The Deposition of Richard II in Richard II by William Shakespeare Richard II is the first play of Shakespeare's four-part History Tetraology. It tells the story of Richard II's deposition and Bolingbroke's rise to power. There are numerous reasons for Richard's fall. He went off to war and left his kingdom vaulnerable. Richard disregarded the advice of his elders. He even went so far as to steal Bolingbroke's inheritance. As Richard lost the support of the nobles and lords, Bolingbroke gained their support. Bolingbroke used this support to depose king Richard II. After the banishment of Bolingbroke, Richard quickly gets back to business and makes plans to go to war in Ireland. There are rebels in Ireland and the king must act to suppress them. But the king has little money; the cost of maintaining elaborate court life has taken its toll on the treasury. Richard plans on demanding and borrowing money from the wealthy and even renting out English land. This taxing the English and renting out English land shows a flaw in Richard as a king. He has a willingness to ignore his duty to the country in favor of his personal interests. Selfish kings are bound to be overthrown. Shortly after decided this Richard gets word that John of Gaunt is on his deathbed. He is elated because he figured an easier way to fund his war. After the death of Gaunt, Richard will claim Gaunt's lands as his own and use Gaunt's wealth for the war. Richard's coldness towards his uncle shows his lack of respect for anybody but himself. This lack of respect will help lead to his downfall. Gaunt curses Richard upon his deathbed. This curse is a bad omen and a prophesy of Richard's downfall. Richard's foolishness is shown w... ... middle of paper ... ... Richard has nothing. He urges the Queen to travel to London to see for herself. Act 4 is one long scene describing the deposition of King Richard. Bolingbroke summons Richard so that he may give up his crown. It is important that he do so in front of all the nobles so there is no doubt about Bolingbroke's rise to king. Richard gives his crown to Bolingbroke ever so reluctantly with a long monologue full of grief. "With mine own hands I give away my crown, / With mine own tongue deny my sacred state" (208-9). Richard surrendered his land, crown, and kingship to Bolingbroke. All that is left for Richard to do is read and sign the charges put forth against him. His involvement in the death of Gloucester's was brought into plain view for all. Now that Richard has been deposed, he can be tried for his sin like anyone else. Gaunt's prophesy has come true.
Shakespeare constructs King Richard III to perform his contextual agenda, or to perpetrate political propaganda in the light of a historical power struggle, mirroring the political concerns of his era through his adaptation and selection of source material. Shakespeare’s influences include Thomas More’s The History of King Richard the Third, both constructing a certain historical perspective of the play. The negative perspective of Richard III’s character is a perpetuation of established Tudor history, where Vergil constructed a history intermixed with Tudor history, and More’s connection to John Morton affected the villainous image of the tyrannous king. This negative image is accentuated through the antithesis of Richards treachery in juxtaposition of Richmond’s devotion, exemplified in the parallelism of ‘God and Saint George! Richmond and victory.’ The need to legitimize Elizabeth’s reign influenced Shakespeare’s portra...
...historical background set forth in the film, with the broad details of the attempted rebellion propelled by Queen Eleanor and led by Richard and Geoffrey are accurate, as is the attempt by Philip of France to undermine the Angevin Empire to regain the provinces acquired by Henry through his marriage to Eleanor. As depicted in the film, the indecision, faced by Henry II in attempting to determine which son to name as successor resulted from his desire to have the empire that he had created remain intact, rather than dividing the empire between his sons and this, in turn, led to the fracturing of both family and political cohesion, leaving the empire vulnerable to outside forces. Both Richard and John eventually ruled the empire, supported and influenced by their mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine, who was released from her Salisbury prison upon the death of King Henry II.
In this play of challenge and debate, could it be possibly suggested that King Richard had a part to play in the murder of his uncle the Duke of Gloucester? Could the reader possibly pick up this assumption having known nothing about the play? These are all factors that one must find by reading in between the lines, noticing and understanding the silence that is exchanged. For the silence is just as important as the speech.Why is it assumed that King Richard II has anything to do with the murder? Let us review a scene from the play were Gaunt accuses Richard of being accountable for Gloucester's death.
In conclusion, it is apparent that Richard III is quite a moral play. The characters in it are able to repent their own transgressions, and condemn those of others, and finally, retribution and judgement are always carried through. This text fully demonstrates a social morality that is, early on, ignored, but culminates in the fulfilment of a natural justice, and thereby endorses the moral codes it shows us.
Throughout Richard II, Bolingbroke is up against King Richard. Richard is, to a considerable degree, the morally void opportunist: he does after all sieze Gaunt's lands at the moment of his death, taking the entire inheritance away from Gaunt's sons. Richard lacks a sense of morality when it is to his advantage to ignore morality, and proclaims what is right when he thinks he can save his crown. At Gaunt's death, when York attemps to point out that what Richard is doing is wrong, Richard says simply: 'Think what you will, we sieze into our hands/ His plate, his goods, his money and his lands'. Yet later, as Richard is surrounded and on the verge of defeat: 'We are amazed, and thus long have we stood/ To watch the fearful bending of thy knee,/ Because we thought ourself thy lawful king;/ And if we be, how dare thy joints forget/ To pay their awful duty to our presence?'. Richard uses morality as a tool, a necessary quality in a good ruler, yet he is not manipulative enough. Bolingbroke not only ignores morality in his dealings, but keeps up the appearance of moral right and goodness. Bolingbroke knows how to let others take the fall...
Shakespeare Richard III was a traitor, a murderer, a tyrant, and a hypocrite. The leading characteristics of his mind are scorn, sarcasm, and an overwhelming contempt. It appears that the contempt for his victims rather than active hatred or cruelty was the motive for murdering them. Upon meeting him he sounds the keynote to his whole character. " I, that am curtailed of this proportion, cheated of feature by dissembling nature, Deform'd, unfinish'd sent before my time Into this word scarce half made up"( 1.1.20-23)
Richard had weakened since he had become king and was no longer ruthless as he had no reason to be ruthless. He had got what he wanted and was pleased with himself. He thought he was invincible, and he was too confident, which cost him his life. If he had been more careful, he would have been aware of the danger that lied before him. But, he did use some similar techniques in both the scenes.
King Richard II is Shakespeare's example of a king who removes himself from the reality of the common people. Richard views his position as a source of amusement. His "cares" as King, other than an opportunity for an agreeable audience, are merely a burden. Instead of investigating the accusations of treachery from Henry and Mawbrick, he exiles both men as an easy way out. Richard was born a King, and knows no life other than that of royalty. Unfortunately the lesson that must know men to rule them costs him the thrown. Richard's lesson influences his usurper and his usurper's heir to the thrown, demonstrating to them both the value of humility.
... bloody pathway to kingship. Filled with scorn against a society that rejects him and nature that curses him with a weakened body, Richard decides to take revenge and ultimately declares a war between himself and the world. By achieving goals for the mere sake of self-advancement, a self-made hero, an ambitious king, and an atrocious villain were created. Richard assumes that love forms a bond which men can break, but fear is supported by the dread of ever-present pain (Machiavelli ch. XXIV); thus, for true success the hero must be a villain too. Richard III becomes one of literature’s most recognized anti-heroes under the hands of Shakespeare as he has no objective or thought to take up any other profession than the art of hatred; however, ironically being a representative of a heroic ruler sent by God, he is made to commit murder to redeem society of their sins.
The undeniable pursuit for power is Richard’s flaw as a Vice character. This aspect is demonstrated in Shakespeare’s play King Richard III through the actions Richard portrays in an attempt to take the throne, allowing the audience to perceive this as an abhorrent transgression against the divine order. The deformity of Richards arm and back also symbolically imply a sense of villainy through Shakespeare’s context. In one of Richard’s soliloquies, he states how ‘thus like the formal Vice Iniquity/ I moralize two meanings in one word’. Through the use of immoral jargons, Shakespeare emphasises Richard’s tenacity to attain a sense of power. However, Richard’s personal struggle with power causes him to become paranoid and demanding, as demonstrated through the use of modality ‘I wish’ in ‘I wish the bastards dead’. This act thus becomes heavily discordant to the accepted great chain of being and conveys Richard’s consumption by power.
He breeds anger in Clarence and the populace, not of himself, but of Edward and the rightful heirs. "We are not safe, Clarence, we are not safe,"3 he exclaims as his brother is hauled away to the tower. He preys on the "hateful luxury And bestial appetite"4 of the citizenry, catapulting himself to the thrown over a heap of bodies: deaths that hang on his head. But, it is Richard's attitude that his end goal of the crown justifies the murderous means that so closely links ...
jailed and executed for committing treason. www.altavista.com search engine said that in the play, Shakespeare said that Richard
There are many tragic events that lead to Richard’s downfall and consequently lost of his crown. The most important one was that he basically didn’t ...
From the beginning of the play, Richard II is apathetic at best in his royal role. By exiling Bolingbroke and...
Nevertheless, as a man of action, Bolingbroke has achieved for himself the goal of retrieving his father Gaunt's estates and much more. He, in the end, is king, King Henry IV. And though Richard as king was full of pomp and ceremony, those things were no match for ambition carried to its fullest. His strong words belied incompetence as a ruler, and he could not hold his position. It seems that it was inevitable that Bolingbroke would be the victor at last. Richard should have taken more note of his usurper, before he was such, this man he called "[Gaunt's] bold son" (1.1.3).