Monarchic Authority In The Elizabethan Era

Antunez 1
Bianca Antunez
ENL 117
Prof. Bloom/ TA: Leanna
9 Mar 2017
Comments, please! J
Deleted Scenes: Richard II and the Deposition
Two conflicting theories of monarchic authority arose during the Elizabethan Era, both finding their way into various works of literature, including William Shakespeare’s Richard II, denoting what gave a monarch the right to rule or to claim the throne. The first, divine right, describes that God directly instills the monarch with power to carry out the will of God. This God-given right to rule meant that to question or rebel against the actions of the monarch would question God’s judgment, both of which found fault within Elizabethan society. In contrast, the contract theory of monarchic authority illustrates
In Richard II, some may interpret the deposition scene as support for the contract theory by saying that Richard wasted his rule and should have appealed more to the people. In a conversation between some men in Act III, Scene 4, a gardener says, “Bolingbroke/ Hath seized the wasteful king, O, what pity is it? / That he has not so trimmed and dressed his land/ as we this garden!” (III.4.54-57). This describes Richard as a failure of the “keeper of the land” and a “wasteful king” instead of someone who cares for his people like a gardener cares for his garden. He failed his people, and by the contract theory, they can rebel because of it. To counter this argument, however, would show that this is merely a gardener sinning against the throne and against God. In terms of divine right, Richard does not rule for the people, God rules through him for God’s higher purpose; nothing can take that away. As described earlier in the play by Richard, “Not all the water in the rough rude sea/ can wash the balm from an anointed king,” (III.2.54-55). This line, dictated by Richard (which means it came straight from God and by God’s own will) refutes the gardener’s arguments that a king can merely be seized and deposed and that the king serves the people. Richard explains that nothing (not
A tragic hero must have a fatal flaw or error in judgment (usually offset by justice or revenge), bad fortune because of the flaw or error, and an over-exaggerated fate, such as Richard’s tragic death. Richard’s misruling and failing as a king underlines his role as a tragic hero in the play, until he encounter misfortune, which then results in his deposition and death. The deposition scene plays a significant role in the idea of Richard as a tragic hero because it paints Richard as a victim of an unlawful fate as he says, “Though some of you, with Pilate, wash your hands, / Showing an outward pity, yet you Pilates…water cannot wash away your sin,” (IV.1.239-240, 242). In these lines, Richards likens himself to Christ and those who rebelled against him to Pilate. In doing so, Richard relates back to divine right by showing that he and God are connected; he can say he is like God without it being blasphemy or a sin or anything because he himself was appointed by God. Moreover, he explains that by rebelling against the monarch, they sin against God since the king acts as a stand-in for God. Relating himself to Christ and his enemies to Pilate immediately portrays Richard as a tragic hero who upholds his duties but still meets a tragic fate. In the case of Richard, his fate stems from his errors in judgment as a human, such as ordering the death of Duke of