Bolingbroke rebellion is a major influence on William Shakespeare’s Richard II. Prior to this revolt, the king’s position was that he was sacred, untouchable, and divinely-ordained. Despite King Richard’s grievous misdeeds, many noblemen deferred to the divine image of kingship. They condemned rebellion. Richard’s abuse of his kingly power caused some noblemen to reject this divine image and openly rebel. The act of rebellion has several drastic and dramatic consequences. It legitimizes rebellious acts as a result of abuses from the king. And it makes rebellion a natural outcome of monarchial power. It destroys God’s divine image by suggesting that men are the ones who make kings. It sets a dangerous precedent, stating that anyone can be king if he has enough physical support. In the end, Henry IV’s reign was filled with civil unrest and new revolts. These plays depict rebellion as the natural outcome of abuses of power and tyranny. The play shows that a monarch cannot protect his rule by relying solely on the idea of divine right. He must act responsibly and justly to gain the respect of his subjects. It is shown that rebellion can be a very dangerous thing because it can bring chaos and destruction to a kingdom.
Richard II starts with a majority of characters condemning open rebellion. John of Gaunt, the Duke of York and others are upset by Richard’s recklessness and unwise policy, but they don’t support his open rebellion. It is because the idea of divine rights of kings has become the dominant political ideologie of our time. The doctrine of kings’ divine rights preaches that their authority is solely due to God. It is thus divinely sanctioned that the king has power. No mortal on earth could ever rebel against God’s authority, regardless of how serious his alleged earthly sins were. Even those who have the greatest grievances against Richard endorse this ideology, showing that it’s a widely-accepted ideology deeply ingrained in the consciousness of people.
John of Gaunt shows a great deal of outrage towards Richard for his abuse of kingly authority. Richard’s policies, he says, have tarnished England’s glorious past. Gaunt is well aware that Richard’s involvement in the murder of his brother Gloucester is direct. Richard’s economic policies are also causing him to be painfully aware. Gaunt may not be afraid to criticize Richard, but he does not want to revolt. Although Gaunt thinks that kings are responsible, he believes in their divine right. He tells his Duchess that he will not be able to revenge the death of Richard’s husband by rebelling because he thinks Richard is God’s “substitute”. In other words, the king acts as God’s earthly representative. Richard’s crimes could only be punished by God, as no mortal on earth can defy Richard and disobey him. York also has a deep understanding of Richards sin, but he still frowns and calls Bolingbroke a traitor. Bolingbroke is accused of disturbing the civil order with his “despised armed” (1009) against the true “anointed King” (1009). York raises an army to defend Richard against Bolingbroke and his rebel armies. Bolingbroke only surrenders to the rebels under duress.
Both York and Gaunt acknowledge that Richard’s legitimacy is questionable, but neither one questions it. They believe that Richard is legitimate as king, and so they are willing to put aside their complaints in order to remain Richard’s subjects. Richard II demonstrates that outright revolt is a very difficult matter because rebels are challenging the legitimacy of a sovereign who’s generally considered to be divinely appointed. Richard II also aims to destroy the established doctrine of divine right and replace it by a new, modern idea that claims a king is responsible to his people if he behaves responsibly. Richard II’s rebellion is an ideological revolution that seeks undermine the foundations of divine monarchy. Henry IV’s turbulent period shows that an ideological shift brought about by rebellion is bound to cause chaos and unrest.
Richard II shows that kings can’t rely on the principle of divine right to protect their rule. Even in societies which accept the principle of divine right for kings and monarchs, rebellion will occur when the monarch abuses power. Richard II demonstrates that relying on the principle of divine right to strengthen and legitimize a monarchy’s rule against rebellion is not effective. Richard II is blindly pursuing the divine rights of kings, believing that his “divinely-sanctioned” authority has some magic power to protect his crown from any rebellion attempts. He believes, naively, that “not every drop of water from the rough, rude ocean can wash away anointed king’s balm [and] the breaths worldly men cannot remove the deputy selected by the God” (1013). Although he is informed of the desertion, he believes his divinely inspired name is “worth forty thousand names” (1014), which will allow him to defeat Bolingbroke and his rebellion. Richard’s repeated claims of divine protection that does not exist become ludicrous when it is clear that his kingdom has no physical support. This play shows how earthly support is what protects a monarch from rebellion and not mystical heavenly powers. Bolingbroke is a rebellion that shows the need to modify the doctrines regarding the monarchial absolutism, and the divine rights of kings.
Richard II’s rebellion is started by the king. Richard fails in his understanding that to ensure that his reign is protected from revolts, it’s not enough to be legitimate, but he has to also be just. This play shows us that even when a monarch loses the public’s support due to his misbehavior, rebellion is inevitable. While a king is a sovereign, he has an earthly form, and therefore, can have earthly flaws or imperfections which prevent him living up to the image of his divinity. Richard the Lionheart is a great example. Though he appears to be a divinely-anointed monarch, his true self is one of greed, corruption, moral irresponsibility, and corruption. Richard II is the story of King Richard, who was responsible for all rebellion. The play is not about Bolingbroke, but rather the misdeeds of the king. Bolingbroke doesn’t appear to be the unreliable and ruthless rebel who wants to overthrow the king. The king’s cruelty towards Bolingbroke is the catalyst for his rebellion. Bolingbroke remained mostly silent during Richard’s testimony scene, which revealed his guilty conscience. He is not a traitor but merely a reluctant one who has been pushed to rebel by the mistreatment he receives from the king. Bolingbroke’s revolt was therefore started by the King. Richard is overthrown by rebellious means, but it is his own destruction that brings him down. Richard says that his misconduct has led him to “find [him]self as a traitor, because [he] have undeck[ed] pompous body” (1029). Richard’s blatant mismanagement has led him to destroy himself. In his deposition, he “washed away” his balm (1028), using his “own tears”, and “gave up his crown” (1028), by his own “hands”. Richard II shows rebellion as an outburst of anger at Richard, not Bolingbroke. Richard’s lust for power is what led to this rebellion and not Bolingbroke. Bolingbroke’s rebellious act shows the limitations and flaws of a monarchial-absolutist political system. Because the king was viewed as divine, the people could not hold him accountable. In such cases, the people can only punish him by openly rebelling.
Bolingbroke’s rebellion has both short-term and long-term effects. Short-term, it disrupts civil peace. The rebellious rebellion causes a rift between Bolingbroke, Richard’s followers and the English people. As soon as Bolingbroke took the throne in England, factionalism nearly broke out into violent violence when a group Richard’s followers attempted to assassinate him. This violent plan was a prelude to the violent conflicts of 1 Henry III and 2 Henry III. Carlishe’s prophecy is correct: this rebellion will destabilize England and bring about “disorder” (1027), “horror”, “fear” and “mutiny”. It will also cause “kin to be divided and people of the same kind to be disoriented” (1027). Civil peace is “sleeping with Turks and Infidels”, 1027, and the future generations are going to “cry for your woes” and “groan at this foul act”, 1027. Henry IV’s reign is seriously weakened in the books 1 Henry IV & 2 Henry IV. His reign was marked by domestic unrest and civil rebellion. His enemies included the noble house of Northumberland and his cousin Mortimer. The Welsh nobleman Glyndwr also rose up. This rebellion has a long-term impact on the kingship. It destroys all association between a king and the divine. It shows that anyone who has enough physical support is capable of becoming king. This can happen with or without divine approval.
Bolingbroke’s rebellion destroyed the king’s most important source of protection by destroying his divine right. His rebellion has the greatest long-term impact. All kings can be revolted and deposed from the moment he breaks down the divine image. Bolingbroke is placed in an untenable position as soon as he ascends to the throne. This is because the doctrine that protected kings against revolts was destroyed. In the first lines of Henry IV we see that the newly-crowned king faces new civil unrest. Henry IV does not enjoy the same self-assured nonchalance as King Richard. He is “shaken”, “wan with concern” (1188), and “wan” (1188), by new “civil slaughter” (1189). Bolingbroke’s rebelliousness has opened up the floodgates for revolts. Henry IV is the last king to be regarded as inviolable and sacred. Henry IV no longer enjoys the protection of the kingly divine aura. He can’t afford to be like Richard and take his subjects for granted. To win the affection and respect of people, he will have to employ every trick and technique to “pull allegiance out of their hearts”. In the short-term the rebellion brings civil unrest and a wave of new rebellions. Bolingbroke’s rebelliousness will change the way kings behave and act in the future. In the absence of a divine image for kings, a ruler must become more of an earthly politician and less of a divine god-minister. Bolingbroke uses his tact, his skills and his wit to present a public image that is attractive and makes him appear “fresh” and “new” (1228). Bolingbroke has to be careful to please the public, since the rebellion has destroyed the unbreakable kingship.
Bolingbroke’s rebellion has long lasting effects on him. This is evident in both 1 Henry IV as well as 2 Henry IV. Bolingbroke, as a usurper, has suffered the long-term effects of his rebellion. He is treated with disdain by his noblemen including Worcester and Hotspur. Nobody worships him like the anointed holy king. Hotspur calls Bolingbroke Bolingbroke. This is to indicate that Henry will not be acknowledged as the king. Bolingbroke, as a monarch, has difficulty finding loyal and consistent supporters. Bolingbroke’s kingship rests on very weak foundations, so few people will pledge their unconditional support. Bolingbroke can depose any king he wants. The act also serves as a warning to other people to disobey the law. In the reign of King Richard most noblemen were against rebellion. However, in Henry IV’s reign, noblemen are less concerned about the morality of rebellion.
King Henry understands that his reign is insecure because he has removed the divine protection from the throne. King Henry’s rebellion has long-term implications, and he must battle new rebellions all throughout his reign. In the face of an untenable kingship, Henry becomes a victim of great mental distress. He is obsessed with the idea that he should visit the holy Land to atone and cleanse his sins. He is increasingly restless, troubled and unable find peace in sleep. Henry IV never managed to overcome the consequences of rebellion. His tainted kingship is also a constant reminder. Henry IV believes that only death can erase some of those unpleasant consequences and change his tainted image. Henry IV still fears and worries about the future of his son. He believes that a son who inherits his throne will be a more legitimate king. Henry IV advises his son that since his rebellion stripped a monarch of their divine shield, they must resort to extreme measures to protect his kingship. This means seeking “foreign disputes” (1392) to unify the division within his kingdom. Henry’s dying counsel is a great example of how much his rebellious actions have weakened the notion of kingship. Richard did not need to do much to protect his rule. But after the revolt and the fall of the kingly divine, a monarch is extremely vulnerable. He must use all the tricks, strategies, and devices to preserve and secure his crown.
Shakespeare’s works show how rebellions can have a radical effect. Bolingbroke’s rebellion not only destroys England’s peace, but also alters forever the definition kingship. Bolingbroke’s rebellion can lead to the deposition of all kings. Rebellion destroys beyond repair the stability and security that comes with kingship. This rebellion alters kingship’s style and manners. The rebellious king is forced to adopt a more approachable manner in order to get public support. The revolt modernizes the idea of kingship as it makes future monarchs responsible and fair or they risk suffering the fate of Richard.
References
Original: In conclusion
Paraphrased: To sum up
Shakespeare, William. The Norton edition of William Shakespeare’s plays and sonnets. Ed. Greenblatt, Stephen. Norton & Company, 2008, located in New York, published the original text.
Comments are closed.