‘For Few Mean Ill in Vaine’: Roxolana and the Clash of Passion and Politics in the Ottoman Court in Fulke Greville's The Tragedy of Mustapha (1609) and Roger Boyle's The Tragedy of Mustapha (1665)

IF 0.3 3区 历史学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES
Aisha Hussain
{"title":"‘For Few Mean Ill in Vaine’: Roxolana and the Clash of Passion and Politics in the Ottoman Court in Fulke Greville's The Tragedy of Mustapha (1609) and Roger Boyle's The Tragedy of Mustapha (1665)","authors":"Aisha Hussain","doi":"10.1111/rest.12883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite the many historical references to wealth, military strength and political efficiency, Turks were generally represented as violent, lustful and despotic figures in early modern cultural discourses. The stereotyped cultural Turk soon populated the London stages, thus moulding a recognisable dramatic type whose brutality and sexual appetite were also combined with political corruption. However, as this contribution seeks to demonstrate, Fulke Greville's Mustapha (1609) and Roger Boyle's Mustapha (1665) instead discuss characters who digress from traditional Orientalist portrayals of Turks whose sexual incontinence parallels with political corruption. In particular, this article engages with intersections between gender studies and Orientalism to investigate how Roxolana, in both plays, transgresses traditional representations of the female Christian‐to‐Muslim convert, whose lust distracts the Turkish ruler from his political duties. Both playwrights explore Roxolana's active interest in affairs of the Ottoman Court and the unexpected alliance she forms with Hungarian Queen Isabella when she, at the Hungarian Queen's request, protects Isabella's infant son and the Hungarian crown jewels. Their friendship appears to echo gift exchanges between Queen Elizabeth I and Turkish Queen Mother, Safiye Sultan, after the establishment of the Levant Company, which are detailed in various letters exchanged between the two monarchs in 1599. In light of this, I explore how Greville and Boyle could be commenting upon the political turmoil that James I's succession and the Stuart Restoration brought about in England, given that the country was more stable in a religious and political sense under the rule of former monarch Elizabeth I.","PeriodicalId":45351,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Renaissance Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12883","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite the many historical references to wealth, military strength and political efficiency, Turks were generally represented as violent, lustful and despotic figures in early modern cultural discourses. The stereotyped cultural Turk soon populated the London stages, thus moulding a recognisable dramatic type whose brutality and sexual appetite were also combined with political corruption. However, as this contribution seeks to demonstrate, Fulke Greville's Mustapha (1609) and Roger Boyle's Mustapha (1665) instead discuss characters who digress from traditional Orientalist portrayals of Turks whose sexual incontinence parallels with political corruption. In particular, this article engages with intersections between gender studies and Orientalism to investigate how Roxolana, in both plays, transgresses traditional representations of the female Christian‐to‐Muslim convert, whose lust distracts the Turkish ruler from his political duties. Both playwrights explore Roxolana's active interest in affairs of the Ottoman Court and the unexpected alliance she forms with Hungarian Queen Isabella when she, at the Hungarian Queen's request, protects Isabella's infant son and the Hungarian crown jewels. Their friendship appears to echo gift exchanges between Queen Elizabeth I and Turkish Queen Mother, Safiye Sultan, after the establishment of the Levant Company, which are detailed in various letters exchanged between the two monarchs in 1599. In light of this, I explore how Greville and Boyle could be commenting upon the political turmoil that James I's succession and the Stuart Restoration brought about in England, given that the country was more stable in a religious and political sense under the rule of former monarch Elizabeth I.
“为少数人虚伤大雅”:从富尔克·格雷维尔的《穆斯塔法的悲剧》(1609)和罗杰·博伊尔的《穆斯塔法的悲剧》(1665)看奥斯曼帝国宫廷中的罗索拉纳和激情与政治的冲突
尽管历史上有很多关于财富、军事力量和政治效率的文献,但在早期现代文化话语中,土耳其人通常被描绘成暴力、好色和专制的人物。刻板的文化土耳其人很快占据了伦敦的舞台,从而塑造了一种可识别的戏剧类型,其残暴和性欲也与政治腐败相结合。然而,正如这篇文章试图证明的那样,富尔克·格雷维尔的《穆斯塔法》(1609)和罗杰·博伊尔的《穆斯塔法》(1665)讨论的人物偏离了传统东方主义对土耳其人的描述,他们的性失禁与政治腐败相似。本文特别探讨了性别研究和东方主义之间的交集,以调查在这两部戏剧中,罗克索拉纳是如何违背了女性从基督教到穆斯林的传统表现,她的欲望分散了土耳其统治者的政治职责。两位剧作家都探讨了罗索拉纳对奥斯曼宫廷事务的积极兴趣,以及她在匈牙利女王伊莎贝拉的要求下,保护伊莎贝拉的婴儿和匈牙利皇冠上的珠宝时,与匈牙利女王伊莎贝拉结成的意想不到的联盟。他们的友谊似乎与女王伊丽莎白一世和土耳其女王母亲萨菲耶苏丹在黎凡特公司成立后交换的礼物相呼应,这在1599年两位君主之间交换的各种信件中都有详细记载。鉴于此,我探讨了格雷维尔和博伊尔如何评论詹姆斯一世的继承和斯图亚特复辟给英格兰带来的政治动荡,因为在前君主伊丽莎白一世的统治下,这个国家在宗教和政治意义上更加稳定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Renaissance Studies
Renaissance Studies MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: Renaissance Studies is a multi-disciplinary journal which publishes articles and editions of documents on all aspects of Renaissance history and culture. The articles range over the history, art, architecture, religion, literature, and languages of Europe during the period.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信