2004
Volume 24, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1384-5829
  • E-ISSN: 2352-118X

Abstract

Abstract

Although early modern Dutch revenge tragedies have for a long time been studied in the light of the idea that passions need to be restrained, there is an inseparable political dimension connected to such plays. In the three revenge tragedies discussed in this contribution (1638-1645), the royal sovereignty of the political rulers degenerates into tyranny. The sovereign paradigm, however, rouses dismay among several dramatis personae. Frequently, we hear critical and dissenting voices, which explicitly oppose the conception of sovereignty as it is advocated by the potentates. In this article, I consider the question whether in the criticism of the old, sovereign conception of power () an apology for a new, alternative policy is articulated, which Foucault termed . Moreover, I argue that the revenge plays participate in the discursive context of Frederick Henry’s potential expansion of power in the period around 1640.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/NEDLET2019.1.003.LAUR
2019-03-01
2021-06-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/13845829/24/1/03_NEDLET2019.1_LAUR.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/NEDLET2019.1.003.LAUR&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Allman, E.J., Jacobean Revenge Tragedy and the Politics of Virtue, University of Delaware Press, Newark, 1999.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anon
    Anon., Don Jeronimo, Maerschalk van Spanjen, erven Gysbert de Groot, Amsterdam, 1713.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Armitage, D., Condren, C., & Fitzmaurice, A., Shakespeare and early modern political thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brandt, G., De veinzende Torquatus, Izaak Duim, Amsterdam, 1733.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Buitendijk, W.J.C., Jan Vos. Toneelwerken: Aran en Titus; Oene; Medea, Van Gorcum, Assen, 1975.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bruin, G. de, ‘De soevereiniteit in de Republiek. Een machtsprobleem’, in: BMGN-Low Countries Historical Review, 94(1), 1979, 27-40.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Buys, R., Sparks of reason: vernacular rationalism in the Low Countries, 1550-1670, Verloren, Hilversum, 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dean, M., Governmentality: power and rule in modern society, Sage, Londen, 1999.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Dollimore, J., Radical tragedy: religion, ideology and power in the drama of Shakespeare and his contemporaries, Harvester press, Brighton, 1984.
  10. Foucault, M., Senellart, M., Ewald, F., & Fontana, A., Sécurité, territoire, population: cours au Collège de France, 1977-1978, Seuil, Parijs, 2004.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Geerdink, N., ‘Het vraagstuk van een wraakstuk’, in: Honings, R., Jensen, L., & Marion, O. van (eds.), Schokkende boeken!, Verloren, Hilversum, 2004, 39-46.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Geyl, P., ‘De interpretatie der Deductie van 1587’, in: Bijdragen voor de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 12, 1957, 44-48.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Giddens, A., The nation-state and violence (Vol. 2), University of California Press, Berkeley, 1985.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Helmers, H., ‘The Politics of Mobility: Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus, Jan Vos’s Aran en Titus and the Poetics of Empire’, in: Bloemendal, J., & Smith, N. (eds.), Politics and Aesthetics in European Baroque and Classicist Tragedy, Brill, Leiden, 2016, 344-372.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hoenselaars, T., ‘Het spel van wraak en moraal in het Engelse en Nederlandse toneel van de renaissance’, in: De zeventiende eeuw, 7(2), 1991, 113-126.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Keirsbilck, M., ‘The tongue, the mouth and safeguard of freedom: towards a governmental reading of Vondel’s Palamedes (1625)’, in: Noak, B., & Konst, J. (eds.), Wissenstransfer und Auctoritas in der frühneuzeitlichen niederländischsprachigen Literatur, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Berlijn, 2014a, 277-296.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Keirsbilck, M., ‘Om de vorst zijn’ moedwil te besnoeien’: gouvernementele verkenningen in Vondels Palamedes (1625), Gysbreght van Aemstel (1637) en Lucifer (1654), Universiteit Gent, Gent, 2014b.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. King, E.L., At the Limit: Ethics, Sovereignty, and Subjectivity in English Revenge Tragedy, Tufts University, Medford, 2012.
  19. Korsten, F.W., Vondel belicht: voorstellingen van soevereiniteit, Verloren, Hilversum, 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Korsten, F.W., Sovereignty as inviolability: Vondel’s theatrical explorations in the Dutch Republic, Verloren, Hilversum, 2009.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Korsten, F.W., ‘What Roman Paradigm for the Dutch Republic? Baroque Tragedies and Amibuities Concerning Dominium and Torture’, in: Bloemendal, J., & Smith, N. (eds.), Politics and Aesthetics in European Baroque and Classicist Tragedy, Brill, Leiden, 2016, 43-74.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kossmann, E.H., ‘Volkssouvereiniteit aan het begin van het Nederlandse ancien régime’, in: BMGN-Low Countries Historical Review, 95(1), 1980, 1-34.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Leo, R., ‘Hamlet’s Early International Lives: Geeraardt Brandt’s De Veinzende Torquatus and the Performance of Political Realism’, in: Comparative Literature, 68(2), 2016, 155-180.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Lever, J.W., The tragedy of state, Methuen, Londen, 1971.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Pieters, J., & Roose, A., ‘The art of saying “no”: premonitions of Foucault’s “governmentality” in Étienne de la Boétie’s Discours de la servitude volontaire’, in: Deploige, J., & Deneckere, G. (eds.), Mystifying the monarch: studies on discourse, power and history, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, 2006, 79-97.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Pieters, J., Historische letterkunde vandaag en morgen, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Plard, H., ‘Adaptations de la « Tragédie Espagnole » dans les Pays-Bas et en Allemagne (1595-1640)’, in: Jacquot, J., & Konigson, E. (eds.), Dramaturgie et société: rapports entre l’oeuvre théâtrale, son interprétation et son public aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles, CNRS, Parijs, 1967, 633-653.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Prak, M., ‘Republiek en vorst. De stadhouders en het staatsvormingsproces in de Noordelijke Nederlanden, 16e-18e eeuw’, in: Amsterdams Sociologisch Tijdschrift, 16(2), 1989, 28-52.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Siegl-Mocavini, S., S. John Barclays “Argenis” und ihr staatstheoretischer Kontext: Untersuchungen zum politischen Denken der Frühen Neuzeit, De Gruyter, Berlijn, 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Sierhuis, F., The Literature of the Arminian Controversy: Religion, Politics and the Stage in the Dutch Republic, Oxford University Press, New York, 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Skinner, Q., Visions of Politics 2: Renaissance Virtues, Cambridge university press, Cambridge, 2002.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Smits-Veldt, M.B., ‘De toneelauteur en zijn product. Het succes van Geeraardt Brandts De veinzende Torquatus op de Amsterdamse Schouwburg’, in: Spiegel der Letteren, 44(1), 2002, 42-62.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Troost, W., Stadhouder-koning Willem III: een politieke biografie, Verloren, Hilversum, 2001.
  34. Vanhaesebrouck, K., ‘Tragédie classique, souveraineté et droit: le cas de Britannicus (1669) de Jean Racine’, in: Cools, A., Crombez, T., Slegers, R., & Taels, J. (eds.), The Locus of tragedy (Vol. 1), Brill, Leiden, 2008, 81-102.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Vermeer, W., ‘Enkele opmerkingen over ‘Aran en Titus’ van Jan Vos’, in: De Nieuwe Taalgids, 65, 1972, 257-267.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Weber, M., ‘Science as a Vocation’, in: Gerth, H.H., & Mills, C.W. (eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, Routledge and Kegan Paul, Londen, 1948, 129-156.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/NEDLET2019.1.003.LAUR
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error