The Duke’s description of a ‘complete bosom’ suggests an emotional self-sufficiency, which he echoes in his disguise as the friar in the face of Lucio’s accusations claiming the Duke was ‘not inclined’ towards sexual activity. But his treatment of Lucio, (which will be further analysed later in the essay) however, seems to suggest that he is not as, ‘complete’ as he might like to be and that he is affected by others opinions. This does not point to a noble administrator because he may not do things so to save his reputation. On the other hand, if Lucio’s accusations are false it is reasonable for the Duke to be angry as he has strived for a good reputation and he doesn’t need Lucio to destroy that for him {as explained in the paragraph above}.
A more manipulative side to the Duke appears when he gives one of the reasons for abdicating his office. ‘Hence we shall see, /if power change purpose, what our seemers be.’ The end-rhyme and the positioning of these lines at the end of the scene both add emphasis to this pronouncement, which implies that the Duke’s primary purpose is to test his suspicions about Angelo’s virtue and honour. This suggests a cavalier attitude to the casualties of Angelo’s regime, although he ultimately does look after them.
I consider that if the Duke already suspects Angelo, it is ethically questionable to allow him the power to abuse the Viennese people which coincides with William Hazlitt’s view (in his study ‘Characters of Shakespeare’s Plays, 1817) that the Duke is, ’more absorbed in his own plots and gravity than anxious for the welfare of the state’ but conversely I can understand that it is necessary as it gives the Duke a platform for his own reforms and enables him to start more significantly as he re-establishes his reign.
There also has to be a certain amount of cruelty in the Duke as he invents a plot and positions his characters, whilst enjoying superior knowledge about events will turn out. For instance, the Duke could have revealed himself to countermand the order to execute Claudio, but instead he bids the prisoner, ‘Be absolute for death.’ Or he could have told Isabella that Claudio had in fact been spared, but instead his announcement that her brother is dead is abrupt and callous. He makes Mariana think that her long awaited husband is to be executed, however, these things are quickly excused in the light of the Dukes promptings towards mercy at the end of the play. This idea is also supported by the critic G.Wilson Knight who says that, ‘their result, however, in each case justifies their initiation.’ Also, this firmness could be seen as a sign that he will be an efficient administrator of justice, as he would not be affected by the emotions of others.
There is also some reservation about the mental state of the Duke to uphold justice. The Duke paints a picture of the world turned upside down in Act 1, Scene 3 because the laws have not been enforced: ‘quite athwart/ Goes all decorum’. He uses a sequence of animal imagery, ‘o’er-grown lion in a cave’ to convey this disturbed state, and his first image is a mixed metaphor, which may highlight both the topsy-turvy state of Vienna and of the Duke himself. I think that in the way these speeches represent a breakdown of order in the state they also reflect a breakdown in the Duke, which surely cannot lead to a just leader.
The Duke’s natural ability to be an authority figure is illustrated at certain points in the play. In Act 3, scene 1 it is clear that he is a ruler even when he is dressed as a monk; his orders to Isabella are clear and detailed, full of imperative verbs of command, almost breathless in their speed and length, ’Haste you speedily to Angelo; if for this night he entreat you to his bed, give him promise of satisfaction.’ The plan demonstrates a level of physical and mental energy that the Duke has not hitherto revealed but is certainly a quality that an administrator of justice needs.
In Act 4, scene 3 the Duke attempts to persuade Barnadine to prepare for death but he is adamant that he will not. And so the Duke decides that it would be, ‘damnable’ both for Barnadine and for his captures to execute him while he is in this repentant mood, thus showing the Duke’s sense of morality and that, whilst he wishes his plan to work, it is obvious that this does not mean at all costs.
In the last scene, the Duke uses a formulation, which seems to express equivalence and balance, and refers to the plays title, ‘An Angelo for Claudio, death for death’ and, ‘like doth quit like, and Measure still for Measure.’ But he does not in the end utilise this formulation, instead one of forgiveness and mercy is preferable to the Duke. Many believe that the Duke’s dispensing of justice represents the ideal of severity together with mercy, a Christian ideal, however, a doubt into the quality of upholding justice that the Duke possesses has to develop when the Duke shows his desire to see the women beg for Angelo as it could be interpreted to be a dubious assertion of his legal power.
On analysing the treatment of Lucio, it does occur to me to be particularly harsh, and it is striking that the Duke reserves his severest words and punishment not for the hypocritical ruler or the convicted murder but for the man whom he heard ‘slander’ him. However, execution for fornication faced Claudio and Angelo had to marry as a punishment with the threat of execution, which is the same for Lucio, so if I measure just on punishment, the Duke does appear more just. However, it is clearly apparent that the Duke has taken into consideration what Lucio so unwittingly yet personally said about him whilst deciding on a punishment as when Lucio protests against his sentence the duke’s reply is, ‘slandering a prince deserves it’: this is a different matter from righting a wrong done to Mistress Keepdown.
The Duke’s wisdom is most thoroughly displayed in the finale of the play. The Duke sets his plan up excellently by allowing Angelo to fall into his own trap, which consequently justifies that he should face the extreme penalty he has to inflict on others until he is finally saved by the Duke’s act of clemency. The Duke ensured that Angelo should not commit the actual offences he planned (this makes much easier to make a lesson out of him) and he can now pardon the culprit without disturbing the foundations of justice. This balance between mercy and retribution is what makes the Duke such a good distributor of justice.
But the sovereign achieves more than a demonstration of, ‘the properties of government’. The deeper moral of the ‘trial’ is seen in its effects on the conscience of those tried. It makes Angelo recognise that death is his just desert. Lucio will never again, ‘slander a prince’ and both Claudio and Juliet have acknowledged their transgressions and have repented.
The Duke also pardons Barnadine’s ‘ earthly faults. I initially did not agree with this and considered that perhaps the Duke’s acts of clemency were beginning to be a little limitless as Barnadine was a convicted murderer. However, I realised that Barnadine can actually be said to be a special case, ‘as a prisoner of nine years old’ he should long since have been executed or set free.
Through the Duke’s practical prudence, the tragic knot is untied. He managed to redirect events and the characters are made to rectify their flawed standards. For Claudio the two roads, to life on earth and to immortality, are again opened. The true spiritual exercise to prepare him for death is, first to ask his sister’s forgiveness, and then, go on his knees before God. Meanwhile, through the Duke’s efforts, his survival in the natural world of human frailty is to be assured, that he may fulfil his function in life through marriage and offspring. For this to come about, however, it was necessary to meet Angelo’s demands by substituting another man’s head for Claudio’s. So the initial thought of callousness on the Duke’s part is erased through deeper deliberation.
There is one worry that is evoked after reading the last act of the play and that is that the Duke seems to have lapsed into excessive clemency, which is a reminder of what happened before. This worry is soon expunged when the reader realises that the laws before were allowed to ‘slip’ but this time the Duke is in full control.
In conclusion I have decided that as mediator between the extremes of Angelo and Isabella stands the Duke, ‘a gentleman of all temperance’. He applies principle to practice to the near tragic situation and all of his decisions have been proved beneficial to nearly everybody. The only fault I can express would be his treatment of Lucio as he, I feel, has misinterpreted Lucio’s lighthearted character and taken his slanders too seriously. Through the whole play the Duke’s remedial functions work according to plan, with exception of Barnadine’s head, conveying the wisdom and careful considerations of the Duke. Justice is suitably combined with mercy and thus one can rightly conclude that the Duke does, ‘bear the sword of heaven’ and that he is an upright dispenser of justice.
