Cymbeline, King of Britain

Intricately and eclectically plotted, and producing in its last scene the most elaborate series of revelations and surprises in the canon as it snatches its multiple happy endings from the jaws of several disasters, Cymbeline belongs to the Jacobean vogue for tragicomedy which began with the success of Francis *Beaumont and John *Fletcher’s Philaster in 1609. Cymbeline and Philaster are in fact closely related, and it seems most likely that Shakespeare’s play was influenced by the work of his two younger colleagues—with one of whom he would later collaborate on All Is True (Henry VIII), The Two Noble Kinsmen, and possibly the lost *Cardenio. Simon *Forman records seeing Cymbeline performed in April 1611, when it was probably relatively new: unlike Pericles and The Winter’s Tale it nowhere echoes the writings of *Plutarch which Shakespeare had consulted so heavily when composing Timon of Athens, Antony and Cleopatra, and Coriolanus, so it was probably composed later than both of these previous experiments with the romance genre, in 1610.

Text: The play first appeared in print in the Folio in 1623, where its text provides the first recorded instance of the name ‘Imogen’: one of Shakespeare’s sources for the play, however, the ancient British section of *Holinshed’s Chronicles, tells of an Innogen (wife of the legendary Brute), a name Shakespeare had earlier given to Leonato’s non-speaking wife in the opening stage direction of Much Ado About Nothing. Since Forman’s eyewitness account of seeing Cymbeline performed refers to its female protagonist as ‘Innogen’ throughout, it is almost certain that Shakespeare actually called his heroine Innogen, and that the spelling ‘Imogen’ only appears in the Folio through scribal or compositorial error. Otherwise the Folio text is a good one: variations in spelling, and a high incidence of parentheses (even in stage directions), suggest that it was set from a scribal copy, probably by Ralph *Crane, of an earlier transcript (whether of foul papers or a promptbook) prepared by more than one scribe.

Sources: Cymbeline combines three distinct plot-lines, concerning, respectively, Cymbeline’s dealings with the Romans, the wager on Innogen’s chastity, and the exile of Belarius. Shakespeare’s information about the semi-legendary king, supposed to have ascended the British throne in 33 bc, came from Holinshed’s Chronicles, as did the account of the heroic defence of a narrow pass attributed in the play to Belarius, Guiderius, and Arviragus but deriving from an incident at the battle of Loncart (976: this is described in the Scottish section of the work which Shakespeare had consulted when writing Macbeth). Other minor details show that Shakespeare had also read the account of Guiderius in the second part of A Mirror for Magistrates (1578) and Robert Fabyan’s New Chronicle of England and of France (1516). More centrally, the wager plot comes from *Boccaccio’s Decameron (where it provides the ninth story on the second day), though Shakespeare draws some of its details from a version called Frederyke of Jennen (first printed in Dutch in 1518, translated into English in 1520, and reprinted in 1560). Much of the other material dramatized in the play—including the banishment of the hero, the jealousy of his foolish rival, and the flight of the heroine to an unjustly banished courtier’s cave—derives from an anonymous Elizabethan play, Rare Triumphs of Love and Fortune, performed in 1582 and published in 1589.

Synopsis: 1.1 Innogen, sole remaining child of King Cymbeline (her two elder brothers having been abducted in infancy), has married the commoner Leonatus Posthumus, preferring him to her stepmother’s foolish son Cloten. Her parting from the banished Posthumus—during which she gives him a diamond ring and he her a bracelet—is interrupted, thanks to the Queen’s machinations, by the angry Cymbeline. At Posthumus’ insistence his servant Pisanio remains with Innogen while he embarks for Rome.

1.2 Cloten, loser of a sword-skirmish with the departing Posthumus, is flattered by two lords who confide their actual contempt for him to the audience.

1.3 Pisanio describes Posthumus’ departure to the yearning Innogen.

1.4 In Rome, Posthumus speaks with a Frenchman and an Italian, Giacomo, about the relative chastity of their countrywomen: despite the objections of his host Filario, Posthumus bets the mocking Italian the diamond ring and 10,000 ducats that Giacomo will be unable to seduce Innogen.

1.5 The Queen obtains what she thinks is lethal poison from the doctor Cornelius, though he, not trusting her, supplies a drug which induces only a deathlike trance: she gives it to Pisanio, saying it is a powerful medicine.

1.6 Giacomo arrives at the British court and almost convinces Innogen that Posthumus is unfaithful before his offer of himself as a replacement alerts her to his ulterior motives. Giacomo claims he was only attempting her virtue to test her, mollifies her by praising Posthumus, and persuades her to look after his trunk in her private chamber.

2.1 Cloten, angry after losing at bowls, is again mocked behind his back by two flattering lords.

2.2 After Innogen retires to bed and falls asleep, Giacomo emerges from the trunk and takes notes about the room’s decor before stealing the bracelet from her arm: in doing so he further notices a distinctive mole on Innogen’s left breast, before returning undetected to the trunk.

2.3 The following morning Cloten employs musicians to serenade Innogen (with the song *‘Hark, hark, the lark’): antagonized by his insults to Posthumus and anxious about the loss of her bracelet, she tells him he is less valuable than Posthumus’ meanest garment.

2.4 Back in Rome Giacomo, showing the bracelet and describing Innogen’s mole, persuades Posthumus she has betrayed him, and is given the ring.

2.5 The enraged Posthumus rails against all women.

3.1 The Roman ambassador Caius Lucius demands payment of the annual tribute Cymbeline owes to Augustus Caesar: at the Queen’s instigation he refuses, and Lucius regretfully declares war.

3.2 To his horror, Pisanio has received a letter from Posthumus instructing him to kill Innogen for her alleged infidelity, using the opportunity his letter to her will provide. This letter, which Pisanio gives Innogen, claims Posthumus is waiting for her at Milford Haven in Wales, towards which she is impatient to flee.

3.3 Outside their Welsh cave, Belarius warns his untravelled sons Polydore and Cadwal against the vices of court life: when they have gone hunting, he confides to the audience that though brought up to think he is their father they are really Guiderius and Arviragus, Cymbeline’s sons, whom he stole 20 years earlier to avenge his unjust banishment.

3.4 Near Milford, Pisanio is unable to carry out Posthumus’ orders, which he shows to Innogen: outraged, she renounces Posthumus and implores Pisanio to kill her as instructed. Pisanio tells her he is sure Posthumus has been deceived, but means to placate him for the time being by sending a bloodstained piece of clothing, as requested, as evidence that Innogen is dead: meanwhile he advises her to get to Rome by disguising herself as a boy and taking service as a page with Caius Lucius, who will shortly be at Milford. Leaving, he gives her the so-called medicine he had from the Queen.

3.5 Cymbeline, the Queen, and Cloten part from Caius Lucius: the King’s preparations for war are distracted by the news that Innogen has vanished. Pisanio, interrogated by Cloten, shows him the letter inviting Innogen to Milford. Cloten resolves to avenge Innogen’s earlier remark by dressing in some of Posthumus’ clothes, going to Milford, and there killing Posthumus and raping Innogen.

3.6 Dressed as a man a hungry Innogen, now calling herself Fidele, finds Belarius’ cave, where Belarius, Guiderius, and Arviragus make her welcome.

3.7 In Rome recruitment is afoot for Lucius’ campaign against Britain.

4.1 Cloten, dressed as Posthumus, is near Milford.

4.2 Innogen remains at the cave while the men go hunting: she feels unwell, and takes the Queen’s drug. The men see Cloten, and while Belarius and Arviragus check he is not part of a whole party seeking them, Guiderius, provoked, fights with him and decapitates him. Belarius is horrified, though Guiderius unrepentantly throws the head into a river. Arviragus finds Fidele apparently dead in the cave: sorrowfully he and Guiderius lay out the corpse and recite a dirge, ‘Fear no more the heat of the sun’. Belarius lays Cloten’s headless body alongside before the three depart. Innogen regains consciousness to find what she thinks is her husband’s headless corpse, concluding that Pisanio and Cloten must have conspired against her. Lucius, passing by to Milford (where he expects troops from Rome led by Giacomo), is touched by what seems to be the sorrow of a page over his dead master, and takes Fidele into his service.

4.3 At court the Queen is sick with anxiety at Cloten’s absence. Cymbeline learns that Roman troops have landed, but Pisanio has heard nothing from either Posthumus or Innogen.

4.4 Belarius, Guiderius, and Arviragus, despite Belarius’ fear of being recognized, resolve to join the British army.

5.1 Posthumus, carrying the bloody cloth Pisanio sent, has come to Britain with the Roman army: repenting of Innogen’s death, he takes off his Italian clothes and resolves to fight on the British side.

5.2 In battle, Posthumus, dressed like a peasant, defeats but spares a guilt-stricken Giacomo, who does not recognize him.

5.3–4 Cymbeline is captured but rescued by Belarius, Guiderius, Arviragus, and Posthumus: the Romans retreat.

5.5 Posthumus narrates to a British lord how Belarius, Guiderius, and Arviragus reversed a British retreat down a narrow lane into a victorious renewed assault. He decides to dress as a Roman again in the hopes of dying at British hands, and is taken prisoner. Jailed, he prays for death, imploring Innogen’s forgiveness before falling asleep. In a vision the ghosts of his father, mother, and two brothers appear and call to Jupiter on his behalf. Jupiter descends in thunder, promises that he has not forsaken Posthumus, and gives the ghosts a tablet which they lay on Posthumus’ breast before disappearing. Waking, Posthumus reads the riddling tablet, which he is unable to interpret, before, after bantering with his miserable jailer, he is called before Cymbeline.

5.6 Cymbeline is rewarding Belarius, Guiderius, and Arviragus for their deeds in battle, unable to find their unknown comrade Posthumus, when Cornelius brings the news both of the Queen’s death and of her dying confession that she had planned to kill both Innogen and Cymbeline in her bid to make Cloten king. Lucius, Giacomo, a soothsayer, Posthumus, and Innogen, still dressed as Fidele, are brought in as captives, expecting to be killed: Lucius successfully pleads that Fidele should be spared. Instead of begging for Lucius’ life in return, however, Innogen has recognized Giacomo, and with Cymbeline’s support demands to know how he obtained the ring he is wearing. Giacomo confesses how he cheated in his wager with Posthumus, at which the enraged Posthumus steps forward, striking Innogen down when she tries to interrupt him: Pisanio, however, has recognized her and makes her known, though, reviving, she accuses him of giving her poison. Cornelius explains the nature of the drug he gave the Queen, which on her deathbed she had mentioned giving to Pisanio. Posthumus, Innogen, and Cymbeline embrace. Pisanio now explains where Cloten went, and Guiderius completes his narrative by boasting of having killed him. Cymbeline sentences him to death, but Belarius intervenes by revealing the true identities of himself, Guiderius, and Arviragus, to the delight of Cymbeline and Innogen, whom Belarius and the princes have already recognized as Fidele. Cymbeline spares all the remaining prisoners: Posthumus is recognized as the unknown soldier who spared Giacomo in battle, and now spares him again despite his penitent willingness to die for his crimes: and Lucius’ soothsayer interprets the tablet as a prediction of the reunion of Cymbeline’s family. Cymbeline embraces peace by deciding to resume paying tribute to Rome.

Artistic features: The difficulty and complexity of the play’s plotting is matched by an unusual density and knottiness of syntax, from which some of Cymbeline’s most famously simple and affecting passages (notably the dirge, ‘Fear no more the heat of the sun’) can seem a relief. It is at once one of the most puzzlingly uncertain in tone, and one of the most weirdly affecting, of Shakespeare’s later plays.

Critical history: Eighteenth-century comments on the play, like 18th-century adaptations (see below), predictably object to the unclassical irregularities of its plotting: Dr *Johnson famously observed that ‘to remark the folly of the fiction, the absurdity of the conduct, the confusion of the names and manners of different times, and the impossibility of the events in any system of life, were to waste criticism upon unresisting imbecility, upon faults too evident for detection, and too gross for aggravation’ (1765). (This did not, however, prevent contemporary engravers from choosing Giacomo’s voyeurism in Innogen’s chamber as one of the most frequently illustrated scenes from the late plays.) The Victorians were willing to forgive many of the play’s perceived faults for the sake of Innogen (‘undoubtedly one of the most exquisite of all Shakespeare’s female creations’, wrote Thomas Kenny in 1864), while the 20th century was more interested in explaining them by reference to the play’s contexts both in the politics of the Jacobean court and in the last phase of Shakespeare’s career. In terms of content, the play’s interests in British unification, in imperial peace, in the masque, and even in Milford Haven—where *James I’s dynastic ancestor Henry VII came ashore to claim the throne—have all been explored in relation to James’s cultural and political agendas: in style, its tragicomic experimentations with shocking incongruity, and its self-conscious reuse of motifs from earlier works in the Shakespeare canon (whether *Juliet’s potion, *Othello’s jealousy or *Lear’s loved and lost youngest daughter), have been related to similar techniques deployed less conspicuously in the other late romances.

Stage history: Forman’s account of the play does not indicate where he saw it, though the masque-like special effects of 5.5 suggest it may have been written with the indoor *Blackfriars theatre in mind. It was revived at court for *Charles I and Henrietta *Maria in 1634, but was displaced later in the century by Thomas Durfey’s adaptation The Injured Princess, or, The Fatal Wager (1682), in which Giacomo becomes a splendidly louche Restoration rake. In 1746 the original returned to the stage (despite William *Hawkins’s adaptation of 1759), and in a moderately cut and transposed text *Garrick made *Posthumus one of his best-loved Shakespearian roles from 1761 until his retirement: *Kemble was equally successful in the part, with Sarah *Siddons as his slandered bride. In the 19th century Imogen (as she was then known), both innocent and married, was one of Shakespeare’s favourite heroines, attracting actresses such as Helen *Faucit (who played the part for nearly 30 years, from 1837 to 1865) and Ellen *Terry (with *Irving as Iachimo, 1896). Over the next 50 years, though, the play’s combination of artifice and enchantment fell from favour, and despite Peggy *Ashcroft’s two triumphs as Imogen (at the *Old Vic in 1932, and at Stratford, in a fairy tale-style production by Peter Hall, in 1957) few 20th-century productions were conspicuous successes: modern dress, then novel, did not help the play in Barry *Jackson’s Birmingham production of 1923 (derisively called ‘Shakespeare in plus-fours’), and B. Iden-Payne’s critically acclaimed attempt to direct the play on sets derived from Jacobean masques (Stratford, 1937) did not dissuade George Bernard *Shaw from producing his own critical rewriting of the last act, Cymbeline Refinished, in which Imogen is much less willing to forgive Posthumus for trying to kill her. John *Barton tried without success to make Cymbeline into a ‘state of England’ play in the oil crisis year of 1974, alluding in his production’s designs to the vast refinery that now dominates Milford, and it is an index to directors’ continuing lack of confidence in the play that a subsequent RSC revival, directed by Adrian *Noble in 1997, modified the script to supply a narrator. Kneehigh’s superbly inventive 2006 production, as part of the RSC’s *Complete Works Festival, similarly crowbarred in a narrator, a pantomime dame called Joan, just returning after 30 years in the Costa del Sol to find the country precariously poised as it is at the play’s opening. It established a raucous, convivial, gossipy tone and worked powerfully to offer a way in to the magical, moving, and irreverently witty fairy tale hybrid its director, Emma Rice, dreamed up. The following year *Cheek By Jowl offered a pared-back, modern-dress take on the play, with a still unknown Tom *Hiddleston as both Posthumus and Cloten, and in 2012 the newly formed South Sudan Theatre Company, from the newly formed South Sudan, brought a disarmingly celebratory production to the *Globe to Globe Festival. The choice of play, with its themes of peace emerging from uncertain national rule and battle, could not but move the more for the spectre of the civil wars tearing the country apart.

Michael Dobson, rev. Will Sharpe

On the screen: A 45-minute TV version (1937) was one of the earliest British TV Shakespeare transmissions. Other TV productions include one from the USA (1981), one from Belgium (1981), and Elijah Moshinsky’s BBC TV production (1982) with Helen Mirren as Imogen, generally regarded as one of the best of the BBC series. Michael Almereyda directed the first major studio version (2014), with Ed Harris as Cymbeline, Ethan Hawke as Iachimo, and Dakota Johnson as Imogen in a modern-day setting of the play (the tagline on the poster read ‘Kings, Queens, Soldiers, Bikers, War’).

Anthony Davies

Recent major editions

Roger Warren (Oxford, 1998); John Pitcher (Penguin, 2005); Jonathan Bate and Will Sharpe (RSC, 2011)

Some representative criticism

Brockbank, J. P., ‘History and histrionics in Cymbeline’, Shakespeare Survey 11 (1958)
Hawkes, Terence, ‘Aberdaugleddyf’, Shakespeare Jahrbuch, 136 (2000)
Jones, Emrys, ‘Stuart Cymbeline’, Essays in Criticism 11 (1961)
Marcus, Leah, Puzzling Shakespeare: Local Reading and its Discontents (Berkeley, California, 1988)