“Bolingbroke Karşısında Richard Güçsüz Kalıyor”: II. Richard Oyununda Kusursuz Hükümdar Düşüncesi

Yıl 2018, , 844 - 856, 11.07.2018

Emine Seda Çağlayan Mazanoğlu

https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.409427

Öz

Shakespeare, tarihi oyunlarında sınıf farkı gözetmeksizin
ulusu birleştirmeyi başaran mükemmel kralı sunar ve hükümdarın yasalara karşı
gelmesi ve ortak rızayı dikkate almaması durumunda adaleti sağlayamadığını ve
despot bir yönetim sürdürdüğünü gösterir. Bu sebeple, bu makalenin amacı,
Shakespeare’in, II. Richard oyununda meşru bir hükümdar olan
Kral 2. Richard’ı ve tahtı ele geçirerek Kral 4. Henry olan Bolingbroke’u
karşılaştırarak mükemmel kral ile zorba hükümdar arasındaki farklılıkları ortaya
koyduğunu göstermektir. 2. Richard, yasaları ve gelenekleri yok sayan; usulsüz
mali uygulamalarla halka zulmeden; yetersiz danışmanlara yetki veren ve soylu
sınıfla birlikte halkın da sevgisini ve desteğini kaybeden adaletsiz bir kral
olarak anlatılırken; Bolingbroke, kanunlara ve adetlere saygı gösteren; haksızlıklarla
savaşan ve hem soyluların hem orta sınıfın takdirini kazanan etkili bir
yönetici olarak tasvir edilir. Shakespeare, yasalara saygılı olmanın ve insanların
haklarını korumanın ideal hükümdarın özellikleri olduğunu gösterirken, yasaları
tanımamanın ve halkın malına el koymanın güçsüz ve zorba bir yöneticinin
özellikleri olduğunu ortaya koyar. Buna bağlı olarak, Shakespeare’in, ortaçağ
İngiliz tarihini ve politikasını, Elizabeth döneminde kusursuz hükümdar
düşüncesine atıfta bulunmak için kullandığı ortaya konacaktır. Shakespeare,
Kraliçe 1. Elizabeth’in gözdelerine yetki vermesine ve halkı kötü mali
uygulamalarla ezerek gücünü kötüye kullanmasına gönderme yapar. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

William Shakespeare, kusursuz hükümdar, güç, Elizabeth dönemi

“[Bolingbroke] weighs [Richard] down” : The Idea of Perfect Monarch in Richard II

Öz

In his history plays Shakespeare presents the idea of
perfect monarch who achieves to unite the nation regardless of class
distinctions, and demonstrates that if a sovereign violates the laws and
disregards common consent, s/he fails to exercise justice, and consequently establishes
despotic rule. Hence, the aim of this article is to argue that in Richard II Shakespeare puts forth the
distinction between a perfect monarch and a tyrant through the comparison of
Richard II, the legitimate king, and Bolingbroke, who ascends the throne as
King Henry IV after he usurps the throne. Richard is presented as an unjust
king who violates the laws and customs; suppresses his people through illegal
monetary practices; empowers insufficient counsellors, and loses the love and
support of the noblemen and the common men; whereas, Bolingbroke is portrayed
as an effective sovereign as he respects the laws and customs; fights injustice
and gains the admiration of the nobility and the commoners. Therefore, it will
be argued that as Shakespeare presents, being law-abiding and protecting the
rights of the people are the qualities of an ideal ruler while flouting the
laws and dispossessing the people are the features of an ineffective and a despotic
monarch. Accordingly, it will also be demonstrated that through the medieval
English history and politics Shakespeare refers to the idea of perfect monarch
in the Elizabethan era. He refers to
Elizabeth I’s abuse of her sovereign authority to entrust her favourites with
authority and to suppress her people by corrupt financial practices.

Anahtar Kelimeler

William Shakespeare, perfect monarch, power, the Elizabethan era

Kaynakça

• Referans1 Barron, C. M. (2008). Richard II and London. In A. Goodman and J. L. Gillwapie (Eds.), Richard II: The art of kingship, 129-155: Oxford: Oxford UP.
• Referans2 Becker, G. J. (1977). Shakespeare’s history plays. New York: Frederick Ungar.
• Referans3 Bevan, B. (1994). Henry IV. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• Referans4 Bevan, B. (1996). King Richard II. London: Rubicon Press.
• Referans5 Campbell, L. B. (1964). Shakespeare’s histories: mirrors of Elizabethan policy. London: Methuen.
• Referans6 Champion, L. S. (1990). The noise of threatening drum: dramatic strategy and ideology in Shakespeare and the English chronicle plays. Newark: Delaware UP.
• Referans7 Cubeta, P. M. (1971). Twentieth century interpretations of Richard II. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
• Referans8 Coffman, B. J. (1979). Acting that argument: a character study of Henry Bolingbroke in Shakespeare’s Richard II and Henry IV. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Indiana University, Bloomington. Retrieved 2 January 2018 from: https://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/results/182898CCAE51412EPQ/1?accountid=11248.
• Referans9 Cohen, D. (2002). History and the nation in Richard II and Henry IV. Studies in English Literature,1500-1900, 42 (2), 293-315. Retrieved 2 January 2018 from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1556116.
• Referans10 Devlin, D. (1989). This earth, this realm, this England. In L. Cookson and B. Loughrey (Eds.), Critical essays on Richard II: William Shakespeare, 65-79: Harlow: Longman.
• Referans11 Doran, S. (2000). Elizabeth I and foreign policy, 1558-1603. London: Routledge.
• Referans12 Dowden, E. (1879). Shakspere. London: Macmillan.
• Referans13 Dowden, E. (1998). The immaturity of Richard II and the realism of Bolingbroke. In C. R. Forker (Ed.), Shakespeare the critical tradition: Richard II, 247-255: London: The Athlone Press.
• Referans14 Elliott, J. R. (1968). History and tragedy in Richard II. Studies in English Literature,1500-1900, 8 (2), 253-271. Retrieved 2 January 2018 from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/449658.
• Referans15 Frye, R. M. (1925). Shakespeare’s life and times: a pictorial record. London: Faber and Faber.
• Referans16 Given-Wilson, C. (2008). Richard II and the higher nobility. In A. Goodman and J. L. Gillwapie (Eds.), Richard II: The art of kingship, 107-129: Oxford: Oxford UP.
• Referans17 Goodman, A. (2008). Richard II’s councils. In A. Goodman and J. L. Gillwapie (Eds.), Richard II: The art of kingship, 59-83: Oxford: Oxford UP.
• Referans18 Hodgdon, B. (1991). The end crowns all: closure and contradiction in Shakespeare’s history. Princeton: Princeton UP.
• Referans19 Holderness, G. (2000). Shakespeare: the histories. Houndmills: Macmillan.
• Referans20 Jones, R. C. (1991). These valiant dead. Iowa City: Iowa UP.
• Referans21 Kantorowicz, E. H. (1973). From the king’s two bodies. In N. Brooke (Ed.), Shakespeare: Richard II: a casebook, 169-186: London: Macmillan.
• Referans22 Levin, C. (2002). The reign of Elizabeth I. Houndmills: Palgrave.
• Referans23 Moseley, C. (1989). ‘This blessed plot’: the garden scene in Richard II. In L. Cookson and B. Loughrey (Eds.), Critical essays on Richard II: William Shakespeare, 94-102: Harlow: Longman.
• Referans24 Myers, A.R. (1991). England in late middle ages. London: Penguin Books.
• Referans25 Ormrod, W.M. (2008). Finance and trade under Richard II. In A. Goodman and J. L. Gillwapie (Eds.), Richard II: The art of kingship, 155-187: Oxford: Oxford UP.
• Referans 26 Ornstein, R. (1972). A kingdom for a stage: the achievement of Shakespeare’s history plays. Cambridge: Harvard UP.
• Referans 27 Parsons, K. & Mason, P. (1995). (Eds.), Shakespeare in performance. London: Salamander.
• Referans28 Pearlman, E. (1992). William Shakespeare: the history plays. New York: Twayne Publishers.
• Referans29 Phillips, J. (2012). The practicalities of the absolute: justice and kingship in Shakespeare’s Richard II. ELH, 79 (1), 161-177. Retrieved 2 January 2018 from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41337583.
• Referans30 Pollard, A.J. (2000). Late medieval England 1399-1509. Essex: Longman.
• Referans31 Potter, N. (1989). ‘This sceptred isle’: the idea of England in Richard II. In L. Cookson and B. Loughrey (Eds.), Critical Essays on Richard II: William Shakespeare, 21-30: Harlow: Longman.
• Referans32 Rowse, A. L. (1977). Shakespeare the Elizabethan. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
• Referans33 Scott, W. (2002). Landholding, leasing, and inheritance in Richard II. Studies in English Literature, 42 (2), 275-292. 02.01.2018. Retrieved 2 January 2018 from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1556115.
• Referans34 Shakespeare, W. (1956). King Richard II. P. Ure (Ed.). London&New York: Routledge.
• Referans35 Snider, D. J. (1998). Richard II and the right of revolution. In C. R. Forker (Ed.), Shakespeare the critical tradition: Richard II, 261-276: London: The Athlone Press.
• Referans36 Spiekerman, T. (2001). Shakespeare’s political realism: the English history plays. New York: New York State UP.