As for Poland, it became a Republic w/ an elective monarchy only ca. 1572
when the regnant Jaigellonian (sp. ??) dynasty died out; and Poland's
considerable power in its region declined from that time. I.e., the
going's-on in Hamlet's part of the world may reflect political processes
somewhat contemporary with the life of the English playwright, to whose
realm Hamlet is sent, and which he visits with his buddies' sealed letters.
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:02:46 +0100
Penny M <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thank you for the Denmark connection - and the Polish. Wasn't Philip an
> elected count of Poland? But see also his Defence of Leicester, in which
>he
> claims that John Dudley was descended from the house of Berkeley which was
> itself descended ‘lineally’ from a King of Denmark. Even while stressing
> that in heraldic law, succession rightly lies with the one who descends
>from
> the oldest sister. (Not with Elizabeth, then: I think the Defence is no
> naïve mistake, as some have claimed.)
> Penny.
>
> -----Original Message-----
>From: Sidney-Spenser Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of James C. Nohrnberg
> Sent: 24 July 2008 18:12
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Elective Monarchy lights on Denmark
>
> This sounds right to me. The republican strain is a stalking-horse, but
> (for some literary reflections of all of this) Hamlet's dying voice is for
> the election of Fortinbras, (as formerly Hamlet deplored the election [by
> some kind of default] of Claudius [Ham. V.ii.65], and as earlier seems
>about
>
> to light upon Laertes in a coup ["The rabble call him lord; / And .... The
> ratifiers and props of every word, ' / They cry 'Choose we: Laertes shall
> be king:' Caps, hands, and tongues applaud it to the clouds:"
> IV.v.102ff.).
>
> Meanwhile Fortinbras has been stalking Poland, where the monarchy was
> likewise elective--famously or infamously, apparently. Elizabeth's own
> voice is said to have been, sotto voce, for James: for his succession,
>but
> also, in a way, for his election in lieu of Tudor issue lineally extract.
> See, for the legendary character of the Polish constitution, and the
> general rule (or practice) of elective monarchy amongst Germanic peoples,
>to
>
> which English "vox populi" Republicans might appeal as precedent, esp. in
> the deposition of Charles I, Earl R. Wasserman, "The Meaning of 'Poland'
>in
> [Dryden's] _The Medal_" in Mod. Lang. Notes 73:3 (March 1958). Cp. also
> Hamlet III.ii.356, "You have the voice of the king himself / For your
> succession" with Ros.&Guild. on "The cease of majesty" as a "massy wheel"
> (Ham. III.iii.11 ff.) creating a gulf-like power-vacuum (implicitly,
> perhaps, making for the emergence of elective [rather than dynastic]
> monarchic politics).
>
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:14:54 +0100
> andrew zurcher <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> The disputation at Oxford in 1566 was probably not, as Colin says, an orgy
>
>>of republicanism (led by a demagorgue?), but I still suspect that the whole
>
>>event was pretty perilously politically charged. Parliamentary debate over
>>the issue of the queen's marriage and succession had issued in two
>>petitions in 1563, both of which the queen had answered according to
>>contemporary accounts angrily, and another (perhaps informal?) petition in
>>1566, which provoked a response preserved by none other than Harington (in
>>which E promised to be no step-dame but a 'natural mother'). The prospect
>>of the 'election' of a monarch after the death of a dhildless queen, the
>>last of Henry VIII's children, was a real one. Thus a conclusion in favour
>>of succession was tantamount to an exhortation to marry and procreate --
>>which is just the same old heavyhandedness that angered Elizabeth in
>>Parliament, now at arm's length. In other words, the politically sensitive
>>part of this disputation was likely not the argument in favour of electio
>>(a stalking-horse), but that in favour of successio!
>>
>> az
>>
>>> Leche of Merton asked 'An Princeps declarandus esset electione potius
>>> quam successione' The same Leche 'elegantem orationem habuit contra
>>> successionem et pro electione in creando Rege' (238). A Mr Matthew also
>>> spoke for 'electio'. Then 'ad extremum Mr Cooper Magdel. pro successione
>>> determinavit,cum adjectione maximi periculi si Regnum relinqueretur de
>>> successione incertum' -so it probably wasn't an orgy of republicanism,
>>> what with all the students crying out 'vivat regina' and all.
>
> [log in to unmask]
> James Nohrnberg
> Dept. of English, Bryan Hall 219
> Univ. of Virginia
> P.O Box 400121
> Charlottesville, VA 22904-4121
[log in to unmask]
James Nohrnberg
Dept. of English, Bryan Hall 219
Univ. of Virginia
P.O Box 400121
Charlottesville, VA 22904-4121
|