Absalom and Achitophel as a Political Satire
Unit 2: John Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel
Table Contents
Personal Information
Assignment Details
Abstract
Introduction
Satire
Political satire
Absalom and Achitophel as a political satire
Basically a political satire
Dryden’s Aim in Absalom and Achitophel
Political satire cast in Biblical mould
Example of satire in Absalom and Achitophel
Conclusion
Personal information :
Name : Vala Nikita
Batch : M.A Sem 1 (2024-2026)
Enrollment Number :
E-mail Address : nikitavala2811@gmail.com
Roll no -18
Assignment Details :
Topic : Absalom and Achitophel as a Political Satire
Paper and subject code : Paper 101: Literature of the Elizabethan and Restoration Period
Submitted to : Smt. Sujata Binoy Gardy, Department of English, MKBU , Bhavnagar
Date of submission : november 20, 2024
- Abstract:
John Dryden’s 'Absalom and Achitophel' is a classic example of political satire. Written in 1681, the poem critiques the political situation of 17th-century England, particularly the Exclusion Crisis, a period of intense debate over English succession. Using a biblical allegory, Dryden represents real political figures through symbolic characters: Absalom as the Duke of Monmouth, Achitophel as the Earl of Shaftesbury, and David as King Charles II. Through humor, irony, and exaggeration, Dryden criticizes the ambitions and manipulations of political leaders, highlighting the dangers of rebellion and disloyalty. The poem defends the legitimacy of the monarchy and emphasizes the value of political stability. 'Absalom and Achitophel' remains a notable work for its effective use of satire to comment on political issues, blending critique with a moral lesson.
- Key words :
Satire,Political Satire,Allegory,Exaggeration,Irony,John Dryden, Absalom and Achitophel, Exclusion Crisis,17th-century England,King Charles II,Duke of Monmouth,Earl of Shaftesbury,Loyalty,Political Ambition.
Introduction:
Restoration, Restoration of the monarchy in England in 1660. It marked the return of Charles II as king (1660–85) following the period of Oliver Cromwell’s Commonwealth. The bishops were restored to Parliament, which established a strict Anglican orthodoxy. The period, which also included the reign of James II (1685–88), was marked by an expansion in colonial trade, the Anglo-Dutch Wars, and a revival of drama and literature (see Restoration literature).
- Absalom and Achitophel:
Absalom and Achitophel, verse satire by English poet John Dryden published in 1681. The poem, which is written in heroic couplets, is about the Exclusion crisis, a contemporary episode in which anti-Catholics, notably the earl of Shaftesbury, sought to bar James, duke of York, a Roman Catholic convert and brother to King Charles II, from the line of succession in favor of the king’s illegitimate (but Protestant) son, the duke of Monmouth. Dryden based his work on a biblical incident recorded in 2 Samuel 13–19. These chapters relate the story of King David’s favorite son Absalom and his false friend Achitophel (Ahithophel), who persuades Absalom to revolt against his father. In his poem, Dryden assigns each figure in the crisis a biblical name; e.g., Absalom is Monmouth, Achitophel is Shaftesbury, and David is Charles II. Despite the strong anti-Catholic tenor of the times, Dryden’s clear and persuasive dissection of the intriguers’ motives helped to preserve the duke of York’s position.
A second part of the poem—largely composed by Nahum Tate, playwright and poet laureate of Britain, but containing 200 lines by Dryden that were directed at his literary rivals Thomas Shadwell and Elkanah Settle—was
published in 1682.
- John Dryden:
John Dryden (1631-1700) was an influential English poet, playwright, and literary critic. He is widely regarded as one of the most significant figures in English literature, particularly during the Restoration period. Here’s a brief overview of his life and career:
- Early Life and Education
Born on August 9, 1631, in Aldwincle, Northamptonshire, England.
He belonged to a Puritan family and was educated at the prestigious Westminster School in London.
He later attended Trinity College, Cambridge, where he studied classical literature and developed a strong foundation in poetry.
- Literary Career
Dryden began his career as a poet with his first major work, "Heroic Stanzas" (1659), an elegy honoring Oliver Cromwell.
However, after the Restoration of the monarchy in 1660, he shifted his allegiance to the new regime, and in 1667 he published "Annus Mirabilis," a long poem that celebrated England's resilience after the Great Fire of London and the Anglo-Dutch War.
He became England's first official Poet Laureate in 1668 and was appointed Historiographer Royal in 1670, cementing his status as a leading literary figure of the time.
- Major Works
Dryden was known for his skillful use of satire. His poem "Absalom and Achitophel" (1681), a political satire, is one of his best-known works.
He also made significant contributions to English drama, writing numerous comedies and tragedies, including "All for Love" (1677) and "The Indian Emperor" (1665).
In addition to poetry and drama, Dryden was a prominent literary critic. His work "An Essay of Dramatic Poesy" (1668) is an important piece of criticism that discusses the principles of drama and poetry.
- Later Life and Legacy
In 1685, with the ascension of the Catholic King James II, Dryden converted to Roman Catholicism, a decision that impacted his career when William III, a Protestant, took the throne in 1688. He lost his position as Poet Laureate and faced financial difficulties.
Despite these challenges, he continued to write, producing translations of classical works, including Virgil’s "Aeneid" and Ovid’s "Metamorphoses."
Dryden died on May 1, 1700, and was buried in Westminster Abbey, honored as one of England's greatest literary fifigures.
- Contribution to Literature
John Dryden's work is celebrated for its wit, clarity, and use of heroic couplets, a poetic form he mastered. He played a crucial role in shaping English literature, particularly in refining poetic and dramatic forms. His influence extended to later writers, including Alexander Pope and Samuel Johnson, who considered him a literary giant of his era.
What is Satire?
Satire
Although scholars generally agree that satire cannot be defined in a categorical or exhaustive way, there is a consensus regarding its major features: satire is a mode, rather than a genre; it attacks historically specific targets, who are real; it is an intentional and purposeful literary form; its targets deserve ridicule on the basis of their behavior; and satire is both humorous and critical by its nature. The specificity and negativity of satire are what separates it from comedy, which tends to ridicule general types of people in ways that are ultimately redemptive. Satire is also rhetorically complex, and its critiques have a convoluted or indirect relation to the views of the author. Satire’s long history, which is not straightforwardly linear, means that it is impossible to catalog all of the views on it from antiquity through to modernity. Modern criticism on satire, however, is easier to summarize and has often made use of ancient satirical traditions for its own purposes—especially because many early modern theorists of satire were also satirists. In particular, modern satire has generated an internal dichotomy between a rhetorical tradition of satire associated with Juvenal, and an ethical tradition associated with Horace. Most criticism of satire from the 20th century onward repeats and re-inscribed this binary in various ways. The Yale school of critics applied key insights from the New Critics to offer a rhetorical approach to satire. The Chicago school focused on the historical nature of satirical references but still presented a broadly formalist account of satire. Early 21st century criticism has moved between a rhetorical approach inflected by poststructural theory and a historicism grounded in archival research, empiricism, and period studies. Both of these approaches, however, have continued to internally reproduce a division between satire’s aesthetic qualities and its ethical or instrumental qualities. Finally, there is also a tradition of Menippean satire that differs markedly in character from traditional satire studies. While criticism of Menippean satire tends to foreground the aesthetic potential of satire over and above ethics, it also often focuses on many works that are arguably not really satirical in nature.
What is political satire?
Political Satire
Political satire in the strictest and most obvious sense is fiction and journalism that mock living politicians and the current regime with a view to subverting their authority. Literature of this kind does not survive in large quantities from Byzantium, and when it does exist, the object of its mockery is not always evident. Little of it directly targets the political figure who really counted: the ruling emperor. This chapter, therefore, in order to justify its existence, will discuss the topic in a broad sense, by taking a broad definition of both politics and satire. It will consider all targets of satire who exercised, or pretended to, authority of any kind: spiritual, cultural, and professional, as well as political and social. It will thus advance the hypothesis that all satire is basically political, and that this is why relatively little of what was written managed to survive in the deeply conformist culture of Byzantium. At the same time, my chapter will start from the assumption that all debunking of authority deserves to be considered as satire, whatever the medium, the genre, and the linguistic register of its discourse; whether its perspective is top-down or bottom-up; whatever techniques it uses or combines from allegory, dramatization, parody, or just plain invective; and, finally, regardless of the quality of the wit and humor that is displayed. The essential ingredient is the intention to make fun of those who take themselves too seriously and have persuaded others to buy into their self-importance.
It follows from the above that my approach will be historical rather than literary. While acknowledging the wit, elegance, and artfulness of certain literary portrayals, the focus will be primarily on the authority figures who are satirized and the motivation for debunking them. The means by which satire is deployed are relevant only to the extent that they give an idea of its effect on audiences and readers, and therefore of its success in achieving its ends. The question of ends is part of a larger historical and indeed anthropological question: what is the function of satire in a given political system? The question cannot be answered solely on the basis of the direct textual evidence, especially in a society like Byzantium from which so little satirical literature survives. We have to ask whether this material truly represents the place of satire in Byzantine culture, given what we know of Byzantine cultural norms and expectations.
Absalom and Achitophel as a political satire.
'Absalom and Achitophel' is a political satire written by John Dryden in 1681. The poem is one of the most famous and effective examples of political satire in English literature. Here’s why it is considered a political satire:
1. Historical Context: The poem was written during the political unrest in England in the 17th century, specifically around the time of the "Exclusion Crisis." This was a period when there was a debate over whether James, Duke of York (a Catholic), should be excluded from the line of succession to the English throne in favor of the Protestant Duke of Monmouth.
2. Biblical Allegory: Dryden cleverly uses a biblical allegory to veil his political critique. The characters in the poem correspond to real political figures of the time:
Absalom represents the Duke of Monmouth, the illegitimate son of King Charles II, who was favored by many as a potential Protestant king.
Achitophel symbolizes the Earl of Shaftesbury, a leading politician who advocated for Monmouth's claim to the throne and opposed the succession of the Catholic James.
David is a representation of King Charles II.
Satire is a form of literature, the proclaimed purpose of which is the reform of human weaknesses or vices through laughter or disgust. Satire is different from scolding and sheer abuse, though it is prompted by indignation. Its aim is generally constructive, and need not arise from cynicism or misanthropy. The satirist applies the test of certain ethical, intellectual and social standards to men and women, and determines their degree of criminality or culpability. Satire naturally has a wide range; it can involve an attack on the vices of an age, or the defects of an individual or the follies common to the very species of mankind.
Absalom and Achitophel is a landmark political satire by John Dryden. Dryden marks his satire with a concentrated and convincing poetic style. His satiric verse is majestic, what Pope calls: “The long majestic march and energy divine”. Critics have unanimously remarked on Dryden’s capacity to transform the trivial into the poetical; personal envy into the fury of imaginative creation. The obscure and the complicated are made clear and simple. All this transforming power is to be seen at the very beginning of Absalom and Achitophel. The state of ‘Israel’ is easy to understand and yet Dryden shows himself a master both of the Horatian and the Juvenalian styles of Satire. He is urbance witty, devastating and vigorous, but very seldom petty.
Basically a Political Satire:
Dryden called Absalom and Achitophel ‘a poem’ and not a satire, implying thereby that it had elements other than purely satirical. One cannot, for instance, ignore the obvious epic or heroic touches in it. All the same, the poem originated in the political situation of England at the time and one cannot fail to note that several political personalities are satirized in it. Published in November 1681, the theme was suggested by the king to Dryden. At this time, the question of succession to King Charles had assumed great importance. The Earl of Shaftesbury had been thrown into prison to face a charge of high treason. There were two contenders for the succession. Firstly, Charles’ brother James, Duke of York, a known Roman Catholic; the second contender was Charles’ illegitimate son, the Protestant Duke of Monmouth. The Whigs supported Monmouth while the Tories supported the cause of James in order to ensure stability in the country. There was great public unrest on account of the uncertainty of succession. King Charles II saw to it that the Exclusion bill brought before Parliament, to exclude the succession of his brother James, could not be pushed through. The earl of Shaftesbury, a highly ambitious man, sought to capitalise on this unrest. He also urged Monmouth to rebel against his father. The King, though fond of his illegitimate son, did not support his succession because that would have been against law. The Earl of Shaftesbury was arrested on a charge of high treason and lost popular support.
Dryden’s Aim in Absalom and Achitophel:
The aim of Dryden was to support the King and to expose his enemies. Of course, Charles had his own weaknesses; he was extremely fond of women. But Dryden puts a charitable mantle over his sexual sins. He is mild in dealing with his real vices. The king himself did not think unfavorably of his love affairs. Sexual license was the order of the age and as such, it did not deserve condemnation. Dryden has nothing but praise for the king’s moderation in political matters and his leniency towards rebels. Dryden’s lash falls on the King’s enemies, particularly the Earl of Shaftesbury. He was a reckless politician without aunty principles who, “ having tried in vain to seduce Charles to arbitrary government had turned round and now drives down the current”. Dryden dreads the fickleness of the mob and he is not sure to what extremes a crowd can go. However, the king’s strictness and instinct for the rule of law won him popular support and he was able to determine the succession according to his desire. Dryden’s reference to the godlike David shows his flattery of the King and his belief in the “Theory of the Divine Right of Kings”.
Political Satire Cast in Biblical Mould:
Dryden chose the well known Biblical story of Absalom revolting against his father David, at the wicked instigation of Achitophel, in order to satirize the contemporary political situation. The choice of a Biblical allegory is not original on dryden’s part, but his general treatment of the subject is beyond comparison, as Courthope points out. But all the while Dryden takes care to see that the political satire is not lost in the confusion of a too intricate Biblical parallelism. The advantage of setting the story in pre-Christian times is obvious as it gave Dryden had at once to praise the King and satirize the King’s opponents. To discredit the opponents he had to emphasize on Monmouth’s illegitimacy; but at the same time he had to see that Charles (who was Monmouth’s father) was not adversely affected by his criticism. He could not openly condone Charles’ loose morals; at the same time, he could not openly criticize it either. With a masterly touch he sets the poem :
“In pious times are priestcraft did begin
Before polygamy was made a sin;
When man on multiplied his kind,
Here one to one was cursedly confined ....”
The ironic undertone cannot be missed; Dryden is obviously laughing up his sleeve at Charles himself, who, as a witty patron, could not have missed it, nor failed to enjoy it.
Examples of Satire in 'Absalom and Achitophel'
1. Characterization of Achitophel: Dryden presents Achitophel as a scheming manipulator who uses his wit and persuasive skills to encourage Absalom (Monmouth) to rebel against his father, David (Charles II). This reflects Shaftesbury's real-life political machinations.
2. Critique of Monmouth's Ambition: By likening Monmouth to Absalom, a biblical figure who led a failed rebellion against his father, Dryden criticizes Monmouth's ambition and the futility of his actions.
3. Use of Mockery: Dryden mocks the leaders of the rebellion, showing them as foolish and hypocritical, highlighting the absurdity of their cause in an exaggerated manner.
Conclusion:
Dryden is correctly regarded as the most vigorous and polished of English satirists combining refinement with fervor. Dryden is unequaled at debating in rhyme and Absalom and Achitophel displays his power of arguing in verse. It may be said that Absalom and Achitophel have no rival in the field of political satire. Apart from the contemporary interest of the poem and its historical value, its appeal to the modern reader lies in its observations on English character and on the weaknesses of man in general. His generalizations on human nature have a perennial interest. Dryden triumphed over the peculiar difficulties of his chosen theme. He had to give, not abuse or politics,but the poetry of abuse and politics. He had to criticize a son whom the father still liked; he had to make Shaftesbury denounce the King but he had to see to it that the King’s susceptibilities were not wounded. He had to praise without sounding servile and he had to criticize artistically. Dryden achieves all this cleverly and skilfully. Achitophel’s denunciation of the king assumes the shades of a eulogy in Charles’ eyes. Absalom is a misguided instrument in Achitophel’s hands. The poem is certainly a political satire, but it is a blend of dignity with incisive and effective satire.
Words :3,254
images : 2
References:
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Absalom and Achitophel | Restoration, Satire and Allegory.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 24 Feb. 2011, www.britannica.com/topic/Absalom-and-Achitophel.
Stinson, E. (2019, August 28). Satire. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Literature. Retrieved 18 Nov. 2024, from https://oxfordre.com/literature/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190201098.001.0001/acrefore-9780190201098-e-1091.
Marciniak, Przemysław, and Ingela Nilsson. Satire in the Middle Byzantine Period. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 15 Dec. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004442566 Web.
Sid. “Absalom and Achitophel as a Political Satire.” Desdemona Literarism, 12 May 2013, desdemonaliterarism.wordpress.com/2013/05/12/absalom-and-achitophel-as-a-political-satire.
Comments
Post a Comment