Volpone and Mosca: Two Styles of Roguery

Author(s): Carol A. Carr

Source: College Literature , Spring, 1981, Vol. 8, No. 2 (Spring, 1981), pp. 144-157
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25111384

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to College Literature

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 VOLPONE AND MOSCA: TWO STYLES OF ROGUERY
Carol A. Carr

Volpone has been long regarded as the best of Jonson's plays. This
praise, however, is often qualified by critics who find certain elements in it
disturbing. They have sensed an uncertainty of purpose, a jarring mixture
of the satiric, the comic, and the tragic; they have felt the ending to be too
harsh; they have even questioned the very brilliance of Volpone himself.l
Both the greatness of Volpone and its unevenness can be understood if it is
seen as a "rogue play," one of a number of Jacobean satires centered on the
con game and its able practitioners. It is the rogue's ability to attract and re
pel at the same time which accounts for the play's mixed tone.
The rogue was a useful figure in Jacobean satire because he provided an
organizing focal point. Since the rogue preys on folly and vice, he draws to
himself suitable examples for the satiric sting. However, the rogue is an ex
tremely attractive character, and all too often he destroys the corrective pur
pose of the play. Rather than focusing on the faults satirized, the audience
identifies with this vital but reprehensible character, sharing in his delights
in the game.2
This problem inherent in the rogue can be seen with particular clarity in
Volpone because of the contrast between its two central characters. Vol
pone and Mosca both illustrate the rogue's ability to attract. But Mosca's
cooler temperament is less compelling and more suited to satire. A compari
son of the two shows why Volpone appeals to us as well as why he disrupts
the play's didactic intentions.
Volpone and Mosca both illustrate the traits which define a rogue. They
both are intelligent; both show an astute knowledge of men's motives and
great ingenuity in inventing schemes to exploit this knowledge. Both have
histrionic abilities. They are glib of tongue, perfect at disguise. Both, al
though in different ways, show a superior detachment from the avarice
which enslaves the legacy hunters. But these are secondary traits. There are,
as well, two primary traits of the rogue which Volpone and Mosca possess.
First, they are engaged in gaining money from others through trickery ard
deceit. Second, they take an absolute delight in gulling others, a delight
which overshadows their pleasure in gaining money. Gulling to them is
viewed as an absorbing game to be played with skill and daring. It is this
amoral delight which, above all, marks Volpone and Mosca as rogues.
In the first scene Volpone strikes the keynote of the rogue's view of
things. Although he has lavish praise for the end product of his activities,
gold, he is quick to add,

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 VOLPONE AND MOSCA 145

Yet, I glory
More in the cunning purchase of my wealth
Than in the glad possession . . . . (I.i.30-32)3
This attitude is amply demonstrated by both Volpone and Mosca through
out the play. It is evident in their glee after each deception, in Mosca's solil
oquy on parasites, and in the alacrity with which they pursue new schemes.
Volpone can declare after the first trial that gulling exceeds even sexual
pleasure:
O, more than if I had enjoyed the wench.
The pleasure of all womankind's not like it. (V.ii. 10-11)
Volpone's and Mosca's attitude toward gulling is also revealed in the lan
guage they use to describe it. Gulling is spoken of as either a game or an art.
Thus Volpone enjoys "playing" with the suitors' hopes and using "fine de
lusive sleights" (I.i.85, I.ii.95); Mosca refers to gulling as Volpone's
"sport" (V.v.18); and Volpone marvels that Mosca is in "so rare a humor"
(I.iv.138). The sense of gulling as an art is particularly marked in the scene
after the first trial. Mosca calls their deception of the court a "masterpiece"
because they were able "to make/ So rare a music out of discords" (V.ii. 13
18). Such language is also seen earlier when Volpone praises Mosca not for
his success in getting gold but for his style: "O, but thy working, and thy
placing it!" (I.iv.136). Thus we can see that the rogues' pleasure in gulling
results from their sense of overcoming difficulties, as in a game, and from
their aesthetic appreciation of the coherent patterns of activity they create
by manipulating others.
Although Volpone and Mosca are so alike when it comes to these central,
defining traits of the rogue, it is a mistake to see them as similar characters.
When it comes to the less essential traits of the rogue, they show, in fact, re
markable divergence. Of the two, Mosca illustrates the more typical pat
tern, whereas Volpone is a good example of a complex, individualized vari
ation. However, the traits of both characters can be found, in different
combinations, in many other Jacobean rogues. Middleton's Lucre and Wit
good in A Trick to Catch the Old One have contrasting traits that are in
many ways similar to Volpone's and Mosca's (although they are rather
bourgeois versions of the rogue and pall beside the magnifico and his ser
vant). Of more interest is Jonson's Face, who as clever servant turned con
man follows in Mosca's footsteps but adds to the character some of the zest
of Volpone.
The differences between Volpone and Mosca are perhaps nowhere more
marked than in the opening scene of the play; in a sense this scene offers a
blueprint for the patterns of speech and action which continue throughout.
It begins with Volpone's magnificent eulogy to gold. Although there is an
undercurrent of irony qualifying this speech, it still must be acknowledged
as breath-taking. Its allusions are sweeping, its rhythms hypnotic. Its very

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 146 COLLEGE LITERATURE

audacity leaves an audience more spellbound than critical. But its mood is
abruptly punctured by Mosca:
Volpone.. . . Thou art virtue, fame,
Honor, and all things else. Who can get thee,
He shall be noble, valiant, honest, wise?
Mosca. And what he will, sir. Riches are in fortune
A greater good than wisdom is in nature. (Li.25-29)
The juxtaposition of the two speeches is striking. Mosca does not merely in
terrupt Volpone; he breaks a spell, and he does so sheerly through his tone
of voice. He is not contradicting Volpone but merely summing up his speech
into a concise maxim. Mosca's tone is dry, matter-of-fact, and detached;
Volpone's is buoyant, imaginative, and impassioned.
The actions of the two rogues in this scene are just as contrasting and just
as typical. Mosca's first lines have been said to arise out of boredom,4 but
this interpretation overlooks the specific motive Mosca has for his interjec
tion. Mosca's first action is to take over the discussion so that he can turn it
to his own purposes. This is made clearer in his second interruption where
he again completes Volpone's sentence but this time is able to control the
conversation. Continuing in Volpone's strain, he overrides Volpone's own
interruption and arrives at his point:
You know the use of riches, and dare give, now,
From that bright heap, to me, your poor observer. (Li.62-63)
Volpone's response is just as typical. He evidently gives Mosca some money
and then quickly dismisses him to "Call forth my dwarf, my eunuch, and
my fool/ And let 'em make me sport" (Li.69-70). Ironically, the man who
has just delivered an eloquent eulogy to gold hands it over without hesita
tion, while the man who takes a cool view of money is quick to seek it.
Volpone and Mosca reveal in this first scene their basic differences of per
sonality. Mosca is detached and calculating with his eye ever on his advan
tage. Volpone, in contrast, is imaginatively involved in the moment and
seeks, above all, pleasure. The contrast runs throughout the play. Vol
pone's ebullience is clear everywhere, from his masterful speeches to Celia
to his short interjections: "Excellent, Mosca!/ Come hither, let me kiss
thee" (I.iii.78-79); "O, I shall burst!/ Let out my sides, let out my sides"
(I.iv. 132-33). In opposite key to these extravagant outbursts, Mosca plays
his own tune:
Contain
Your flux of laughter, sir. You know this hope
Is such a bait it covers any hook. (I.iv. 133-35)
'T seemed to me you sweat, sir. (V.ii.37)
Between the two, the play provides a full orchestration of the variable po
tentialities of the rogue.
Of the two personalities, Mosca's calculation is probably more frequent

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 VOLPONE AND MOSCA 147

in rogues than Volpone's extreme buoyancy. Indeed, the play demonstrates

that Volpone's emotions hamper him from acting effectively under pres
sure?a very necessary ability if one is to gull others. The reactions of each
when they are first threatened with exposure is revealing:
Volpone. Hark! Who's there?
I hear some footing; officers, the Saffi,
Come to apprehend us! . . .
Mosca. To your couch, sir; you
Make that place good, however . . . . (III.viii. 15-20)
Here Volpone's fertile imagination produces dangers that are not there. In a
sense it operates almost like the greed of the legacy hunters. It distorts the
world and leaves him vulnerable to gulling.
Nevertheless, Volpone's enthusiasm and zest for life are essential rogue
traits, for they add immeasurably to our delight in the character. In his
book Jonson and Elizabethan Comedy, Lester Beaurline points out that
Volpone's inflated style creates an atmosphere of liveliness, of gaiety?a
comic atmosphere. Often his sheer "rush of words" provides us immediate,
unreflecting pleasure.5 Mosca, of course, is not without this verbal gusto, as
he shows in his soliloquy on parasites (indeed, Beaurline discusses his use of
"exuberant speech" too). But Mosca is usually less buoyant than Volpone;
his style is dryer, more matter-of-fact. Unlike Volpone's comic high spirits,
Mosca's style is perfectly attuned to satire. Such a style, however, makes
Mosca less alive, less vital, to the audience. For all Mosca's skill, Volpone
remains the play's central figure.
These differences in personality between Volpone and Mosca correspond
to their respective roles in the play. Volpone as magnifico is in the position
to ignore cost and seek pleasure, whereas Mosca as servant and parasite
must scrape for his money. The contrast is often overlooked in reading the
play but becomes very evident if we try to visualize it in performance and
focus on actions rather than on words. Volpone, doubtless costumed in rich
gowns and furs, is seen being visited by suitors, entertained by Nano,
Androgyne, and Castrone, and waited upon by Mosca. He is clearly secure.
In contrast, there is a good deal of truth in Voltore's characterization of
Mosca as "A slave,/ Would run on errands, and make legs for crumbs"
(V.vii.1-2). Although he enjoys a privileged position in Volpone's house,
Mosca is, in the final analysis, only a servant, dependent on Volpone for his
livelihood. If we read the play carefully, we see that he does a good deal of
menial work for Volpone, opening his shrine, putting away his gold and
plate, fetching his dwarf, showing visitors in and out. Indeed, Rainer Pineas
in "The Morality Vice in Volpone" has argued that Mosca is the dominant
figure of the play because Volpone's role in bed is passive;6 however, a good
deal of Mosca's activity is merely the extension of his master's will.
Lowly as it is, however, Mosca's position is that of the traditional rogue

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 148 COLLEGE LITERATURE

whereas Volpone's is not. Rogues are generally servants or vagabonds not

masters?as the father of all rogues, Lazarillo de Tormes, well illustrates. If
they are aristocratic by birth, they are either bastards or penniless. Such a
position is part of what constitutes their success. They have no stake in so
ciety; so they have nothing to lose, and their position outside the order gives
them the detachment necessary to manipulate that order.7 To some extent
Volpone creates this distance by isolating himself in his house and adopting
the mask of a sick man. This gives him a detachment from the outside world
on which he preys. However, he lacks such detachment from Mosca, who is
an integral part of his private household and both serves and flatters him. In
the end his misplaced trust in his servant is a direct cause of his "mortifica
tion." In contrast, Mosca is not misled by his camaraderie with Volpone.
Whereas Volpone shows a genuine fondness for Mosca,8 Mosca's love is al
ways solely for his own "dear self and . . . most prosp'rous parts" (III.i.2).
His fox trap at the end does not surprise us. Like all true rogues he serves his
master in order to serve himself.
The contrasting personalities of the voluptuous master and his careful
servant can be seen with particular clarity if we approach two central
thematic concerns of the play?avarice and acting. These themes are rele
vant not only to Volpone but to the broader subject of roguery itself, for all
rogues seek to gain money and all employ, to some degree, the art of acting.
Both Mosca and Volpone illustrate the rogue's basic traits of freedom from
blinding avarice and excellent histrionic abilities. But these general simi
larities diminish when they are closely scrutinized.
Volpone has been characterized as a satire on avarice. Certainly the world
evoked in the opening lines?where gold is God?is the world we see
throughout the play. If it is clear, however, that the play is a criticism of
avarice, it is not clear whether Volpone and Mosca are objects of this criti
cism. Since both direct most of their energies to the accumulation of money,
it would seem that they are avaricious; however, their very methods of ob
taining this money argue just the opposite. Mosca and Volpone's ploy
works only because the suitors are blinded by greed. As Mosca says,
Each of 'em
Is so possessed and stuffed with his own hopes
That anything unto the contrary,
Never so true, or never so apparent,
Never so palpable, they will resist it?(V.ii.23-27)
The rogues' ability to manipulate this greed in others suggests that they are
not similarly in its blinding grip. Indeed, they show a thorough understand
ing of avarice and are the play's most articulate critics of it: "What a rare
punishment/ Is avarice to itself!" cries Volpone (I.iv. 142-43). One of the
paradoxes of roguery is that to be successful in getting money the rogue
must maintain a detached view of it. Otherwise he will be blinded by greed

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
VOLPONE AND MOSCA 149

and gulled in turn. Both Volpone and Mosca possess this detached attitude
towards money; however, their reasons for this detachment differ signifi
cantly.
Of the two Mosca's attitude towards money is the easier to understand.
As his first action is to ask Volpone for money, so throughout the play he
seems ever alert to turning over a few more chequins. It is obvious that all of
the suitors are paying him for what they consider his special aid to them.
His actions after the first trial suggest how he operates. Here he skillfully
gets the stingy Corbaccio to give him six chequins for "the advocate's fee"
(Voltore will surely never see it) as well as some extra for himself (IV.vi.83
88). If, however, Mosca is always calculating how to get money, he shows
little emotion towards it. His description of Celia, "Bright as your gold!
and lovely as your gold!" (I.v.114), seems for Volpone's benefit, for his
statements about money are generally characterized by their dry ironic tone
and are limited to a shrewd assessment of its effect on others:
O, no; rich
Implies it. Hood an ass with reverend purple,
So you can hide his two ambitious ears,
And he shall pass for a cathedral doctor. (I.ii. 110-13)
We get in Mosca the sense of a hard-headed realist. His seeking of money is
not presented as irrational but as the cool calculation of one who knows all
too well the importance of having riches in this world.
Volpone's attitude toward money is more complex. Although he speaks
frequently of the disastrous effects of avarice and is able to manipulate it in
others, he lacks Mosca's coolness towards money. The opening lines of
both characters are good examples of the difference. Although Volpone's
speech, like Mosca's maxim, is devoted primarily to caricaturing the power
of gold over other men, it has a certain warmth which Mosca's lacks. Vol
pone obviously enjoys viewing his money, and this pleasure in physical pos
session is echoed elsewhere in the play:9
Let me see: a pearl!
A diamond! plate! chequins! good morning's purchase. (I.v.89-90)
Even Volpone's detailing to Celia of the crowns and jewels he will give her
suggests more than an attempted seduction; it reveals a relish for the very
thought of such riches. At the same time, Volpone's actions somewhat belie
his words. He is much less attentive to gaining money than Mosca. Money is
no object in his pursuit of Celia?or even in getting rid of Lady Wouldbe,
whose absence Volpone would "take . . . upon any price,/ With any loss"
(IILv. 13-14). And he loses sight of money altogether in Act V when his ef
forts are directed solely to the discomfiture of the gulls.
Perhaps the easiest way to understand Volpone's attitude towards money
is to see it as one more pleasure in life in which he indulges. Money to Vol
pone is a sensuous experience; he likes to see it and to feel it. His frequent

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 150 COLLEGE LITERATURE

disregard for money is merely a by-product of his divided attentions: he is

attracted to such a multiplicity of pleasures. Thus Volpone forgets money
when he sees Celia, and forgets Celia in turn to seek "violent laughter" by
gulling the suitors (V.i.15). His "detachment" is therefore a far cry from
Mosca's thoroughly pragmatic view of money.l ?
The differences in the two rogues are also reflected in their approaches to
acting. All rogues are actors?conning another person demands at the least
a false front, often a role?and Volpone and Mosca are even more self-con
scious of their position as actors than most rogues are. They direct one an
other, discuss problems of props and costumes, and praise one another's
performance. Indeed, the play gives so much attention to acting that it be
comes in many ways a play about acting, and there is even a suggestion of
Volpone and Mosca vying for top honors.11 Both rogues are, to be sure, ex
pert actors, but they are experts in quite different styles?styles particularly
suited to their contrasting personalities.
Volpone would have excelled under the nineteenth century star system.
He is above all the master of the set piece and the rhetorical bravado that
goes with it. When we think of Volpone as actor, we picture stunning indi
vidual performances: Volpone as Scoto, Volpone as passionate wooer, Vol
pone as commendatore. Each is a distinct role performed in an appropriate
style with appropriate language. Scoto, the mountebank, speaks the rough
language of the streets: "These turdy-facy-nasty-paty-lousy-fartical
rogues" (II.ii.59). Celia is offered an exquisite lyric adapted from Catullus.
The role of commendatore is played in a broadly farcical style. Volpone's
acting is a series of individual virtuoso performances in widely varying
roles.
The opposite is true of Mosca. Mosca is always Mosca. Even when he
dons the robes of a clarissimo, he is still meant to be recognized by the other
characters. Nor does he give strikingly dissimilar impressions. True, he is
Mosca the upright man for Bonario, and Mosca the new heir for the suitors
in Act V. But most of the time he is Mosca the servant, pretending to work
in the interests of whoever is paying him at any given moment. This is not to
say that Mosca is an inferior actor to Volpone. He is, in fact, a particularly
impressive actor, but his abilities are different from his master's. Rather
than playing a series of fixed roles set at intervals, Mosca gives one contin
uous brilliant performance. He is, after all, conning Volpone, and his "If it
please my patron,/ Not else" (I.ii.64-65) is just as much an act as his similar
phrases to the suitors. Only in rare asides and soliloquies do we see a Mosca
who is not acting. As a result, Mosca must be, above all, a flexible actor,
able to adjust himself instantaneously to changing circumstances and
changing audiences.
Mosca's art is the art of improvisation. Unlike Volpone's magnificent set
pieces, Mosca's dialogue gives the impression of being constantly modified

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
VOLPONE AND MOSCA 151

as the pressure of the moment demands. His skill is particularly apparent in

Act III, scene ix, when he is able to patch up the damage caused by
Bonario's intrusion on Volpone and Celia. First he handles Corbaccio by
suggesting that Bonario, hearing about his father's intention to disinherit
him, came on his own seeking to kill Corbaccio. Then, when Mosca dis
covers he has been overheard by Voltore, he quickly readjusts the story for
this second suitor. Now he claims Bonario was planted there on purpose
"To do some violence upon his parent" (1.34). In the end Mosca is able to
satisfy both suitors that he is working in their interests alone, and he enlists
both to further his own designs in court.
This scene also demonstrates Mosca's other great ability, perhaps the
keystone of his art?his skill in adjusting all that he says to fit a changing
audience. Although Mosca is always playing himself, his role is full of
nuances, for he delicately adjusts his speech to flatter each suitor. His great
est performance is in the first trial scene where he continually shifts his at
tentions from one suitor to another, keeping all the different stories
straight, and working all into one effective defense. It is truly his "master
piece."
These talents of Mosca's?his ability to modify his script to suit each oc
casion and his ability to please every audience?are exactly those which his
master lacks. Volpone's failure to improvise is apparent in the frequency in
which he is trapped in his role and must suffer the consequences. As Scoto
he is beaten away by the angry Corvino, and as commendatore he almost
suffers a similar fate. When Bonario leaps from behind the arras to label
him a "foul ravisher," he remains just that, unable to alter his behavior
quickly as Mosca does when Voltore overhears him. Brilliant though his
roles are, Volpone cannot shift gear, adapt and change, as occasion de
mands. Similarly, except when he plays the dying rich man, his roles are
never perfectly attuned to his audience. His magnificent wooing of Celia
seems only "sensual baits" to that religious lady. Especially significant is
his failure as commendatore. His rather crude directness fits the character,
and he does succeed in needling Corbaccio and Corvino. But he does not
adjust his approach with Voltore and pushes the advocate too far. Voltore
is shrewder than the other two and less deeply involved. That he requires
more careful handling is shown by Mosca's treatment of him in the will
scene, where after openly ridiculing Lady Wouldbe, Corvino, and Corbac
cio, he turns to Voltore with the ironic,
Reverend sir! Good faith, I am grieved for you,
That any chance of mine should thus defeat
Your?I must needs say?most deserving travails. (V.iii.82-84)
Unlike Mosca, Volpone treats all the suitors alike, and he draws a distinct
and undesired response from Voltore.
The differing acting styles of the two rogues are summed up in their own

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 152 COLLEGE LITERATURE

words within the play as each thinks upon what to him is the greatest per
formance. Volpone recalls a specific role:
As when in that so celebrated scene
At recitation of our comedy,
For entertainment of the great Valois,
I acted young Antinous, and attracted
The eyes and ears of all the ladies present,
T' admire each graceful gesture, note, and
footing. (III.vii. 159-64)
Volpone is particularly conscious of style, of acting as an entertainment
which the audience admires as such. Mosca, in contrast, pictures no one
scene but a world in which living itself is acting:
But your fine, elegant rascal, that can rise
And stoop, almost together, like an arrow;
Shoot through the air as nimbly as a star;
Turn short as doth a swallow; and be here,
And there, and here, and yonder, all at once;
Present to any humor, all occasion;
And change a visor swifter than a thought,
This is the creature had the art born with him;
Toils not to learn it, but doth practice it
Out of most excellent nature. (III.i.23-32)
Mosca's acting consists not of polished pieces for the stage; it is not to
entertain himself or others. Acting for Mosca is a way of living, a constant
shifting of face and actions in order to manipulate others. His acting is like
himself, practical and attuned to specific goals. In contrast, Volpone's
seems to be an end in itself. We sense in his scene with Celia that he is
caught up in his performance and has momentarily forgotten his passion for
the lady. Acting for Volpone is another pleasure which he gives himself up
to totally. And perhaps of all his pleasures it is the most important. Volpone
is first of all an actor; Mosca is first of all a con man.
Of the two rogues Volpone is by far the more brilliant. His zest for life
makes him more attractive than Mosca, and his varying moods make him
more complex. So strong is his impact that for a time his name became a
part of our vocabulary.12 Ironically, however, the very strength of his char
acterization threatens to disrupt the play's unity. Volpone was intended as
satire, as its style suggests. It employs a good deal of caricature, exaggera
tion, and formal patterning. From the real shrine on stage in Act I to the pat
entrances of the suitors,l3 the elements are stylized so as to produce a sense
of distance. However, Volpone's character demands a complex, mixed re
sponse which breaks down this distance. His enthusiasm charms us, and his
cruelty shocks us. His very failures to be the ever-resourceful rogue?as
when he languishes under Celia's attractions or is helpless before Lady
Wouldbe's onslaught?only make him seem human and involve us more.

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
VOLPONE AND MOSCA 153

Volpone's character thus complicates the overall tone of the play.14 The
same cannot be said for Mosca. Less dynamic than Volpone, Mosca does
not destroy the sense of distance the play establishes.
Jonson's greater ease in handling Mosca is clear at the play's end. The
clash between a rogue's attractiveness and his culpability is commonly in
tensified at this point, for the audience does not wish to see such an enter
taining character get his just deserts. The playwright thus frequently
chooses to eliminate punishment in keeping with the rogue spirit or to mini
mize it. The former is impossible in Volpone because of the serious nature
of the crimes presented, and evidently the latter was equally impossible for
Jonson because of his determination to scourge vice. The severity of the
sentences imposed, however, sits ill with an audience?and this is especially
true of Volpone's sentence.
Volpone's sentence is particularly disturbing because we have found him
so attractive, because he is the character we identify with. It is also because
Volpone is a more complex character than Mosca, and his sentence seems a
denial of this complexity. Volpone's fate at the end is presented to us as an
exemplum:
And since the most was gotten by imposture,
By feigning lame, gout, palsy, and such diseases
Thou art to lie in prison, cramped with irons,
Till thou be'st sick and lame indeed. (V.xii. 121-24)
Although the moral posturing of the corrupt avocatore who pronounces
these words is obvious, the sentence still attempts to reduce Volpone to the
same level as the other two-dimensional characters. Its stylized nature?
matching punishment with crime?is in keeping with the satiric design of
the play, but it does not answer the complex feelings Volpone's character
has aroused.15
Nevertheless, although Volpone's punishment is unsettling, the end of the
play points in the direction of future, less perturbing conclusions. This is
owing to Jonson's skillful handling of Mosca. In working with the parasite,
Jonson hit upon a means of providing an appropriate overthrow and hence
punishment of roguery: the turning of rogue upon rogue and the ensuing
contest between them. This contest provides us with a display of the rogues'
wit and energy which delights us, and at the same time it helps mollify our
sense of the court's injustice. Given the world of Volpone and the rogues'
abilities, the victory of Mosca and Volpone as portrayed in Act IV seems the
inevitable conclusion for the play. Nevertheless, their defeat in Act V does
come about through their own actions rather than through any efforts by
the corrupt and inept court. Moreover, since it is Mosca who initiates the
"trap" which leads to the rogues' downfall, it is fitting that he is bested by
Volpone.
Mosca's ploy is in the spirit of roguery and is perfectly consistent with his

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
154 COLLEGE LITERATURE

character and his earlier actions. Mosca is not motivated by any sudden
burst of greed, as Alexander Leggatt has argued.,6 In his soliloquy which
reveals his plot against Volpone, he shows neither greed nor rancour,
merely the cool detachment that has marked his actions from the beginning:
Since he will needs be dead afore his time,
I'll bury him, or gain by him. I'm his heir,
And so will keep me, till he share at least. (V.v.13-15)
At this point Mosca is not necessarily opting for Volpone's whole estate. He
is merely attempting to get the most he can from the new circumstances
which have presented themselves.
Moreover, it is evident that Mosca's fox trap was really in the cards from
the beginning. It is a natural outcome of his coolness towards Volpone, and
even more it is a natural outcome of roguery itself. A rogue acknowledges
no moral obligations; he seeks for himself alone whatever he can get
through trickery and deceit. It is therefore only logical that a rogue would
not hesitate to make his partner his victim. In fact, the very delight in the art
of gulling makes other rogues particularly attractive choices. Mosca's ac
tions at the end of this play are therefore satisfying to the audience because
they are part of a natural pattern in roguery and hence seem inevitable. Jon
son was to exploit this underlying rivalry between rogues fully in The
A Ichemist where Face and Subtle square off at the beginning.
The rivalry furnishes the play with a very striking closing scene. When
Volpone and Mosca are pitted against each other, we see them equally
matched for the first time, and the tension is accordingly higher than in the
earlier gullings. Each gives, as could be expected, a brilliant performance.
Mosca, as always, plays to the audience, addressing the avocatori as "rev
erend fathers" and "grave fathers." When his hand is finally called by
Volpone, he is not at a loss but attempts once more to adjust quickly:
"Patron! . . . Why, patron!" (V.xii.85, 88). Volpone, however, is more
than his match. His sudden unmasking delights us with its audacity: "I am
Volpone, and this is my knave" (V.xii.89). True to form, Volpone's per
formance is less practically attuned to the moment's need than Mosca's, but
it is more dazzling, full of style and zest. Even as he is led off to a heavy
punishment, he is able to pun wittily on his fate: "This is called mortifying
of a fox" (V.xii.125). This marks his victory in the game if not in the court.
Since throughout the play Mosca demonstrates his superior ability under
pressure, his defeat by Volpone would seem inconsistent were it not that
Jonson makes his failure conform to a pattern seen previously. In the first
four acts Mosca's clear-sightedness was largely a result of his position as
servant, as outsider, and Volpone lacked this objectiveness as magnifico. In
the last act the roles are reversed. By assuming Volpone's robes, Mosca
gains the treatment previously accorded his master. He is flattered by the
court and promised not only a rich future but an established one.17 The

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
VOLPONE AND MOSCA 155

sense of power is intoxicating and causes Mosca to push Volpone too

far: "I cannot now/Afford it you so cheap" (V.xii.69-70). Mosca mis
judges Volpone's feelings, just as earlier Volpone had failed to grasp
Mosca's.
Moreover, Mosca's new sense of status leads to pomposity:
If such an insolence as this must pass
Upon me, I am silent; 'twas not this
For which you sent, I hope. (V.xii.75-77)
Since we know he is a fraud, the image here is of a little man in the big
man's clothes. He is a bit ridiculous (even granting he is acting), and he is a
fit subject for the satiric bite of his overthrow and punishment.
In contrast, Volpone's brilliance in this last scene reinforces his attrac
tiveness as a rogue and leaves an indelible impression on our imaginations.
Whereas we feel ambiguous about his sentence?wanting him neither pun
ished nor pardoned?his winning of the game is highly satisfactory because
we have found him the more attractive of the two from the beginning. At
the same time, this last flourish erases much of his earlier cruelty from our
minds and hence operates even further to undercut his position as a moral
example at the end. It is no wonder that Jonson chose not to repeat his char
acterization of Volpone, however brilliant, but instead to pattern his future
rogues closer to the more amenable Mosca.
Both Volpone and Mosca, however, are rich in implications for Jonson's
future rogues and for other Jacobean stage types as well. Their many dif
ferences suggest the potential variety of rogue characters which can be
created and point also to the relationship of the rogue to the Jacobean
villain and the Jacobean gull.
On the whole Mosca illustrates the pattern most frequently found in
rogues. His centrality in the tradition is owing to two major traits: his ab
solute flexibility and his overriding pragmatism towards all save the game of
gulling. He is the direct predecessor of Jonson's greatest rogue creations,
the trio of Face, Subtle, and Dol. Face, in particular, as clever servant
turned confidence man, fully develops the potentialities seen in Mosca.
Nevertheless, Volpone, while less typical, is not without his analogues
and heirs in roguery. He illustrates better than Mosca the vitality principle
that is always a part of the rogue and dominates in some; in a sense he rep
resents a major branch of the tradition. Thus Shakespeare's greatest rogues,
Falstaff and Autolycus, with their love of wine and song are more akin to
Volpone than to Mosca. So too is Middleton's Touchwood Senior, who
links the zest for life with the forces of procreation, thereby suggesting the
source of our delight in rogues, obscured in Volpone because of his per
versity.
In addition, both Volpone and Mosca have certain traits which reveal the
rogue's relationship to other character types of this period. Ironically, in

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
156 COLLEGE LITERATURE

Jonson's work Volpone's main heir is not a rogue at all but the great gull,
Sir Epicure Mammon. Sir Epicure shows the same love of pleasure and the
same vivid imagination as Volpone, but he is without his insight into men
and their motives. He develops fully an element glimpsed occasionally in
Volpone?the danger that imaginative involvement will lead to gullibility.
The ties between Volpone and Sir Epicure suggest the sometimes frail line
between guller and gull which is used for ironic effect by some playwrights.
Thus Middleton's Follywit tricks his uncle only to be fooled himself in the
end.
As Volpone's enthusiasm can lead to gulling, so Mosca's coolness holds
potentialities for villainy. Although within Jonson's work Mosca's
descendants are delightful rogues, his complete self-seeking and his ability
to remain detached even from the comradeship of his partner are key traits
of the Jacobean villain. The epithets applied to Mosca throughout by the
many characters he deceives?"Loving Mosca," "Grateful Mosca,"
"sweet Mosca" (I.ii.122,1.v.79,1.vi. 122)?remind one of "honest, honest
lago": a villain who with his emphasis on "sport" might be considered a
distant cousin. Indeed, Volpone itself in its treatment of vice as well as folly
suggests the perilous closeness of the rogue to far darker figures.

NOTES
1 Wallace Bacon writes that when Jonson "turns serious he tends to split the play
wide open"?"The Magnetic Field: The Structure of Jonson's Comedies,"
HLQ, 19(1955-56), 138. S. L. Goldberg finds the ending unsatisfactory?"Folly
into Crime: The Catastrophe of Volpone, "MLQ, 20 (1959), 233-42. And Calvin
Thayer suggests that Volpone becomes too human for the comic tone?Ben
Jonson: Studies in the Plays (Norman: Unversity of Oklahoma Press, 1963), p.
54. More recently C. N. Manlove has reasserted such criticisms in "The Double
View in Volpone," SEL, 19 (Spring 1979), 239-52. Manlove feels that the "in
structive" and "delightful" elements become "increasingly opposed" as the
play progresses and that the "motivation is thin" in the fifth act where we begin
to find Volpone's name, the fox, "a little inapposite."
2 See Alexander Leggatt's chapter, "The Comedy of Intrigue: Money and Land,"
in Citizen Comedy in the Age of Shakespeare (Toronto: University of Toronto
Press, 1973), pp. 54-77, in which he discusses the difficulties of using intrigue
plots for serious moral and social criticism.
3 Ben Jonson, Volpone, ed. Alvin B. Kernan (New Haven: Yale University Press,
1962). Subsequent references are to this edition.
4 John S. Weld, "Christian Comedy: 'Volpone,' " SP, 51 (1954), 175; Alexander
Leggatt, "The Suicide of Volpone," UTQ, 39(1969), 24.
5 L. A. Beaurline, Jonson and Elizabethan Comedy: Essays in Dramatic Rhetoric
(San Marino: The Huntington Library, 1978), p. 178.
6 Discourse, 5 (1961-62), 453-54.
7 The importance of distancing oneself from the order can be seen with particular

This content downloaded from

41ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
VOLPONE AND MOSCA 157

clarity in Thomas Middleton's A Trick to Catch the Old One where the rogue
Witgood, who has previously been the victim of others' schemes, becomes the
trickster when he finds himself in need. "There's nothing conjures up wit sooner
than poverty" (II.i.84), he confides.
8 See his many epithets for Mosca as well as V.iii.61, 102-4, and V.v.3-4.
9 See too I.ii. 116-17: "Dispatch, dispatch. I long to have possession/Of my new
present."
10 Manlove has also noted the "double position of involvement and ironic dis
tance" Volpone has toward gold, but he feels that gold's attraction for Volpone
lies in its power (pp. 241-42). The analysis does not, it seems to me, account for
the physicality Volpone displays toward his gains?his frequent desire to feel
and see his riches.
11 On this subject see Alvin B. Kernan's introduction to the Yale edition of the play
and Alexander Leggatt, "The Suicide of Volpone." Leggatt suggests that Vol
pone and Mosca can be seen as rival artists and compares them to Jonson and
Inigo Jones.
12 The OED records usage of "Volpone" as a noun meaning "a cunning schemer
or miser" in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries.
13 The initial order of entrances?Voltore, Corbaccio, and then Corvino?is main
tained in the trial scene, the will scene (where they are dismissed in exactly re
verse order) and in the final sentencing.
14 This problem could be corrected in production, but the cure might prove worse
than the disease, for much of the play's greatness lies in Volpone's engaging en
ergy. A case in point is the 1952 Stratford production in which Ralph Richard
son emphasized some of Volpone's weaknesses, perhaps, as Brian Parker
suggests, in reaction to Sir Donald Wolfit's famous interpretation which glossed
over them. (See R. B. Parker, "Wolfit's Fox: An Interpretation of Volpone ,"
UTQ, 45 [Spring 1976], 201 and 216.) Yet Richardson's performance was not
nearly so well received as Wolfit's.
15 For a somewhat similar interpretation of the audience's reaction to the sentence,
see Goldberg, pp. 235-40.
16 "TheSuicideof Volpone," p. 19.
17 Not only Volpone's fortune but marriage into the fourth avocatore's family. We
can assume that Mosca overhears some of the references to marriage (made at
V.xii.50-51, 62, and 83), for Volpone certainly does, as he indicates in line 84.

This content downloaded from

41.229.92.252 on Thu, 27 May 2021 10:18:06 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms