20 pages • 40 minutes read
Absalom and Achitophel
A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Themes
The Legitimacy of Monarchy vs Mob Rule
One of the greatest political questions in Dryden’s time was whether England should maintain a traditional monarchy or whether the more radical democratic ideas of the Civil War era should prevail and establish a permanent commonwealth. In “Absalom and Achitophel”, Dryden refers to the anti-monarchical ideas that were openly professed during the Civil War era and which remained a threat to the restored monarchy: “These Adam-wits, too fortunately free / Began to dream they wanted liberty” (Lines 51-52). Dryden mocks those who dream of more democratic rule, and the poem depicts democracy as regression instead of progression. The poet claims that such men simply wish to revert to a more primitive and anarchic state, since they “thought that all but savages were slaves” (Line 56, italics mine). Instead, Dryden sides explicitly with the traditional forces of monarchy, defending the king’s prerogative and depicting more democratic ideals as nationally destabilizing—King David’s more sensible Jewish subjects, he claims, “curst the memory of the civil wars” (Line 74) and accept that it is better to remain loyal to the king. By the same reasoning, the poet implies that sensible Englishmen should do the same.
Dryden is also harsh in his representation of the average subject’s political savvy. He warns his readers, “Nor is the people’s judgment always true / The most may err as grossly as the few” (Lines 781-782). He portrays the common Jewish people as simplistic in their sentiments and therefore easily misled by manipulative demagogues. When Absalom traverses the land trying to win the hearts of the people, the gullible Jewish mob eagerly responds: “Th’ admiring crowd are dazzled with surprise / And on his goodly person feed their eyes” (Lines 686-687). Since the crowds are so easily seduced by pandering charm, they welcome Absalom as their “young Messiah” (Line 728) instead of scrutinizing his motives. This characterization suggests that the common people are unfit for executive power.
The Relationship Between Father and Sons/Kings and Subjects
At the heart of “Absalom and Achitophel” is a father-son relationship: the relationship between King David and Absalom. In the political discourse of the day, kings were often spoken of as fathers, with their subjects as their children. The crisis between King David and Absalom in the poem is, literally and figuratively, both a political rupture and a personal one.
King David’s main flaw—as both father and king—is his mildness and indulgence towards his son’s flaws. The speaker calls King David “indulgent” (Line 31), a proud father who sees “His youthful image in his son renew’d” (Line 32). The king’s idealism causes his love for his son to only grow stronger, but this parental affection leads him to spoiling Absalom—“To all his wishes nothing he deni’d” (Line 33). In addition—and most crucially—he fails to see his son’s character flaws that foreshadow the trouble Absalom is capable of causing: “What faults he had (for who from faults is free?) / His father could not, or he would not see” (Lines 35-36). King David unknowingly sows the seeds for the future plot by refusing to see his son for what he is, and by failing to check Absalom’s excesses of character before it is too late.
King David’s paternal flaws are similar to his kingly flaws: He is almost too kind to both son and subjects. Achitophel notices this failing and tells Absalom, “Not that your father’s mildness I contemn / But manly force becomes the diadem” (Lines 381-382), adding that King David has also overlong spoiled his subjects, just as he did with Absalom: “‘Tis true, he grants the people all they crave; / And more perhaps than subjects ought to have” (Lines 383-384). King David’s closing speech admits that he has perhaps been too soft, describing himself as “So willing to forgive th’offending age” (Line 941) and explicitly linking his dual roles of father and king: “So much the father did the king assuage” (Lines 941-942). The poem’s thematic preoccupation with the father/king and son/subject dynamic explores the obligations of both parties, which, according to Dryden, are as follows: A king/father should be just but firm, and a son/subject should be obedient and grateful.
Political Integrity vs Political Opportunism
There is a wide rift in the poem between those who seek to undermine King David and his chosen succession, and those who remain loyal. Dryden’s depictions have explicit moral coloring: The opponents are deeply flawed and dangerous, while the supporters are the virtuous bedrocks of their country. The difference between the two groups is that the opponents are defined by their lack of sincerity—seeking only their own gain, they act more out of opportunism than real conviction.
Achitophel is moved only by “wild ambition” (Line 198) and a restless desire to be more than what he is, as he has “grown weary to possess / A lawful fame, and lazy happiness” (Lines 200-201). His demagogic fomentation of civil unrest, described as his determination to lend “the crowd his arm to shake the tree” (Line 203), is therefore not based on any considered political philosophy: His trouble-making arises solely from vainglory. Absalom is similar, acknowledging that his father is a good king and has always treated him well, but he nevertheless rebels because he is an “ambitious youth, too covetous of fame” (Line 309, italics mine). Thus, the motivations of both of the king’s main opponents are wholly and fundamentally selfish.
The supporters, on the other hand, are honorable: They stand by King David even when it is difficult to do so, because they are committed to the ideals of just monarchy that his reign represents. Barzillai, for example, is praised for his steadfast alliance with David since his youth, when “In exile with his god-like prince he mourn’d / For him he suffer’d, and with him return’d” (Lines 823-824). The speaker also notes how “The court he practis’d, not the courtier’s art” (Line 825, italics mine)—or, in other words, how Barzillai is devoted to the art of good governance (“the court” [Line 825]) and not to self-advancement at any cost (“the courtier’s art” [Line 825]). The poem also praises Barzillai’s son, whose virtues are a foil to Absalom’s selfishness: He “the goal of honour won” (Line 835) in spite of his short life, and was “with every grace adorn’d” (Line 831). Barzillai’s son is the sort of man Absalom ought to be, but which he has failed to be due to his own lack of honor.
Unlock all 20 pages of this Study GuidePlus, gain access to 8,800+ more expert-written Study Guides.
Including features:
