Absalom and Achitophel as a Political Satire

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 Drydens 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. Published in November
1681, the theme was suggested by the king to Dryden. At this time, the question
of succession to King Charles had assumed great importance. The Earl of
Shaftesbury had been thrown into prison to face a charge of high treason. There
were two contenders for the succession. Firstly, Charles brother James, Duke of
York, a known Roman Catholic; the second contender was Charles illegitimate
son, the Protestant Duke of Monmouth. The Whigs supported Monmouth while
the Tories supported the cause of James in order to ensure stability in the
country. There was great public unrest on account of the uncertainty of
succession. King Charles II saw to it that the Exclusion bill brought before
Parliament, to exclude the succession of his brother James, could not be pushed
through. The earl of Shaftesbury, a highly ambitious man, sought to capitalise on
this unrest. He also urged Monmouth to rebel against his father. The King, though
fond of his illegitimate son, did not support his succession because that would
have been against law. The Earl of Shaftesbury was arrested on a charge of high
treason and lost popular support.
Drydens Aim in Absalom and Achitophel:
The aim of Dryden was to support the King and to expose his
enemies. Of course, Charles had his own weaknesses; he was extremely fond of

women. But Dryden puts a charitable mantel over his sexual sins. He is mild in
dealing with his real vices. The king himself did not think unfavourably of his love
affairs. Sexual licence was the order of the age and as such, it did not deserve
condemnation. Dryden has nothing but praise for the kings moderation in
political matters and his leniency towards rebels. Drydens lash falls on the
Kings enemies particularly the Earl of Shaftesbury. He was reckless politician
without any principles who, having tried in vain to seduce Charles to arbitrary
government had turned round and now drives down the current. Dryden dreads
the fickleness of the mob and he is not sure to what extremes a crowd can go.
However, the kings strictness and instinct for the rule of law won for him popular
support and he was able to determine the succession according to his desire.
Drydens reference to the godlike David shows his flattery of the King and his
belief in the Theory of the Divine Right of Kings.
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 drydens 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 Kings
opponents. To discredit the opponents he had to emphasise on Monmouths
illegitimacy; but at the same time he had to see that Charles (who was
Monmouths 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 Kings susceptibilities were not
wounded. He had to praise without sounding servile and he had to criticise
artistically. Dryden achieves all this cleverly and skilfully. Achitophels
denunciation of the king assumes the shades of a eulogy in Charles eyes.
Absalom is a misguided instrument in Achitophels hands. The poem is certainly
a political satire, but it is a blend of dignity with incisive and effective satire.