Shall say against their hearts, 'We thank the gods

Our Rome hath such a soldier'. (1.1X.1)

But this social influence will be common to all Roman families and sons, and cannot be responsible for the extreme nature of Coriolanus's character. Far more important an influence has been his mother. Volumina has brought him up of with only one aim in mind; to make him a great soldier:

When yet he was but tender bodied . . . when for a day of Kings' entreaties, a mother should not sell him an hour from her beholding . . . To a cruel war I sent him, from whence he returned, his brows bound with oak. I tell thee daughter, I sprang of not more in joy at first hearing he was a man-child, than now in first seeing he had proved himself a man.

Virgilia: But had he died in the business, madam, how then?

Volumina: Then his good report should have been my son. (1.111.5)

We have a further insight into the way Coriolanus's character has been formed from an early age through Valeria's report of young Martius, Coriolanus's son, over whom,

In William Shakespeare's Coriolanus, Coriolanus's banishment is the climax of a series of events in which several forces play a part, all pushing him towards his inevitable downfall. As is usual in Shakespearean Tragedy, the hero, at the peak of his achievements, falls, due to a fatal flaw in his character. Coriolanus 's flaw is his arrogant pride and lack of temperance, and his fall is great, from national hero to outcast.

A particular feature of this play is that Shakespeare has shown us how the hero's character came to be flawed. We see that the flaw has its roots in the family and society which moulded his personality. This insight does not enable us to excuse Coriolanus for his behaviour, but it does prevent us from presenting a simple black and white case on the question of who is to blame for his downfall.

In Coriolanus's Rome the citizens fall roughly into two categories, the patricians and the plebeians. The two factions are seen to coexist in a state of more or less mutual antagonism, with stability being maintained by a willingness to compromise on both sides.

Coriolanus does not fit in with his society. His valour places him above the plebeians, and his lack of politic sense places him outside to the circle of patricians. He cannot understand the concepts of expediency and respect necessary for the maintenance of a stable society by its authorities. He naively sees society in simplistic terms of good patricians, and bad plebeians.

In soothing them, we nourish 'gainst our senate The cockle of rebellion, insolence, sedition, Which we ourselves have plough'd for, sow'd, and scattered. (111.1.68)

Coriolanus's flaw is his pride, his insistence on voicing his opinions regardless of the consequences, and the narrow-mindedness which makes him immune to change. He firmly believes that the duty of every Roman male is to achieve valour, and valour is the only virtue he recognises. It is his single-minded determination that has led to his success, but it also leads him to hate and despise all those who, in his view, fail to live up to their duty:

The idea of 'countrymen' means little or nothing to him. Though he seems to be fighting for Rome, it is as a personal ideal, or symbol, and he holds his fellow Romans in utter contempt. They are an insignificant rabble to him, and he makes little distinction between them and the enemy.

It is not the fact that he holds these opinions, however, that seals his doom, it is the fact that he cannot refrain from voicing them vehemently in public on every possible occasion. He insists on acting in this way, against the good advice, to dissemble, from Menenius and his mother, even when his life is at stake.

From the point of view of Roman society there is no one to blame but Coriolanus himself. As illustrated by Menenius's story of the body and its parts (1.1.95 - ), the motif of the play, the harmonious operation of the community is the criterion by which the actions of its individuals must be judged. By this criterion, although the military service Coriolanus has done for Rome is undeniably great, it is also undeniable that he is likely to do a great deal of harm to the living fabric of the society. On this point, Sicinius and Menenius, representatives of the two factions of society, cannot help but agree:

Sicinius: He's a disease that must be cut away.

Menenius: Oh, he's a limb that has but a disease. (111.1.292)

In terms of the action of the play, therefore, we must appoint blame primarily to Coriolanus himself for his arrogance and open display of hatred, and secondarily to the spiteful jealousy of the tribunes, and the indecision and gullibility of the plebeians.

The play gives us, however, evidence of the causes behind human character. Through the character of Coriolanus's mother, and the nature of Roman society itself, we can see why Coriolanus is the way he is. We can note the influence of Roman society itself in its upholding valour as a high virtue. This is seen in the eagerness of the patricians to praise him for his supreme soldiership.

If I should tell thee o'er this thy day's work,

Thou't not believe thy deeds: but I'll report it,

Where senators shall mingle tears with smiles

. . . ladies shall be frighted . . . the dull tribunes

That with the fusty plebeians hate thine honours,

Shall say against their hearts, 'We thank the gods

Our Rome hath such a soldier'. (1.1X.1)

But this social influence will be common to all Roman families and sons, and cannot be responsible for the extreme nature of Coriolanus's character. Far more important an influence has been his mother. Volumina has brought him up of with only one aim in mind; to make him a great soldier:

When yet he was but tender bodied . . . when for a day of Kings' entreaties, a mother should not sell him an hour from her beholding . . . To a cruel war I sent him, from whence he returned, his brows bound with oak. I tell thee daughter, I sprang of not more in joy at first hearing he was a man-child, than now in first seeing he had proved himself a man.

Virgilia: But had he died in the business, madam, how then?

Volumina: Then his good report should have been my son. (1.111.5)

We have a further insight into the way Coriolanus's character has been formed from an early age through Valeria's report of young Martius, Coriolanus's son, over whom,

Coriolanus does not fit in with his society. His valour places him above the plebeians, and his lack of politic sense places him outside to the circle of patricians. He cannot understand the concepts of expediency and respect necessary for the maintenance of a stable society by its authorities. He naively sees society in simplistic terms of good patricians, and bad plebeians.

In soothing them, we nourish 'gainst our senate The cockle of rebellion, insolence, sedition, Which we ourselves have plough'd for, sow'd, and scattered. (111.1.68)

Coriolanus's flaw is his pride, his insistence on voicing his opinions regardless of the consequences, and the narrow-mindedness which makes him immune to change. He firmly believes that the duty of every Roman male is to achieve valour, and valour is the only virtue he recognises. It is his single-minded determination that has led to his success, but it also leads him to hate and despise all those who, in his view, fail to live up to their duty:

The idea of 'countrymen' means little or nothing to him. Though he seems to be fighting for Rome, it is as a personal ideal, or symbol, and he holds his fellow Romans in utter contempt. They are an insignificant rabble to him, and he makes little distinction between them and the enemy.

It is not the fact that he holds these opinions, however, that seals his doom, it is the fact that he cannot refrain from voicing them vehemently in public on every possible occasion. He insists on acting in this way, against the good advice, to dissemble, from Menenius and his mother, even when his life is at stake.

From the point of view of Roman society there is no one to blame but Coriolanus himself. As illustrated by Menenius's story of the body and its parts (1.1.95 - ), the motif of the play, the harmonious operation of the community is the criterion by which the actions of its individuals must be judged. By this criterion, although the military service Coriolanus has done for Rome is undeniably great, it is also undeniable that he is likely to do a great deal of harm to the living fabric of the society. On this point, Sicinius and Menenius, representatives of the two factions of society, cannot help but agree:

Sicinius: He's a disease that must be cut away.

Menenius: Oh, he's a limb that has but a disease. (111.1.292)

In terms of the action of the play, therefore, we must appoint blame primarily to Coriolanus himself for his arrogance and open display of hatred, and secondarily to the spiteful jealousy of the tribunes, and the indecision and gullibility of the plebeians.

The play gives us, however, evidence of the causes behind human character. Through the character of Coriolanus's mother, and the nature of Roman society itself, we can see why Coriolanus is the way he is. We can note the influence of Roman society itself in its upholding valour as a high virtue. This is seen in the eagerness of the patricians to praise him for his supreme soldiership.

If I should tell thee o'er this thy day's work,

Thou't not believe thy deeds: but I'll report it,

Where senators shall mingle tears with smiles

. . . ladies shall be frighted . . . the dull tribunes

That with the fusty plebeians hate thine honours,

Shall say against their hearts, 'We thank the gods

Our Rome hath such a soldier'. (1.1X.1)

But this social influence will be common to all Roman families and sons, and cannot be responsible for the extreme nature of Coriolanus's character. Far more important an influence has been his mother. Volumina has brought him up of with only one aim in mind; to make him a great soldier:

When yet he was but tender bodied . . . when for a day of Kings' entreaties, a mother should not sell him an hour from her beholding . . . To a cruel war I sent him, from whence he returned, his brows bound with oak. I tell thee daughter, I sprang of not more in joy at first hearing he was a man-child, than now in first seeing he had proved himself a man.

Virgilia: But had he died in the business, madam, how then?

Volumina: Then his good report should have been my son. (1.111.5)

We have a further insight into the way Coriolanus's character has been formed from an early age through Valeria's report of young Martius, Coriolanus's son, over whom,

It is not the fact that he holds these opinions, however, that seals his doom, it is the fact that he cannot refrain from voicing them vehemently in public on every possible occasion. He insists on acting in this way, against the good advice, to dissemble, from Menenius and his mother, even when his life is at stake.

From the point of view of Roman society there is no one to blame but Coriolanus himself. As illustrated by Menenius's story of the body and its parts (1.1.95 - ), the motif of the play, the harmonious operation of the community is the criterion by which the actions of its individuals must be judged. By this criterion, although the military service Coriolanus has done for Rome is undeniably great, it is also undeniable that he is likely to do a great deal of harm to the living fabric of the society. On this point, Sicinius and Menenius, representatives of the two factions of society, cannot help but agree:

Sicinius: He's a disease that must be cut away.

Menenius: Oh, he's a limb that has but a disease. (111.1.292)

In terms of the action of the play, therefore, we must appoint blame primarily to Coriolanus himself for his arrogance and open display of hatred, and secondarily to the spiteful jealousy of the tribunes, and the indecision and gullibility of the plebeians.

The play gives us, however, evidence of the causes behind human character. Through the character of Coriolanus's mother, and the nature of Roman society itself, we can see why Coriolanus is the way he is. We can note the influence of Roman society itself in its upholding valour as a high virtue. This is seen in the eagerness of the patricians to praise him for his supreme soldiership.

If I should tell thee o'er this thy day's work,

Thou't not believe thy deeds: but I'll report it,

Where senators shall mingle tears with smiles

. . . ladies shall be frighted . . . the dull tribunes

That with the fusty plebeians hate thine honours,

Shall say against their hearts, 'We thank the gods

Our Rome hath such a soldier'. (1.1X.1)

But this social influence will be common to all Roman families and sons, and cannot be responsible for the extreme nature of Coriolanus's character. Far more important an influence has been his mother. Volumina has brought him up of with only one aim in mind; to make him a great soldier:

When yet he was but tender bodied . . . when for a day of Kings' entreaties, a mother should not sell him an hour from her beholding . . . To a cruel war I sent him, from whence he returned, his brows bound with oak. I tell thee daughter, I sprang of not more in joy at first hearing he was a man-child, than now in first seeing he had proved himself a man.

Virgilia: But had he died in the business, madam, how then?

Volumina: Then his good report should have been my son. (1.111.5)

We have a further insight into the way Coriolanus's character has been formed from an early age through Valeria's report of young Martius, Coriolanus's son, over whom,

Sicinius: He's a disease that must be cut away.

Menenius: Oh, he's a limb that has but a disease. (111.1.292)

In terms of the action of the play, therefore, we must appoint blame primarily to Coriolanus himself for his arrogance and open display of hatred, and secondarily to the spiteful jealousy of the tribunes, and the indecision and gullibility of the plebeians.

The play gives us, however, evidence of the causes behind human character. Through the character of Coriolanus's mother, and the nature of Roman society itself, we can see why Coriolanus is the way he is. We can note the influence of Roman society itself in its upholding valour as a high virtue. This is seen in the eagerness of the patricians to praise him for his supreme soldiership.

If I should tell thee o'er this thy day's work,

Thou't not believe thy deeds: but I'll report it,

Where senators shall mingle tears with smiles

. . . ladies shall be frighted . . . the dull tribunes

That with the fusty plebeians hate thine honours,

Shall say against their hearts, 'We thank the gods

Our Rome hath such a soldier'. (1.1X.1)

But this social influence will be common to all Roman families and sons, and cannot be responsible for the extreme nature of Coriolanus's character. Far more important an influence has been his mother. Volumina has brought him up of with only one aim in mind; to make him a great soldier:

When yet he was but tender bodied . . . when for a day of Kings' entreaties, a mother should not sell him an hour from her beholding . . . To a cruel war I sent him, from whence he returned, his brows bound with oak. I tell thee daughter, I sprang of not more in joy at first hearing he was a man-child, than now in first seeing he had proved himself a man.

Virgilia: But had he died in the business, madam, how then?

Volumina: Then his good report should have been my son. (1.111.5)

We have a further insight into the way Coriolanus's character has been formed from an early age through Valeria's report of young Martius, Coriolanus's son, over whom,

Shall say against their hearts, 'We thank the gods

Our Rome hath such a soldier'. (1.1X.1)

But this social influence will be common to all Roman families and sons, and cannot be responsible for the extreme nature of Coriolanus's character. Far more important an influence has been his mother. Volumina has brought him up of with only one aim in mind; to make him a great soldier:

When yet he was but tender bodied . . . when for a day of Kings' entreaties, a mother should not sell him an hour from her beholding . . . To a cruel war I sent him, from whence he returned, his brows bound with oak. I tell thee daughter, I sprang of not more in joy at first hearing he was a man-child, than now in first seeing he had proved himself a man.

Virgilia: But had he died in the business, madam, how then?

Volumina: Then his good report should have been my son. (1.111.5)

We have a further insight into the way Coriolanus's character has been formed from an early age through Valeria's report of young Martius, Coriolanus's son, over whom, no doubt, Volumina has had huge influence.

Valeria: I saw him run after a gilded butterfly, and when he caught it, he let it go again, and after it again, and over and over he comes, and up again, catched it again . . . he did so set his teeth and tear it. Oh, I warrant how he mammocked it! (1.111.60)

We can feel sympathy for Coriolanus when he says:

I muse my mother

Does not approve me further, who was wont

To call them woollen vassals, things created

To buy and sell with the groats, . . .

Why did you wish me milder? Would you have me

False to my nature? Rather say I play

The man I am. (111.11.7)

This insight makes the question of who is to blame much less clear-cut, and perhaps even meaningless.

The problem for Rome is essentially a practical one, of how to ensure self-preservation, and all the insight and understanding in the world would not lessen the necessity of taking steps against Coriolanus.

Copyright Ian Mackean. Read the full version of this essay at: http://www.literature-study-online.com/essays/coriolanus.html