“O loyal father?”: Aumerle, Treason, and Feudal Law in Shakespeare's Richard II

Abstract

ABSTRACTIn this paper, I show that the current reading of act 5, scenes 2 and 3 of Shakespeare's Richard II, which reduce the Duke and Duchess's opposing reactions to their son's treason to gendered stereotypes of female/family loyalty and male/political loyalty, is instead a complex response to the way the feudal issues both inherent in the play and explicitly referred to in these scenes are entangled with the competing economic, personal and legal repercussions of breaking a feudal oath. By restoring feudal law, in particular the legal response to becoming surety for another, into a play preoccupied with oaths and oath-breaking, these two scenes become a tangible illustration of the play's anxiety around the connection between a man's oath and his life. I believe that, after many years of reading these scenes in gendered terms, a restoration of the play's legal focus – as well as early modern knowledge of feudal law that has not yet been acknowledged in these scenes – is long overdue. Finally, I suggest that Shakespeare dismantles the vision of a stable political structure by suggesting how the oath – the religiously imbued scaffolding of feudal power – is easily broken, condemning even the king's most loyal subjects.