which awaits her for having had a sexual relationship outside wedlock. After realising that

103

Don Fernando has tricked her and has no intention of marriage, she decides to take it upon herself to find him and persuade him to fulfil his promise and take her as his lawful wife. Dorotea therefore runs away from home, with only a male servant as her guide, and goes in search of Don Fernando. She soon finds out however, that Don Fernando has married Luscinda, a beautiful girl of high rank. After hearing that her parents have offered a reward for anyone who finds her and brings her home, she flees into the mountains with her trusted servant, and disguises herself as a peasant boy. Farjardo points out the necessity of such a disguise for a young woman travelling only in the company of a servant, as dressed in her normal clothes, she would have been incredibly vulnerable to attack, or frowned upon for being without father or husband. Furthermore, he points out that through her disguise, Dorotea is able to overcome her feminine 'weakness', and instead takes on a bold masculine appearance which reflects her strong character. (cf. Farjardo 1984: 104) Alone in the wilderness, Dorotea quickly realises that her servant's intentions towards her are not honourable, and when he attempts to rape her, she pushes him off a cliff and leaves him for dead. She then finds work serving a herdsman who believes she is a peasant boy. However, as soon as he finds out that Dorotea is in fact a woman in disguise, he too shows sexual interest in her. Dorotea therefore runs away and decides to live alone in the wilderness, out of shame and desperation, and hopes that Heaven will release her from her misery. (cf. Cervantes 2010: 284-288) On the one hand, Dorotea demonstrates strength and determination as she does not allow her servant or the herdsman to have their way with her, and even manages to physically push a grown man off a cliff in order to protect herself from him. On the other hand however, after experiencing so many horrors, it seems that Dorotea has given up as when the curate, the barber and Cardenio find her, she is desperately unhappy and wishes for some wonder to save her from her misery. Even so, the fact that a young woman is able to survive far away from civilisation, completely alone without a male protector, speaks for Dorotea's unusual strength and independence which is similar to that of Marcela, who lives only in the company of her goats. Later in chapter XXXVI, Dorotea is finally reunited with Don Fernando when he unexpectedly arrives at the inn where she is lodging with Don Quijote, Sancho Panza and Cardenio. As soon as she sees him, she kneels down before him, and in floods of tears gives a long speech, which the following passage is an extract of:

104

Yo soy aquella labradora humilde a quien tú, por tu bondad o por tu gusto, quisiste levantar a la alteza de poder llamarse tuya […]. Tú quisiste que yo fuese tuya, quisístelo de manera que aunque ahora quieras que no lo sea no será posible que tú dejes de ser mío […]. […] tú sabes bien de la manera que me entregué a toda tu voluntad […]. Y si no me quieres por la que soy, que soy tu verdadera y legítima esposa, quiéreme a lo menos y admíteme por tu esclava; que como yo esté en tu poder, me tendré por dichosa y bien afortunada. (I am the humble peasant girl who you, either in good-nature or for your own pleasure, wanted to raise high enough to call your own […]. You wanted me to be yours, and even though you now think differently, it is not possible for you to stop being mine […]. […] you know fully well how I willingly gave myself to you […]. And if you will not have me as your lawful and true wife, then take me as your slave; for as long as I am in your power, I count myself happy and fortunate.) (Cervantes 2010: 379)

In her lengthy and heartfelt speech, Dorotea begs Don Fernando to take her as his wife, and even declares herself willing to become his slave, as she would rather face a life being ruled by him, than a life without him. Dorotea assumes the role of a subordinate woman, desperate for Don Fernando to keep his promise and marry her so that her honour may be restored and she can lead a normal life with a husband at her side. Through her wretched plea, it is clear just how important virginity and chastity were during the Renaissance, and the terrible fate that women were subjected to, regardless of whether they were tricked, raped or willingly gave into a man's advances. The ending of the Dorotea episode is fortunately happy, as Don Fernando accepts Dorotea as his wife, while his actual wife, Luscinda, is allowed to marry her long lost lover Cardenio, who never stopped loving her. Through Dorotea's sheer determination, she is able to persuade Don Fernando to marry her and thus succeeds in restoring her honour. Dorotea may therefore be considered a strong woman who goes against society's expectations for dishonoured women at that time, as she takes matters into her own hands, refusing to enter a convent or stay at home and face punishment. Instead, she seeks out the man who cheated her and is responsible for disgracing her. However, once she finds him, she does not reproach him for his behaviour or seek revenge, but fully submits herself to him, willing even to live her remaining life as a servant, just so that she can be in his proximity. This highlights her weakness as a woman, as there is no other realistic option available to her apart from marriage or a life in servitude where she would remain disgraced and unmarried. Furthermore, she delivers her speech weeping and on her knees, which could not be more different from Marcela's speech which was given standing above the crowd of

105 people and without any outward show of emotion or weakness. Nonetheless, Dorotea fulfils her goal and is able to restore her previously lost honour. The theme of chastity and honour is reflected in the Hero-Claudio plot in Much Ado About Nothing. Like Dorotea, Hero is also disgraced and her honour and chastity are questioned, as she is accused of pre-marital sex with her lover. Compared to Dorotea however, Hero reacts passively despite the accusations being false. Hero neither shows courage to stand up and defend herself, nor seeks the villains responsible for casting doubt on her spotless reputation. Instead, she allows the Friar and her father to fake her death and is even prepared to embrace religious life, so that her family's honour may be restored. Thus, in contrast to Dorotea, Hero conforms to the restrictions placed upon her by patriarchal rules, and is therefore more representative of disgraced women of the Renaissance. In his article which explores the rhetorical devices used by women in Don Quijote, Matthew A. Wyszynski highlights the differences between Dorotea's and Marcela's powerful speeches:

Dorotea is as formidable a woman as Marcela. Both have made a decision and both have actively undertaken courses of action contrary to the expectations of society. Despite these similarities, Dorotea's use of rhetoric is much more effective than Marcela's. (Wyszynski 2010: 91)

Not only is Dorotea able to illicit help from the three men who are spell-bound by her tale of woe, but she is also able to persuade the rogue, Don Fernando, to take her as his wife, even though he could easily deny her claims and dishonour her further. Murillo also highlights Dorotea's strong character which he argues is reflected in her verbal outpour: "She pleads, weeps and sobs out of apparent desperation, yet the verbal vehemence of her discourse is a measure of her intelligence and energetic self- possession." (Murillo 1990: 109) In contrast, Marcela is only able to convince Don Quijote of her right to independence, as none of the other people present take her seriously or respect her wishes. It can therefore be argued that Dorotea is more successful than Marcela at getting what she wants. However, it must be added that both women have two very different causes: Dorotea wishes to restore her virtue and honour after being deceived and immediately gains her listeners' sympathy, as men often deceived innocent young women and the characters can therefore relate to her plight. Marcela however, is unable to persuade anyone other than the insane knight

106 that her cause is honourable, as her cry for independence is revolutionary and completely unique in Renaissance society, and is therefore met with hatred and suspicion. Based on their different causes and how they deliver their speeches, Marcela can be considered the stronger woman as she succeeds in remaining unmarried and successfully challenges the boundaries and restrictions in place for women of the Golden Age, and is ultimately able to lead an independent life, free from patriarchal rule. Dorotea, in contrast, is condemned to live a life of obedience and submission to her husband, a man she does not love but is forced to marry to save herself from eternal disgrace.

3.4.4.4 Teresa Panza

Sancho Panza's wife, Teresa Panza, is one of the only mother figures to appear in Don Quijote. Although there is a marked absence of mothers in Cervantes' literature, some examples of powerful mothers can be found in the novel Los trabajos de Persiles y Sigismunda (1617) and the novella La fuerza de la sangre (1613). (cf. El Saffar and Zavala 1995: 295) Due to the complete lack of mother figures in both of Shakespeare's plays, Teresa can only be compared to those Shakespearean characters who carry out the role of a wife. Because Much Ado About Nothing exclusively focuses on women before they are married, the only wife Teresa can be compared to is Katherina from The Taming of the Shrew, as although Bianca is also married, her relationship with her husband is not given much attention in the play. Teresa Panza lives in a small house in a village and has two children: a son and a daughter. Whilst her husband Sancho is travelling through Spain, taking part in crazy adventures with his master Don Quijote, Teresa stays at home and looks after the children. Lidia Falcón points out the contrast between Teresa's laborious housework, and her husband's often reckless and irresponsible behaviour: "[...] tenemos a Teresa Panza tranquila en su casa, trabajando en las tareas cotidianas que dan de comer a sus hijos, cultivando el campo y cuidando a los animales, mientras se escandaliza por las locuras del hidalgo y de su marido." (We have Teresa Panza quietly at home, carrying on with the domestic chores which feed her children, working in the fields, and looking after the animals, whilst the madness of the knight

107 and her husband irritate her.) (Falcón 1997: 67) Judging by this description, it seems that Teresa is more responsible than her husband as she carries on with the important tasks, whilst Sancho amuses himself. Furthermore, she demonstrates that she is a physically strong woman who is able to carry out backbreaking chores by herself, and can successfully survive without a husband at her side. When Sancho arrives home in chapter LII at the end of part one, Teresa runs to greet her husband. Instead of showing joy at his return, she enquires after the donkey's health, seemingly unconcerned for her husband's well-being. She then presumes to ask Sancho what he has brought back for her and the children, after being away for such a long time. Her wishes for gowns for herself and shoes for the children demonstrate her materialistic nature and outspokenness, as she expects her husband to provide for his family and has no qualms in telling him so. (cf. Cervantes 2010: 527) Her failure to show affection towards her husband may demonstrate the underlying anger she feels at having to manage everything alone whilst her husband takes part in crazy adventures. Teresa therefore does not comply with the role of a doting housewife, but rather demonstrates a strong character and is primarily concerned with providing for her children and ensuring that she too has some benefit out of Sancho's expeditions. Teresa stands in stark contrast to her husband. Whereas her husband increasingly allows himself to be influenced by his master Don Quijote, and progressively loses his sense of reality, Teresa stays realistic and does not let herself be carried away by her husband's fantasies. She is very much 'down to earth', is unambitious, and does not wish for anything to change in their lives. She happily accepts their social class, something which differs to her husband who, despite his simple, poor background, dreams of becoming the governor of an entire island. Teresa's lack of ambition can clearly be seen when studying the relationship she has with her daughter María, otherwise known as Mari Sancha or Sanchica. Sancho wants to ensure a good match between his daughter and a rich man, so that the entire family can benefit from the newly acquired wealth and his daughter is guaranteed a rise in society. Teresa, however, wants her daughter to marry someone of equal status and class, who comes from a similar background. She feels her daughter would be unable to be herself if she were married to a gentleman of great wealth, as she would constantly feel uncomfortable in the presence of high-society, and would never be accepted by her husband. Instead, she would continuously be humiliated and always 108 reminded of her humble background. In the following speech, Teresa gives Sancho her opinion on the matter of their daughter's marriage:

¡Por cierto que sería gentil cosa casar a nuestra María con un condazo, o con caballerote que cuando se le antojase la pusiese como nueva, llamándola de villana, hija del destripaterrones y de la pelarruecas! ¡No en mis días, marido! ¡Para eso, por cierto, he criado yo a mi hija! Traed vos dineros, Sancho, y el casarla dejadlo a mi cargo, que ahí está Lope Tocho, el hijo de Juan Tocho, mozo rollizo y sano, y que le conocemos y sé que no mira de mal ojo a la muchacha; y con éste, que es nuestro igual, estará bien casada, y le tendremos siempre a nuestros ojos, y seremos todos unos, padres y hijos, nietos y yernos, y andará la paz y la bendición de Dios entre todos nosotros; y no casármela vos ahora en esas cortes y en esos palacios grandes, adonde ni a ella la entiendan ni ella se entienda. (A fine thing it would be, to marry our María to a great count or gentleman who, whenever he feels like it, would insult her, calling her a scoundrel and the daughter of farmers and wool spinners! Not over my dead body, husband! I have not raised my daughter for this! You bring home the money, Sancho, and leave marrying her up to me; there is Lope Tocho, Juan Tocho's son, a stout and sturdy lad who we know and I know that he has an eye for the girl; and with him, one of our sorts, she would be well married and would always be near us and we would be together, parents, children, grandchildren and son-in-laws, and peace and God's blessing would be among us; so do not marry her to those courts and grand palaces where she will neither understand, nor be understood.) (Cervantes 2010: 583-584)

In this speech, Teresa is clearly outspoken and tells her husband exactly what she thinks. She draws attention to the fact that she alone has raised María, in an attempt to increase her right for a say in the matter. Teresa uses solid, rational arguments which differ greatly from Sancho's wild fantasies, and reminds her husband of their humble background and class boundaries. Her challenging of Sancho is therefore utterly justified, and her reasons appear sensible in comparison to her husband's farfetched ideas. The language Teresa uses shows she is high-spirited and strong-minded, and not afraid of criticising her husband. This can be seen by the punctuation used in her speech, as the exclamation marks demonstrate her strong feelings on the matter, and may even indicate that she is shouting at her husband. She therefore does not assume a passive role of silently accepting all her husband's decisions. Although Sancho allows Teresa to give her speech without interruption, his strong reaction in the following extract shows his fury at her for undermining him and not supporting his decision or assuming her natural position as an obedient wife:

— Ven acá, bestia y mujer de Barrabás — replicó Sancho —: ¿por qué quieres tú ahora, sin qué ni para qué, estorbarme que no case a mi hija con quien me dé nietos

109

que se llamen «señoría»? […] ¿No te parece, animalia — prosiguió Sancho —, que será bien dar con mi cuerpo en algún gobierno provechoso que nos saque el pie del lodo? Y cásese a Mari Sancha con quien yo quisiere […]. Y en esto no hablemos más, que Sanchica ha de ser condesa, aunque tú más me digas. (— Come here, you beast and wife of Barrabas — replied Sancho —: why are you trying to prevent me without reason, from marrying my daughter to someone who gives me grandchildren who will be known as «lordship»? […] Do you not see, you animal — carried on Sancho —, that it will be good for me to enter some profitable government that will make us prosperous? I will marry Mari Sancha to whom I wish […]. And we will speak no more of this, Sanchica will be a countess regardless of what you say.) (Cervantes 2010: 584)

Sancho insults his wife by calling her 'beast' and an 'animal' which both indicate her wild nature but emphasise that she is subordinate and not his equal. In The Taming of the Shrew, Katherina is also compared to a falcon, and in Much Ado About Nothing, Beatrice is compared to a female hawk. However, in both these cases, the animal imagery is not used as an insult, but is rather intended as a metaphor to justify the need to tame the women into more gentle beings. In their argument, Sancho also refers to Teresa as 'wife of Barrabas', a disrespectful Spanish proverb used as an insult. Sancho attempts to put his wife in her rightful place and assert his authority by making it clear that he will do as he likes, and that their daughter's fate lies entirely in his hands. Even though he is never at home and therefore takes no active part in his children's upbringing, he still considers it his right to decide what is best for them and does not take his wife's opinion into consideration, even though she only wants the best for Mari Sancha. It seems that Teresa's right to an opinion does not stretch beyond the household. Instead, Sancho clearly considers himself as head of the family and solely responsible for deciding matters of importance. Following her husband's outburst, Teresa continues to remain unconvinced by Sancho's arguments and repeats that she is vehemently against his wish to marry María to someone of high rank. Despite her low rank in society, she shows that she is verbally confident and thoroughly able to express herself, refusing to be silent. Indeed, according to Louise Ciallella, "Sancho and Teresa are in a relationship of verbal equality (even with its simultaneous praise and insult)." (Ciallella 2003: 288) In the end however, Teresa realises her efforts are futile as she is merely a woman, and finally admits defeat in the final passage of the chapter:

El día que yo la viere condesa — respondió Teresa —, ése haré cuenta que la entierro; pero otra vez os digo que hagáis lo que os diere gusto, que con esta carga 110

nacemos las mujeres, de estar obedientes a sus maridos, aunque sean unos porros. (The day I see her a countess — replied Teresa — will be the same to me as if I were burying her; but I tell you again, do as you please, because we women are born with the burden of having to obey our husbands, even if they are stupid.) (Cervantes 2010: 587)

Teresa realises the futility of her arguments and therefore, instead of continuing to fight for her beliefs concerning her daughter's wellbeing, she accepts her subordinate position as a wife and tells Sancho he should do as he pleases. She repeats her strong fears for her daughter, but also acknowledges women's natural inferiority to men and the obedience they must show towards their husbands. This statement stands in stark contrast to Marcela's speech where she declares: "Yo nací libre" (I was born free) (cf. Cervantes 2010: 126), refusing to acknowledge any natural inferiority just for being female. Although Teresa initially puts up a fight on the matter of her daughter's future, and behaves very untypically of what was expected from passive, silent wives of the Golden Age, she eventually complies with Sancho's wishes as she has no other option than to obey. She does, however, finish her final outburst with an insult at her husband, implying that he is stupid, like many other husbands who women are forced to obey. The chapter ends with Teresa weeping in earnest as an ultimate sign of defeat. On the one hand, the fact that she weeps even though she has, up until now, given strong arguments and responses to Sancho's demands, demonstrates her weakness as a woman as she ultimately can do no more than cry and admit failure. On the other hand however, she may tactfully employ this measure in an attempt to emotionally appeal to Sancho and manipulate him. Indeed, her crying does have an effect on Sancho as he consoles her and promises to delay Mari Sancha's marriage to a noble man for as long as possible. In fact, the marriage never takes place and whether or not Sancho is able to carry out his goal and marry his daughter to a count or gentleman is left open to the reader. Although Sancho initially assumes the typical role of a dominant husband, refusing to listen to his wife and insulting her for speaking her mind, he does show compassion and understanding towards her grief and never directly carries out his intentions of marriage. Therefore, Teresa's arguments appear to have had their intended effect upon Sancho who, as a compromise towards his wife's wishes, delays his plans of marriage and María remains unmarried until the end of the novel. This concluding factor serves to indicate certain equality between Sancho and Teresa, as Teresa is victorious in their dispute, managing to cleverly convince her 111 husband to put his plans of marriage on hold. This episode is reminiscent of Much Ado About Nothing, where Beatrice likewise outwardly accepts defeat and acknowledges her female weakness, but still manages to manipulate Benedick into confronting Claudio and challenging him to a duel. (cf. IV.i.317-323) Teresa's refusal to remain silent and to allow her husband to act as he pleases, shows similarities to Katherina's loud manner at the beginning of the play, when she first meets her future husband Petruchio. Like Teresa, Katherina also confidently argues with Petruchio, however, whereas Katherina directly insults Petruchio and matches his witty comments and remarks, Teresa is more restrained as she only criticises her husband's decision without ever directly insulting him. Teresa can therefore be seen as more respectful towards her husband compared to Katherina, even though Sancho's insults of her are far more serious than Petruchio's teasing. The changes brought on Kate by Petruchio's taming methods are dramatic and by the end of the play, she demonstrates her submissive behaviour towards her husband. Lidia Falcón directly compares Cervantes with Shakespeare in the following statement: "No cae Cervantes nunca en la vulgaridad de defender la domesticación de las mujeres a manos de maridos brutales y mandones, como le ocurre a Shakespeare en su misógina comedia 'La fierecilla domada.'" (Cervantes never vulgarly defends female domestication in the hands of brutal and domineering husbands, as Shakespeare does in his misogynistic comedy The Taming of the Shrew.) (Falcón 1997: 71) This is supported by the fact that Teresa is a static character who remains largely unchanged throughout the novel, always making her opinion clear, even if this results in conflict. Teresa can be considered a strong female figure, as she is outspoken, opinionated, a successful mother and farmer (despite having no husband at her side) and succeeds in preventing Sancho from immediately marrying María to a noble man.

3.4.4.5 Zoraida

Zoraida is the only woman to appear in the novel who comes from a foreign background and culture. She makes her first appearance in part one, chapter XXXVII, when she and her male companion, referred to only as 'the captive', arrive at the inn where Don Quijote and Sancho are staying. The captive's name is not revealed until

112 far later in the story, which contrasts to Zoraida and shrouds him in a certain degree of anonymity, as her name is known from the start. It is immediately apparent from the veil that covers her face, her exotic appearance and her silence, that she is a Moor. Her obvious different culture sparks suspicion and distrust among the group, and Dorotea voices her fears, asking the captive: "Decidme, señor […]: ¿esta señora es cristiana o mora? Porque el traje y el silencio nos hace pensar que es lo que no querríamos que fuese." (Tell me sir […]: is this woman a Christian or a Moor? Because her clothes and her silence have us believe that she could be what we wish she were not.) (Cervantes 2010: 390) From Dorotea's question, it is instantly clear that Moors were not a welcomed sight in Spain (see chapter 1.3.3 'Islam in Spain' for background information on the Spanish population of Moors). The captive tells them that she is indeed a Moor, but that her heart is that of a Christian, and she has left her home country of Algiers to be baptised in Spain and lead a Christian life. When Zoraida removes her veil, the group of onlookers discover that she is utterly beautiful, even more so than Luscinda and Dorotea. With her beauty, she bewitches the guests at the inn and they immediately warm to her and treat her kindly. In the following chapters, the captive tells their story of how they came to be in Spain, and Zoraida's background is revealed. The captive relates how he was captured by the Turks and held prisoner in Algiers. Kept locked up in prison, he is noticed by the young Moorish girl, Zoraida, who lives in a large house overlooking the prison. She falls in love with him from afar, and drops money into his cell along with a letter in which she promises to help him escape if he takes her with him to Spain. In this letter, she writes the following:

Yo soy muy hermosa y muchacha, y tengo muchos dineros que llevar conmigo. Mira tú si puedes hacer cómo nos vamos, y serás allá mi marido, si quisieres, y si no quisieres, no se me dará nada […]. (I am young and very beautiful, and I have a lot of money to take with me. See if you can arrange for us to go, and there you will be my husband, if you like, and if you do not want to, it will not distress me.) (Cervantes 2010: 414)

This, and two further letters, are the only times when Zoraida's real, authentic voice is directly heard, apart from her short outburst during their arrival at the inn, where she exclaims: "¡No, no Zoraida: María, María!" (No, not Zoraida: María, María!) This is an attempt to highlight her Christian belief as she is very much aware of how her Moorish appearance provokes distrust in the Spanish. (Cervantes 2010: 391) On all 113 other occasions, Zoraida's voice is only heard through the captive's own words, and Zoraida herself is excluded from participating in his tale as she does not speak the Spanish language. She is therefore virtually void of subjectivity as the reader is denied a first-hand account from Zoraida herself, and she is instead solely represented through the captive's figural characterisation of her. (cf. Webster Garrett 2000: 144) In the above extract taken from her first letter, Zoraida refers to herself as beautiful and rich. This makes her appear arrogant and confident and may be Cervantes' attempt to highlight the cultural differences between Spanish women and the Moors. Zoraida is clearly determined to convert to Christianity and in order to ensure her own safe passage to Spain, offers to marry the captive and to make him wealthy with her father's riches. Unlike Dorotea's pleading with Don Fernando, she does not beg the captive to marry her, but instead shows indifference, as she makes it clear that she will not mind if he does not take her as his wife. Furthermore, she is the one to express her wish for marriage in order to benefit from the arrangement and fulfil her deepest desire to lead a Christian life. Choosing a partner for self-benefit, without ever having met face-to-face, is common behaviour for Cervantes' and Shakespeare's male characters. Examples of such behaviour can be seen between Grisóstomo and Marcela, and Claudio and Hero in Much Ado About Nothing, as both men seek the benefits of a rich and beautiful wife. Zoraida therefore breaks the norms in place for women at the time by being the one to propose marriage and actively pursue a man for her own benefit. Both these actions were typically carried out by men and never by women, who instead were meant to play the passive role of merely receiving men's attentions. When Zoraida's father catches the captive with his arm around his daughter, Zoraida is quick to react and feigns a fainting fit in order to justify their behaviour. This demonstrates Zoraida's great initiative and cunning, as she is easily able to fool her father. Likewise, she manipulates the captive into helping her escape from home, as she lies about her cruel father, claiming the following: "[…] si mi padre lo sabe, me echará luego en un pozo y me cubrirá de piedras." ([…] if my father were to find out, he would at once throw me down a well and cover me with stones.) (Cervantes 2010: 414) It soon becomes clear however, that instead of being cruel and violent, her widowed father dotes upon his beloved daughter as she is everything he has. Her lenient father allows his beautiful daughter to refuse her many suitors and for the time being, remain unmarried. This behaviour is mimicked in Marcela's uncle who also 114 refuses to force his niece into marrying one of her many suitors against her will. Zoraida's father also shows great concern when he believes his daughter to have fainted and lovingly attends to her. (cf. Cervantes 2010: 422-424) His love for her is however most clearly seen when he finds out that Zoraida plans to convert to Christianity and leave him and her home behind, in order to start a new life in Spain. At first, he is furious and curses his daughter for choosing to go with Spanish Christians, their natural enemies. However, left behind on shore and with his daughter sailing away, he makes the following heartfelt plea:

Vuelve, amada hija, vuelve a tierra, que todo te lo perdono; entrega a esos hombres ese dinero, que ya es suyo, y vuelve a consolar a este triste padre tuyo, que en esta desierta arena dejará la vida, si tú le dejas. (Come back, my beloved daughter, return to shore, I forgive you all; give the men the money, for it is theirs now, and come back to console your sad father, who on this dry shore will cease to live if you leave him.) (Cervantes 2010: 432)

Murillo describes this heart-breaking scene as follows: "In all of Cervantes' fiction there is no scene more solemn and heart-rending, and no figure more desolate than this father lamenting his loss and none more deserving of our compassion." (Murillo 1990: 120) Despite his devastation at losing his daughter, Zoraida carries on with her plan. It is clear that Zoraida has a very strong personality, and that her determination to become a Christian and marry the captive is even greater than the love for her father, as she ignores his pleads and leaves him behind. Not even the threat to end his life influences her decision, and she carries on with her journey to Spain, cold heartedly deserting her father. Not only does this demonstrate that she is strong and does not react emotionally towards her father's grief, but it also shows that she is willing to disobey and disrespect him, even though she is under his rule as she does not yet have a husband. This shows her independence from her father and her ability to make her own decisions in life. In The Taming of a Shrew, Bianca also disobeys her father as she elopes with Lucentio and the two lovers are secretly married. However, the extent of Bianca's involvement in planning the clandestine wedding is unknown, and it may have entirely been Lucentio's idea, with Bianca merely complying with his wishes. This being said, she does agree to marry him, knowingly disrespecting her father who has no say in the matter and only discovers that his youngest daughter has married after the wedding takes place.

115

Although Zoraida shows independence from her father and disobeys him by running away from home and stealing from him to pay for her passage and ensure her survival in Spain, she is not completely free from male power. She remains unable to travel to Spain herself and must instead rely on the company of the Spanish captive to help her reach the Christian country. This shows similarities with Dorotea who also runs away from home but needs a male servant to accompany her on her journey through Spain. The fact that both women seek the company of men shows that the idea of a woman travelling alone was something unheard of. This is why independent Marcela is met with such uproar, because she tends to her herd of sheep, wandering from one place to another, completely alone and without a man at her side. When Zoraida finally reaches Spain, the change in her character could not be more extreme. She is no longer the richly adorned, confident woman initially described by the captive, as her jewellery and money were stolen along the way by pirates. Not only has her appearance changed, she is also silent and withdrawn. Carroll B. Johnson writes: "[…] upon reaching Christian Spain Zoraida is rendered mute, suddenly deprived of her ownership of the discourse and converted into an object." (Johnson 2000: 88) Her transformation into a mute object is brought on by the change of culture and language, as she is clearly out of place in this new, foreign country. Unable to speak the language, she is left incapable of communicating with the other characters except for the captive, who speaks Arabic and acts as an interpreter. Indeed, the only way Zoraida can directly interact with the guests at the inn is through gestures and body language. From the outset she is distant and passive and only made visible to her new companions through the captive's translations. She is therefore completely reliant on him and can no longer act independently in her new surroundings. Zoraida's change into a submissive, silent, passive woman has little to do with being female, but rather with being a foreigner from a country with different traditions, culture, religion and language. The reaction by critics towards Zoraida has been fairly varied. Some critics view her as a serious, religious, honest woman, who is in love with the captive, whilst others have referred to her as being: "[una] consumada actriz, orgullosa, vana, de fe religiosa superficial, amorosamente fría, indiferente." ([An] accomplished actress, proud, vain, with superficial religious belief, cold-hearted, indifferent.) (Zimic 2003: 143) Erin Webster Garrett also raises doubts regarding Zoraida's character: "Is

116

Zoraida the Christian convert the captive wishes to portray, or is she the calculating and wilful Moorish seductress of cultural mythology?" (Webster Garrett 2000: 146) After stealing from her loving father and betraying his trust, she is left unaffected by his devastation and cruelly abandons him, even though she is everything he has. Murillo however, interprets Zoraida's reaction to her father not as cruel, but as determined and brave: "Zoraida's [motives] are courageous and pure, divinely inspired. […]. Zoraida has the courage to leave her loving father in order to reach the sanctuary of faith and love in Christianity." (Murillo 1990: 118) This does not explain however, why Zoraida fails to persuade her father to join her on her journey and also convert to Christianity. It has also been argued that Zoraida is cold and unloving due to her initial indifference concerning the captive, whom she may only want to marry in order to get to Spain and fulfil her lifelong wish of converting to Christianity. However, despite this negative view of Zoraida, later on in the tale, she proves that she does care about the captive and is not as selfish as she may initially seem. It becomes clear to the reader that she loves him, by her behaviour towards him during their journey. Following their arrival on Spanish soil and having been robbed of all their possessions, the captain tells his listeners:

Pero lo que a mí más me fatigaba era el ver ir a pie a Zoraida por aquellas asperezas, que, puesto que alguna vez la puse sobre mis hombros, más le cansaba a ella mi cansancio que la reposaba su reposo; y, así, nunca más quiso que yo aquel trabajo tomase […]. (But what distressed me most was to see Zoraida walking on the rough ground, for though I once carried her on my shoulders, my own weariness made her more tired than her rest refreshed her; and thus she did not allow me to repeat this exertion [...].) (Cervantes 2010: 436)

Through the captive's words, it appears that Zoraida is more concerned for the wellbeing of her lover than that of her own, as she refuses to be a burden to him, demonstrating a certain degree of selflessness towards the captive. Moreover, she proves that she is able to make the difficult journey on foot and without the help of others, indicating physical strength and equality with her male companions. Through Zoraida, the reader is given an impression of how women lived in northern Africa, and an insight into a culture which few people in early modern Spain knew anything about. Through his portrayal of Zoraida, Cervantes shows that like Spanish women, Moorish women also lacked basic human rights in a male-run

117 society, and if unmarried, were expected to obey their fathers, as was Zoraida. Like the captive, Zoraida is imprisoned in the walls of her house and stands under the constant supervision of her father, whom she is expected to respect and obey. However, she demonstrates that she is unwilling to accept her fate as a young Muslim woman and actively seeks to change this. Through her determination, she is able to escape from her home, travel to Spain and fulfil her dreams. Once she arrives however, everything changes and she is no longer a woman of power and wealth but a disliked Moorish woman, an outsider, unable to communicate with those around her as everything is different and foreign. Although she is a Moor, the main characters in the novel, such as Dorotea, Don Quijote and Sancho Panza, all treat Zoraida respectfully and are interested and not repulsed by her exoticness. This increases a reader's sympathy towards Zoraida, even though she belongs to a religion which was hated in those days. Cervantes makes Zoraida into a likeable figure, which could be an attempt to defend the Moors during a time fraught with conflict between the two different cultures, as the reader sympathises with Zoraida's quest to convert to Christianity. Through her actions at the beginning of the captive's tale, she succeeds as a strong, independent woman by taking risks, disobeying her father and boldly proposing marriage to a complete stranger, thus breaking the boundaries in place for women in her culture. Later however, she is shown as passive and fully reliant on her lover as she does not belong in Spain. These two sides of Zoraida are complete contrasts, but it can be concluded that within her culture and native country, she is a powerful, intelligent, strong woman, willing to rebel and go against what was considered appropriate behaviour for Muslim women, in order to achieve what she believes in.

3.4.4.6 Camila

In chapter XXXII of part one of Don Quijote, a suitcase is discovered at the inn where the characters are staying, and upon opening it, a forgotten manuscript is revealed with the title "El curioso impertinente" (The Ill-Advised Curiosity). The curate reads the story aloud to the other characters, and thus, this tale becomes a story-within-a- story, much like the play-within-a-play in The Taming of the Shrew, which is

118 performed for Christopher Sly's entertainment. Due to the story's 'fictitious' nature and the fact that its origins are unknown as it is neither part of Cide Hamete Benengeli's manuscript, nor the translator's notes, this tale has often been discredited and at times even completely ignored by Cervantine critics. (cf. Wilson 1987: 10) Even so, the characters that appear in this poignant short tale are Cervantes' creations, and thus much can be said about the author's attitude to women, as the tale includes a very interesting female character named Camila. The tale is set in Florence, Italy, and tells the story of Anselmo and his beautiful, high-born and chaste wife, Camila. Anselmo decides to test his wife's virtue as he is unable to believe that she is really as perfect as she appears. Ironically, Camila is 'la perfecta casada' (the perfect wife), but is not accepted as such, and is instead viewed with suspicion and distrust by her husband. Due to his unfounded suspicions regarding his wife's fidelity, Anselmo enlists the help of his best friend Lotario, whom he asks to seduce Camila, in order to find out whether she will submit to temptation or prove herself to be honourable. At first, Lotario is aghast at the idea and cannot believe what his friend asks of him: "[…] ¿tú no me has dicho que tengo de solicitar a una retirada, persuadir a una honesta, ofrecer a una desinteresada, servir a una prudente?" ([…] have you really told me, that I must pursue an honest woman, win over one who is virtuous, attend to someone so disinterested and court one so sensible?) (Cervantes 2010: 334) However, Anselmo insists and although at the beginning Lotario tricks his friend into believing that he has attempted to seduce his wife, but that she continuously rebukes his advances, he soon unwillingly succumbs to Camila's charm and beauty. Unbeknownst to Anselmo, who is away from home, Lotario begins to woo Camila in earnest. Alone with Lotario, Camila is initially shocked by his blatant flirtations and writes a letter to her husband, begging him to be allowed to seek refuge at her parents' home. Anselmo forbids her to leave the house, and forces her to remain in the company of Lotario as he believes his plan to test his wife has finally been put into action. Slowly, Camila begins to yield to Lotario's persistent advances: "Lloró, rogó, ofreció, aduló, porfió y fingió Lotario con tantos sentimientos, con muestras de tantas veras, que dio al través con el recato de Camila y vino a triunfar de lo que menos se pensaba y más deseaba." (Lotario wept, begged, promised, flattered, insisted and pretended with so much feeling and with such demonstrations of sincerity, that Camila's weariness disappeared and he won the triumph he least expected and most 119 deeply longed for.) (Cervantes 2010: 348) Through passion and desire, Camila becomes an object of lust which is to be conquered and therefore initially has no active role in the story, except for that of passive submission. Her behaviour mirrors that of Dorotea, as both women were honest and pure before being corrupted by men. Both these female characters show the bad influence which men can have on innocent women, and that they are the cause for their dishonour. A reason for Cervantes to highlight this sad fact may be due to his own family history, through his beloved sister Andrea's tragic story of seduction and betrayal (see chapter 2.2.2 'Women in the Life of Cervantes'). Anselmo's lack of trust in Camila causes his wife and his best friend to become lovers. They continue their affair until the day that Anselmo finds out that his wife has given in to Lotario's advances and has been unfaithful. In an attempt to salvage her honour, Camila plans and stages an elaborate scene for Anselmo, who watches everything from a hiding place. She professes her innocence and purity, and accuses Lotario of wronging her. Camila adopts the persona of the chaste Lucretia (from Ovid's Fasti and Livy's The History of Rome), and as a sign of her innocence, swears to take her own life in order to salvage Anselmo's honour. To make her claims appear convincing, she plunges a dagger into her side, purposefully stabbing her shoulder to avoid severe injury. Although Lotario is aware that everything is a mere act, he is so surprised by Camila's sincere words and passionate actions that he is left uncertain as to whether her demonstrations are real or feigned. Indeed, Lotario: "[…] admiró de la sagacidad, prudencia y mucha discreción de la hermosa Camila […] maravillándose de la industria de Camila […]." (He admired the astuteness, cunningness and subtlety of beautiful Camila […], and was lost in wonder at her dexterity […].) (Cervantes 2010: 362) Camila differs greatly to Shakespeare's Hero, who is also accused of unchaste behaviour. Hero, who is in fact innocent, undertakes nothing to prove her honour or cast doubt upon the accusations made against her. Camila, however, is anything but passive and like Dorotea, also refuses to silently accept her fate without putting up a fight. Despite Camila's unfaithfulness to her husband, she cunningly deceives him and demonstrates enormous courage, strength and intelligence. She concocts the entire plan herself, and is such an impressive actress, that Anselmo, who moments before was convinced of his wife's deepest betrayal, is left in no doubt of her chastity. Edith Trachman shows support for Camila's strong character and claims that "[…] great 120 cunning, sagacity, and prudence, [are] manifested in the counterfeit part which she enacts to deceive her husband and convince him of her innocence and loyalty […]." (Trachman 1932: 110) Following her deceitful declaration of innocence, Camila is no longer under suspicion, and is thus free to carry on her affair with Lotario, whilst her husband remains unsuspecting. E. C. Riley suggests that "El curioso impertinente" is the closest thing to tragedy ever written by Cervantes, and that there is a Shakespearian quality about it. (cf. Riley 1986: 81) The tale's tragic ending is as follows: Anselmo finally discovers the truth about his wife's and best friend's betrayal, and in a fit of rage, rushes to confront the pair of adulterers. However, before Anselmo is able to confront Camila, she runs away to Lotario, taking her most precious jewels with her. During the Renaissance, men's honour was gained through women's sexual purity. If a wife was found to be guilty of adultery, her wronged husband had the right to publically execute her and her lover. This practise was condoned by Spanish law and there are various recorded cases of such punishments in sixteenth and seventeenth century Spain. (cf. Jehenson 1998) This is why Camila, probably fearing the worst, flees and seeks the protection of her lover. Upon discussing their options, Lotario decides to leave Camila at a monastery and abandons her to join the army. Shortly after, Lotario dies in combat followed by Camila, who dies of a broken heart. Anselmo also dies broken hearted and aware that he is solely to blame for his ruin and dishonour. Before succumbing to death, he writes the following lines in a letter:

Un necio e impertinente deseo me quitó la vida. Si las nuevas de mi muerte llegaren a los oídos de Camila, sepa que yo la perdono, porque no estaba ella obligada a hacer milagros, ni yo tenía necesidad de querer que ella lo hiciese; y pues yo fui el fabricador de mi deshonra […]. (A ludicrous and ill-advised desire robbed me of life. If news of my death reaches the ears of Camila, she should know that I forgive her, because she was never obliged to perform miracles, nor ought I to have obliged her to perform them; and thus I was the cause of my own dishonour […].) (Cervantes 2010: 373)

In the above passage, Anselmo accepts sole responsibility for his actions and even forgives his unchaste wife, despite the fact that she is guilty of the ultimate betrayal. In contrast, no man ever takes even part of the blame for Hero's supposed affair in Much Ado About Nothing, and she alone has to face the consequences. In the eyes of Anselmo however, Camila is blameless for her behaviour, even though adultery

121 belonged to one of the most severe sins in Renaissance Spain (see chapter 1.1.2 'Virginity, Chastity and the Double Standard'). The topic of jealous husbands testing their wives' fidelity has a long history in literature and was also explored by Shakespeare during the same period, in plays such as Othello, Cymbeline and The Winter's Tale. (cf. Wilson 1987: 17) Likewise in The Taming of the Shrew, there is also a brief episode in the final scene when the three husbands, Petruchio, Lucentio and Hortensio, put their wives' obedience to the test. The reason for this wife-testing is, however, not jealousy, but rather the need to confirm male authority and power in marriage. The majority of wife-testing episodes in literature have dire consequences for women, such as Othello, which ends in a bloodbath. In Cervantes' short tale however, "[…] the husband eventually realizes that he is the cause of his own dishonour – which is refreshingly different from the usual line taken by those outraged husbands, the Spanish Othellos who figure in seventeenth century plays." (Riley 1986: 82) "El curioso impertinente" therefore does not conform to the traditional wife-testing tale, as Camila is not directly punished by her husband, and Anselmo proves to be understanding and forgiving. Although Camila can be regarded as one of the protagonists in this short story, her adultery is not the main focus. The emphasis in the tale is on men's irrational fears and obsessions, and not on women's infidelity. Edith Trachman interprets this short tale as a warning about the problems and effects of unprovoked jealousy, and argues that Cervantes chastises husbands who are jealous without cause, as opposed to unchaste wives. (cf. Trachman 1932: 106) This is the key difference between Much Ado About Nothing and this novella, as in Shakespeare's play, the characters' strong reactions towards Hero stand in foreground and give an insight into the fate that awaited unchaste women in Renaissance England. Cervantes however, does not criticise Camila's behaviour through other characters' harsh reactions towards her, and can instead be considered to side with Camila, as the reader is left in no doubt that her obsessively jealous husband is the cause for her betrayal. This is supported by the following quote from E. C. Riley: "[Her] virtue proved illusory when put to the test, which it would not have done if he had not tested it." (Riley 1986: 82) Both Camila and Hero are dishonoured women and are destined for religious life, as this is the only respectable option available to them. However, despite the fact that Camila ends up in a nunnery, silent and secluded from the world, she can still be regarded as a strong woman due to her previous behaviour. Firstly, she willingly 122 chooses to embark on an affair with Lotario without being forced into anything. This demonstrates courage and a certain amount of autonomy from her husband, as she shows that she is her own person and that she has her own passionate desires. Secondly, upon being discovered, she refuses to remain silent and to accept whatever punishment her husband wishes to subject her to, and instead fights to conserve her honour and reputation by tricking and deceiving her husband. In his paper which discusses Camila's character, Howard Mancing emphasises her dominance in the second part of the story, as she has significantly more utterances than the male characters: "Camila's movement from a silent object of desire and discussion to a narrating and controlling agent makes her the most interesting and most autonomous character in the tale read in the inn of Juan Palomeque." (Mancing 2005: 18) Camila thus transforms into an active subject, rather than solely the object of men's desires which she was in the first half of the story, and through the power of speech, expresses her assertiveness. This change demonstrates that Camila is a dynamic character with many different characteristics, which makes her more interesting and important to the tale, compared to the two static male characters, Anselmo and Lotario. Finally, Camila never repents her adulterous behaviour. Instead of showing regret for her betrayal, she dies of a broken heart caused by her lover's death, thus sealing an eternal bond of love between her and Lotario. Camila therefore does not embody the stereotypical chaste, honest and obedient wife of the Renaissance, but can instead be considered rebellious and going against the norms and conventions in place at that time.

3.4.4.7 La Duquesa

La Duquesa (the Duchess) is a key character in part two of Don Quijote, and directly influences many of Don Quijote's and Sancho Panza's actions. La Duquesa is a wealthy duchess who lives with her husband in richness and splendour, and has everything that money can buy. When she meets Don Quijote and Sancho Panza, she immediately recognises them from the first part of the novel which she says she has already read. This is a metafictive device employed by Cervantes to make the reader question the relationship between fiction and reality. Through this ironic literary

123 technique, La Duquesa is aware of Don Quijote's madness and decides to let herself and her husband be entertained by his crazy behaviour. Bored by the monotony of her comfortable lifestyle and the endless parties she attends, La Duquesa attempts to make her life more exciting by fuelling Don Quijote's knight-errant fantasies, however insane they may appear. Along with her husband, the Duchess assumes a key role in the novel as although Don Quijote is the protagonist, both she and the Duke are responsible for the greatest adventures he experiences as a knight. They therefore both assume dominant positions in part two of the novel and become part of Don Quijote's made-up world. When the reader is first introduced to the Duchess, she is dressed in fine clothes and mounted on horseback, with a hawk on her arm. Her husband is absent, and Don Quijote immediately notes that she must be the mistress of the hunting party, and that she herself is a 'bella cazadora' (a fair huntress). (cf. Cervantes 2010: 778) In a later hunting scene where Don Quijote and Sancho Panza are also present, a wild boar runs at the hunting party and whereas Sancho flees in panic and attempts to escape up a tree, the Duchess tries to approach the boar and kill the beast herself: "[…] a todos se adelantara La Duquesa, si el duque no se lo estorbara." ([…] the Duchess would have gone in front of them all, had the Duke not held her back.) (Cervantes 2010: 815) For the modern day reader, both these scenes may not seem particularly unusual. In the seventeenth century however, hunting was considered a masculine sport and unsuitable for ladies. As the Duke later points out to Sancho: "[…] el ejercicio de la caza de monte es el más conveniente y necesario para los reyes y príncipes que otro alguno." ([…] hunting is more suitable and necessary for kings and princes, than for anyone else.) (Cervantes 2010: 816) With this statement, the Duke highlights the aristocratic nature of the sport, as well as the fact that it is mainly associated with men, as he fails to mention queens, or princesses who may also participate in hunting. The first impression of the Duchess is that she does not conform with the typical role of a nobleman's wife confined to home, but instead actively participates in a male sport, even assuming the role of leader in the absence of her husband, as Don Quijote immediately identifies her as the mistress of the entire hunting group. Furthermore, she proves herself to be courageous and fearless in the face of danger, two attributes mainly associated with men, as she attempts to kill the dangerous wild boar herself, instead of seeking male protection.

124

It is interesting to note that although the Duchess plays a key part in the novel, her physical appearance is never described. The only remark made regarding her appearance, is that she is fair and beautiful, but, unlike with Dorotea or Dulcinea, her exact looks are never revealed. This heightens her power and authority, as she is not made into an object to be admired or pursued by men, as are so many other women in Cervantes' novel or in Shakespeare's plays. Indeed, when Sancho first exchanges words with her, he is left: "[…] admirado así de la hermosura de la buena señora como de su mucha crianza y cortesía […]." ([…] mesmerised by the beauty of the good lady, as well as by her good upbringing and politeness.) (Cervantes 2010: 780) It is therefore clear that there is more to the lady than first meets the eye, as she is not only beautiful, but also eloquent, well-mannered, talkative, and literate, which she demonstrates by having read the first part of the novel. A further point to consider is the anonymity surrounding her character. Not only is her physical appearance hidden from the reader, her name is also never revealed and she is only known by the name of 'La Duquesa'. The same anonymity can be seen in Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew with Hortensio's wife, 'the widow', who is only referred to by this name. However, unlike the title 'the widow', which reinforces inferiority as it emphasises one of the three categories forced upon women of the English Renaissance, 'the Duchess' highlights power and aristocracy. With this name, the Duchess stands apart from the simpler characters in the novel such as Sancho Panza, who, as a peasant, has a much lower stance in society. The reader soon finds out that La Duquesa is an incredibly powerful and manipulative woman. Although she is married to a duke, it is mostly she who plays with Don Quijote and Sancho Panza for her own entertainment. Even though she is well aware that Dulcinea does not exist (from having read the first part of the novel), she plays along with Don Quijote's fantasy, convincing him and Sancho that Dulcinea is enchanted and that in order to release her from the spell cast upon her by an evil magician, Sancho must do the following:

[…] el buen Sancho haga alguna disciplina de abrojos, o de las de canelones, que se dejen sentir, porque la letra con sangre entra, y no se ha de dar tan barata la libertad de una tan gran señora como lo es Dulcinea, por tan poco precio; y advierta Sancho que las obras de caridad que se hacen tibia y flojamente no tienen mérito ni valen nada. ([…] good Sancho must discipline himself with dry sticks, or with a whip, which make themselves felt, because letters enter with blood, and the release of such a great lady as Dulcinea will not be granted so cheaply, for such a low price; 125

and inform Sancho that acts of charity which are carried out so weakly and half- heartedly, are pointless and without merit.) (Cervantes 2010: 830)

In the passage quoted above, La Duquesa informs Don Quijote that his faithful squire Sancho must physically injure himself to save Dulcinea. Such is the Duchess' authority, that she is easily able to convince Sancho of Dulcinea's enchantment, even though up until then, he never believed in Dulcinea's existence and knew that she was merely part of Don Quijote's fantasy. This shows that "[…] la autoridad de una duquesa es suficiente para que Sancho cuestione lo que él creía por experiencia propia: como miembro de una clase inferior, tiene que creer, o decir creer, o actuar como si creyera, lo que afirma esa autoridad superior." ([…] a duchess' authority is enough to make Sancho question what he believes in from own experience: as a member of inferior class, he has to believe, or pretend that he believes, or act as though he would believe, which confirms this superior authority.) (Rivers 1991: 40) Although the Duchess neither believes in Dulcinea's nor the magician's existence, she chooses to become part of the fantasy and to influence Don Quijote's and Sancho's actions, as she clearly enjoys manipulating people, even if this results in their injury. She fails to see the seriousness of her intervention, and considers Don Quijote and Sancho Panza as mere pawns in a game which serve for her entertainment. Through her actions and Sancho's and Don Quijote's compliance to her demands and wishes, she is characterised as authoritative and powerful. However, the reader is well aware that the Duchess is also scheming and resourceful, as her motives are always selfish and boisterous, and at the expense of the other characters. The Duchess immediately takes a liking to Sancho and finds him amusing and charming. In chapter XXIII, she invites him to her chambers after dinner, and in the company of her damsels, has a long conversation with him. In his article which discusses the relationship between Sancho and the Duchess, Elias L. Rivers argues that this scene would have been highly unrealistic in seventeenth century Spain:

[…] hay que reconocer que en la vida cotidiana española del siglo XVII, tanto por la separación de las clases sociales como por la separación de los sexos, hubiera sido poco menos que imposible que un simple campesino pasara la siesta encerrado con una duquesa y sus damas. ([…] one must take into consideration that in ordinary Spanish life in the seventeenth century, it would have been impossible for a simple farmer to spend the siesta in the company of a duchess and her ladies, due to class separation, as well as the separation of the sexes.) (Rivers 1991: 38)

126

The Duchess is aware of the power she holds and uses this to get what she wants, even if this entails interacting with people who are vastly inferior to her. She disregards the social conventions in place for women at that time, and chooses to spend time with Sancho as she gains delight from his simplicity and wit. She therefore puts her own wishes before what is expected of her as a married, noble woman. Through her close relationship with Sancho, the Duchess becomes someone Sancho can confide in, and he even seeks her protection during times of danger. In chapter XXXIV, Sancho is left terrified by the cries of battle which echo through the forest, unaware that everything has been staged by the Duke and Duchess. Such is his fear, that: "[…] dio con él desmayado en las faldas de La Duquesa, la cual le recibió en ellas y a gran priesa mandó que le echasen agua en el rostro." ([…] he fainted onto the skirts of the Duchess, who allowed him to lie there and immediately ordered water to be splashed onto his face.) (Cervantes 2010: 820) In a later episode, the sounds of drums are heard in the distance and Sancho: "[…] no hay que decir sino que el miedo le llevó a su acostumbrado refugio, que era el lado o faldas de La Duquesa […]." ([…] needless to say that through fear, sought his usual refuge at the Duchess' side or in her skirts […].) (Cervantes 2010: 833) It is interesting to note that although the Duke and Don Quijote are present in both scenes, Sancho seeks refuge from the Duchess, despite the fact that she is a woman. The Duchess must therefore possess strength and power, or else Sancho would seek protection elsewhere. The Duchess shows herself to be highly critical of Don Quijote's adoration of Dulcinea, as she often questions his love for her and puts his fidelity to the test. When Sancho leaves to become governor of an island (another cruel trick played on him by the Duke and Duchess), Don Quijote remains behind. The Duchess approaches Don Quijote, who is feeling lonely and dejected, and offers him one of her damsels to spend the night with him and keep him company: "— En verdad — dijo La Duquesa —, señor don Quijote, […] que le han de servir cuatro doncellas de las mías, hermosas como unas flores." (— Indeed — said the Duchess —, sir Don Quijote, […] four of my damsels who are as beautiful as flowers, will wait upon you.) (Cervantes 2010: 880) It is clear that this is an attempt to corrupt Don Quijote's fidelity, and that the Duchess wishes to put an end to his chastity as she considers his adoration of Dulcinea ridiculous. Her behaviour shows that she has no respect for Don Quijote and considers it her right to meddle in his affairs for her own amusement, regardless of the consequences this may have for the knight. 127

Lidia Falcón claims that La Duquesa can be considered a realistic representation of women who belonged to high society during the Spanish Golden Age, and that Cervantes may have been inspired by real life duchesses whom he would have been acquainted with as part of his lavish lifestyle:

Seguramente el personaje de la Duquesa de la Segunda Parte del Quijote, contiene rasgos de aquellas damas que conoció en los palacios de condes y de los duques. Y las descripciones de sus fiestas y palaciegas conspiraciones, en las que pasaban sus ocios, únicas actividades en las que entretenían una vida inútil, corresponden a situaciones reales vistas por él. (It is certain that the character La Duquesa, from part two of Don Quijote, contains certain traits from the ladies he (Cervantes) met in the palaces of counts and dukes. The descriptions of the parties and courtly intrigues which filled their free time were the only activities which served as entertainment in an otherwise purposeless life, and correspond to real-life situations which he would have experienced.) (Falcón 1997: 16)

The Duchess' boredom with her comfortable lifestyle is the reason for her to seek entertainment which she finds by cruelly manipulating and tricking the novel's main characters. La Duquesa is incredibly cunning and intelligent, as Don Quijote and Sancho Panza always believe her earnestness and allow themselves to be tricked and manipulated by this contriving female character, never suspecting her of wrongdoing. Furthermore, she demonstrates bravery and strength as a woman, showing courage in times of great danger and offering other characters, such as Sancho, protection and refuge at her side. La Duquesa can be seen as having a major influence on both Sancho's and Don Quijote's behaviour, and is therefore very different to the other female characters so far discussed. The authority she has over the other characters is almost certainly due to the fact that she is a duchess and of higher rank than everyone else, except for her husband. Not much is disclosed in the novel regarding the relationship between the Duchess and her husband however, it is safe to say that there is a certain amount of equality between them. Although most of the tricks played on Sancho and Don Quijote are planned by both, the Duchess assumes a more important role in the novel as she is far more dominant than her husband. The Duchess' voice is heard most frequently, most of the hoaxes are instigated by her, whilst her husband assumes a more passive role, and she sometimes even acts alone, completely without her husband's involvement. La Duquesa stands in contrast to all previously discussed women in both of Shakespeare's plays and in Don Quijote, due to her dominance and

128 power. The education she has received and the respect she gains from the other characters are both due to her high social rank as a duchess. However, the freedom her character experiences to do what she likes, such as hunting or befriending and spending time alone with men who are not her husband, cannot be attributed to her aristocracy, as women of high rank were also expected to conform to social conventions, and were thus mostly silent and invisible. The Duchess contradicts these conventions and is never treated subordinately, like so many of the other female characters already analysed, but instead demonstrates power over men whose actions she actively influences. Although her character may not always be completely believable (as previously mentioned by Elias L. Rivers), it is obvious that Cervantes intended her to be a strong female character. This may have caused Renaissance readers to question gender boundaries and reconsider the passive and subordinate ideal for women, given the Duchess' success as a fearless and courageous power- hungry female.

3.4.4.8 Further Female Characters of Interest

Antonia Quijana is Don Quijote's not yet twenty-year-old niece, who lives with her uncle at his home in La Mancha. She is the only family member of Don Quijote to appear in the novel, and apart from her, there is never any mention of other relations he may have. Antonia Quijana is present in both parts of the novel, and although the part she plays is minimal in comparison with other female characters, she actively attempts to influence Don Quijote's behaviour as she cares greatly for her uncle and wishes to keep him from harm. After her uncle returns home from his disastrous first adventure, Antonia blames the books of chivalry for putting crazy ideas into Don Quijote's head. In order to put a stop to his dangerous escapades, she decides that these books must be destroyed, and is responsible for initiating the burning of her uncle's entire collection of books. In the following passage, Antonia warns the curate and the barber of the dangerous power Don Quijote's books possess, and urges that they burn them all: "[…] todos han sido los dañadores: mejor será arrojallos por las ventanas al patio y hacer un rimero de ellos y pegarles fuego; y, si no, llevarlos al corral, y allí se hará la

129 hoguera […]." ([…] every single book is to blame: it would be best to throw them out of the windows onto the courtyard and set fire to the pile; or take them to the yard, and there a bonfire can be made […].) (Cervantes 2010: 61) With this suggestion, Antonia persuades the curate and the barber to burn all of Don Quijote's beloved books, demonstrating that she is able to assert herself in male company. El Saffar and Zavala mention Antonia's increasing dominance in the second half of the novel, as she shouts at her uncle and tries everything in her power to stop him from leaving their home in search of adventures for the third time. (cf. El Saffar and Zavala 1995: 319) Antonia criticises her uncle in the following outburst, and tells him exactly what she thinks of him, making him sound old and ridiculous:

¡[…] con todo esto dé en una ceguera tan grande y en una sandez tan conocida, que se dé a entender que es valiente, siendo viejo; que tiene fuerzas, estando enfermo, y que endereza tuertos, estando por la edad agobiado, y, sobre todo, que es caballero, no lo siendo […]! ([…] and yet that you should be so blind, and so stupid as to try and make yourself valiant when you are old; strong, when you are sickly, able to make up for injustice, when you yourself are bent with age, and, on top of that, a knight, when you are not one […]!) (Cervantes 2010: 591)

Like with Teresa Panza's criticism of Sancho, the exclamation marks in the above passage could also serve to indicate a passionate and emotional outburst. Judging from this extract, Antonia can be considered a strong-minded woman, unafraid to speak her mind, regardless of the fact that her uncle is a figure of authority, someone she should respect, not criticise. It seems the roles between Don Quijote and Antonia are reversed, as she assumes responsibility for him, trying to prevent him from doing further harm to himself. Interestingly, her surname also hints at her dominant character as it appears to be feminised due to ending in 'a', as opposed to the usual masculine ending of 'o' (Quijana/Quijano). This may be interpreted as a sign of independence, as Antonia Quijana's name does not conform to the usual dominant masculine ending. After his fourth and final adventure, Don Quijote returns home and is immediately taken ill. From his deathbed, he writes his final testament in which he leaves his entire fortune to his niece, providing one condition. If Antonia were to marry a man who has heard of books of chivalry, she would immediately be disinherited:

130

Iten, es mi voluntad que si Antonia Quijana mi sobrina quisiere casarse, se case con hombre de quien primero se haya hecho información que no sabe qué cosas sean libros de caballerías; y en caso que se averiguare que lo sabe y, con todo eso, mi sobrina quisiere casarse con él y se casare, pierda todo lo que le he mandado […]. (It is my wish that if my niece, Antonia Quijana, wishes to marry, that it should first be ascertained that the man she marries does not know what books of chivalry are; and that if it is found that he does, and my niece marries him anyway, that she loses everything I have left her […].) (Cervantes 2010: 1103)

Regarding marriage, Don Quijote assumes the role as dominant male, seeing it as his right to have a say in who Antonia marries. Although it is clear from previous chapters that Antonia detests books of chivalry for the negative influence they have had on her uncle, and would therefore probably refrain from marrying a man who is passionate about these, it is improbable that she would be able to find someone in seventeenth century Spain who has never heard of these books. Antonia is therefore not completely free to choose whom she marries. She does, however, have more freedom than Katherina from The Taming of the Shrew and Hero from Much Ado About Nothing, who both have absolutely no say whatsoever in their choice for a husband. Furthermore, Don Quijote does not order Antonia to marry, but merely makes his wishes clear regarding her potential husband. It is therefore left up to her as to whether she chooses a husband or not. Antonia's success and power are questionable. Despite her passionate outbursts and words of warning, Don Quijote never seems to take her seriously, and regardless of what his niece advises him, he always goes out on his adventures anyway. Antonia therefore differs greatly from the Duchess, who has a huge, mostly negative, influence on Don Quijote's behaviour, demonstrating dominance, power and control over men. To summarise, due to her limited appearances in the novel, the inability to influence the actions of her uncle, and the fact that he always disregards her arguments and fails to take her seriously, Antonia Quijana does not belong to the dominant women of Don Quijote. Like Teresa Panza, she does however speak her mind and has no qualms about criticising her uncle, something which would have been frowned upon at a time where silence was a virtue. The final female character to be discussed in this thesis is Don Diego de la Llana's daughter. Out of all the women who have been analysed from Don Quijote, she is by far the most passive and submissive, with the least rights. It is therefore interesting to see how she is treated by the male characters as this may give an insight

131 into Cervantes' intentions behind this female figure. In part two of the novel where Sancho Panza serves as governor of an island, Don Diego de la Llana's two children, a girl and a boy, are brought to him as they are suspected of wrongdoing. Previous to this episode, every occasion where Sancho has been called upon as governor to resolve an issue, has been arranged by the Duke and Duchess for their own amusement. Don Diego de la Llana's children are however genuine, and the scene is not instigated. Like with the Duchess and Shakespeare's 'widow', the girl is also nameless and shrouded in anonymity, and is only ever referred to as 'Diego de la Llana's daughter'. This immediately hints towards her lack of independence as she is bound to her father and has no identity of her own. The young woman is brought to Sancho and is dressed in boys' clothes, which straight away suggests that dishonour has befallen her, like Dorotea who also makes her first appearance dressed as a peasant boy. However, the distressed girl explains that the clothes are a disguise as she has run away from home where her father, a widower, has kept her locked away for ten years. In floods of tears, she tells Sancho that she only wants to be free to leave the house and see the world, and to be treated as an equal to her brother, who is allowed to come and go as he likes:

Este encerramiento y este negarme el salir de casa, siquiera a la iglesia, ha muchos días y meses que me trae muy desconsolada. Quisiera yo ver el mundo, o a lo menos el pueblo donde nací, pareciéndome que este deseo no iba contra el buen decoro que las doncellas principales deben guardar a sí mismas. (This imprisonment and prevention at being allowed to leave the house, even to go to church, has been making me very unhappy for many days and months. I would like to see the world, or at least the village where I was born, and it does not seem to me that this wish differs from the respect good maidens should have for themselves.) (Cervantes 2010: 925)

Her reasons for wanting to escape are thoroughly plausible, as is her unhappiness after ten years of imprisonment. Nonetheless, Sancho is left untouched by her misfortune and throughout her story, shows impatience and annoyance at her tears, and repeatedly urges her to come to an end so that he can move on and solve further incidents on his island. When she finally finishes, he decides the following:

[...] dejaremos a vuesas mercedes en casa de su padre [...]. Y de aquí adelante no se muestren tan niños, ni tan deseosos de ver mundo, que la doncella honrada, la pierna quebrada, y en casa, y la mujer y la gallina, por andar se pierden aína, y la que es deseosa de ver, también tiene deseo de ser vista. ([…] we will bring the two 132

of you home to your father […]. And in future, do not show such childish eager to see the world, for a respectable damsel is expected to stay at home, as if she were lame, and a wandering woman and hen will soon become lost, and she who is eager to see, also desires to be seen.) (Cervantes 2010: 927)

In the above speech, Sancho uses three sexist Spanish proverbs to make his point. The first suggests that an honourable woman should remain at home, as if she had a broken leg. The second proverb, which warns of a wandering woman and hen, refers to a woman's loss of virtue if she is given the freedom to go where she pleases. The third draws attention to the sinful nature of female curiosity. All three proverbs demonstrate Sancho's belief that honourable young women should be kept locked indoors for their own protection, and reinforce his lack of understanding that they should desire to see the world. It is difficult for the reader to tell if Don Quijote would have reacted in the same way as Sancho, as he is not present in this chapter. One can however assume that Don Quijote would have wanted to help the girl escape, due to his past behaviour in supporting Marcela's independence and helping Dorotea find the man who wronged her, and the fact that he considers it his duty as a knight to help women in distress. Once the girl's fate has been decided, she and her brother are returned home to their father. However, the brief escapade has lasting consequences for the young woman's future. Stricken by her incredible beauty, a male onlooker decides to ask Don Diego de la Llana for his daughter's hand in marriage. Thus, the girl will have no choice but to assume the role of a wife, after years of imprisonment and confinement as an unmarried daughter. On the one hand, it is incredibly difficult not to sympathise with the distressed girl who appears to have done nothing wrong and only wishes to catch a glimpse of the world beyond her confinement. The compassion her character may evoke in the reader could show that Cervantes sympathises with young women's lack of freedom. On the other hand, Sancho's decision to send the girl home to her father shows consistency with Renaissance beliefs for what was appropriate behaviour for women. The typical viewpoint of patriarchal Renaissance society would have been to keep young unmarried women locked away and guarded, to prevent them from dishonour. Additionally, it could be argued that Cervantes did not intend for Sancho's sexist reaction toward the girl to be taken seriously, as the entire situation of Sancho as governor is farcical and supplies the second part of the novel with comedy and light-heartedness. Therefore, Sancho's lack of compassion and chauvinistic comments

133 may be completely contrary to Cervantes' own opinions and beliefs concerning unmarried women, and could instead be understood as indirect criticism of these social conventions. This interpretation would support the theory that Cervantes sympathised with women and was ahead of his time regarding women's rights.

134

4. Conclusion

In the first part of this thesis, an overview concerning the historical and social background of England and Spain during the Renaissance was given, in order to set the scene for the subsequent textual analysis of two of Shakespeare's comedies and Cervantes' novel, Don Quijote. It was found that both English and Spanish societies were directly influenced by humanism, which justified and reinforced many misogynistic views portraying women as naturally weak and servile. Conduct books, which advised and instructed women on how to behave, served the purpose of idealising the role of the obedient housewife and dutiful mother, bound to serve God and her husband. Thus, every woman was expected to conform to her husband's wishes and demands, and to bear as many children as possible, regardless of the high mortality rate during childbirth. In both countries, contrasting moral standards existed for men and women, and behaviour which was tolerated in men, such as pre-marital affairs or unfaithfulness during marriage, was condemned and punished in women. Although the importance of female virginity can be witnessed in all sixteenth and seventeenth century social classes, it was of heightened significance in middle and upper-class Spanish and English women, who would lose their honour if they were no longer a virgin at the time of marriage. Women not only faced the pressure of conforming to strict moral standards, they were also influenced by the Renaissance ideal of beauty, as initially proposed by Francesco Petrarch. As was previously demonstrated, the concept of faultlessly, beautiful, fair and blue-eyed women was unrealistic and virtually unattainable for the vast majority, especially for the naturally dark-skinned Spanish. Therefore, this would have increased feelings of inaptitude and inferiority which most women would have already felt after reading conduct books on female perfection. Despite the fact that illiteracy reigned in both sixteenth and seventeenth century Spain and England, a small number of women was educated. The reason for this was not to reduce the gap between men and women, but rather to mould women into intellectual companions for their husbands. Nonetheless, humanists debated on the dangers of teaching women to read, and feared that they would become too powerful if educated to the same standard as men. Thus, women were only partially

135 included within this education movement, and were instead encouraged to pursue more appropriate feminine tasks such as needlework, music, dancing and, more importantly, to improve their skills as housewives. The main difference which existed between Spain and England at this period of history was caused by religion. In Protestant England, every woman was expected to fall into one of the following roles: maid, wife or widow. Spanish women had the additional option of entering a Catholic convent to become a nun. Nuns had the benefit of being able to lead a life without being subjected to patriarchal rule, and even had the chance to become educated. However, the life of a nun was far from idyllic. Convents were places where rules and regulations dictated everyday life, and despite being exempt from marriage and motherhood, nuns were constantly subjected to restrictions placed upon them by powerful religious figures who were all exclusively male. In the second part of this thesis, the biographies of William Shakespeare and Miguel de Cervantes were presented, along with the role which women played in their lives. By the close relationship which Cervantes had with his sisters, and the fact that he supported them in times of need, it can be ascertained that Miguel de Cervantes demonstrated great sympathies towards women. In contrast, Shakespeare left his family behind to pursue his career in London, disinherited his youngest daughter, and completely excluded his wife from his final testament, despite thirty-four years of marriage. Despite the fact that both writers include dominant female characters in their texts, opinions on their feminist or anti-feminist natures differ greatly. Due to the highly contrasting statements made by feminists, no conclusion was reached by merely reviewing these opinions. Therefore, an unbiased textual analysis was undertaken in part three of this thesis. Compared to Shakespeare's female characters, Cervantes' women seem louder and assume more active roles, remaining unchanged throughout the novel. Once married, Katherina and Beatrice, two of Shakespeare's most dominant women, both submit to their husbands and give up their strongest weapon, namely, their sharp- tongues. Despite giving the play's longest speech, Katherina does so only through her husband's command and not at her own will, acting like his puppet. Beatrice likewise changes from being witty, sharp-tongued and at times shrewd, to accepting her weakness as a woman, and becoming Benedick's wife (even though she vowed never to marry), making a silent and passive final appearance. Such extreme changes are not 136 witnessed in the women of Don Quijote. Teresa Panza is never afraid to criticise her husband and often embarks on heated debates with him. Antonia Quijana is likewise often critical of her uncle, and attempts to influence his behaviour, regardless of his authority over her. Similarly, the Duchess also proves to be adept at using language and always succeeds at cleverly manipulating Don Quijote and Sancho Panza for her own entertainment. Marcela, Dorotea and Camila all give long speeches at their own accord, and are able to persuade men into either accepting them as their wives, or believing their fidelity. All these factors support the fact that Cervantes' female characters are verbally more successful compared to Shakespeare's women, whose spirit is crushed once they are married. It appears that unmarried women have no place in Shakespeare's plays, as not only are they frowned upon and criticised by other characters, but they always willingly accept marriage and are keen to give up their independence. For example, Katherina seems to embrace her new role as Petruchio's wife and openly shows her husband affection and respect, and even ends the play with a lecture on how married women should submit themselves to their husbands. Based on the actual text, Katherina can be viewed as the embodiment of the perfect Elizabethan wife, who Shakespeare may have intended to function as a model for unruly women to follow. In Don Quijote, unmarried Marcela symbolises freedom and autonomy and is allowed to exist without a husband at her side. In her poignant speech, she stresses that she was born free and has the right to lead her life as she wishes. The fact that Cervantes created such a revolutionary female character demonstrates his liberal and modern views, which stand in contrast to Shakespeare's traditional representation of women which all fall into the categories of maid, wife or widow. Many of Cervantes' female characters are physically strong. Teresa Panza is in sole charge of running the household whilst her husband is away. Zoraida makes the long journey from northern Africa to Spain, walking much of the way on foot and refusing to be carried by the Captive. Dorotea likewise demonstrates physical strength as she pushes her attacker over a cliff and leaves him for dead, and journeys alone through Spain, looking for the man who took her virginity, so that she can restore her honour. Furthermore, the Duchess is willing to singlehandedly take on a dangerous wild boar, and offers other characters, including Sancho, her protection, which also demonstrates strength and power. There is little indication that Shakespeare's women have such physical strength. Beatrice accepts her inability to avenge her cousin's 137 misfortune, and instead begs Benedick to kill Claudio as she knows she is unable to. Hero lies unconscious on the floor whilst false accusations regarding her virtue are made, failing to stand up for herself. Even Katherina, who at the beginning of the play acts violently against potential suitors and her sister, is moulded into a passive wife who condemns such behaviour. A further difference between Shakespeare's and Cervantes' texts is how marriage is treated. In the two comedies, Katherina and Hero are both married through arrangements made by their fathers, which serve the purpose of financial benefits and an increase in social rank. Upon marriage, Petruchio claims ownership of Katherina, objectifying her and seeing it as his duty to tame her into submission, to conform to his wishes. Hero is also seen as an object by Claudio, who views their marriage as an exchange through which Hero will belong to him. Furthermore, Shakespeare often idealises marriage. For example, despite complete inequality between the couple, Katherina and Petruchio are presented as happy and content with their contrasting roles. In Don Quijote, the majority of women have a say in whom they marry and are not treated as objects. Antonia Quijana is free to choose a husband, providing she complies with her uncle's wishes and refrains from marrying someone obsessed with books of chivalry. Marcela's uncle accepts her continuous rejections of potential suitors, and refrains from forcing her into marriage against her will. Zoraida chooses to marry the captive and even takes it upon herself to propose to him, assuming an untypically dominant role. Teresa Panza succeeds in delaying her husband's arranged marriage for their daughter, who in effect remains unmarried until the end of the novel. Only Diego de la Llana's daughter is denied a choice in whom she marries. Whilst Shakespeare tends to include dynamic female characters, Cervantes' women are all exclusively static. On the one hand, one could argue that Shakespeare's female figures are therefore more interesting and are of greater importance compared to the play's static male characters. On the other hand, however, the fact that these women almost always transform from strong-minded females into passive and submissive figures, stands in contrast to Cervantes' characters who remain strong and independent throughout the novel. Margaret, from Much Ado About Nothing, contrasts to this argument, however, as she too is a static character who is sharp- tongued, outspoken and confident from start to finish. As she belongs to the working class however, and is merely a maid, she is not an important character in the play. 138

A similarity which can be found between Shakespeare's plays and Cervantes' novel is the inclusion of orphaned characters. Beatrice lives with her uncle as both her parents have died. Antonia Quijana likewise lives with her uncle, as does Marcela, as both have lost their parents. Zoraida is also motherless, as is Diego de la Llana's daughter. This supports the fact that in sixteenth and seventeenth century Spain and England, the mortality rate was exceptionally high, especially in women who faced the dangers of childbirth. Few of Shakespeare's characters are physically described, although allusions are often made regarding their beauty. The majority of Cervantes' characters are pronounced beautiful, all except for Teresa Panza and Antonia, whose physical appearance is never mentioned. Although many of Cervantes' women conform to the Renaissance concept of beauty by being fair, blue-eyed and desired by men, Zoraida, for example, is a dark-skinned beauty. Furthermore, Dulcinea's unrealistic appearance can be considered a parody of the Petrarchan conventions. Similarly, Shakespeare also comically plays on the traditional beauty ideal through Lucentio's exaggerated descriptions of Bianca. Therefore, both writers can be seen as partly criticising the Renaissance concept of beauty as they do not exclusively follow the standards, and at times, even satirise them. A further shared similarity between both writers, and which corresponds to the social expectations of the Renaissance, is the importance placed upon female chastity and virginity. Shakespeare demonstrates this in Much Ado About Nothing, with the public humiliation of Hero. Likewise, the importance of virginity is highlighted through Dorotea, who can only restore her lost honour by marrying the man who corrupted her in the first place. Whereas Hero is shunned by the majority of the characters who angrily insult her and even wish her dead, Dorotea is met with sympathy and understanding, and is helped and supported by the other characters in the novel. The fact that both writers treat this subject so differently could be due to their different personal backgrounds, as Cervantes' own sister was dishonoured and deserted by a man, which may have strengthened his sympathies for such unfortunate women. In conclusion, Miguel de Cervantes has been found to be the more liberal of the two writers, regarding women's rights and their expected roles in society. Cervantes is sympathetic towards a wide range of women, including those who have been dishonoured and wronged by men, and even Zoraida, who belongs to a different 139 culture and religious background, gains the other characters' compassion. Cervantes supports the idea that women should be able to choose whom they marry, and through the radical character of Marcela, questions a woman's right to lead an independent life, free from marriage and motherhood. In contrast, William Shakespeare's female figures are far more traditional in their roles and if initially dominant and shrewish, by the end of the play, they are transformed into silent, well-behaved and content wives. Due to the fact that the main dissimilarity which was discovered between Renaissance England and Spain was religion, this alone cannot account for the contrasting female figures present in both writers' texts. Therefore, it is to be concluded that the notable variations are due to Cervantes' and Shakespeare's different personal backgrounds, and have little to do with their separate distinct nationalities.

140

5. Works Cited

Primary Sources

Cervantes, Miguel de (2010). Don Quijote de la Mancha [1605/1615]. Ed. Francisco Rico. Madrid: Punto de lectura.

Shakespeare, William (1995). The Taming of the Shrew [1594]. Ed. G. R. Hibbard. London: Penguin.

Shakespeare, William (2008). Much Ado About Nothing [1598]. Ed. Sheldon P. Zitner. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Smith, Sir Thomas (1982). De Republica Anglorum [1583]. Ed. Mary Dewar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Secondary Sources

Aspinall, Dana E. (2002). "The Play and the Critics." In: Dana E. Aspinall, ed. TheTaming of the Shrew: Critical Essays. New York: Routledge. 3-38.

Bamber, Linda (1982). Comic Women, Tragic Men. A Study of Gender and Genre in Shakespeare. California: Stanford University Press.

Bean, John C. (1983). "Comic Structure and the Humanizing of Kate in The Taming of the Shrew." In: Lenz, Greene and Neely, eds. The Woman’s Part. Feminist Criticism of Shakespeare. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. 65-78.

Berggren, Paula S. (1983). "Female Sexuality as Power in Shakespeare's Plays." In: Lenz, Greene and Neely, eds. The Woman’s Part. Feminist Criticism of Shakespeare. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. 17-34.

Bevington, David (2002). Shakespeare. Oxford: Blackwell.

Biewer, Carolin (2006). Die Sprache der Liebe in Shakespeares Komödien. Eine Semantik und Pragmatik der Leidenschaft. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.

Cacho, María Teresa (1995). "Los moldes de Pygmalión (sobre los tratados de educación en el Siglo de Oro)." In: Iris M. Zavala, ed. Breve historia feminista

141

de la literatura española II: La mujer en la literatura española. Barcelona: Anthropos. 177-214.

Calvo, José (1989). Así vivían en el Siglo de Oro. Madrid: Anaya.

Ciallella, Louise (2003). "Teresa Panza's Character Zone and Discourse of Domesticity in Don Quijote." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 23.2: 275-296.

Clamp, Mike (2002). Cambridge Student Guide: Much Ado About Nothing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Close, Anthony (1990). Miguel de Cervantes: Don Quixote. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cruz, Anne J. (1996). "La búsqueda de la madre: Psicoanálisis y feminismo en la literatura del Siglo de Oro." In: Alain Saint-Saëns, ed. Historia silenciada de la mujer. La mujer española desde la época medieval hasta la contemporánea. Madrid: Complutense. 39-64.

Daniell, David (2002). "The Good Marriage of Katherine and Petruchio." In: Dana E. Aspinall, ed. The Taming of the Shrew: Critical Essays. New York: Routledge. 71-83.

Dodell, Petra (2005). Frauenbilder in der spanischen Novellistik des Siglo de Oro. Berlin: Walter Frey.

Dusinberre, Juliet (1975). Shakespeare and the Nature of Women. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.

El Saffar, Ruth and Zavala, Iris M. (1995). "Elogio de lo que queda por decir: reflexiones sobre las mujeres y su carencia en Don Quijote." In: Iris M. Zavala, ed. Breve historia feminista de la literatura española II: La mujer en la literatura española. Barcelona: Anthropos. 285-326.

Estévez, Xosé (2005). El contexto histórico-estructural de El Quijote. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto.

Fajardo, Salvador J. (1984). "Unveiling Dorotea or the Reader as Voyeur." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 4.2: 89-108.

Falcón, Lidia (1997). Amor, sexo y aventura en las mujeres del Quijote. Madrid: Vindicación feminista.

Fernández Álvarez, Manuel (1974). La sociedad española del Renacimiento. Madrid: Cátedra.

Ferreras Savoye, Jacqueline (1995). "El Buen Amor, La Celestina: la sociedad

142

patriarcal en crisis." In: Iris M. Zavala, ed. Breve historia feminista de la literatura española II: La mujer en la literatura española. Barcelona: Anthropos. 69-100.

Gay, Penny (1994). As She Likes It: Shakespeare’s Unruly Women. London and New York: Routledge.

Greenblatt, Stephen and Abrams, M. H. et. al (eds.) (2006). The Norton Anthology of English Literature. 8th ed. Vol. 1. New York: Norton & Company.

Greer, Germaine (2007). Shakespeare’s Wife. London: Bloomsbury.

Hathaway, Robert L. (1993). "Dorotea, or the Narrators' Arts." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 13.1: 109-126.

Hays, Janice (1983). "Those 'soft and delicate desires' Much Ado and the Distrust of Women." In: Lenz, Greene and Neely, eds. The Woman’s Part. Feminist Criticism of Shakespeare. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. 79-99.

Honigmann, Ernst (2001). "Shakespeare's Life." In: Margreta de Grazia and Stanley Wells, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1-12.

Jardine, Lisa (1989). Still Harping on Daughters: Women and Drama in the Age of Shakespeare. New York: Colombia University Press.

Jehenson, Yvonne (1990). "The Pastoral Episode in Cervantes' Don Quijote: Marcela Once Again." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 10.2: 15-35.

Jehenson, Yvonne (1998). "Masochisma versus Machismo or: Camila's Re-writing of Gender Assignations in Cervantes's Tale of Foolish Curiosity." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 18.2: 26-52.

Johnson, Carroll B. (2000). Cervantes and the Material World. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Kolin, Philip C. (1991). Shakespeare and Feminist Criticism: An Annotated Bibliography and Commentary. New York: Garland Publishing.

Korda, Natasha (2002). "Household Kates. Domesticating Commodities in The Taming of the Shrew." In: Dana E. Aspinall, ed. The Taming of the Shrew: Critical Essays. New York: Routledge. 277-304.

Krauss, Werner (1966). Miguel de Cervantes: Leben und Werk. Neuwied: Luchterhand.

Lewes, Louis (1895). The Women of Shakespeare. Trans. Helen Zimmern. London: Hodder Brothers.

143

Mancing, Howard (2003). "Cervantes as Narrator of Don Quijote." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 23.1: 117-140.

Mancing, Howard (2005). "Camila's Story." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 25.1: 9-22.

Marting, Diane E. (2001). The Sexual Woman in Latin American Literature. Florida: University Press of Florida.

Maurer, Margaret and Gaines, Barry (2010). "Putting the Silent Woman Back into the Shakespearean Shrew." In: Wootton and Holderness eds. Gender and Power in Shrew-Taming Narratives, 1500-1700. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 101- 122.

McKendrick, Melveena (1983). "Women Against Wedlock: The Reluctant Brides of Golden Age Drama." In: Beth Miller, ed. Women in Hispanic Literature: Icons and Fallen Idols. Berkeley: University of California Press. 115-146.

McNeill, Fiona (2007). Poor Women in Shakespeare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mikesell, Margaret Lael (2002). "Love Wrought These Miracles. Marriage and Genre in The Taming of the Shrew." In: Dana E. Aspinall, ed. The Taming of the Shrew: Critical Essays. New York: Routledge. 106-129.

Monzón, Eugenia (2005). "Marginalidad y prostitución." In: Isabel Morant, ed. Historia de las mujeres en España y América Latina. Volumen II. El mundo moderno. Madrid: Cátedra. 379-395.

Morant, Isabel (2005). "Hombres y mujeres en el discurso de los moralistas. Funciones y relaciones." In: Isabel Morant, ed. Historia de las mujeres en España y América Latina. Volumen II. El mundo moderno. Madrid: Cátedra. 27-61.

Murillo, L. A. (1990). A Critical Introduction to Don Quixote. New York: Peter Lang.

Mussio, Thomas E. (2000). Bandello's "Timbreo and Fenicia" and The Winter's Tale. In: Comparitive Drama. 34.2: 211-244.

Navas Ocaña, Isabel (2006). "¿Y si don Quijote, Sancho y hasta el mismísimo Cervantes fueron mujeres?" In: Mercedes Arriaga et al. eds. Desde Andalucía: Mujeres del Mediterráneo. Almería: ArCiBel Editores. 337-353.

Neely, Carol Thomas (1991). "Broken Nuptials: Much Ado about Nothing." In: Gary Waller ed. Shakespeare's Comedies. London and New York: Longman. 138- 154.

Newman, Karen (1991). "Renaissance Family Politics and Shakespeare's The Taming

144

of the Shrew." In: Gary Waller ed. Shakespeare's Comedies. London and New York: Longman. 39-55.

Nünning, Vera and Ansgar (2007). An Introduction to the Study of English and American Literature. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett.

Ortega, Margarita (2005). "Las edades de las mujeres." In: Isabel Morant, ed. Historia de las mujeres en España y América Latina. Volumen II. El mundo moderno. Madrid: Cátedra. 317-349.

Parr, James A. (2005). Don Quixote. A Touchstone for Literary Criticism. Kassel: Reichenberger.

Pérez Samper, María de los Ángeles (2005). "Las reinas." In: Isabel Morant, ed. Historia de las mujeres en España y América Latina. Volumen II. El mundo moderno. Madrid: Cátedra. 399-435.

Perry, Mary Elizabeth (1996). "Religión, género y poder: Las moriscas en la España de los siglos XVI y XVII." In: Alain Saint-Saëns, ed. Historia silenciada de la mujer. La mujer española desde la época medieval hasta la contemporánea. Madrid: Complutense. 65-77.

Pfister, Manfred (19948). Das Drama. Theorie und Analyse. München: Wilhelm Fink.

Pierson, Peter (1999). The History of Spain. Westport: Greenwood Press.

Rabin, Lisa (1994). "The Reluctant Companion of Empire: Petrarch and Dulcinea in Don Quijote de la Mancha." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 14.2: 81-91.

Riley, E. C. (1986). Don Quixote. London: Allen and Unwin.

Rivers, Elias L. (1991). "Sancho y la Duquesa: Una nota socioliteraria." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 11.2: 35-42.

Rutkowski, Rainer (1986). "Misoginia y nostalgia en las escenas bucólicas del Quijote." In: Cuadernos Hispanoamericanos. Madrid: Instituto de Cooperación Iboamericana. 53-62.

Sánchez Lora, José Luis (1988). Mujeres, conventos y formas de la religiosidad barroca. Madrid: Fundación Universitaria Española.

Sánchez Lora, José Luis (2005). "Mujeres en religión." In: Isabel Morant, ed. Historia de las mujeres en España y América Latina. Volumen II. El mundo moderno. Madrid: Cátedra. 131-152.

Schama, Simon, Director (2002). A History of Britain, Volume 3 1558-1689 [Film]. BBC Worldwide.

Smith, Hilda L. (1996). "Humanist Education and the Renaissance concept of

145

woman." In: Helen Wilcox, ed. Women and Literature in Britain, 1500-1700. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 9-29.

Stone, Lawrence (1977). The Family, Sex and Marriage in England 1500-1800. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

Strong, Roy (1998). The Story of Britain: A People's History. London: Pimlico.

Strosetzki, Christoph (1991). Miguel de Cervantes. Epoche-Werk-Wirkung. München: Beck.

Suzuki, Mihoko (2000). "Gender, Class and the Ideology of Comic Form: Much Ado About Nothing and Twelfth Night." In: Dympna Callaghan, ed. A Feminist Companion to Shakespeare. Oxford: Blackwell. 121-143.

Trachman, Sadie Edith (1932). Cervantes' Women of Literary Tradition. Instituto de las Españas: New York.

Trapiello, Andrés (2001). Las vidas de Miguel de Cervantes. Barcelona: Ediciones Península.

Traub, Valerie (2001). "Gender and Sexuality in Shakespeare." In: Margreta de Grazia and Stanley Wells, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 129-146.

Trill, Suzanne (1996). "Religion and the Construction of Femininity." In: Helen Wilcox, ed. Women and Literature in Britain, 1500-1700. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 30-55.

Ureña, Camila Henríquez (1995). Feminismo y otros temas sobre la mujer en la sociedad. Santa Domingo: Taller.

Wayne, Valerie (1996). "Advice for Women from Mothers and Patriarchs." In: Helen Wilcox, ed. Women and Literature in Britain, 1500-1700. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 56-79.

Webster Garrett, Erin (2000). "Recycling Zoraida: The Muslim Heroine in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 20.1: 133-156.

Whitenack, Judith A. (1993). "Don Quixote and the Romances of Chivalry Once Again: Converted Paganos and Enamoured Magas." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 13.2: 61-91.

Wilson, Diana de Armas (1987). "'Passing the Love of Women': The Intertextuality of El curioso impertinente." Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America. 7.2: 9-28.

Woodbridge, Linda (1984). Women and the English Renaissance. Literature and the

146

Nature of Womankind, 1540-1620. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Zimic, Stanislav (2003). Los cuentos y las novelas del Quijote. Frankfurt: Vervuert.

Zitner, Sheldon P. (1994). Introduction to the Oxford Shakespeare: Much Ado About Nothing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Online Sources

Catalán, Rosario Hernández (2005, May). "El Quijote y el feminismo". Círculo Hermenéutico. Open Section. [Online] http://www.circulohermeneutico.com/RevistaCH/N5/revista5-6.pdf [2012, Sep. 11].

Chrisafis, Angelique (2002, May 8). "Don Quixote is the world's best book say the world's top authors". The Guardian. Culture Section. [Online] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/may/08/humanities.books [2012, Aug. 24]. donquijote.org. "Biography of Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra". Don Quixote Museum. [Online]. http://www.donquijote.org/vmuseum/biography-cervantes/ [2012, Aug. 14]. donquijote.org. "The Golden Age". Don Quixote Museum. [Online]. http://www.donquijote.org/vmuseum/biography-cervantes/ [2012, Aug. 14].

Eakins, Lara (2010 June 1). "The Six Wives of Henry VIII: Catherine of Aragon". Tudor History. [Online]. http://tudorhistory.org/aragon/ [2012, Aug. 10].

Encyclopaedia Britannica. "Moor (people)". [Online] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/391449/Moor [2012, Sep. 25].

Gutiérrez Sebastián and Moreno Llaneza (2007, June). "Las mujeres reales en la vida de Cervantes". IES Suel.org. [online] http://iessuel.org/coeduca/descargas/muquijote.pdf [2012, Aug.14].

Ministerio de educación, cultura y deporte. "Cervantes biografía". Museo casa de Cervantes. Valladolid. Cervantes Section. [Online]. http://museocasacervantes.mcu.es/pdf/cervantes.pdf [2012, Aug. 14].

Sanjurjo, Victoriano Santana (2008, March 23). "Visión cervantina de la mujer: la mujer en El Quijote". Teldeactualidad. Culture Section. [Online] http://www.teldeactualidad.com/pdf/visioncervantinatodo.pdf [2012, Aug. 08].

147

Thomas, Heather (2012, September 27). "The Queen's Death." Queen Elizabeth I (1533-1603). [Online]. http://www.elizabethi.org/contents/death/ [2012, Oct. 22].

Universia.net.mx (2005 July 26). "Revelan un 'Quijote' feminista". Universia México. Noticias Section. [Online]. http://noticias.universia.net.mx/ciencia-nn- tt/noticia/2005/07/26/90747/revelan-quijote-feminista.html [2012, Aug. 14].

William-Shakespeare.org (2004 November 1). "The Children of William Shakespeare". William Shakespeare Biography. [Online]. http://www.william- shakespeare.org.uk/children-william-shakespeare.htm [2012, Aug. 14].

148