The Duchess of Malfi

Early modern drama frequently adheres to a five-act play structure. While complicated works by Jonson or Shakespeare have acts and scenes that lead into one another in creative and unexpected ways, theories of five-act structures can still sometimes be used to identify the general arc of early modern drama, especially tragedies. Nineteenth-century German playwright and critic Gustav Freytag’s popular “Freytag’s Pyramid” from 1863’s Technique of the Drama identifies five structural categories corresponding to five acts: introduction, rise, climax, return/fall, and catastrophe.

Within this structure, the first act’s introduction has two parts: exposition to establish setting and characters and an exciting force or complication. The first act, which is made up of one long scene, establishes the nature of the Italian courts, introduces and characterizes the main protagonists and antagonists, and complicates the plot with the Duchess and Antonio’s marriage.

Antonio’s lengthy comments at the beginning of the scene do not serve to move the plot forward, and the Corruption, Deceit, and Betrayal that take place at the Malfi court would still be evident without them. Instead, this is the first moment in which Webster uses this century-old tale of Italian murder to comment on the affairs of his contemporary England:

And what is ‘t makes this blessed government

But a most provident council, who dare freely

Inform him the corruption of the times?

Though some o’ the court hold it presumption

To instruct princes what they ought to do,

It is a noble duty to inform them

What they ought to foresee (I.1.16-22).

Antonio explains that, in France, the king cleanses corruption from the social circles that surround him and therefore keeps the entire country from corruption. The French courtiers are encouraged to “freely inform” the king of any corruption. Even though there are some subsets of courtiers who find this sort of communication presumptuous, Antonio says it is a noble duty to have such an open dialogue with one’s king. Antonio’s praise of this fictional version of France comments subtly on the rule of James I, who frequently fought with his Parliament’s House of Commons, seeking to diminish their power and bolster his own. While Parliament wanted to preserve the right to “inform” James how he should govern, James and other royalists found it presumptuous to speak over a king’s absolute power. In this play and others, Webster sets this thematic tension in another time and country, because if shown with a local, contemporary setting, the play could face censorship. Webster’s intentional use of international, historical events likely kept him safe from charges of treason. Figuring a young Italian woman as his main protagonist would make it easier for Webster to dissemble, should any accusations of anti-monarchical sentiment arise.

Antonio’s comments on the nature of the Italian courts lead to the characterization of the two main antagonists, Ferdinand and the Cardinal, who embody everything that is wrong with Italian nobility. Antonio says the Cardinal “strews in his way flatterers, panders / intelligencers, atheists, and a thousand such political / monsters” (I.1.161-63). His title is the only thing religious about the Cardinal: otherwise, he is thoroughly corrupt, dealing in bribery and trickery. While Ferdinand is the Duchess’s twin genetically, he is the Cardinal’s twin “in quality.” Antonio tells Delio that Ferdinand dissembles and deals dishonestly, does not pay debts, or return favors. Both the Cardinal and Ferdinand are characterized by appearing different on the outside than they are on the inside. Of the Cardinal, Antonio says, “Some flashes [of bravery] superficially hang on him […] but observe his inner character” (I.1.156-57, emphasis added). Of Ferdinand, he says, “What appears in him as mirth is merely outside” (I.1.170, emphasis added). Both brothers present a version of themselves that hide their true nature.

This characterization of Ferdinand and the Cardinal also characterizes the Duchess via juxtaposition. Antonio establishes her virtue by positioning her against her brothers: “But for their sister, the right noble Duchess: / You never fixed your eye on three fair different medals / Cast in one figure, of so different a temper” (I.1.187-89). Though the three siblings look similar, the Duchess’s personality starkly contrasts her brothers’. This characterization-via-reflection doubles as an inventive world-building tactic. In high-visibility court settings full of flatterers and panderers, one’s personality is defined by the perceptions of those around them. The Duchess is more virtuous for her brothers’ corruption, and they appear more corrupt when juxtaposed with her virtue.

After these characterizations, the Act introduces a complication to the plot: the Duchess’s proposal of marriage to Antonio. The Duchess knows the nature of the court and is aware that a marriage to the low-born Antonio is dangerous. She tells Cariola, “I am going into a wilderness / Where I shall find nor path nor friendly clew / To be my guide” (I.1.359-61). She senses that she is about to do something unprecedented and there will be no one to protect her from the ramifications. However, she desires a love marriage and she and Antonio undergo a ceremony called “a contract in a chamber / per verba di presenti” (I.1.478), which is Latin for “by speaking in each other’s presence.” In such a ceremony, a couple needed only to mutually declare they were man and wife. While these contracts were considered official and binding, couples were also usually forced to have an official ceremony to cement the validity of the union. Partially because the Duchess’s brothers have forbidden her from marrying and partially because of his social status, Antonio and the Duchess do not intend to tell anyone but Delio, Cariola, and their household about their marriage, nor to have a ceremony under the authority of the Church. As such, the Cardinal and Ferdinand would consider them to be living in sin.