The theoretical framework of this thesis was formed by the analysis of contextualizational approaches and the political subversiveness of Držić's writings, i.e. ideological readings by literary historians were analyzed who frequently provided more insight into their own biases rather than accentuated the hermeneutical intricacies of Držić's works. Due to the discovery of his political writings, Držić was often labeled as a revolutionary and a rebel, and in his works subversion of power was sought because the poet uses the language of literary discourses in his letters, that is his works, which proved excessive in the analysis since it is primarily the mechanics of a literary work, and not about the mechanics of power. The thesis also tried to indicate that it is of great importance to view Držić's opus separately from his political act. It was pointed out that Držić's works are created within the rhetorical culture in which poetic imitation is a creative principle of creation – works are created by inheriting, borrowing and adapting from other authors. Precisley this essential feature of Držić's period has been neglected by contextualizational readings in the interpretation of Držić's work. The literary and political identity of Marin Držić, one of the Renaissance's most important comedic playwrights, was illustrated by various readings of the erudite comedies Dundo Maroje, Arkulin, Skup and the first Croatian Renaissance tragedy Hekuba in particular, whose distinctiveness has been demonstrated by recent scientific writings. These are primarily readings by Živko Jeličić, Leo Košuta, Frano Čale, Slobodan Prosperov Novak and Milovan Tatarin, but also by many other authors who point out the dramaturgic peculiarities of Držić's oeuvre. The conducted analysis, i.e. the juxtaposition of the texts of the mentioned authors, concluded that in places where subversion was observed, it was actually about interliterary and intertextual relations as well as dramaturgical and comediographic mechanisms.