Shakespeare\'s Richard II Careful Analysis of John

Shakespeare's Richard II

Careful analysis of John Locke's Two Treatises of Government reveals the author's fairly rigid attitude towards the constitution, right and responsibilities of a political state. When applying Locke's well defined principles to Henry Bolingbroke's overthrow of Richard II for rights to the throne of England in the late 14th century in Shakespeare's Richard II, several parallel situations are found which Locke primarily refers to in a hypothetical sense. When examining Shakespeare's work from an erudite perspective, one may perceive that in many ways, Bolingbroke and Richard II's struggle for power -- along with the surrounding circumstances of the political state and the lot of its commoners -- actually mirror several circumstances which Locke portrays in his book. By interpreting the events in Shakespeare's drama through the mandates outlined in Two Treatises of Government, it becomes apparent that Locke would have willingly sanctioned Bolingbroke's usurpation of the throne as much as he would have that of anyone.

The pivotal factor which decides this point is Richard II's relationship with his subjects, who have been increasingly neglected by the monarch on a host of fronts. Richard II is far from an ideal king; his selection of counselors is fairly imprudent, his attentions are focused more on foreign affairs than those domestic, and he is decidedly impecunious, as the following quote -- in which the king speaks of journeying to Ireland for war -- readily indicates.

"…our coffers, with too great a court

And liberal largess, are grown somewhat light,

We are enforced to farm our royal realm,

The revenue wherof shall furnish us

For our affairs in hand (Act I, scene IV, lines 43-48)."

Richard II's domestic negligence and improper treatment of his subjects is evidenced in the preceding passage. Due to his own prodigal spending habits (denoted by his "liberal largess" towards his "too great a court"), he is willing to tax his subjects to fund a war of little necessity (and less immediacy) abroad, which is referred to as his "affairs in hand." One of his unwise selections of counselors, Green, has persuaded him to embark on this military campaign, which will monetarily drain his subjects and leave them effectively neglected. Such a passage is highly indicative of Richard II's reign, and a source of unrest for many of his subjects.

When the present legislative body fails to meet the needs of its people, Locke unequivocally advocates the summoning of a new legislative body. If war and insurrection is required to bring about this change, then Locke recommends both military means and its subsequent violence. Although the author reiterates this viewpoint several times in the second treatise of Two Treatises of Government, he perhaps does so most convincingly in the following quotation from the third chapter. "…where an appeal to the Law, and constituted Judge lies open, but the remedy is deny'd by a manifest perverting of Justice, and a barefaced wresting of the Laws…there it is hard to imagine any thing but a state of War (p.281)."

Several components of this quotation parallel Richard II's relationship with his subjects. As king of England, he most certainly embodies the physical manifestation of "the Law," and his selfish taxing of the people to accommodate his own monetary habits may certainly be considered a "wresting" of law and a "perverting of Justice." His negligence of domestic affairs in favor of frivolous foreign pursuits can be similarly categorized. But the most important part of this passage occurs near its completion, in which Locke states that such unjust, perverse government justifies a "state of War," which applies to Richard II's negligence and justifies civil war to remove him from the throne. Only by doing so can true lawfulness and justice be restored to the people of England.

Furthermore, in the final chapter of the second treatise of Two Treatises of Government, in which the author discusses the validation of insurrection to dissolve one political state and institute another, Locke also grants his implied approval of Henry Bolingbroke's overthrow of Richard II. The author spends the majority of the chapter justifying revolt under a number of disparate circumstances, not the least of which occurs when a Prince or legislative power abuses his authority by not acting in the best interest of the people. The preceding passages of this paper have demonstrated that this description certainly applies to Richard II's situation with his subjects. However, Locke closes out his political treatise by indicating that the people themselves may determine whether or not the Prince is in violation of his duty, and may act accordingly as the following quotation demonstrates. "…Who shall be Judge whether the Prince of Legislative act contrary to their Trust? This… may spread amongst the People, when the Prince only makes use of his due Prerogative. To this I reply, the People shall be Judge…"

In this quotation Locke assuredly gives the power to the people to decide whether or not their current form of government is working or effective for them. By stating that the subjects of a Prince "shall be Judge," Locke is giving the people the right to essentially determine whether or not the Prince has acted against their will, which is denoted in this passage as acting "contrary to their Trust." This quotation further reinforces the notion that it is applicable to the subjects of Richard II by the description of the Prince's behavior in breaching the people's faith in him. By describing such an ill behaving prince as one who "only" uses his "due Prerogative," Locke could be implicitly alluding to the capricious, whimsical nature of arbitrarily wasting money, raising taxes, and launching overseas invasions that Richard II was known, disliked, overthrown, and eventually murdered for.