Fletcher's Satire of Caratach in Bonduca

Abstract

Marco Mincoff once argued that for soldier the embodiment of all the virtues,1 particularly courage, integrity, and truthfulness. Such characters as Caratach in Bonduca and Aecius in Valentinian assert moral authority in their playworlds. Paul D. Green views the hypermasculine Caratach as patently superior Queen Bonduca and her daughters because he champions the Roman attitudes and values the play endorses: the context of the play, 'woman' suggests irrationality, thoughtlessness, and violence, whereas to be 'man' be reasonable and honorable in the Roman mode.2 Simon Shepherd deems Caratach only Briton who truly just and chivalrous.3 Sharon Macdonald claims Caratach represents King James and flatteringly mirrors the king's misogynistic views.4 John Curran characterizes Bonduca as bloodthirsty, irrational, and childishly irrelevant, praising Caratach as high-minded.5 More recently Jodi Mikalachki asserts that the distinction between Caractacus's manly romanitas and Boadicea's female savagery became standard feature of early modern accounts of Roman Britain.6 Caractacus a figure of exemplary manliness7 who wins unqualified historiographical praise,8 whereas Boadicea represents, as late as Milton, 'the rankest note of Barbarism'9 which must be purged in order for Britain join Rome in the masculine project of civilization. Mikalachki argues that Fletcher seems have followed this pattern in composing his drama Bonduca10 claiming that Because she defied Caratach's order return her spinning wheel and instead meddled in the affairs of men, Bonduca bear full responsibility for the Britons' eventual defeat.11 Mikalachki here paraphrases Caratach's own words, but the passive is made imprecise; Caratach blames Bonduca for the British loss, but does the play? In assuming that the play endorses the values and perspective of Caratach, these views miss Fletcher's dramatic techniques that everywhere undermine Caratach and ultimately repudiate him.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.