ABSALOM AND ACHITOPHEL

                  EXPLORE THE POEM AS A POLITICAL ALLEGORY.... 

                    Absalom and Achitophel is "generally acknowledged as the finest political satire in the English language". It is also described as an allegory regarding contemporary political events, and a mock heroic narrative. On the title page, Dryden himself describes it simply as "a poem".

                   As a literary device, an allegory is a narrative in which a character, place, or event is used to deliver a broader message about real-world issues and occurrences.

                       On the surface, John Dryden’s poem “Absalom and Achitophel” is a rehashing of the story of David, the third king of Israel, and his illegitimate son Absalom, who rebels against his father and tries to usurp his throne. However, this biblical story is merely an allegory, a form of extended metaphor, for the political events that unfolded in Dryden’s time.

                 In 1678, an alleged Catholic conspiracy to assassinate King Charles II, known as the Popish Plot, swept across England, creating mass anti-Catholic hysteria and prompting the Exclusion Crisis of 1679.

                 Absalom and Achitophel is a celebrated satirical poem by John Dryden, written in heroic couplets and first published in 1681.The poem tells the Biblical tale of the rebellion of Absalom against King David; in this context it is an allegory used to represent a story contemporary to Dryden, concerning King Charles II and the Exclusion Crisis (1679–1681). The poem also references the Popish Plot (1678) and the Monmouth Rebellion (1685).

                      Absalom and Achitophel is "generally acknowledged as the finest political satire in the English language".It is also described as an allegory regarding contemporary political events, and a mock heroic narrative. On the title page, Dryden himself describes it simply as "a poem".

                   The Exclusion Crisis lasted until 1681 and consisted of three Parliamentary bills which attempted to exclude James, King Charles’s brother, from royal succession because he was a Roman Catholic rather than a Protestant. Dryden’s poem is a thinly veiled satirical roast of the political drama that pervaded English society in the late 1670s and early 1680s, and no one is spared his wit. 

                 According to Dryden, “the true end of satire is the amendment of vices by correction,” and “Absalom and Achitophel” is an attempt to that end. Through the use of satire and allegory in “Absalom and Achitophel,” Dryden ultimately argues that the Popish Plot and the Exclusion Crisis were devious ploys to divert the rightful order of succession and prevent James II from ascending the throne.

                     Through the deceit of Achitophel, a politician who sows dissention among the Jews, Dryden allegorizes the Popish Plot and implies the fabricated plot is merely an attempt to breed strife between David and the government, or, figuratively, between Parliament and Charles II of England.

               In Israel, metaphorically England, the “Good Old Cause revive[s] a plot” to “raise up commonwealths and ruin kings.” The “Good Old Cause” is a reference to the Puritan Rebellions of the English Civil War (1642–1651), which pitted King Charles I, who was supported by the Catholics, against Parliament, which was supported by the Puritans, a form of Protestantism. 

                 The war was a victory for Parliament; Charles I was executed and the Commonwealth of England was created. The monarchy was restored in 1660, and Charles II ascended the throne. With this reference, Dryden implies that the Popish Plot is little more than a revival of the Good Old Cause and an attempt to dethrone a king. 

                      In the poem, rumor begins to spread that King David’s life is “Endangered by a brother and wife. / Thus in a pageant show, a plot is made, / And peace itself is war in masquerade.” Titus Oates, a priest of the Church of England and the mastermind of the Popish Plot, accused Charles’s brother James and Charles’s wife, Queen Catherine, of involvement in the plot against Charles. 

                     Dryden suggests that Oates’s claims are nonsense—the plot is a “pageant show,” a charade—and such claims amount to a “war in masquerade,” as the desired outcome, to remove a man who is destined to be king out of royal succession, is similar to that of the English Civil War. Ultimately, the plot fails “for want of common sense,” but it has a “deep and dangerous consequence.” 

                     The Popish Plot, Dryden implies, was destined to fail because it completely lacked wisdom. However, the paranoia and anti-Catholic sentiments the plot churned up led directly to the Exclusion Crisis, which again pitted Parliament against the king. 

                      Members of Parliament pushed for James to be removed from royal succession, and Charles adamantly supported his brother.

                  Satire is a genre of literature and performing arts, usually fiction and less frequently in non-fiction, in which vices, follies, abuses and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government, or society itself into improvement.

                        

                      In the poem, Dryden discusses many of the men who support Achitophel and his plan to strip David of his power. In this way, Dryden also satirizes the politicians who supported the Exclusion Bill, portraying them as despicable men “who think too little and who talk too much.” Thus, Dryden implies that their proposed law—to keep Roman Catholics from the throne—is likewise foolish and dangerous.

                    Achitophel, who encourages Absalom to rebel against his father, is a contemptable man who resolves “to ruin or to rule the state.” Achitophel is a representation of Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, a Member of Parliament and founder of the Whig party, who opposed absolute monarchy in favor of a more democratic approach. 

                      Cooper was a major proponent of the Exclusion Bill, and Dryden implies Cooper intended to use the bill to either take the government over, or completely take it down. Achitophel has several supporters, “whom kings no titles gave, and God no grace,” including the “well-hung Balaam and cold Caleb free.” 

                      Balaam and Caleb represent Theophilus Hastings and Arthur Capel respectively, both politicians and members of the Whig party who supported the Exclusion Bill. Dryden therefore implies these men are low-level politicians who have little sense and no influence. 

                     While Balaam and Caleb may have little sense, “not bull-faced Jonas, ” Dryden says, “who could statutes draw / To mean rebellion and make treason law.” 

                       Jonas represents Sir William Jones, a Member of Parliament who supported the Exclusion Bill. As Attorney General, Jones prosecuted several Catholics who were falsely accused and executed during the Popish Plot.

                    In this way, Dryden implies that Jones, especially teamed with Cooper, can do real and lasting damage to the country and to the monarchy.

                         Achitophel and his supporters begin to stoke “the malcontents of all the Israelites” and sway public opinion, and the Sanhedrins, the Jewish high council, becomes “infected with this public lunacy” as well. 

                      The Sanhedrins, of course, are a metaphor for the English Parliament, and the “public lunacy” is the Exclusion Crisis. Through his satirical poem, Dryden had hoped the people of England and Parliament would see the Popish Plot and Exclusion Crisis for what they really were—plots devised to keep James II, a Roman Catholic, out of royal succession.

                     Satire is a form of literature, the proclaimed purpose of which is the reform of human weaknesses or vices through laughter or disgust. Satire is different from scolding and sheer abuse, though it is prompted by indignation.

                      Its aim is generally constructive, and need not arise from cynicism or misanthropy. The satirist applies the test of certain ethical, intellectual and social standards to men and women, and determines their degree of criminality or culpability.

                        Satire naturally has a wide range; it can involve an attack on the vices of an age, or the defects of an individual or the follies common to the very species of mankind.

                      Absalom and Achitophel is a landmark political satire by John Dryden. Dryden marks his satire with a concentrated and convincing poetic style. His satiric verse is majestic, what Pope calls: “The long majestic march and energy divine”. 

                       Critics have unanimously remarked on Dryden’s capacity to transform the trivial into the poetical; personal envy into the fury of imaginative creation. The obscure and the complicated is made clear and simple. 

                            All this transforming power is to be seen at the very beginning of Absalom and Achitophel. The state of ‘Israel’ is easy to understand and yet Dryden shows himself a master both of the Horatian and the Juvenalian styles of Satire. He is urbance witty devastating and vigorous, but very seldom petty.

Ab & AC : Basically a Political Satire:

                                                                                                 Dryden called Absalom and Achitophel ‘a poem’ and not a satire, implying thereby that it had elements other than purely satirical. One cannot, for instance, ignore the obvious epic or heroic touches in it.

                           All the same, the poem originated in the political situation of England at the time and one cannot fail to note that several political personalities are satirised in it.

                         Political Satire Cast in Biblical Mould:

                                                                                                 Dryden chose the well known Biblical story of Absalom revolting against his father David, at the wicked instigation of Achitophel, in order to satirise the contemporary political situation.

                        The choice of a Biblical allegory is not original on dryden’s part, but his general treatment of the subject is beyond comparison, as Courthope points out. But all the while Dryden takes care to see that the political satire in not lost in the confusion of a too intricate Biblical parallelism. 

                          The advantage of setting the story in pre-Christian times is obvious as it gave Dryden had at once to praise the King and satirise the King’s opponents. To discredit the opponents he had to emphasise on Monmouth’s illegitimacy; but at the same time he had to see that Charles (who was Monmouth’s father) was not adversely affected by his criticism.

                       He could not openly condone Charles’ loose morals; at the same time, he could not openly criticise it either. With a masterly touch he sets the poem :

 

                                     “In pious times are priestcraft did begin

                                     Before polygamy was made a sin;

                                     When man on maultiplied his kind,

                                     Ere one to one was cursedly confined….”

 

                       The ironical undertone cannot be missed; Dryden is obviously laughing up his sleeve at Charles himself, who, as a witty patron, could not have missed it, nor failed to enjoy it.

 Conclusion:

                      Dryden is correctly regarded as the most vigorous and polished of English satirists combining refinement with fervour. Dryden is unequalled at debating in rhyme and Absalom and Achitophel displays his power of arguing in verse. It may be said that Absalom and Achitophel has no rival in the field of political satire.

                       Apart from the contemporary interest of the poem and its historical value, it appeal to the modern reader lies in its observations on English character and on the weaknesses of man in general. 

                      His generalisations on human nature have a perennial interest. Dryden triumphed over the peculiar difficulties of his chosen theme. He had to give, not abuse or politics,but the poetry of abuse and politics. 

                         He had to criticise a son whom the father still liked; he had to make Shaftesbury denounce the King but he had to see to it that the King’s susceptibilities were not wounded. He had to praise without sounding servile and he had to criticise artistically.

                          Dryden achieves all this cleverly and skilfully. Achitophel’s denunciation of the king assumes the shades of a eulogy in Charles’ eyes. Absalom is a misguided instrument in Achitophel’s hands. The poem is certainly a political satire, but it is a blend of dignity with incisive and effective satire.

*WORDS - 2,125

*CHARACTER - 12,977

*PARAGRAPH - 43