King Richard II And Sonry V Comparison

1241 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Downfall of Richard Ii

Though King Richard II and King Henry V are both highly theatrical figures in their public performance as kings, both monarchs exemplify different “fictions of kingship.” In the two plays, Shakespeare effectively conveys divergent means by which a king can be a bad and tyrannical leader and by which a king can be a good and just leader. King Richard II proves to be an unsuccessful ruler, because he is too preoccupied with his own wants and desires and shows no redeeming qualities of suitable king. Contrarily, King Henry V proves to be a successful ruler, for his motives and actions are driven by politics and the overall well being of the common folk. While both monarchs are men of words, they use their rhetoric for profoundly different purposes. In contrasting the two men, it can be seen with clarity the distinguishing characteristics that separate the two kings from one another. In Richard II, Shakespeare portrays King Richard II as an unreliable leader. Richard II is highly self-absorbed and neglects to take the common folk into account when making decisions. Because of his narcissism, Richard disregards the consequences of his actions. One of King Richard’s main concerns in the play stems from his desire to acquire John of Gaunt’s possessions shortly after he passes, saying, “Think what you will, we seize into our hands / His plate, his goods, his money, and his lands” (2.1.209-210). Richard demonstrates his relentless motives to obtain Gaunt’s material possessions and land as he persistently insists on doing so even after the Duke of York expresses his reluctance. He showcases his unjustly actions, as well, for he conspires to take the possessions of his uncle that are rightfully Bolingbroke’s, for John of Gaunt is Bo... ... middle of paper ... ... sheds his blood with me / Shall be my brother… And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks / That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s Day” (4.3.58-67). Henry produces strong prose that sets the tone of a victor’s fantasy and gives his soldiers the incentive to fight, for he emphasizes that the battle will give them an accomplishment to be proud of and honored to be a part of. He also invokes the idea of brotherhood, taking away the hierarchy and placing himself on the same level as his soldiers. Shakespeare’s intentions towards the portrayal of both kings are apparent, and he is able to successfully convey the contrast between the noble King Henry V and the notorious King Richard II. Both kings are very dissimilar from one another and it is essential to compare the two in order to distinguish the characteristics that are necessary to be a honorable ruler.

Show More
Related

  • The Beginnings and Endings of Machiavellian Kings

    1007 Words  | 3 Pages

    Shakespeare, William, and Peter Holland. The Tragedy of King Richard the Third. New York, NY: Penguin, 2000. Print.

    Read More

  • Free Henry IV Essays: The Reign of a Tyrant

    379 Words  | 1 Pages

    Although the blame for the fall of Richard II and the rise of Henry IV can be shared by them both, Henry IV having established the precedence of usurpation finds England wracked with civil strife after only one year on the throne. Henry IV discovers the impossible situation of a monarch who in making any choice or decision must face the opposition of those who disagree with him and support the other side of the issue.

    Read More

  • King Richard III: What Makes A Good Monarch?

    546 Words  | 2 Pages

    This alone proves that Richard III was in no way fit to rule as the King and considering what he had to do in order to put himself in the position of power explains why he only served a meager two years before he was killed in battle. However, what he lacked in fitness to rule he made up in when it came to protection of the realm. Biography.com says that King Richard made “…attempts to ease tensions with the Lancastrians, allowing the relocation of Henry VI's remains to St. George's Chapel.” In doing so, King Richard resolved the conflict and possibly prevented an uprising that could have ended in a disaster but he didn’t stop there. He also, signed an agreement with Scotland that called for a ceasefire. These actions would have been King Richards only hope to be remembered for positive leadership. He is actually remembered by many as one of the most “historic and turbulent leaders” (Biography.com) there ever was. Even Shakespeare portrayed him as a bad ruler, with an even worse case of hunchback, in his play King Richard III. An example of his not so positive leadership would be when King Richard “agreed

    Read More

  • A Hero, a King, and a Daemon

    1163 Words  | 3 Pages

    Gifted with the darkest attributes intertwined in his imperfect characteristics, Shakespeare’s Richard III displays his anti-hero traits afflicted with thorns of villains: “Plots have I laid, inductions dangerous / By drunken prophecies, libels, and dreams” (I.i.32-33). Richard possesses the idealism and ambition of a heroic figure that is destined to great achievements and power; however, as one who believes that “the end justifies the means”, Richard rejects moral value and tradition as he is willing to do anything to accomplish his goal to the crown. The society, even his family and closest friends, repudiate him as a deformed outcast. Nevertheless, he cheers for himself as the champion and irredeemable villain by turning entirely to revenge of taking self-served power. By distinguishing virtue ethics to take revenge on the human society that alienates him and centering his life on self-advancement towards kingship, Richard is the literary archetype of an anti-hero.

    Read More

  • Essay on the Tyrant in Richard III and Macbeth

    1834 Words  | 4 Pages

    In the first act of Richard III the audience sees that Richard has developed an elaborate plan to become king (1.1.28-35). His plan is well thought out and looks to the future, not just the present. At the end of act 1 scene 1 Richard describes his plan and begins to get ahead of himself. Then he remembers the plan as a whole and realizes he must execute it in order to succeed. "But yet I run before my horse to market. / Clarence still breathes, Edward still lives and reigns; / When they are gone, then must I count my gains" (1.1.160-163). Through this opening act we see that Richard poses considerable foresight and even acts upon it. By the end of the play, however, this foresight has disappeared. Richard totally ignores Buckingham and refuses to compensate Buckingham for his help in usurping the throne (4.2.119-122). Richard fails to foresee that this action will cause Buckingham to turn against him. This lack or decrease of foresight is one of the principal characteristics of the tyrant.

    Read More

  • The Evil of Richard the Third

    956 Words  | 2 Pages

    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)

    Read More

  • Comparison of King Richard III and Looking for Richard

    1514 Words  | 4 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • Historiographical Debate: Richard III

    2026 Words  | 5 Pages

    Since the death of Richard III at Bosworth field in 1485, many historians, appointed officials, and playwrights, have written their histories, thoughts, and accounts of Richard III’s life for hundreds of years. If we think about all of the medieval kings, princes, and other historical figures who were reported as doing just as many, if not worse crimes during their reign, how come Richard III still gains attention for his? This debate continues to this day, because of the early written records that tried to prove his malicious nature. In addition, the plagiaristic tendencies of early historians further added to the debate because century after century, accounts of Richard’s life became more and more negative.

    Read More

  • Ivanhoe - Strenghth, Honor , And Chivalry

    1570 Words  | 4 Pages

    In spite of the weaknesses, Ivanhoe and King Richard demonstrate true chivalric characteristics. They exemplify integrity, loyalty to the king, a love for adventure, and bravery. Through this book the reader learns the meaning of moral guidelines due to the examples set by King Richard and Ivanhoe. These examples challenge us to search for our own moral guidelines. Without these we have nothing to strive for.

    Read More

  • Prince Hal Character Analysis

    1004 Words  | 3 Pages

    William Shakespeare’s historical play Henry IV is a story about performing the role of a king. It asks us, how are we to know and remain true to ourselves when we are constantly expected to remain in character and adhere to the roles that other people have given us? Prince Hal is one character that has to pay the debt of a performance that he “never promised” (1.2.187). However, Prince Hal is not the only one who has a role to play. King Henry, the usurper to Richard II’s throne, is continually seeking ways in which he can prove to his people that he is worthy of his crown, while Hotspur, the rival to Plantagenet rule, seeks ways to rally forces to overthrow it.

    Read More

  • The Battle of Agincourt

    1993 Words  | 4 Pages

    Shakespeare, William. The Life of King Henry the Fifth. New York: Unicorn Publishers Inc, 1950. Pg. 173-295.

    Read More

  • Henry V Leadership Analysis

    1655 Words  | 4 Pages

    Shakespeare displayed character development in Henry by giving him the throne of King in the play. The transition of a troublesome prince to a respectable King was obtained by Henry’s acceptance toward the responsibilities that he was given. Kinship toward his men, strict rule in the war, ability to learn the mistakes from his past and to grow from it- gave Henry the ability to rule in his reign and to portray his growth and development. Henry’s qualities of an effective leader is displayed in the battlefield and is caused by an epiphany, which allowed him to realize his position in the hierarchical chain after his father died.

    Read More

  • Chivalry Lesson in Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott

    1589 Words  | 4 Pages

    In spite of the weaknesses, Ivanhoe and King Richard demonstrate true chivalric characteristics. They exemplify integrity, loyalty to the king, a love for adventure and bravery. Through this book, the reader learns the meaning of moral guidelines due to the examples set by King Richard and Ivanhoe. These examples challenge us to search for our own moral guidelines. Without these, we have nothing to strive for.

    Read More

  • Characters In Shakespeare's Patterns Of Decay, By William Shakespeare

    1636 Words  | 4 Pages

    Early histories are an interesting place to start a study of Shakespeare. With tragic and comic elements, Henry VI (all parts) and Richard III bend the arc of history. Richard III is particularly fascinating, due to how the title character attacks his enemies. Edward Berry, in Patterns of Decay, says that the play “explores the ‘self alone’ through movement from conquest to destruction.” (75) The characters of Richard III are complicated, and have tragic ends. By examining the title character in Shakespeare’s Richard III, it’s seen that Richard’s motivations, murders, and other actions lead to his ultimate demise as he descends into insanity at the hands of himself.

    Read More

  • Richard II Essay: The Characters of Bolingbroke and Richard II

    860 Words  | 2 Pages

    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).

    Read More

More about King Richard II And Sonry V Comparison

Open Document