A plague upon these sharp-toed shoes!

Mardonius and Bessus present us with competing models of service in the courtly realm of A King and No King. Mardonius speaks for traditional values and Bessus is exposed, over and over, for his uber-pathetic, Falstaffian shamelessness. Yet at play's end, Bessus is quick to note to Arbaces, "I told you once she was not your sister...and she looked nothing like you." Arbaces confirms this, calls him "good captain," and my neat binary is muddled a bit. Might Beaumont and Fletcher be suggesting, as Shakespeare does in the Act 3 trial scene in King Lear, that a sovereign needs both philosophers and fools to help rule well? How else might Mardonius and Bessus compliment each other in the play?

As Phil notes, the city and the crowd figure prominently from the first scene to the conclusion of Philaster. In fact, as is the case in The Knight of the Burning Pestile, members of the general populace take the stage and take over the dramatic action. As they fantasize about how to mutilate Pharamond, what do the citizens hold most significant? One citizen wants his liver to feed ferrets. Another thinks that if Spanish prince's shin bones are "sound," they'll serve him well. Does the crowd ultimately value the idea of rebellion against an unfavorable sovereign, or the economic-ish use they can put this transgressor to? Why do the playwrights invoke one idea of the "multitude," the "people," the "city" throughout and then complicate that by actually staging the angry mob?