The Concept of Absolute Monarchy in King Lear by William Shakespeare

1406 Words3 Pages

The Concept of Absolute Monarchy in King Lear by William Shakespeare

The concept of absolute monarchy comes into existence during the early seventeenth century. For England at this time, the Tudor dynasty ends, while the Stuarts begin theirs. However, it is the latter dynasty that brings the concept into mainstream politics, because “early Stuart political discourse can indeed be read as containing defences of absolutism” (Burgess 19). James I is the first king of the Stuart line and the first to practice absolute monarchy. It is said of him at the time that “James [I] described [sic] his ideal form of government . . . from which he sought [sic] to justify his own absolute authority and power . . . hence he was [sic] to be free and absolute, to be the law in and of his kingdom” (Jordan 15). In coincidence, the beginning of James’ reign coincides within the same time Shakespeare wrote King Lear. In his play, several scenes link together, showing that even though the king supposedly gave up his job, he cannot escape the fact that he is king and will be until his death. These scenes exemplify certain aspects of absolute monarchy. Indeed, the seventeenth century theory of absolute monarchy provides evidence that, although King Lear bestows his role as king to others, he ultimately retains the absolute power and behavior of a monarch in Shakespeare’s famous tragedy.

As a result of Lear holding on to his power, in the first scene of the play he does not take off his royal crown. Furthermore, Lear states, “The name, and all th’addition to a king: the sway, / Revenue, execution of the rest, / Beloved sons, be yours; which to confirm, / This coronet part between you” (Shakespeare I. i.136-139). Thus, Lear moves the power f...

... middle of paper ...

...

UP, 1996.

Foakes, R.A. Introduction. King Lear. By William Shakespeare. Walton-on-Thames,

UK: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1997. 1-151.

Jordan, Constance. Shakespeare’s Monarchies. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1997.

Nelson Greenfield, Thelma. “The Clothing Motif in King Lear.” Shakespeare

Quarterly 5 (1954): 281-286.

Sommerville, J.P. “Absolutism and Royalism.”. The Cambridge History of Political Thought

1450-1700. Ed. J.H. Burns. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1991. 347-373.

Shakespeare, William. King Lear. Ed. R.A. Foakes. Walton-on-Thames, UK:

Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1997.

Tennenhouse, Leonard. Power on Display. New York: Methuen, 1986.

Show More
Related

  • Sense Of Entitlement In Shakespeare's King Lear

    1072 Words  | 3 Pages

    Lear’s character is constantly and dramatically changing throughout the play both by growing as a character but also through many downfalls. Lear becomes emotionally stronger and gains much more rationale near the end of the play, but only after a great downfall in each of these sectors. This was a result of the self-entitlement that Lear had placed on himself. King Lear’s vanity and excessive sense of entitlement was his tragic flaw throughout the play. He was a King, and needed to be served on time. Furthermore, when he is referred to as “my lady’s father,” this also hurts his ego for he is a King and that is what he wishes to be addressed

    Read More

  • Comparing Reality In King Lear And The Wars

    944 Words  | 2 Pages

    Timothy Findley and Shakespeare use the theme of appearance versus reality in their texts: The Wars and King Lear. Characters in the novel and the play: Robert, Goneril, and Regan, intentionally appear to be something they are not in order to achieve a goal. However, they differ in where it leads them by the end, as in King Lear the characters die, unlike in The Wars where Robert cannot escape his true self and goes back to follow his personal morality.

    Read More

  • Expectations of Kingship in Henry IV by William Shakespeare

    847 Words  | 2 Pages

    Henry IV is a play that concerns itself with political power and kingship in English history. References to kingship are prevalent throughout the play, especially in the depiction of the characters. Although most of the characters in this play could teach us about kingship, I would like to focus my attention to Prince Henry. I think that this character helps us to best understand what kingship meant at this particular time in history.

    Read More

  • Absolute Power In Macbeth

    1752 Words  | 4 Pages

    In the early modern period, the political system put in Europe was “absolute power” (Lecturer Morris). According to the OED, “absolute power is a monarch invested in absolute”. In this period, it was believed that it was necessary that only one person designated by God could hold absolute power. Usually this prophecy would be passed down in the royal family, from father to son (Carrol 246). Occasionally, if viewed as worthy of the opportunity, a person, usually a warrior who has served well in war, could rise to the occasion, and can be named king (Lecturer Morris). “The sons do not succeed the fathers, before the people first have as it were anew established them by their new approbation: neither were they acknowledged in quality, as inheriting

    Read More

  • The Tragedy of King Lear Analysis

    2095 Words  | 5 Pages

    In The Tragedy of King Lear, particularly in the first half of the play, Lear continually swears to the gods. He invokes them for mercies and begs them for destruction; he binds both his oaths and his curses with their names. The older characters—Lear and Gloucester—tend view their world as strictly within the moral framework of the pagan religion. As Lear expresses it, the central core of his religion lies in the idea of earthly justice. In II.4.14-15, Lear expresses his disbelief that Regan and Albany would have put the disguised Kent, his messenger, in stocks. He at first attempts to deny the rather obvious fact in front of him, objecting “No” twice before swearing it. By the time Lear invokes the king of the pagan gods, his refusal to believe has become willful and almost absurd. Kent replies, not without sarcasm, by affixing the name of the queen of the gods to a contradictory statement. The formula is turned into nonsense by its repetition. In contradicting Lear’s oath as well as the assertion with which it is coupled, Kent is subtly challenging Lear’s conception of the universe as controlled by just gods. He is also and perhaps more importantly, challenging Lear’s relationship with the gods. It is Kent who most lucidly and repeatedly opposes the ideas put forth by Lear; his actions as well as his statements undermine Lear’s hypotheses about divine order. Lear does not find his foil in youth but in middle age; not in the opposite excess of his own—Edmund’s calculation, say—but in Kent’s comparative moderation. Likewise the viable alternative to his relationship to divine justice is not shown by Edmund with his ...

    Read More

  • King Lear and Illegitimacy

    889 Words  | 2 Pages

    Shakespeare’s treatment of illegitimacy in the play King Lear can be interpreted in many ways depending on the audience. The situation of illegitimacy is portrayed through the relationships of the characters the Earl Of Gloucester and his two sons Edgar and Edmund. Edmund is the illegitimate son while Edgar was born within the law. We learn of Edmund’s illegitimacy in the opening scene in the first act where The Earl of Gloucester is holding a conversation with Kent while Edmund is nearby. Gloucester speaks flippantly and lightly of the way his illegitimate son came into the world while introducing him to Kent saying, “ Though this knave came something saucily into the world before he was sent for, yet his mother was fair, there was good sport at his making, and the whoreson must be acknowledged” (Act I, Scene I, Lines 19-24). There are several peculiar things about this dialogue. One of the interesting aspects of Gloucester and Kent’s discussion is the readiness of Gloucester to admit he has fathered a child out of wedlock. This may be influenced by the fact that Edmund had obviously grown into a son that a father would be proud to have. At first meeting he seems polite, courteous, and loyal. Perhaps these admirable character traits are cause for Gloucester’s willingness to publicly claim Edmund as his own. Another unusual occurrence in the opening dialogue is that Gloucester calls Edmund a whoreson and a knave while he is close by and probably in hearing distance. This seems odd because Gloucester professes to feel only love for his son and no shame but he seems to almost mock him in this situation. One explanation for this behavior may be that deep down Gloucester still harbors some discomfort about the relationship between himself and his son despite his verbal proclamations of shamelessness. This could be inferred from Gloucester’s statement, “ His breeding, sir, hath been at my charge. I have so often blushed to acknowledge him that now I am brazed to ‘t.” (Act I, Scene I, Line 9). Again, depending on the audience the attitudes displayed in the play by the characters and Shakespeare himself by his writing can be interpreted in a variety of ways depending on the observer.

    Read More

  • Social Values in King Lear

    1221 Words  | 3 Pages

    In King Lear, Shakespeare portrays a society whose emphasis on social class results in a strict social hierarchy fueled by the unceasing desire to improve one’s social status. It is this desire for improved social status that led to the unintentional deterioration of the social hierarchy in King Lear. This desire becomes so great that Edmund, Goneril, Reagan and Cornwall were willing to act contrary to the authority of the social hierarchy for the betterment of their own position within it. As the plot unfolds, the actions of the aforementioned characters get progressively more desperate and destructive as they realize their lack of success in attaining their personal goals. The goals vary, however the selfish motivation does not. With Edmund, Goneril, Reagan and Cornwall as examples, Shakespeare portrays the social hierarchy as a self-defeating system because it fosters desires in its members that motivate them to act against the authority of the hierarchy to benefit themselves. A consideration of each characters actions in chronological order and the reasons behind such actions reveals a common theme among the goals for which morality is abandoned.

    Read More

  • Analyzing Shakespeare´s Account of Human Nature in King Lear in Comparison With Other Authors

    1435 Words  | 3 Pages

    Human nature is a concept that has interested scholars throughout history. Many have debated over what human nature is – that is, the distinguishing characteristics that are unique to humans by nature – while others have mulled over the fact that the answer to the question “what is human nature?” may be unattainable or simply not worth pursuing. Shakespeare explores the issue of human nature in his tragedy King Lear. In his play, he attempts to portray that human nature is either entirely good or entirely evil. He seems to suggest, however, that it is not impossible for one to move from one end of the spectrum of human nature to the other, as multiple characters go through somewhat of a metamorphosis where their nature is changed. In this paper I analyze and present Shakespeare’s account of human nature in King Lear in comparison with other authors that we have read throughout our year in the Aquinas program.

    Read More

  • The Consequences of Decisions in King Lear by William Shakespeare

    1367 Words  | 3 Pages

    As the play opens one can almost immediately see that Lear begins to make mistakes that will eventually result in his downfall. The very first words that he speaks in the play are :- "...Give me the map there. Know that we have divided In three our kingdom, and 'tis our fast intent To shake all cares and business from our age, Conferring them on younger strengths while we Unburdened crawl to death..." (Act I, Sc i, Ln 38-41) This gives the reader the first indication of Lear's intent to abdicate his throne.

    Read More

  • Transformation of Lear in Shakespeare's King Lear

    1682 Words  | 4 Pages

    This new Lear is certainly a far cry from the arrogant king we saw at the beginning of the play. Shakespeare has transformed Lear from an ignorant old king into some sort of god, using a seven stage process: resentment, regret, recognition, acceptance and admittance, guilt, redemption, and optimism. Lear’s transformation can be simply described as a transition from blindness into sight, he did not see the value in listening to others, but in the end he gained a sense of optimism and idealism. There is no doubting that Shakespeare has portrayed Lear as a flawed figure, who, through his misfortune and suffering, goes from a contemptuous human being to one who has been purified into an omniscient, godly type character, proving that ignorant people can truly change to become caring individuals.

    Read More

  • Shakespeare’s King Lear Philosophy

    645 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the beginning of the play the reader learns that Lear is ready to give up his kingdom and retire from a conversation that two noblemen, Gloucester and Kent, are having. He asks his three daughters; Cordelia, Goneril, and Regan to express their love for him to help him make his decision as to who would inherit his kingdom. Cordelia has always been his “favorite” daughter and when asked how much she loved her father she does not lie to him and tells him “I am sure my love’s more ponderous than my tongue” (1363). Rather than being grateful for such love and honesty, Lear banishes her to France and divides his kingdom to his two other daughters. Kent does not agree with Lear’s decision and Lear banishes him too.

    Read More

  • The King's Pride Depicted in Shakespeare's King Lear

    564 Words  | 2 Pages

    When one examines the words “pride” and “self-respect”, it is possible one may assume that the two are identical in meaning. That the words go hand in hand like butter and bread. For quite some time I was pondering on the meaning of the two words “pride” and “self-respect”. The more consideration I put into the two the deeper I was in a maze of confusion. After a long thought on the subject I had come to my own conclusion.

    Read More

  • Power's Destruction: King Lear

    691 Words  | 2 Pages

    King Lear by Shakespeare portrayed the negative effects of power resulting in destruction caused by the children of a figure with authority. Through lies and continual hatred, characters maintained a greed for power causing destruction within their families. The daughter’s of Lear and the son Gloucester lied to inherit power for themselves. Edmund the son of Gloucester planned to eliminate his brother Edgar from his inheritance.

    Read More

  • The Theme of Justice in King Lear

    1444 Words  | 3 Pages

    "As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods; / they kill us for their

    Read More

  • King Lear Character Analysis

    1273 Words  | 3 Pages

    King Lear- The king of Britain who is used to lavishing in all of his power and having people cater to him. He doesn’t like to be.

    Read More

More about The Concept of Absolute Monarchy in King Lear by William Shakespeare

Open Document