Absalom and Achitophel: Dryden’s Political Satire in Verse
This blog is written as part of an academic task assigned by Dr. Dilip Barad. He provided us with a worksheet on John Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel, and the task is to study the poem’s historical background, political significance, allegorical framework, and literary features.
Introduction
John Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel (1681) is often celebrated as the finest political satire of the Restoration age, and it holds a special place in the history of English literature. Written in the polished form of heroic couplets, the poem reflects Dryden’s mastery as a poet and his role as the official spokesman of the monarchy. To understand its importance, we must remember the turbulent political climate of late seventeenth-century England. The country was unsettled by the Popish Plot of 1678, a fabricated conspiracy that stirred anti-Catholic fears, and soon after by the Exclusion Crisis (1679–1681), when Parliament sought to prevent King Charles II’s brother, James (a Catholic), from inheriting the throne. Amid this atmosphere of uncertainty and rebellion, Dryden took up his pen to defend the monarchy and the principle of hereditary succession. What makes the poem remarkable is Dryden’s use of biblical allegory: the story of King David and his rebellious son Absalom, guided by the deceitful Achitophel, becomes a mirror for the political drama of his own time. In this allegory, Charles II appears as King David, the Duke of Monmouth as Absalom, and the Earl of Shaftesbury as Achitophel. Through this framework, Dryden is able to critique political opportunism, warn against the dangers of ambition, and uphold the divine right of kings. More than a historical document, Absalom and Achitophel is a work of literature that blends sharp wit, moral seriousness, and poetic brilliance. It continues to be studied not only for its political relevance but also for the way it demonstrates the power of literature to engage with urgent public debates and to transform history into enduring art.
Author and Publication of Absalom and Achitophel
John Dryden (1631–1700) is remembered as one of the most significant and versatile writers of the seventeenth century, often hailed as the dominant literary figure of the Restoration age. He wrote across multiple genres poetry, drama, translation, and literary criticism and his works reflect the intellectual, political, and cultural concerns of his time. Appointed as the first official Poet Laureate of England in 1668, Dryden’s position gave him not only prestige but also the responsibility of being the poetic voice of the monarchy. He is frequently called the “father of English satire” because of the way he perfected satire in verse, using it as a sharp instrument to critique political opponents and expose social follies. His prose works, such as his critical essays, laid the foundation for modern English literary criticism, while his dramatic works made important contributions to Restoration theatre. What sets Dryden apart is his ability to merge art with politics, he was a poet deeply engaged with the events of his day, and his writings served both as literature and as commentary on contemporary society. In Absalom and Achitophel, this quality is most visible: Dryden blends his poetic skill with his political allegiance to defend the monarchy during a turbulent time. Thus, Dryden was not simply a poet of imagination, but also a public intellectual whose works continue to be studied for their literary excellence, political insight, and historical importance.
Absalom and Achitophel is a celebrated satirical poem, widely regarded as one of the greatest examples of political satire in English literature. It was first published in 1681, at a time when England was experiencing deep political and religious divisions. The poem is written in heroic couplets pairs of rhyming lines in iambic pentameter, a form that was especially popular during the Restoration period for its clarity, rhythm, and sharpness of expression. This form allowed Dryden to achieve both elegance and precision, making his satire more memorable and impactful. As a verse satire, the poem combines wit, irony, and biblical allegory to expose the flaws of political figures and to criticize the dangers of ambition and rebellion. Unlike a pamphlet or direct political speech, satire in poetic form enabled Dryden to disguise his attacks within art, giving his defense of monarchy both authority and lasting literary value. This is why Absalom and Achitophel is not only remembered as a historical response to the Exclusion Crisis but also admired as a masterpiece that demonstrates the power of poetry to engage with politics.
The Second Part of Absalom and Achitophel (1682)
After the remarkable success of the first part of Absalom and Achitophel, a second part was published in 1682. Unlike the original, this continuation was not written entirely by John Dryden but was largely the work of Nahum Tate, a poet and playwright of the Restoration period who later became Poet Laureate of England. Tate attempted to extend the biblical allegory and political satire established in the first part, continuing the story of rebellion and political intrigue in order to further support the cause of the monarchy. However, his verses were often considered less refined and less powerful than Dryden’s. While Dryden’s poetry sparkled with wit, balance, and intellectual sharpness, Tate’s contributions sometimes lacked the same polish. Still, the second part remained important in its time because it reinforced the political arguments made in the first part and widened the scope of Dryden’s satire by introducing new characters and targets.
Although Nahum Tate was the main contributor, Dryden himself added about 200 lines to the second part, and these passages are widely regarded as the strongest sections of the continuation. In these lines, Dryden shifted his focus from political figures to his literary rivals, including Thomas Shadwell, Elkanah Settle, and others, whom he mocked mercilessly for their lack of talent, poor judgment, and opportunism. Dryden’s satirical attacks in these additions are sharp, witty, and memorable, cementing his reputation as the greatest satirist of the age. These lines not only strengthened the second part but also demonstrated Dryden’s determination to use poetry as a weapon not just in politics but also in literary debates. While the second part of Absalom and Achitophel is generally remembered as a collaborative work with Tate, its true brilliance lies in the portions where Dryden’s voice is unmistakably present. It stands as evidence of how even in a shared project, Dryden’s mastery of satire and language overshadowed all others, giving the second part a lasting place in the tradition of Restoration literature.
Summary of Absalom and Achitophel
Absalom and Achitophel is a political and allegorical poem by John Dryden that dramatizes the rebellion of Absalom against King David, using it as a mirror for the political tensions of Restoration England. The poem opens by describing the popularity and charm of Absalom, who, despite being illegitimate, is adored by the people. He is flattered and manipulated by Achitophel, a cunning and ambitious counselor, into believing he can claim the throne from his father. Achitophel represents the Earl of Shaftesbury, the political leader pushing the Exclusion Crisis, while Absalom symbolizes Monmouth, the illegitimate but Protestant son of Charles II.
The poem explores the plotting, persuasion, and seduction of rebellion. Absalom’s vanity and ambition make him vulnerable, and Achitophel’s advice encourages him to act against divine and lawful authority. Other characters, like Zimri, Shimei, and Corah, represent additional political figures, each reflecting human weaknesses, chaos, and deceit. Dryden contrasts these rebellious figures with David (King Charles II), the wise and patient ruler, who maintains loyalty to divine order and lawful monarchy. The narrative progresses to show the consequences of ambition and disloyalty: Absalom’s revolt ultimately fails, Achitophel recognizes the futility of his scheming, and chaos ensues among the rebels.
Through this allegorical retelling, Dryden conveys the dangers of ambition, the importance of loyalty to lawful authority, and the moral order sanctioned by God. The poem blends history, politics, and biblical allegory into a cohesive narrative, using satire to expose the vices of politicians while reinforcing the legitimacy of monarchy. It is celebrated not only for its political insight but also for its literary brilliance in heroic couplets and sophisticated use of satire.
Historical and Political Context:
The Exclusion Crisis (1679–1681)
The Exclusion Crisis was one of the most important political events of seventeenth-century England, and it provides the immediate historical background to John Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel. The crisis arose because King Charles II had no legitimate children with his wife, Catherine of Braganza, and so the throne was expected to pass to his younger brother, James, Duke of York. The difficulty was that James had converted to Roman Catholicism, which made him deeply unpopular in a nation that identified itself strongly with Protestantism after the Reformation and the English Civil War. Many Englishmen feared that if James became king, he would attempt to restore Catholic power, undermine the Protestant Church of England, and possibly ally with Catholic powers in Europe. In this atmosphere of suspicion, the Whig Party, led by the Earl of Shaftesbury, began campaigning to prevent James from succeeding to the throne. They argued that Parliament had the right to exclude him, even if he was the next in line by blood. Their opponents, the Tories, supported the principle of hereditary monarchy and defended James’s right to succeed, warning that exclusion would set a dangerous precedent and destabilize the monarchy itself.
The crisis lasted from 1679 to 1681 and dominated political life in England. Parliament debated several Exclusion Bills, and the country was flooded with pamphlets, petitions, and propaganda on both sides. The Whigs presented themselves as defenders of Protestant liberty, while the Tories insisted that the stability of the monarchy depended on strict hereditary succession. During this period, England came close to political breakdown, as tensions between the crown and Parliament reached a peak. For Charles II, the situation was deeply personal: while he was loyal to his brother James, he also faced immense pressure from a public that feared Catholic rule. It was in the middle of this heated atmosphere that Dryden wrote Absalom and Achitophel in 1681, turning politics into poetry. Through his biblical allegory, he defended Charles II’s right to maintain the succession and portrayed the attempt to exclude James as a dangerous act of rebellion against divine order. By casting Shaftesbury as the scheming Achitophel and Monmouth as the misguided Absalom, Dryden warned against the destructive consequences of political ambition. Thus, the poem becomes not only a literary text but also a sharp political intervention, written to influence opinion during one of the most volatile crises of the Restoration period.
The Popish Plot (1678)
Before the Exclusion Crisis erupted, England had already been shaken by a wave of fear and paranoia known as the Popish Plot of 1678. This so-called “plot” was fabricated by Titus Oates, a clergyman who falsely claimed that there was a grand Catholic conspiracy to assassinate King Charles II and replace him with his Catholic brother, James, Duke of York. Although entirely fictional, Oates’s story captured the imagination of the public, feeding on existing anti-Catholic sentiment in England. The result was widespread panic, leading to mass hysteria, wrongful executions of supposed conspirators, and deep distrust of anyone suspected of Catholic sympathies. The Popish Plot inflamed tensions between Protestants and Catholics, and it laid the groundwork for the later Exclusion Crisis, since it seemed to confirm people’s worst fears about a Catholic monarch. Even though the plot was eventually exposed as a hoax, its effects lingered in English politics and culture for years, intensifying suspicion and shaping debates about loyalty, succession, and national security.
John Dryden makes clear reference to this atmosphere of paranoia in Absalom and Achitophel, using it to highlight the threat of revolution and the dangers of false accusations. In the poem, the fabricated Catholic conspiracy becomes part of the backdrop against which Dryden defends the monarchy. He portrays how political agitators, like Shaftesbury (Achitophel), manipulated public fears to turn people against their lawful king. Just as Titus Oates had exploited religious prejudice to spread lies about Catholic plots, so too did the Whigs exploit the fear of Catholic succession to push their agenda of excluding James. For Dryden, both the Popish Plot and the Exclusion movement represented the same danger: the misuse of fear and propaganda to destabilize the kingdom and encourage rebellion. By invoking the memory of the Popish Plot, Dryden reminds his readers how easily the public can be misled, and he warns that continuing down this path could lead England into chaos, civil war, or even the overthrow of monarchy itself. In this way, the poem is deeply tied to the real anxieties of 1678–1681, showing how literature became a weapon in the battle over England’s future.
The Monmouth Rebellion (1685)
Although Absalom and Achitophel was first published in 1681, its themes and characters became even more relevant with the events that followed, especially the Monmouth Rebellion of 1685. The rebellion was led by James Scott, Duke of Monmouth, the illegitimate son of King Charles II. Dryden had already represented Monmouth allegorically in his poem as “Absalom,” the biblical son of David who rebels against his father. After the death of Charles II in 1685, Monmouth, encouraged by those who had supported the Exclusion Crisis, attempted to claim the throne for himself, presenting himself as a Protestant alternative to his Catholic uncle, James II. His rebellion, however, was poorly organized and quickly suppressed. Monmouth was captured and executed, his death marking the failure of this Protestant uprising. Historically, the rebellion exposed just how unstable England remained in the aftermath of the Exclusion debates and how easily political factions could use religion and legitimacy to challenge royal authority.
Dryden’s poem can be read as a prophetic warning of these very events. By portraying Monmouth as Absalom, a beloved but misguided son led astray by the cunning Achitophel (Earl of Shaftesbury) Dryden had already suggested that Monmouth’s ambition could only lead to disaster. The rebellion of 1685 confirmed Dryden’s view: that tampering with the line of succession and stirring rebellion against the monarchy would end in bloodshed and failure. In this sense, the poem gains additional historical significance, as readers after 1685 could see how Dryden’s biblical allegory reflected not only the political crisis of 1681 but also foreshadowed the real rebellion of Monmouth. Thus, the Monmouth Rebellion forms part of the broader political context in which the poem should be understood, highlighting the deep anxieties of the Restoration period about succession, religion, and the legitimacy of kingship.
Dryden’s Political Motivation
John Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel was not written merely as a literary exercise; it was deeply rooted in the political tensions of the Exclusion Crisis. At the heart of the conflict was the attempt by the Whigs to exclude James, Duke of York (the future James II), from the line of succession because of his Catholic faith. Dryden, who served as the Poet Laureate and royal propagandist, saw it as his duty to defend the king’s authority and the principle of hereditary monarchy. By aligning himself with King Charles II and the Tories, Dryden sought to use his poetry as a weapon against those who threatened stability by challenging the rightful heir. His political motivation was clear: to discredit the Exclusionist leaders, particularly the Earl of Shaftesbury, and to present the defense of the Duke of York’s succession as both morally right and divinely sanctioned.
Dryden’s choice of biblical allegory was itself a politically motivated strategy. By portraying Charles II as King David, James as the loyal but disputed heir, and Shaftesbury as Achitophel, the treacherous counselor, Dryden cast the political struggle in terms of divine order and rebellion against God’s chosen ruler. This framing suggested that opposing the Duke of York was not just a political act but a sinful revolt against divine will. Dryden’s motivation, therefore, was not only to strengthen the king’s position during a moment of crisis but also to influence public opinion by shaping how people understood the conflict. His satire ensured that those who pushed for exclusion were remembered as ambitious conspirators, while the monarchy appeared as the guarantor of order and stability. In this way, the poem becomes both a brilliant work of literature and a calculated piece of political propaganda, designed to preserve royal succession and prevent revolution.
Scripture Reimagined: The Soul of Dryden’s Satire
Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel takes its deepest inspiration from one of the most powerful stories of the Old Testament, found in 2 Samuel chapters 13–19. The tale is both dramatic and tragic: King David, beloved ruler and chosen of God, faces betrayal not from a foreign enemy but from within his own household. His son Absalom youthful, charming, and adored by the people cannot resist the temptation of ambition. Drawn into pride and vanity, Absalom listens to the whispers of Achitophel, David’s trusted advisor turned traitor. Achitophel urges him to overthrow his own father. What begins as a daring rebellion ends in sorrow: Absalom falls in battle, caught in the branches of a tree and struck down despite David’s desperate command to spare his life, while Achitophel, consumed by guilt and despair, takes his own life. This biblical story is not merely about politics; it is about the eternal dangers of betrayal, ambition, and defiance against divine will.
Dryden, with his sharp political insight, recognized how perfectly this story mirrored the struggles of Restoration England. In his allegory, King David becomes Charles II, the lawful monarch; Absalom becomes the Duke of Monmouth, the illegitimate yet popular son whose ambition tempted him toward power; and Achitophel becomes the Earl of Shaftesbury, the cunning politician who schemed against the throne. By grounding his satire in this sacred narrative, Dryden gave his poem a double authority: literary and moral. Readers could not dismiss the poem as mere political propaganda; instead, it appeared as part of a larger, divine struggle between rightful kingship and rebellious vanity. In this way, Dryden transformed the Exclusion Crisis into something timeless: a rebellion not just against a king, but against the order of God Himself.
Allegory Unveiled: Mapping the Bible onto Restoration Politics
One of the most remarkable qualities of John Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel is its allegorical brilliance, where the biblical story of Absalom’s rebellion becomes a sharp commentary on Restoration politics. Dryden cleverly assigns biblical characters to real political figures, creating a poetic “map” of his age. This technique not only provided him with a shield of scriptural authority but also allowed him to transform his poem into a timeless satire that exposed the dangers of ambition, betrayal, and political manipulation. Each parallel between scripture and contemporary figures deepens the poem’s political impact, showing how divine order was being challenged by human pride and self-interest.
King David → King Charles II
In the poem, King David symbolizes King Charles II, the rightful monarch whose reign was tested by factionalism and rebellion. Just as David is God’s chosen king, Charles is portrayed as the divinely appointed ruler of England, under threat from both internal discontent and external scheming. Dryden emphasizes Charles’s wisdom, patience, and commitment to stability, painting him as the protector of divine order against rebellious forces.
Absalom → James Scott, Duke of Monmouth
Absalom, David’s handsome and beloved son, is paralleled with James Scott, Duke of Monmouth, the illegitimate son of Charles II. Like Absalom, Monmouth was popular, charismatic, and admired by the people for his charm and military leadership. Yet, both figures become tragic because their popularity makes them vulnerable to manipulation. Dryden highlights how Monmouth, like Absalom, is torn between loyalty to his father and the temptation of seizing power, ultimately becoming a symbol of misguided ambition.
Achitophel → Anthony Ashley Cooper, Earl of Shaftesbury
Achitophel is one of Dryden’s most biting portraits, representing Anthony Ashley Cooper, the Earl of Shaftesbury. Known for his political cunning and as the mastermind behind the Exclusion Crisis, Shaftesbury is portrayed as the false counselor who tempts Monmouth into rebellion. Just as Achitophel betrays David in scripture, Shaftesbury betrays Charles by attempting to block the rightful succession of James, Duke of York. Dryden’s depiction of him is one of the sharpest examples of Restoration satire, exposing the dangers of manipulative leadership.
Zimri → George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham
Zimri, a figure marked by instability and chaos, represents George Villiers, the Duke of Buckingham. Once a close ally of Charles II, Buckingham later turned against him. Dryden satirizes him as reckless, inconsistent, and unreliable—a man of many talents but little direction, embodying the destructive consequences of political fickleness.
Shimei → Slingsby Bethel
Shimei in the Bible cursed King David during his time of weakness, and in Dryden’s poem, he is matched with Slingsby Bethel, a radical sheriff of London. Bethel was a strong supporter of the Whig cause and a fierce critic of royal power, making him a perfect parallel to Shimei’s disloyalty and rebellious spirit.
Corah → Titus Oates
Corah, who in the Bible led a rebellion against Moses, is represented by Titus Oates, the infamous figure who fabricated the Popish Plot. Oates’s lies about a Catholic conspiracy to kill Charles II created mass panic in England, much like Corah’s rebellion threatened God’s chosen order. Dryden mocks Oates as a dangerous deceiver who thrives on fear and falsehood.
Other Figures
Dryden’s allegory extends beyond the central players. For example, Amiel represents Edward Seymour, Speaker of the House of Commons, while Barzillai is George Savile, the Marquess of Halifax, a moderate statesman who supported Charles II and acted as a voice of reason. Each of these secondary figures helps Dryden build a complete portrait of the political landscape, showing both the supporters of order and the agents of chaos.
Through these carefully crafted parallels, Absalom and Achitophel becomes more than just a poem; it becomes a literary battlefield, where scripture and satire are merged to defend monarchy against rebellion. Dryden’s use of allegory gave his work timeless power, ensuring that the personal ambitions and political manipulations of his age were immortalized through biblical echoes.
Absalom as Monmouth: The Protestant Hope
In Absalom and Achitophel, John Dryden transforms the biblical figure of Absalom into an allegorical portrait of James Scott, Duke of Monmouth. Just as Absalom was the handsome and beloved son of King David, Monmouth was the illegitimate yet cherished son of King Charles II. Monmouth enjoyed immense popularity in Restoration England, especially because he was Protestant at a time when fears of Catholic succession were running high. This made him the natural “hope” of those who opposed the Duke of York, Charles II’s brother, who had converted to Catholicism and stood next in line for the throne. Monmouth’s charm, good looks, military reputation, and Protestant faith combined to make him a rallying figure for those who wanted to exclude the Catholic heir.
Dryden’s allegory is powerful because it highlights both the attractiveness and the danger of Monmouth’s position. Like Absalom, Monmouth was not the legitimate heir, but his popularity tempted him to imagine kingship as possible. In the poem, Achitophel (representing Shaftesbury) flatters and manipulates Absalom into pursuing rebellion, just as Shaftesbury in real life encouraged Monmouth to lead the Exclusionist cause. By casting Monmouth as Absalom, Dryden warns readers that charm and popularity are not enough to justify rebellion against the lawful king. The comparison also stresses the tragic futility of such ambition: just as Absalom’s revolt ended in disaster and death, Monmouth’s later rebellion (1685) also failed, leading to his capture and execution. Through this allegory, Dryden reveals the peril of allowing political ambition, popular enthusiasm, and religious fear to override the divine order of succession.
Achitophel as Shaftesbury: The Mastermind of Rebellion
In Absalom and Achitophel, Dryden casts Anthony Ashley Cooper, the Earl of Shaftesbury, in the role of Achitophel, King David’s treacherous counselor from the Bible. Just as Achitophel was once a trusted advisor of David who turned against his king to support Absalom’s rebellion, Shaftesbury was once loyal to Charles II but became his fiercest opponent during the Exclusion Crisis. Shaftesbury was a brilliant politician, known for his sharp wit, persuasive oratory, and strong anti-Catholic stance. At a time when the nation feared the prospect of a Catholic monarch in the form of James, Duke of York, Shaftesbury positioned himself as the leader of the Exclusionists, rallying Parliament and the public against the king’s brother.
Dryden’s portrayal of Shaftesbury as Achitophel is biting and ironic. He depicts him as cunning, ambitious, and dangerously persuasive someone who could exploit the people’s fears to manipulate Monmouth (Absalom) into challenging the king. Just as Achitophel used his wisdom and eloquence to mislead Absalom, Shaftesbury is shown as the mastermind who planted the seeds of rebellion, encouraging Monmouth to see himself as the Protestant savior of the realm. At the same time, Dryden underscores the futility of such schemes by recalling the biblical fate of Achitophel, who, realizing that his rebellion was doomed, took his own life. This foreshadowed Shaftesbury’s eventual downfall: after being imprisoned for treason and losing his influence, he fled into exile and died in obscurity.
Through this allegory, Dryden turns Shaftesbury into the villain of his poem, an embodiment of political ambition, religious manipulation, and betrayal of rightful authority. By exposing the dangers of a clever but disloyal counselor, Dryden warns against trusting leaders who prioritize their personal ambition over the stability of the kingdom.
King David as Charles II: The Rightful but Tested Monarch
In Absalom and Achitophel, Dryden draws a powerful parallel between King David of the Old Testament and King Charles II of England. Just as David was God’s chosen king, blessed with wisdom, authority, and legitimacy, Charles II is portrayed as the rightful ruler whose throne is threatened not by foreign invaders but by division within his own household and kingdom. David, despite his personal weaknesses, remained the anointed king whose authority was sacred, and Dryden uses this biblical foundation to emphasize that Charles’s kingship was equally divinely sanctioned and beyond human challenge.
Dryden’s portrayal of Charles II through the figure of David is sympathetic and dignified. Charles is shown as a patient, merciful, and tolerant king, reluctant to punish his rebellious subjects too harshly, mirroring the biblical David’s deep affection for his son Absalom, even when betrayed. In history, Charles faced enormous political and religious turmoil: the Popish Plot, the Exclusion Crisis, and the growing fear of Catholic succession. Like David, Charles had to navigate a kingdom divided by ambition, religious prejudice, and rebellion. Yet Dryden highlights his restraint and steadiness, presenting him as a monarch who sought peace and stability above all, in contrast to the fiery passions of his opponents.
By aligning Charles with David, Dryden elevates the political struggle into a sacred drama: rebellion against Charles was not simply treason against a king, but disobedience against God’s chosen order. This gave the poem both moral and political force, strengthening the royalist argument during the Exclusion Crisis. Through this allegory, Charles II is not just a political figure but a biblical David, a rightful king whose legitimacy stands firm against betrayal, false counsel, and ambitious rivals.
Monmouth’s Legitimacy: A Prince Without a Crown
One of the most pressing political issues underlying Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel was the question of the legitimacy of James Scott, Duke of Monmouth, the eldest of Charles II’s many illegitimate children. Monmouth was the son of Charles and his mistress Lucy Walter, a Welshwoman of modest background. From early on, rumors circulated that Charles and Lucy had secretly married, which, if true, would make Monmouth legitimate and therefore eligible for succession. Although no convincing evidence of such a marriage was ever produced, the story was repeatedly spread and used as political ammunition by those who wished to see Monmouth replace James, Duke of York, as heir to the throne.
The issue was further complicated by the fact that Charles II had no legitimate heirs with his queen, Catherine of Braganza. Their childless marriage intensified anxieties about the royal succession, particularly since the heir presumptive was James, Duke of York, who had converted to Catholicism. For anti-Catholic factions, Monmouth seemed like the ideal alternative: a Protestant, popular among the people, and a skilled military leader. His charm, charisma, and strong public support made him a figure of hope for those who feared a Catholic monarchy. Yet Charles II himself consistently denied the rumors of marriage to Lucy Walter and refused to declare Monmouth legitimate, reaffirming that he was a royal bastard, not a lawful heir.
In Dryden’s allegory, this tension is dramatized in the figure of Absalom, David’s beloved but illegitimate son. Just as Absalom is handsome, adored by the people, and yet unfit to inherit his father’s throne, Monmouth is portrayed as a prince whose appeal lies in personal qualities rather than lawful right. By emphasizing the uncertainty of Monmouth’s legitimacy, Dryden undermines the Exclusionist cause, making clear that Monmouth’s ambition though natural and attractive was ultimately misplaced, as it could never rest on a lawful foundation.
Key Themes in Absalom and Achitophel
Politics, Allegory, and Satire
Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel is one of the finest examples of how literature can directly engage with the political conflicts of its time. Written during the Exclusion Crisis, the poem reflects the heated debates about succession, legitimacy, and the dangers of rebellion against the monarchy. Dryden uses the biblical story of Absalom’s revolt against King David as an allegory for the political tensions surrounding King Charles II and his illegitimate but Protestant son, the Duke of Monmouth. By identifying David with Charles II, Absalom with Monmouth, and Achitophel with the Earl of Shaftesbury, Dryden transforms a biblical narrative into a political commentary that directly addresses the anxieties of Restoration England. This allegorical method gave Dryden’s poem both safety since he spoke through the veil of scripture and sharpness, as readers of his day instantly recognized the parallels. Through this, politics is not just discussed but dramatized, showing the destructive consequences of ambition, rebellion, and manipulation.
At the same time, the poem is also a brilliant work of satire. Dryden employs wit, irony, and biting characterization to expose the weaknesses and hypocrisy of his political opponents. Figures like Shaftesbury are depicted as cunning traitors, Titus Oates (as Corah) as a liar who incited public fear, and Buckingham (as Zimri) as a chaotic opportunist. These satirical portraits strip away their public image and reveal them as self-serving, corrupt figures who endanger the stability of the kingdom. By combining satire with allegory, Dryden makes the political crisis understandable as both a moral lesson and a comedy of human folly. The poem, therefore, functions on three levels: as a political defense of monarchy, as a biblical allegory reinforcing divine order, and as a satire exposing the absurdity and corruption of those who sought to destabilize the crown. It is this mixture of politics, allegory, and satire that has made Absalom and Achitophel not only a central work of Restoration literature but also a timeless example of how art can intervene in political life.
God, Religion, and the Divine Right of Kings
One of the strongest undercurrents in Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel is the theme of religion and the belief in the divine right of kings. In the biblical story, King David is chosen by God to rule over Israel, and his authority is therefore sacred and unquestionable. Dryden adapts this idea to the context of Restoration England by presenting Charles II as a modern David, a ruler appointed by divine will whose position must not be challenged by rebellious subjects or ambitious politicians. This was a powerful message in a time when the monarchy itself was under attack. The Exclusion Crisis had thrown doubts on whether the king’s Catholic brother, James, Duke of York, should inherit the throne, but Dryden uses the biblical analogy to argue that to resist or exclude the rightful heir is not merely a political crime, it is a sin against God’s chosen order. By grounding his poem in religious authority, Dryden ensures that his defense of the Stuart monarchy is not just political propaganda but also moral and spiritual justification for obedience to the crown.
At the same time, Dryden highlights how religion could be twisted and abused by those who opposed the monarchy. Figures like Titus Oates (represented as Corah) are satirized for using false claims of Catholic plots to stir up fear and manipulate public opinion. The so-called Popish Plot was nothing more than a fabrication, but it played on widespread anti-Catholic sentiment, convincing many that rebellion was not only politically necessary but divinely justified. Dryden counters this by showing that such religious fanaticism leads only to chaos and destruction, while true religion calls for loyalty, order, and respect for God’s appointed king. The poem thus contrasts genuine divine authority with the counterfeit claims of rebels and agitators. In doing so, Absalom and Achitophel reaffirms the Stuart belief in the divine right of kings and frames loyalty to the monarch as both a political duty and a religious obligation. Dryden’s fusion of faith and politics gives the poem a powerful rhetorical force, making it both a defense of monarchy and a sermon against rebellion.
Power and Ambition
At the heart of Absalom and Achitophel lies the destructive force of human ambition and the lust for power. Dryden presents Absalom (the Duke of Monmouth) as a young man whose natural charm, popularity, and heroic qualities make him beloved by the people, but whose ambition makes him vulnerable to manipulation. Though he enjoys his father’s love, Absalom is tempted by Achitophel (the Earl of Shaftesbury) with the prospect of a throne that does not rightfully belong to him. This ambition, once ignited, blinds him to the bonds of loyalty, duty, and gratitude that he owes to his father, King David (Charles II). In the biblical allegory, Absalom’s rebellion ends in disaster, serving as a moral warning about the danger of pursuing power through disobedience and betrayal. Dryden adapts this lesson to Restoration politics, showing that the attempt to seize power outside the natural and divine order destabilizes the state and brings ruin upon those who dare to rebel.
Achitophel embodies the darker, more cynical side of ambition. Unlike Absalom, whose desire for power is mixed with vanity and youthful pride, Achitophel is driven by cold calculation, envy, and the thirst for political dominance. His persuasive rhetoric fuels Absalom’s rebellion, illustrating how ambitious leaders exploit the weaknesses of others to achieve their own ends. In Dryden’s satirical portrait, Achitophel represents politicians who prioritize personal gain over the welfare of the nation, revealing how unchecked ambition corrodes loyalty, truth, and stability. The broader political message is clear: ambition that challenges lawful monarchy not only threatens the ruler but also disrupts the balance of society itself. For Dryden, ambition without restraint is not a noble drive for greatness but a dangerous force that leads to treachery, civil war, and divine punishment. Thus, Absalom and Achitophel expose ambition as both a personal weakness and a political threat, warning readers of its capacity to destroy kingdoms and lives alike.
Genre Study: Dryden’s Mastery of Political Satire
Absalom and Achitophel is not merely a narrative poem; it is a masterclass in political satire, blending literary elegance with acute commentary on the turbulent politics of Restoration England. Dryden elevates satire to its highest form by combining the precision of heroic couplets with the subtlety of allegory. The poem’s tightly structured rhymes and iambic rhythm create a sharp, memorable cadence that reinforces the incisive critique of its characters. Each line is carefully crafted to entertain, persuade, and instruct, proving that satire can be as artistically refined as it is politically potent. By transforming real political figures into biblical characters, Dryden achieves the dual effect of veiling direct criticism while making the moral and political lessons unmistakable to his readers.
Beyond its formal brilliance, the poem demonstrates the versatility of satire as a literary tool. It operates on multiple levels: as an allegorical retelling of scripture, a moral commentary on ambition and loyalty, and a social critique of Restoration politics. Figures such as Achitophel, Monmouth, and Corah are both historically recognizable and symbolically instructive, allowing Dryden to address contemporary crises like the Exclusion Crisis, the threat of Catholic succession, and the dangers of factional manipulation. Through humor, irony, and pointed characterization, Dryden exposes the follies, vices, and ambitions of his time while simultaneously reaffirming the divine and lawful order of monarchy. In doing so, Absalom and Achitophel becomes more than a political pamphlet or literary work; it is a timeless exploration of power, morality, and human nature, illustrating how political satire can illuminate society’s deepest tensions with artistry, wit, and insight.
Video Explanation of the Blog
As part of our class activity (suggested by Barad Sir), I prepared this video using NotebookLM. It gives a clear and simple explanation of the main points discussed in this blog on John Dryden’s Absalom and Achitophel. You can watch it here for a quick understanding before (or after) reading the detailed blog.
Conclusion
Absalom and Achitophel remains one of John Dryden’s most celebrated works because it masterfully intertwines political commentary, biblical allegory, and literary artistry. Through the story of Absalom’s rebellion against David, Dryden exposes the dangers of ambition, betrayal, and manipulation while defending the divine right and lawful authority of King Charles II. The poem’s enduring power lies in its ability to reflect the political anxieties of Restoration England such as the Exclusion Crisis, the threat of Catholic succession, and factional scheming while presenting them through elegant heroic couplets and sharp satire. Dryden’s characters, from the ambitious Monmouth to the cunning Shaftesbury, serve as both historical figures and timeless moral lessons, showing that unchecked ambition and disloyalty inevitably lead to chaos and destruction.
As Dryden writes in the poem, “Yet all the charms of fair Absalom were vain”, highlighting that beauty, popularity, or ambition cannot justify rebellion against rightful authority. By combining history, politics, and allegory, Absalom and Achitophel continues to be a timeless work, demonstrating how literature can illuminate the human condition, moral responsibility, and the delicate balance of power in society.
Works Cited
- Abrams, M. H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. 7th ed., Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1999.
- “Absalom and Achitophel.” Poetry Foundation, www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44649/absalom-and-achitophel. Accessed 29 Aug. 2025.
- “Absalom and Achitophel.” Encyclopaedia Britannica, . Accessed 29 Aug. 2025.
- “John Dryden.” Wikipedia, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dryden. Accessed 29 Aug. 2025.
No comments:
Post a Comment