The entry of the theme of corruption gives focus to the first act, the comparison between France and Malfi being first implied and then illustrated later in the act. Indeed the conversation between Bosola and the Cardinal both sets the scene and surprises the audience at the same time: its effect is to question the foundations upon which Malfi was created. A Cardinal must be an upright figure of faith and goodness, yet this is far from the picture that is presented by Webster. The description of the Cardinal as a “great fellow were able to possess the greatest devil, and make him worse” indicates corruption is rife in Malfi. That someone of this whiteness is the devil incarnate also suggests the depth of corruption in Malfi’s leadership. It is “poisoned” at the “head.”
In Bosola’s speech, the repetition of “devil” twice in the speech as well as the implication that he is the “greatest devil” denote the cardinal as the basest form of man. Bosola is crafted with a similar authority as Antonio for this speech, since he also condemns the Cardinal from personal experience:
“I fell into the galleys in your service for two years.”
From this speech we can deduce that Bosola was in the Cardinal’s “service” and that he was effectively jailed for whatever act he committed while under the Cardinal’s instruction. Rumours endorsed by Antonio and Delio place this sentence due to “murther” and that Bosola was released only due to an act of great gallantry. Since Bosola was “in (his) service” during this act, the Cardinal is also therefore incriminated with conspiracy to murder. No surprise then that he described as “the greatest devil” for such a deed. Bosola’s character meanwhile appears less evil, since he was released from “murther” after a mere two years. His gallant act means that the audience draw the conclusion he has been corrupted by the “disease” of corruption, since he has displayed good characteristics elsewhere. Thus the cardinal is doubly damned.
Though The Duchess of Malfi is based loosely upon fact, the dissolution of the monasteries at the time of Henry VIII is a probable reason for the Cardinal’s character being cast thus. Webster sought the approval of the Anglican king, hence the portrayal of a Cardinal of Rome as the “greatest devil” was expedient to ensure the success of his play. However, whatever the reason for crafting the Cardinal as deeply evil, wrapped in his vein of power, his influence on Malfi is clearly considerable. Thus the metaphorical symbol of the font spreading good or evil from the upper echelons of society back to the country as a whole is seen. Clearly the Cardinal has a bearing on the state of Malfi described so eloquently by Bosola as “the greatest devil.”
Bosola describes Malfi as a fruit tree “overladen with fruit.” From history it becomes aware that despite French and Spanish invasions, the state flourished at the time when the play is scripted. The word “overladen” in relation to the state offers an image of plenty, where everyone has ample sufficiency to ensure a decent standard of living. However, these “rich and o’erladen” trees are plundered by “crows, pies and caterpillars.” Due to the influence of the Cardinal and others, it is however being decayed, the ripened fruit being corrupted by these “miserable dependences.” Rather than being a land of plenty for all its people, the state is being blighted by “crows and caterpillars.”
Indeed, Bosola underlines the goodness of the French court and further damns the Duke’s by offering a slightly flawed statement himself:
“Could I be one of these flatt’ring panders…. I would hang on their ears like a horse leech.”
This statement determines two things about the state of Malfi. Firstly, unlike the French court, whose King “quit” his court of “flatt’ring sycophants,” personal favourites are a force to be reckoned with in the corrupt Malfi. They are the “flatt’ring panders” that Bosola refers to. Equally, Bosola exposes himself as a less than perfect character. This is important because although he is cast as a gallant fearless man, he has been capable of committing murder. He wishes to be amongst the “panders” that are the detriment of the state of Malfi. The “panders” are the “crows and caterpillars” corrupting the state. Bosola’s action, that of murder is also an example of how much he is willing to do to further his status. He like many others in Malfi, may he “could be… a flatt’ring pander” yet he knows he cannot thus is willing to ‘sell his soul’ and commit murder. It is a crime for which he was not paid, “The only reward of doing (it) is the doing of it.”
Furthermore, by casting Bosola as a retrograde, Malfi is seen to have corrupted something human, creating a murderer from a man who has shown exceptional bravery to ensure his early release. He was according to Antonio, “very valiant.” The “crows and caterpillars” have eaten away at his heart, destroying his morals. The Cardinal in whose service he was enlisted has “diseased” him to the point of “murther.” Webster also gives Bosola a greater authorial mouthpiece by crafting him thus: he is seen to be corrupt thus is more qualified to analyse the state of Malfi than other characters. He is not a white character, but rather a tragically flawed anti-hero, a murderer and a rogue who wishes to be a “pander” of the state.
Antonio, while showing a clear understanding of corruption, appears as an upright character, thus while the audience appreciate his ideals. His rambling about the ideals of “judicious” government and his admiration for the French court without its “sycophants and panders” speak for his character. It is my belief that the player should convey him as steadfast, uncorrupt and unbending in his belief. He does not wish to be a sycophant, and thus he is perhaps not as well equipped to judge the existence of corrupt ways. This is the reason Webster cast Bosola, whose character is more easily recognised as being dubious. Antonio’s “long” absence from Malfi also means that it is difficult for the writer to write a speech for Antonio where he deals with the corruption present in Malfi.
Further evidence of corruption in the state of Malfi take place in the second scene. Where Bosola has at this point already partially dismantled the character of the Cardinal, Antonio gives his view to Delio. The two are firm friends, and the view Antonio offers is given because Delio requested to more of the “natures” of the characters of state, thus its provenance is of high stock. His description of the Cardinal as a “melancholy churchman” after Delio’s admiring speech about the Cardinal’s “superficial” merits underlines the Cardinal’s bad character, but his supporting speech is far more informing:
“He is jealous of any man…. (has) flatterers, panders, intellegencers, atheists, and a thousand political monsters: He should have been pope (indeed) he would have carried it away without heaven’s knowledge (thanks to the bribes) he did bestow.”
Thus the Cardinal is seen to be corrupt, thanks to the “panders” that are in his employ. The cardinal, this “greatest of devils” holds “a thousand political monsters” in his employment. While a “thousand” may be an exaggeration on the part of Webster, it illustrates the character of the Cardinal as the very worst. An example of one of these monsters is Bosola previously, whom he employed to commit “murther.” The four different types of corrupt being listed here, “flatterers, panders, intellegencers (and) atheists” suggest that the Cardinal’s wrongdoing is a considerable enterprise. He acts as the “greatest devil” for all the “miserable dependences” in Malfi. The Cardinal is in this way similar to a 15th Century Al Capone, whose mafia wrested control of Chicago. Here the Cardinal and his brother decay the ‘fruit’ of Malfi, Webster portraying them as corrupt to the ‘core’.
Webster also directs a jibe towards the catholic church in this speech. That the Cardinal should be a possibility for Pope-ship with this level of corruption shows the contempt Webster’s contemporaries held the Catholic church. In addition the speech suggests that his “outside” that Delio assumes is his whole being, is in fact “mirth.” The Cardinal’s outside is, however, so firmly emplaced to deny most of the inhabitants of Malfi knowledge of his true character. If “heaven’s knowledge” was not to be imparted with this information, then it is another show of how well the Cardinal plays his “fashion.” The ordinary citizenry of Malfi believe him to be a “brave fellow” who plays “tennis” and “dances.” (ref. Delio)
The Cardinal’s brother is not portrayed in any better light than this either. He appears brave, willing to lead his troops into battle, until he is persuaded not to by Castruchio:
“It is fitting a soldier arise to be a prince but not necessary a prince descend to be a captain.”
On the surface this statement suggests that Ferdinand is an upstanding character, leading by example. However, look deeper and an alternate meaning can be found. Anyone willing to commit sufficient ‘legal murders’ can rise to be a prince. Like Bosola who is gallant and brave but commits murder, these ‘captains’ are also the corrupters of the state of Malfi. Antonio doubts the character of the Duke, and is shown to be correct later in the scene. At this point the audience have no greater proof about the character of Duke Ferdinand than the five lines offered by Antonio here, however, Webster does not portray him in a positive light. He mocks the duke with the lines:
“They flatter him the most, say oracles they say hang at his lips: and verily I believe them: for the devil speaks in them.”
Ferdinand, like his brother the Cardinal, is likened to the devil personified. If the devil could speak, he would, through the lips of the duke of Calabria. The Duke has the trappings of corruption, flatterers who laugh when and only when he laughs (L45 A1 Sc2) and proclaim him an oracle. Antonio of course suggests that these ‘prophesies’ come true only through his malign intervention, such as the acts of Bosola for the Cardinal. If the devil speaks through his lips, he is likely to be corrupt. However, if he accurately predicts events and is corrupt, he like the Cardinal may have “murther” committed by his “political monsters.” It is enough that the duke is “flatter(ed)” by those in his service, and we see him play an active part in sycophancy: “Laugh when I laugh.”
The final character introduced in Act one is the Duchess. Antonio uses five ‘goods’ to describe her in his speech. She is described as the “right noble Duchess” presumably contrasting to Webster’s ignoble dukes. The duchess, recently widowed, is eloquent, any listener admiring her speech “in wonder.” The word “wonder” suggests that she is especially gifted with speech, while the insistence by Antonio that the listener would “wish (her) to talk more” implies that not only is she gifted with speech, but that her thoughts are worthy of speech. Equally in the character reference, Antonio offers to the audience that although she has “so sweet a look” she does not use it to create “lavisious” thoughts. This almost angelic description of the duchess does much to renew confidence in the audience that Malfi is indeed a fine and genuine place. Her description is certainly crafted by Webster as different from the corrupt Dukes. Her actions, derived from her “noble virtue” are offered as paragons for other women to copy by Antonio. The idea of “noble virtue” contrasts with the view the audience have been offered about the Duke and his brother, the Cardinal. She is “more in heaven” than on earth, contrasting with the description of her brothers, “devils” whose place in Malfi is like “caterpillars” to decay the goodness of Malfi. If the duchess is “more in heaven” then this image adds to that of her angelic beauty: she is an angel indeed.
Overall, Webster’s constructs present Malfi as a deeply corrupt regime. The “silver font” that should send down drops of justice instead sends out decay. The nobles in Malfi contrast greatly to the paragons of leaders offered in the French court. The Duke and Cardinal with their “sycophants” and “flatt’rers” are shown to be vain and use their power to control others. Worse, they corrupt the “rich” state of Malfi with their “political monsters, atheists (and) intellegeners.” These “miserable dependances” leach from the state like the “pies and caterpillars” from the fruit of the “overladen” fruit tree.
Webster portrays Antonio and the Duchess as the exact opposite of the malign presence offered by the Duke and his brother. Their influence is shown by Antonio’s admiration of the uncorrupt French court. Equally, where Antonio favours the French court, he also favours the Duchess, then gives a list of the reasons for doing so. It is therefore assumed that they are the “silver drops” in the corrupt state, set to contrast against the corruption of the brothers.
The final two characters of the act I feel are dramatic constructs. Delio is used by the writer in this scene so that Antonio can speak candidly about France. By speaking to a friend, the audience value his comment more than were it to be made in public to a group of people. Delio is also used later in the act to hold the plot together, when Antonio points out the duke and describes him as a scoundrel. “This is the Duke of Calabria…. The devils speak (in him).” Bosola is crafted in a similar way. The authorial mouthpiece of Antonio cannot intensely
