Skip to main content

A Beast So Blurred: The Monstrous Favorite in Caroline Drama

  • Chapter
Localizing Caroline Drama

Part of the book series: Early Modern Cultural Studies ((EMCSS))

Abstract

The satirical poet’s implication that Charles I took erotic pleasure in the favorite he “love[d] too well” has not found much support in the work of early modern literary critics and historians. Instead, the dominant view holds that Charles’s love for Buckingham, while intense and sincere, was “not physically expressed,” as Kevin Sharpe writes in his authoritative The Personal Rule of Charles I.1 According to Sharpe, Buckingham played the role of “charismatic elder sibling” to Charles, who came to “admire and love” him. Charles regarded their bond as a “relationship of equals” and received more emotional fulfillment through Buckingham’s friendship than through his initially strained and distant marital relationship with Henrietta Maria. Whereas Buckingham was the last and greatest in a series of handsome young favorites enjoyed by King James, he was the only man Charles ever loved, for, in Sharpe’s strikingly unqualified assessment, “almost immediately after the death of Buckingham, Charles and his wife genuinely fell in love.”2 In his important biography Buckingham, Roger Lockyer similarly rejects the possibility of an erotic bond between Charles and Buckingham. After James’s death, Charles assured Buckingham that he would “no less cherish” him than his father had.3

stellionatus, a beast so blurred, so spotted, so full of foul lines that they knew not what to make of it.

—Lord Bishop of Norwich to House of Lords, May 15, 1626, reporting John Eliot’s speech against the duke of Buckingham

Of Brittish beasts the Buck is king

His game and fame through Europe ringe

His home exalted, keepes in awe

The lesser flocks; his will’s a lawe.

Our Charlemaine takes much delight

In this great beast so faire in sight

With his whole heart affects the same

And loves too well Buck-King of Game.

—“Upon the Duke of Buckingham” (anonymous seventeenth-cen-tury manuscript poem)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Kevin Sharpe, The Personal Rule of Charles I ( New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992 ), 46.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Quoted in Roger Lockyer, Buckingham: The Life and Political Career of George Villiers, First Duke of Buckingham, 1592–1628 ( London: Longman, 1981 ), 234.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Thomas L. Berger, William C. Bradford, and Sidney L. Sondergard, eds., An Index of Characters in Early Modern English Drama: Printed Plays, 1500–1660, rev. ed. ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998 ), 45.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Curtis Perry, “ ‘If Proclamations Will Not Serve’: The Late Manuscript Poetry of James I and the Culture of Libel,” in Royal Subjects: Essays on the Writings of James VI and I, ed. Daniel Fischlin and Mark Fortier (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2002 ), 211.

    Google Scholar 

  5. See also Thomas Cogswell, “The People’s Love: The Duke of Buckingham and Popularity,” in Politics, Religion and Popularity in Early Stuart Britain, ed. Thomas Cogswell, Richard Cust, and Peter Lake ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002 ), 212

    Google Scholar 

  6. Alastair Bellany, “ ‘Raylinge Rymes and Vaunting Verse’: Libellous Politics in Early Stuart England, 1603–1628,” in Culture and Politics in Early Stuart England, ed. Kevin Sharpe and Peter Lake (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1993 ), 299–310

    Google Scholar 

  7. Alastair Bellany, and Bellany, The Politics of Court Scandal in Early Modern England: News Culture and the Overbury Affair, 1603–1660 ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002 ), 254–61.

    Google Scholar 

  8. On Charles and Henrietta Maria, see Sharpe, Personal Rule, 170–72, and Annabel Patterson, Censorship and Interpretation: The Conditions of Writing and Reading in Early Modern England ( Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1984 ), 175

    Google Scholar 

  9. see Paul Hammond, Figuring Sex between Men from Shakespeare to Rochester ( Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002 ), 147

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Paul Hammond, and Curtis Perry, “The Politics of Access and Representations of the Sodomite King in Early Modern England,” Renaissance Quarterly 53 (2000): 1078.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Quoted in Michael B. Young, King James and the History of Homosexuality ( New York: New York University Press, 2000 ), 110.

    Google Scholar 

  12. On Davenant’s “searching and incisive” examination of courtly politics through the topics of love and passion, see Kevin Sharpe, Criticism and Compliment: The Politics of Literature in the England of Charles I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 61–68, 75–82.

    Google Scholar 

  13. William Davenant, The Tragedy of Albovine, King of the Lombards (London, 1629), sig. B2r.

    Google Scholar 

  14. William B. Bidwell and Maija Jansson, eds., Proceedings in Parliament, 1626 4 vols. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991–1996), 3:288.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Edward Topsell, The Historie of Serpents (London, 1608), 277.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mario DiGangi, The Homoerotics of Early Modern Drama ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997 ), 100–133.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Martin Butler, Theatre and Crisis, 1632–1642 ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984 ), 90.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Margot Heinemann, “Drama and Opinion in the 1620s: Middleton and Massinger,” in Theatre and Government under the Early Stuarts, ed. J. R. Mulryne and Margaret Shewring (Cambridge: J. R. 1993 ), 239–40, 253–61

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ira Clark, The Moral Art of Philip Massinger ( Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 1993 ), 87–92

    Google Scholar 

  20. Samuel Harding, Sicily and Naples, or, The Fatall Union: A Tragoedy ed. Joan Warthling Roberts (New York: Garland, 1986), 1.4, p. 67.

    Google Scholar 

  21. James Shirley, The Traitor ed. John Stewart Carter (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1965), 3.2.78–79.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Adam Zucker Alan B. Farmer

Copyright information

© 2006 Adam Zucker and Alan B. Farmer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

DiGangi, M. (2006). A Beast So Blurred: The Monstrous Favorite in Caroline Drama. In: Zucker, A., Farmer, A.B. (eds) Localizing Caroline Drama. Early Modern Cultural Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230601611_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics