Deception and Substitution: Catalysts for Change

Through deception and substitution, Shakespeare’s Duke become less noble and just than the Emperor; this transformation ultimately changes the meaning of Measure for Measure because justice is never served which is a key element of Hecatommithi.

The concepts of deception and substitution are not as present in Hecatommithi as in Measure for Measure. Substitution is even brought forth by Shakespeare’s title. Measure can be substituted for measure, just like the friar is substituted for the Duke. Also, when the Duke disguises himself as the friar, he deceives almost everyone in Vienna. The deception adds to the confusion of Shakespeare’s text. The Duke’s deception makes him more knowledgeable about Angelo’s actions than the Emperor is of Juriste’s actions. But the deception also leads to the Duke becoming unjust.

This transformation’s effect on Measure for Measure results in a drastically different ending than in Hecatommithi. In Cinthio’s text, Juriste, by the Emperor’s command, marries Epitia. The Emperor enforces the marriage so justice would be served, and so that Epitia could marry the man who took her virginity. Therefore, she can keep her honor.

Epitia, in the end, lives happily, and it can be argued that justice is served. In Measure for Measure, since the Duke has many personal meetings with Isabella, he falls in love and wants to have sex with her. He offers to release her brother in return for her hand in marriage. Shakespeare ends the play without telling the reader whether Isabella agrees to marriage.

Also, the Duke’s presence throughout the play results in the preservation of Claudio’s life. Since he is disguised as the friar, he’s privy to information he would not have otherwise known. He overhears Angelo’s plan to sleep with Isabella and can stop it by substituting Mariana for her. In Measure for Measure, the Duke saves Isabella’s virginity and Claudio’s life, whereas in Hecatommithi, Epitia’s virginity is taken and her brother killed. Although the Duke saves Isabella’s virginity from Angelo, he will only save her brother if she gives it to him.

While the Duke pretends to be the friar, the town and Angelo believe he is away. When the Duke “arrives” back in Vienna, by Angelo, Escalus, and the citizens greet him. He states, “Give me your hand / and let the subject see, to make them know / That outward courtesies would fain proclaim / Favors that keep within” (5.1.13-16).

This passage in itself is deceiving because it has multiple meanings. It tells that the Duke will soon admit to his deception as the friar. Courtesies could mean appearances, and the Duke’s appearance as the friar let him, for a while, keep his “favors” within. But now that he will soon be unmasked, his favors will be known. This favor could refer to the Duke’s sexual favour he wants from Isabella. This sexual favor turns the Duke towards injustice because he holds Isabella’s brother’s life against her to make her decide to marry him.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a favor could also be “gracious or friendly action due to special goodwill.” On the other hand, the Duke was putting on the appearance of a good man by “graciously” acting for Isabella by saving her brother’s life. The Duke deceives Isabella by acting like a good man, but he actually wants her sexually.

The Emperor does not have the chance to fall in love with Epitia or want her sexually. This could be because the Emperor is nobler than the Duke, meaning that justice is so important to him that, by falling in love with Epitia, he would be acting against justice. While the Duke claims of justice’s importance, he’s actions do not show this.

In this line, the Duke could also be talking about Angelo’s sexual desire for Isabella and the same sexual favor Angelo asked of Isabella. The Duke knows about Angelo’s feelings for Isabella and is about to uncover them to the rest of the city.

Another form of deception in the text is the use of “subject”, a singular form, and “them,” a plural form. It adds to the complexity because the reader does not know whether the Duke is talking to or about one person or to more than one. This part of the passage can relate to a previous statement by the Duke, “Visit both prince and people” (1.3.46). “Prince” is singular, while “people” is plural. Prince in this statement refers to Angelo, so perhaps the Duke is substituting “subject” for “prince.”

A prince has power, whereas his subjects do not. When Angelo is given the power of the Duke, he is a prince. By the end of the play, Angelo loses his power and becomes a subject. Shakespeare is demonstrating the overall theme of substitution in these two short passages.

When the Duke acts as the friar, he is put in the position to fall in love with Isabella. But, not only is the friar a substitute for the Duke, in his eyes, he is also a substitute for Isabella’s prince. “Come hither Isabella / Your friar in now your prince: as I was then, / Advertising and holy to your business, / Not changing heart with habit, I am still / Attorneyed at your service,” (5.1.373-377).

Isabella is deceived because she does not know the friar is the Duke. The Duke admits that he deceived Isabella by saying, “as I was then.” The Duke has feelings for Isabella while he was acting as the friar, and he thinks he is acting in the best interests of Isabella. By doing what he thought was best for Isabella, he considers himself Isabella’s prince. The Duke’s habit is acting as a friar, so although he changes back to the Duke, he still retains the same feelings for Isabella. He still wanted to help remedy the situation by representing her interests. The ironic part of this situation is that he is not acting in her best interests. Instead, he is treating her exactly the same way in which Angelo did. He bribes her by offering her brother’s life for her virginity.

The syntax of this passage is confusing and represents the multiple layers deception adds to the whole play. Hecatommithi does not contain these multiple layers. The passage reverts in on itself, uses many pronouns, and is not a simple sentence structure. The pronouns are confusing because the reader does not know who is being talked about. Also, since the Friar is not a real person, but instead a projection, the reader does not know whether the pronouns are referring to him or the Duke. The pronouns could also not refer to either the Duke or the friar since the Duke is being deceptive.

All of the changes that Shakespeare presents make the ending for Measure for Measure drastically different than Hecatommithi. The Duke’s deception and substitution began his decent towards injustice. While the Duke was acting out his deception, he had the opportunity to love Isabella. It was this love that made him bend the law to his will, and to make him act the same was as Angelo. The Duke was supposed to serve justice to Angelo because he abused his power when dealing with Isabella. But the Duke did the exact same thing, and therefore justice was not served. Isabella never got justice because there was no one impartial to serve it. Isabella is stuck dealing with men who want to sleep with her.

In Hecatommithi, the Emperor did not fall in love with Epitia so he could act as an impartial judge, and Epitia lived happily. The seemingly small changes of the Duke actually change the whole meaning of Measure for Measure.