The “Subalterne Magistrate” in Sir Philip Sidney’s Arcadia: A Study of the Character of Philanax

Abstract

T H E “ S U B A L T E R N E M A G I S T R A T E ” I N S I R P H I L I P S I D N E Y ’ S A R C A D I A : A S T U D Y O F T H E C H A R A C T E R O F P H I L A N A X MARTIN BERGBUSCH University of Regina I n Sir Philip Sidney’s Arcadia the ideal polity is a monarchy in which the king, whose authority derives from the people and whose power is limited by the laws of the land, rules in the interests of his people. Although he is not compelled to, the king shares the responsibilities of government with the officers whom he appoints chiefly from the nobility, but even on occasion from the lower classes. The nobility and the officers of the crown — although appointed to positions of authority by the king — owe their first duty not to him, but to the land and its people. Normally, these magistrates are required to obey the king, but when he acts against the best interests of the people, they are obliged to give him frank (and perhaps unwelcome) advice, to make up for his deficiencies in government, and — if he persists in evil rule — ■ to resist him forcibly.1 The common people have little or no direct voice in government and, normally, have only the duty of obedience to those in authority. Since sovereignty resides in the people, but can be expressed only through the “subalterne magistrates” of the kingdom, the relationship between the monarch and the magistrates2 is a crucial one. In this paper I wish to exam­ ine an important aspect of this relationship by studying the role and charac­ ter of the most prominent “subalterne magistrate” in the Arcadia, Philanax. Philanax is the chief officer of Basilius, the ruler of Arcadia, and serves as his deputy, virtually ruling Arcadia while Basilius retires to a rural lodge to escape — he thinks — the effects of an obscure and threatening oracle. Read­ ers of the Arcadia, and especially of the composite version of the Arcadia ( 1593) where Philanax’s character is more fully developed than in the Old Arcadia, have been puzzled for a long time by the apparent inconsistency in Sidney’s characterization of Philanax.3 Until the supposed death of Basilius in his retreat, Philanax is presented as the ideal counsellor by whose stan­ dards the other subordinate leaders of the state may be judged, and Sidney’s narrator invariably speaks well of his words and actions. After the king’s “death,” however, Philanax often speaks and acts rashly, cruelly, and unE n g lish Stu dies in C anada, vii, i , Spring 1981 justly; the narrator appears to adopt an inconsistent attitude toward him, sometimes condemning him, but at other times speaking well of him. The two most thoroughgoing attempts to explain the apparent inconsis­ tency in the characterization of Philanax are those of Marcus Selden Gold­ man and Kenneth Thorpe Rowe. Goldman argues that Philanax’s admirable character is transformed by the supposed murder of Basilius because his feel­ ings of love for his country and for his sovereign have been outraged. Accord­ ing to this explanation, Sidney sees the contradiction in Philanax’s character, but is able to forgive his cruelty and dishonesty for the sake of his virtues, partly because he saw the same kind of contradiction in the character of his father-in-law, Sir Francis Walsingham.4 Rowe admits that the conduct of Philanax in the trials of Gynecia (Basilius’s wife) and Pyrocles and Musidorus — who are all accused of murder in the death of Basilius — is incon­ sistent with his earlier characterization, but he argues that his unshakeable and unjustified conviction of their guilt is in keeping with a characteristic hardheadedness and single-mindedness.5 In fact, there is no inconsistency in the presentation of Philanax’s character: his character is developed in a manner completely in harmony with an important principle concerning the relationship of a king and his “subalterne magistrates...