Richard II

 

Synopsis:

 

“Richard II was a king by virtue of the divine right of kings and thus God's elected deputy. He is intelligent but weak. John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster is the king's uncle and father of the king's rival, Henry Bolingbroke. The King banishes courtiers Mowbray for life and Bolingbroke for or ten years which, showing outward mercy, he reduces to six after a vicious quarrel. The King is happy to banish Bolingbroke as he fears that the young man's popularity is a threat to his crown. 

Richard wages is a war in Ireland but needs more funds. John of Gaunt is rich and when he dies the king confiscates his property. Bolingbroke and many nobles rebel against the King and Richard yields and Henry escorts him to London. His loyal queen continues to support him and although the Bishop of Carlisle speaks out against Henry and his claims to the crown he fails. The King signs a confession and yields the throne. Henry orders him confined to the Tower of London, then announces his own coronation as Henry IV. The Duke of Aumerle, the Bishop of Carlisle and the Abbot of Westminster organize a last-minute plot against Henry, but again it fails. Henry has Richard transferred to Pomfret Castle. 

Sir Pierce of Exton is Bolingbroke's hatchet man. When Bolingbroke, as the new king, asks whether anyone will rid him of Richard, Exton assumes Bolingbroke wants him dead. With two assistants, he kills the king, who dies bravely. Exton reminds Henry that he wished him dead, Henry, full of guilt, banishes Exton.”

 

 

Analysis:

 

Shakespeare doesn’t change the events or the sequence during the time Richard reigned, for twenty two years, from 1377 to 1397 but he adds information or presents the characters in a determined way to achieve an impact in the audience. For example, king Richard is often referred to as a tyrant who lacks the ability to rule but he’s divinely ordained king. These features seem to be “a combination of Tudor propaganda and Machiavellian theories”.

A remarkable example of the political Tudor thought is exemplified in the character of John of Gaunt who was the uncle of the young prince and who had some expectations of influence in the new kingship. He was a prominent figure in the English society during that time, owing castles, forests and large amounts of money which had provided him with a large amount of supporters who had the expectation of getting profit from that situation and this is how he is described in the chronicles but in contrast, in this play Shakespeare transforms him to a much more moral character who remains faithful to the king and who defends Richard’s legitimacy due to his divine right to rule defending  patriotism in many of his speeches and loyalty to the king. This loyalty to the king is maintained even when Richard’s popularity descends because of his lack of governing abilities and a climate of usurpation was taking place and even despite many pressures Gaunt defends Richard’s divine right to the crown which was the kind of political message the Tudors wanted to spread with the aim to keep a strong government.

 

 

The language of Richard is very poetic but it is so only when he refers to the indignities he suffers during his kingship despite of being a divinely ordained king and how terrible it is to plan the usurpation of an alleged king. As Amanda Mabillard says in her article Representations of Kingship and Power in Shakespeare's Second Tetralogy “Another addition Shakespeare’s makes to the drama not found in the sources is a speech given by Richard. Richard’s brief initial confidence before Salisbury brings the news that his men have joined Bolingbroke is mentioned briefly in Holinshed. However, the speech Richard gives is created by Shakespeare, and further illustrates Richard’s divine right”:

[Bolingbroke’s] treasons will sit blushing on his face,

Not able to endure the sight of day,

But self-affrighted tremble at his sin.

Not all the water in the rough rude sea

Can wash the balm off from an anointed king.(III. ii. 51-55)

 

 

In this article the author has compared the way Shakespeare changes some of the information found in the chronicles of Holinshed and Froistart, which served as a source for Shakespeare.

In the play, Bolingbroke, the son of Gaunt, is banished by Richard which, taking into account the theories of Maquiavelo, is a big mistake as Bolingbroke is an influent and loved person among the people and according to Maquiavelo this is one of the biggest mistakes a ruler can make.

 

In this passage we can see the real motives behind the banishment of Bolingbroke, which can be interpreted as jellousy:

 

He is our cousin, cousin; but ‘tis doubt,

When time shall call him home from banishment,

Whether our kinsman come to see his friends.

Ourself and Bushy here, Bagot and Green,

Observ’d his courtship to the common people—

How he did seem to dive into their hearts

With humble and familiar courtesy; . . .

As were our England in reversion his,

And he our subjects’ next degree in hope.  (I.iv.19-36)

 

Richard hasn’t done anything in order to gain the support of his citizens and with the banishment of Bolingbroke, Richard only achieves the rejection of the public and his attitude causes a bigger support to Bolingbroke.

This is an example of how the personal decisions of Richard affect the way he governs. Below there is a passage in which Shakespeare elaborates a discourse explaining the reasons how Bolingbroke has gained the support of the people:

 

How he did seem to dive into their hearts

With humble and familiar courtesy;

What reverence he did throw away on slaves,

Wooing poor craftsman with the craft of smiles

And patient underbearing of his fortune,

As ‘twere to banish their affects with him.

Off goes his bonnet to an oyster-wench;

A brace of draymen bid God speed him well

And had the tribute of his supple knee. . .(I.iv.25-33)

 

 

Another important moment is after Gaunt’s death, Richard takes all Bolingbroke’s properties, a mistake that would cost him the crown.

 

The problem is that Richard had spent too much money in living and then he made people pay a lot of money for a long time which increased the amount of money he had to ask for in order to pay the second expedition to Ireland which was extremely expensive. According to Maquiavelo, money is another subject that people normally use to mistrust a ruler and below we can see the way Shakespeare reflects this fact:

 

Richard. We will ourself in person to this war;

And, for our coffers, with too great a court,

. . .We are enforc’d to farme our royal realme,

The revenue whereof shall furnish us

Our affairs in hand. If that come short,

Our substitutes at home shall have blank charters . . .

(I, iv, 41-48)

 

In conclusion, Shakespeare through his language makes clear that Richard has the divine right to rule but he doesn’t have the knowledge to rule properly. These are just some examples which can illustrate the purposes of Shakespeare.

You can take a look at Richard II parallel text and compare the original text and the modern text of the play.

Sources:

Mabillard, Amanda. "Representations of Kingship and Power in Shakespeare's Second Tetralogy." Shakespeare Online. 2000. http://www.shakespeare-online.com/essays/Power.html

Visited: 06 December 2008

http://www.williamshakespeare.netfirms.com/ricardo_ii.htm

Visited: 16 December 2008

http://www.william-shakespeare.info/shakespeare-play-king-richard-ii.htm

Visited: 15-December 2008

http://www.rhymezone.com/r/gwic.cgi?Word=_&Path=shakespeare/histories/kingrichardii/i_iv//

Visited 08- January 2009