Appendix The Queen or The Excellency of her Sex HISTORY OF THE PLAY The Queen was published anonymously in 1653 and remained anonymous until1906 when Professor W. Bang edited the play and attributed it to Ford. Sherman in 1908, H. Dugdale Sykes in 1924 and Joan Sargeaunt in 1935 were all in agreement.' More recent I y Professor H. J. 0 liver in 1955 and Professor O.K. Anderson Jr. in 1972 both confirm Bang's opinion and most scholars would now attribute the play in its entirety to Ford.2 MAJOR THEMES The theme underlying the main plot is the cure of misogyny by arousing jealous suspicions in order to stimulate sexual attraction. This therapeutic idea has been attributed to the influence of Burtonian psychology. The subject is Alphonso, sentenced to death for rebellion but pardoned and married to the Queen, whose sex, however, he abhors. The agent is his counsellor Muretto who, by dropping into his master's mind suspicions of the Queen's relations with the young lord Petruchi, rouses him to a fury of sexual jealousy. Out of this theme three others develop. First is the trial of love, for the Queen endures with fortitude Alphonso's refusal to accept her as a wife and his subsequent accusation of unchastity. Second is the theme of honour; the Queen remains entirely loyal to her husband and also to her responsibilities towards her subjects, for she will allow none of them to risk life and limb by taking up the challenge of her cause. The theme of honour recurs in the secondary plot in Velasco's unwillingness to break the oath which he has sworn to the imperious Salassa even when she frees him from it. These typically Caroline ideas derive mainly from the romances and 161 162 john Ford and the Caroline Theatre might be calculated to appeal both to the popular and to the private theatre-goer. Both the major and the minor plots build up the third theme - that of the stabilising effect of marriage on which the Queen comments- This sacred matrimonial tye of hearts Called marriage has Divinity within't. (11.1888) EVIDENCE OF AUTHORSHIP The case for Ford's authorship of The Queen has been based on textual parallels and similarities in theme and situation. Verbal similarities are always partly subjective and therefore liable to error, but Sykes' review of the findings of Bang and Sherman coupled with his own and followed by those of more recent scholars are convincing and I can add nothing of importance to them. Similarities to Ford's independent work in theme, situation and treatment seem to me of greater value. The trial of love is to be reckoned with in Love's Sacrifice and it is the major theme of The Lady's Trial. The closely associated idea of honour is the basic problem of Love's Sacrifice, The Broken Heart and The Lady's Trial, while the Queen's sense of the responsibilities of royal status is a preoccupation in The Lover's Melancholy and Perkin Warbeck. The importance of marriage as a means to stability, both in the individual and in the community, to a greater or lesser degree runs through Ford's independent plays. But apart from these major themes a number of incidents are strongly reminiscent of Ford. The opening lines plunge us immediately into a challenging situation- 'All's free and all forgiven ... Bless her majesty!' - a curtain-raiser not dissimilar in effect from the opening of Love's Sacrifice and 'Tis Pity. The following verbal combat between Muretto and the astrologer Pynto resembles the 'flyting' between Corax and Rhetias in The Lover's Melancholy. In his cunning handling of his master Muretto obviously recalls the practices of D'Avolos in Love's Sacrifice. Another possible parallel is with Iago's deception of Othello, but if the dramatist had The Queen 163 Shakespeare's play in mind he made very little use of it - surprising considering the dependence upon it of Love's Sacrifice. There is a hint of Desdemona- 'a child to chiding' - but more perhaps of 'patient Grissill' in the Queen's reaction after unsuccessfully pleading with her husband: what was't he said? That I no more should see him, never, never ... Not see him? 'twas too unkinde a task. But he commanded. (11.1255) In fact this passage has touches - 'unkinde', 'no more should see him ... not see him'- of the authentic Ford. The attempt to exploit Velasco's weakness by inducing him to drink recalls the plight of Cassio, but the similarities with Othello are just enough to show that the dramatist was familiar with the play, but had not absorbed its theme and treatment to the point of reassessing them as had the Ford of Love's Sacrifice. The use of a ring, the Queen's first gift to Alphonso, which he causes to be presented to Petruchi in her presence as a pledge of favour and her gay confiscation of it so that she may re-present it to Alphonso, slightly recall the episode of Calantha's ring in The Broken Heart. 3 But in every case, whether in the development of a theme or in the handling of an episode, the superficial similarities merely demonstrate the play's inferiority. Beyond a brief exposition the dramatic opening leads nowhere for it is cut short by the quarrel which, in contrast to that between Corax and Rhetias, is without dramatic significance and degenerates into scurrility for its own sake; it is also prolonged to the point of tediousness. Whereas the ring episode in The Broken Heart is functional to the action and sparks off a new development in three main characters, the scene here is a piece of stage trickery designed to evoke a sentimental sympathy with the Queen when later disillusionment falls upon her. It is one of several examples in the play of writing for effect rather than meaning. The debt to Burton in the main plot may be admitted, but in the generally flattened characterisation of this play psychological complexity is hardly possible. Alphonso is a 164 john Ford and the Caroline Theatre puppet going through the motions of psychological conflict but passion never goes further with him than rhetoric or childish truculence. 'I am not sorry', he replies to the Queen's injunction to repentance for his late disloyalty, 'Nay nor will not be sorry, know from me I hate your sex in general.' That Muretto should reveal nothing of his purpose in asides or soliloquy is typical of Ford, but as the play is constructed we see so little of his plan in action and hear the truth so late in the fifth act that his behaviour seems unnecessarily devious. When he finally explains himself it is at an undramatic length in flat prose. The main plot halts for lack of a clearly conceived motivation. Salassa and Velasco again go through the motions but against Thamasta and Menaphon, with whom they have been compared, they are little more than predictable exponents of well-worn ideas. It is difficult to believe in the major characters, and while Bufo's bawdry and Pynto's visions have some life in them neither contributes anything to the dramatic intention. But whatever the play lacks in planning and motivation it abounds in opportunities for the kind of spectacle a popular audience would appreciate. The presentation of a public execution with the added excitement of a last-minute reprieve was likely to please and the dramatist is not niggardly! There are three such scenes, following the same visual pattern, and Salassa's entrance to execution with 'her hair loose' also includes the victim's facile last maxims from the scaffold. The fifth act with the summoning of the three champions and their entrances in full armour- the stage directions are specific­ is a sustained pageant. This repetitiveness, without the dramatic acceleration which Ford achieves in Meleander's subtly varied reception of the Prince's gifts in The Lover's Melancholy, is a surprising characteristic in a play attributed to a dramatist whose economy in handling a main plot is a feature of his authentic work. A general flatness of tone and a falling short of purpose are characteristic of this play. A useful contrast is that between Alphonso's praise of the Queen's beauty and Giovanni's lines addressed to Annabella in 'Tis Pity. I have surveyed the wonder of her cheeks, Compared them with the lillies and the rose The Queen 165 And by my life Muretto, roses are Adulterate to her blush and lillies pale Examined with her white. (The Queen, IV.2407) These lines can mean no more than that the Queen's cheeks are pinker than the rose and whiter than the lily. Compare with the concentration of Giovanni's praise of Annabella: The lily and the rose, most sweetly strange, Upon your dimpled cheek do strive for change; Such lips would tempt a saint; such hands as those Would make an anchorite lascivious. ('Tis Pity, 1.3:p.l09) There follows on Alphonso's lines a passage in which the author may have intended to give a hint of the denouement by suggesting an as yet unexplained irony in Muretto, underlying Alphonso's newly-awakened love. If this was his purpose he signally failed, for the dialogue rapidly degenerates into something bordering on farce: Alph. She is superlative. Mur. Divine. Alph. Rich, bright. Mur. Immortal. Alph. Too, too worthy for a man. Alph. The gods might enjoy her. (IV.2437) This is a failure in judgement as well as in dramatic control.