Ah, Paris!
Was he, or wasn’t he? That is the question concerning the role of Paris in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. Was it Shakespeare’s intent that the character have a bigger influence on the play than most people give him credit for? Was there something about the character that should lead us to draw some conclusions about him? Shakespeare is well known for his use of play on the names of his characters. Also, the influence of the Greek and Roman traditions was very strong in his writings. With these in mind, one has to wonder if the Paris of Romeo and Juliet was derived from the legend of Paris, prince of Troy. The intent of this paper is to support this theory.
In order to believe that there is reason for this theory, one must realize the use of play that Shakespeare used in hi plays. Many of the names that he attributed to his characters contain hidden meanings. These meanings, when discovered, open up a new level of interpretation of that particular character. Because of them, actors, directors, and readers can get a better sense of the characteristics and actions that belong to the certain character. One example of these names is found in The Tempest. The name Miranda means “miracle.” However, the example that best supports the theory is found in Romeo and Juliet. The character Tybalt’s name means “cat-like.” Several instances within the play support this interpretation. In Act II, scene IV, line 19, speaking of Tybalt, Mercutio says, “More than Prince of Cats.” He furthers this description in Act III, scene I, line 75 when he calls Tybalt a “rat-catcher” to his face. Line 77 also supports the claim when Mercutio says, “Good king of Cats, nothing but one of your nine lives.” These few lines give the reader an insight to the demeanor of Tybalt that would otherwise have to be imagined. The meaning gives the character more strength, and allows the reader to view him in a particular light that advances the understanding of the character. The most important thing about this particular character is that he is part of Romeo and Juliet. This means that Shakespeare did use this type of play in this work. Since this is one of his earliest plays, there is good reason to believe that Shakespeare may have borrowed characteristics from other well known characters in order to give his audience a better insight about one of his own.
If Shakespeare did borrow characteristics, one has to wonder what he borrowed from. Since he lived during the middle of the English Renaissance, which was the “new birth” of the Greek and Roman classics, there is great reason to believe that he borrowed from the Roman traditions of Ancient Greece. How did he know about them? It is important to remember the history of Rome and England. Rome conquered the world. One of its earliest conquests was Greece. The Ancient Greeks had legends of gods and heroes that the Romans found intriguing. Upon conquering the country, the Romans stole many of the stories that belonged to Greece, and made them their own. In doing so, many of the manes of the gods and heroes were changed. Even though most of the characters’ names were changed, the story of the Trojan War remained mostly intact. Around 55 AD, Julius Caesar invaded Britain, binging with him the Roman culture. The stories of the Romans spilled over to Celts who inhabited the island. Rome began to fall around 70 AD, and the Romans began pulling out of England. However, the stories remained. In 449, the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes arrived in England. They pushed the Celts out of England, into Ireland. Just like several of the Celtic words that crossed into the vocabulary of the invaders, so did the stories that came from Rome. Even though this is theory, it is very likely that it happened. There is not proof of Roman tradition in England until around 1380 when Geoffrey Chaucer produced “Troilus and Criseyde.” The poem is about two lovers who lived in the time of the Trojan War. This is very significant, because around 1601, Shakespeare wrote the play, Troilus and Cressida. Not only do we wonder if Shakespeare’s play was based on the poem, but we also see that the Roman tradition was very prominent in his mind. Jupiter, Mars, and Dian, all roman derivations of Greek gods, are spoken of in the play. Most importantly though, Paris is a character in the script.
According to the Greek traditions, Paris was prince of Troy. He was chosen to be the judge of a beauty contest between Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite. Each goddess offered Paris a gift to choose her as the fairest of the goddesses, but Aphrodites’ was the most intriguing to him. She offered him the love of any woman in the world. Naturally, he chose the most beautiful one. Paris chose Helen, wife of Menelaus, king of Sparta. The conflict that ensued between Paris and Menelaus started a war between Greece and Troy. According to the Greeks, Paris was not much for fighting. In fact, he is spoken of as sitting in the castle, polishing his armor, while his fellow countrymen are being killed for a conflict that he started. He is not portrayed very favorably. Even Helen herself wished for a braver man to love. Legend has it that one day, Paris and Menelaus came face to face with each other. A duel began, and Menelaus got the best of Paris. He grabbed Paris by the helmet and began to take him to his side of the battlefield. He would have killed the prince if Aphrodite had not loosened the straps of Paris’ helmet. This action allowed him to escape. If it were not for divine intervention, Paris would have died. Though Paris escaped death that time, he could not escape the arrow of Philoctetes, which brought his end.
Though Paris had this reputation in Greece, Shakespeare seemed to have seen him in a different respect. In Troilus and Cressida, Paris is given a better view. In Act I, scene II, lines 212-214, Pandarus says, “Yonder comes Paris, yonder comes Paris. Look ye yonder, niece; is’t not a gallant man, too, is’t not? Why this is brave now.” In The Rape of Lucrece, line 1473, Paris is referred to as “fond.” Though “fond” can mean “foolish,” it also means “favorable.” These statements are in contradiction with the way the Greeks perceived Paris. The most important of Shakespeare’s suggestions is that Paris truly loved Helen. In the Greek tale, Paris won Helen’s love. True, he may have loved her, but she was more of a prize to him than a wife. In Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida, Paris is portrayed as actually loving Helen. In Act II, scene III, lines 156-160, Paris speaks of fighting for his love. He says, “There’s not the meanest spirit on our party without a heart to dare, or sword to draw, when Helen is defended; nor none so noble whose life were ill bestow’d or death unfam’d, where Helen is the subject.” In Act III, scene I, line 159, Paris tells Helen, “Sweet, above thought I love [thee].”
It has already been established that there is good reason to believe that Shakespeare used play in the character of Paris. It has also been proven that Shakespeare did have the influence of Greek and Roman traditions to base his character on. We even know the story of Paris and how Shakespeare imagined him to be. Now, we can finally turn to the Paris of Romeo and Juliet and see what similarities he has with the Trojan prince. First of all, and most obviously, they have the same name. This began thought of the comparison theory. Secondly, both men are government officials. The Paris of Troy was a prince in his kingdom. The Paris of R&J was a county. A county is like an earl. He has political power over a certain area of land. In fact, in Act III, scene IV, line 21, Old Capulet calls Paris a “noble earl.” Third, both men chose the woman that they wanted to be with. The Trojan chose Helen, and the County chose Juliet. In Act I, scene II, line 6, Paris asks Old Capulet, “But now my Lord, what say you to my suit?” The “suit” in the question is Paris’ asking Old Capulet for Juliet’s hand in marriage. In turn, neither woman had a choice about whether or not she wanted to be with her Paris. Helen was charmed by the spell of a goddess. Juliet was being forced by her father to marry County Paris. Finally, both men dueled with their enemies. Paris fought with Menelaus. He would have died if it were not for the intervention of Aphrodite. Even though Paris did not know that Romeo was his rival for Juliet’s love, he battled with him and lost his life in the process.
Now, let’s turn to the similarities between Shakespeare’s portrayal of Paris in Troilus and Cressida to that of Romeo and Juliet. In T&C, Paris was seen as a brave and handsome man. In R&J, Paris had the same qualities. In Act I, scene III, lines 79-94, Juliet’s mother tries to persuade Juliet to the advantages that Paris has over other men. She tells Juliet to “read o’er the young Paris’ face, and find delight writ there with beauty’s pen.” Even Romeo calls Paris “noble” in Act V, scene III, line 75. As the Paris of T&C was thought of as brave, so did the Paris of R&J prove his bravery in his duel with Romeo.
The similarity between the Paris of Troilus and Cressida and the Paris of Romeo and Juliet that gives the biggest indication of character is found in the love that each had for his chosen woman. Paris’ love for Helen in T&C has already been established. The Paris of R&J was definitely in love with Juliet. When told on Monday that he would wed Juliet on Thursday, he replied, “My Lord, I would that Thursday were tomorrow” (Act III, scene IV, line 20}. He longed to be with Juliet. His reaction to Juliet’s death was the nail in the coffin (so to speak) that proved his love for her. In Act V, scene III, liner 12-17, Paris said, “The obsequies that I for thee will keep nightly shall be to strew thy grave and weep.” Even with his own death, Paris tries to remain with Juliet. In Act V, scene III, lines 72-73, Paris tells Romeo, “If thou be merciful, open the tomb, lay me with Juliet.”
So how can this theory be important to the story? What changes anything about the meaning of Paris role in R&J? Well, one has to remember that Romeo and Juliet was one of Shakespeare’s earliest plays. People of his time did not have Troilus and Cressida to look to in order to see these similarities. Their first impressions of Paris are what they imagined as his lines were read. Of course, they could get an impression of his character in the similarities between the play and the Greek story. This would lead to an interpretation of Paris that would give him a submissive, weak role that he usually gets from all readers. However, after studying Shakespeare, and understanding his view of Paris in his other writings, we get an entirely different interpretation of Paris when we read the play again. We get the feeling that Prince Paris had in Troilus and Cressida, Act IV, scene I, line 54, when he asked, “Who in your thoughts, deserves the fair Helen best, Myself or Menelaus.” The same question could now be asked about who deserves Juliet best, Paris of Romeo?
Many things have been proven in this essay. However, the actuality of the County Paris being derived from Prince Paris can only be suggested. After all, this paper only intended to support a theory, not to prove it. Of course, the two characters could not be exactly the same. If they were, then Shakespeare would have been accused of copying, and probably would not have gotten as much respect as he did during and after his life. However, the similarities between the two characters are there, and they cannot be ignored.
Works Cited
Shakespeare, William. Romeo and Juliet. The Riverside Shakespeare,
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston/New York, 1997;
Pgs. 1104-1139
Shakespeare, William. Troilus and Cressida. The Riverside Shakespeare,
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston/New York, 1997;
Pgs, 482-525