Pázmány Péter Catholic University Faculty of Humanities

Department of English and American Studies

Who Could Be Responsible for the Tragic Death of Romeo

and Juliet?

(a retrospective study from a legal as well as moral point of view)

© Dabas, 12.12.2007.

2

There is a whole library of books dealing with Shakespeare. Half of this library would sum

him up as the world′s greatest dramatist-poet. Even when we are interested in his career as a

lyrical and epic poet, we cannot avoid alluding to the dramas.1The aim of this short study is to

put the basic concept of the drama under a magnifying glass from a legal as well as moral

aspect. We cannot, obviously, change the basic conflict or other features that inevitably led to

the tragic end; however, it would be a noble and interesting task to draw up hypotheses which

might have changed the climax as well as the dreadful outcome of the play. What moral and

legal liability can be identified? What moral roles do the different characters play? Who could

be blamed and what for? Who should not have been involved in the conflict? There are

several questions out of which surely many will be not answered however noble our initiation

is. On the contrary, we intend to display the key concepts leading to the desperate ending,

fallible humans, endless disputes, incompetent friends, impotent deeds of a churchman,

struggle and fight for love and freedom, triving on hatred and revenge. Everthing that is

human and everything that really could have happened differently. Analyzing the plot and the

happenings from a purely literal point of view is not our task now. Being a canon lawyer, the

writer of this essay would rather focus on the moral or immoral bahavior of the characters.

Meanwhile introducing the stage figures we wish to emphasize our aim seeking responsibility

and blame.

The age when Shakespeare worked was full of adventages for him and also for his

contemporaries. The Virgin Queen, Elizabeth I, supported the drama-writers, so it is not

surprising that experts call those dramas Elizabethan dramas. Therefore, a great deal of

dramas appeared at the end of the 16th century, including both major types: comedy and

tragedy.One of the most favored tragedies of Shakespeare is Romeo and Juliet written in

1590s.

Most discussions and stage productions give a simplified view of the play. Moreover, most

people consider that it is a "play of young love" or "the great typical love-tragedy of the

world" and so on. However, such remarks do an injustice to the complexity of the play. It is a

work of art which weaves together a large number of related impressions, ideas, images and

moral judgements.2

1Szilassy, Zoltán-Pálffy, István,

English Literature from 1485 to1660

, Debrecen:KLTE, 1981/, 79, 82.

2 Spencer, T. J. B.,

Romeo and Juliet, in troductio ,

Lo ndo n: Penguin boo ks,1967/, 7

3

Since the plot itself is well-known we would not like to go into it deeply. The only thing is

now to discuss who could be responsible for the tragic death of two pure lovers. After The

Proluge in wich a chorus speaks, we get to know about two households ′both alike in dignity"

/Pr.L.2./ and about the town where the scene takes place. We also come to be aware of the

fact that these households are in mutual hate, and this is what destroys the lives of ′star-

crossed lovers". /Pr.L.6./ Although one reason for the tragedy (as we have seen it in The

Prologue) is already given, we cannot be satisfied with it. Is the feud between the two families

the only acceptable explanation for the tragic death? No, probably not. So right from the start,

let us see which characters have influence on the end of the play.

By dividing them into two groups, we are to say that Mercutio, the kisman of Escalus,

Benvolio, nephew of Montague, Abram and Balthasar are gathering around the Montague

family, while Tybalt, nephew of Capulet, the Nurse, Peter and the other servants embody the

group that is centered in Capulet family. Certainly, there are some people who are

insignificant, which means that they are not in close connection with the families, like Paris,

who is in fact the suitor of Juliet, but is not involved in the feud; Escalus, the Prince of

Verona, and the two Friars, Laurence and John.

Mercutio is gay (certainly it rather refers to his masculine complexion and not a

gender divergance) and brave. He is not really involved in the family feuds. As he is a

kinsman of the Prince, he is also invited to the party of the Capulets. At the same time, he is

also the friend of Benvolio and Romeo. He dislikes Tybalt who always challenges him to a

duel. He seems to support Romeo until he gets a fatal injury when he says, ′A plague a′both

your houses" /III.1.L.100/ expressing that this feud and hate is nonsence. By saying this, he

seems to be a non-committal character as well, but in fact we know that his death, which is

the first one in the play, reflects to the course of fatal events taking place in the following

scenes. Could his sentence serve us like a balme and judgement on Romeo′s gang? Surely, it

could. However, as we are only at the beginning of a blooming climax, we cannot consider it

to be a final consequence. Moreover, he mentions both families, which does underline the

basic concept featuring the two houses in hatred. Therefore, Mercutio′s line is acting like a

first-instance judgement, the reader′s crave for more is not yet satisfied. A practical question,

however, could be whether the happenings could be ceased at this point or not. Legally, it

could have. As my being a lawyer, it even seems to be strange that after Tybalt being stabbed,

Romeo is free to go away and is only put into exile and is not executed. At the time when the

scences took place a simple execution could have been carried out easily. However, we have

two roots of the story. It is not a secret that no matter how much we would like Shakespere to