Absalom And Achitophel Essay, Research Paper

Father and Son

As related to Absalom and Achitophel

Absalom and Achitophel begins in the universe of Old Testament history. The obscure scriptural yesteryear of the gap lines lets the narrative to be set from 2 Samuel in a broad historical frame that hopes to legalize the male monarch & # 8217 ; s promiscuousness by tie ining the male monarch as male parent of the land:

In pious times, e & # 8217 ; R priestcraft did get down,

Before polygamy was made a wickedness ;

When one adult male on many multiplied his sort,

Ere one to one was damned confined ;

When nature prompted and no jurisprudence denied

Promiscuous usage of courtesan and bride ;

Then Israel & # 8217 ; s sovereign after Heaven & # 8217 ; s ain bosom,

His vigorous heat did diversely leave

To married womans and slaves ; and, broad as his bid,

Scattered his Maker & # 8217 ; s image through the land. ( l. 1-10 )

The association between God and David is made through the clever comparing of Godhead and human birthrate. There is some sarcasm in seeing God & # 8217 ; s abundant creative activity reflected in the male monarch & # 8217 ; s sexual extravagancies, but the sarcasm doesn & # 8217 ; t cut down the position of the male monarch. It serves, at the beginning of the verse form, to divide the individual of the male monarch from the office of the male monarch.

The gap scenes emphasize David as an indulgent male parent, non as caput of the state. David & # 8217 ; s pleasance in Absalom analogues God & # 8217 ; s attitude toward Adam in the Garden. All of Absalom & # 8217 ; s gestures are

accompanied with grace,

And Eden was opened in his face.

With secret joy indulgent David viewed

His vernal image in his boy renewed:

To all his wants nil he denied ;

And made the charming Annabel his bride. ( l. 29-34 )

The easy traveling nature of Absalom, put together with the specific mention to paradise, assist set up him as the figure from Eden that will be seen once more in the enticement. The word picture of David emphasizes a combination of Godhead and human paternity. Like God, David takes great joy in his creative activity ; like God, he supplies Absalom with a worthwhile bride. This serious presentation of David in his fatherlike joy and indulgence, as compared to the Godhead theoretical account, can non be taken as unfavorable judgment of the male monarch. It strengthens the insouciant relationship between God and David established at the gap of the verse form. When attending is called to indulgence or failing in David & # 8217 ; s character, it is in a context that shows David & # 8217 ; s indulgence to be a contemplation of his paternal, instead than kingly, capacity:

What faults he had ( for whom from mistakes if free? )

His male parent could non, or he would non see. ( l. 35-36 )

The accent is on David & # 8217 ; s paternal indulgence. The initial presentation of David and Absalom closes with a declaration of the composure of David & # 8217 ; s reign:

Therefore praised and lived the baronial young person remained,

While David, undisturbed, in Sion reigned. ( l. 41-42 )

In the enticement, Achitophel uses scriptural linguistic communication to carry Absalom of the kingship to which he is destined:

Auspicious prince, at whose birth

Some royal planet ruled the southern sky ;

Thy hankering state & # 8217 ; s favorite and desire

Their cloudy pillar and their guardian fire:

Their 2nd Moses, whose drawn-out wand

Divides the seas, and shows the promised land ;

Whose clicking twenty-four hours in every distant age

Has exercised the sacred prophesier & # 8217 ; s fury:

The people & # 8217 ; s supplication, the sword lily diviners & # 8217 ; subject,

The immature work forces & # 8217 ; s vision, and the old work forces & # 8217 ; s dream!

Thee, savior, thee, the state & # 8217 ; s vow & # 8217 ; s confess,

And, ne’er satisfied with visual perception, bless. ( l. 230-241 )

The usage of typology in the scriptural context of the verse form suggests a all right differentiation between Absalom & # 8217 ; s response to the enticement, and to Achitophel & # 8217 ; s well-spoken words. By utilizing types to carry Absalom of his function as savior, Achitophel becomes an dry Gospel prophesier, and Absalom a false christ. Achitophel is non slow to offer specific illustrations of his anticipations. He foremost claims that Absalom & # 8217 ; s birth was marked by some royal planet that ruled the southern sky & # 8211 ; a favourable portents. The astronomical mark, which is one of the messianic allusions of the enticement scene, is non the right birth mark! The star of the existent Messiah rises in the E, non the South ( Matt. 2:2, 9-11 ) .

Following, Achitophel calls Absalom the state & # 8217 ; s cloudy pillar, guardian fire, and 2nd Moses ( ll. 233-35 ) . All three are familiar scriptural marks ; and the pillar and fire are promised in Isaiah as marks of God & # 8217 ; s renewed presence among the Israelites ( Isaia

h 4:5 ) . The typical marks that Achitophel references have general scriptural significance and would hold been persuasive for Absalom, the scriptural prince.

In converting Absalom of his messianic function, Achitophel portrays David as an old adult male with worsening powers and as a fallen Satan:

Had therefore old David, from whose pubess you spring,

Not dared, when Fortune called him, to be male monarch,

At Gath an expatriate he might still stay,

And heaven & # 8217 ; s anointing oil had been in vain.

Let his successful youth your hopes engage ;

But shun the illustration of worsening age ;

Behold him puting in western skies,

The shadows lengthening as the bluess rise.

He is non now, as when on Jordan & # 8217 ; s sand

The joyful people thronged to see him set down,

Covering the beach, and melanizing all the strand ;

But, like the Prince of Angels, from his tallness,

Semens toppling downward with lessened visible radiation. ( ll. 262-274 )

There is a great trade of sarcasm in this, warning of Achitophel & # 8217 ; s delusory persuasion. Hoping to convert Absalom of the practicality of a & # 8220 ; delighting colza upon the Crown & # 8221 ; ( l 474 ) , Achitophel associates David & # 8217 ; s old age with his supposed political powerlessness. Achitophel attempts to take the kingship and the inquiry of sezession from the authorization of Heaven and the jurisprudence of God by distorting the history of David & # 8217 ; s return from expatriate. Harmonizing to Achitophel, David was called from Gath by luck ; harmonizing to the Bible, he was called from expatriate by God and anointed by Heaven. Achitophel & # 8217 ; s statement makes the holiness of heaven dependant on the arbitrary function of luck & # 8217 ; s wheel, whose awards must be grabbed. In the context of scriptural history, that ethic evidently contradicts the moral codification and universe order implied by God & # 8217 ; s written jurisprudence.

The terminal of Achitophel & # 8217 ; s description is the simile & # 8220 ; like the Prince of Angels, & # 8221 ; used to typify David & # 8217 ; s diminution. Achitophel chooses this image to contrast the descending, wavering visible radiation of David & # 8217 ; s kingship with the lifting royal planet of Absalom & # 8217 ; s aspirations ; but the usage of this simile reveals more than the long-winded resemblance. By placing Godlike David with Satan, Achitophel joins forces with the Satan himself as a maligner of God.

As the image of David comes to a stopping point, Achitophel characterizes David & # 8217 ; s impotance more subtly. Asserting that David is powerless to defy Absalom & # 8217 ; s claim to the throne, Achitophel asks, & # 8220 ; What strength can he to your designs oppose, / Naked of friends, and unit of ammunition beset with enemies? & # 8221 ; ( l. 279-80 ) . The 2nd line of the pair alludes to Samson and suggests the description, from Milton, of Samson being blind among his enemies:

Betray & # 8217 ; vitamin D, Captiv & # 8217 ; vitamin D, and both my eyes put out,

Made of my enemies the contempt and regard ;

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Blind among enemies, O worse than ironss,

Dungeon, or beggary, or creaky age! ( Samson Agonisties ll. 33-34, 68-69 )

There are two ways of reading this allusion back into Achitophel & # 8217 ; s portrayal of David. The most obvious is that Achitophel unwittingly predicts the concluding victory of David as a Samson figure who wreaks mayhem on his enemies and asserts the force of God & # 8217 ; s jurisprudence.

But, in depicting David, Achitophel is besides appealing to David & # 8217 ; s relationship to Christ, particularly Christ among enemies and false friends. That relationship besides suggests the concluding triumph of God over Satan and all Antichrists. Furthermore, David as paralleled with Samson, given the typical relationship that both Old Testament figures bear to Christ, plays off nicely against David & # 8217 ; s ain mention to Absalom as a false Samson, a make-believe Messiah:

If my immature Samson will feign a call

To agitate the column, allow him portion the autumn. ( fifty 955-56 )

The pair works in two ways, qualifying Absalom & # 8217 ; s rebellion and messianic claim as a & # 8216 ; autumn & # 8217 ; and ironically opposing it to the true messianic & # 8216 ; name & # 8217 ; and & # 8216 ; autumn & # 8217 ; to give and decease which Samson, as type of Christ, exemplifies. The words of Achitophel and the play of his enticement of Absalom qualify the two figures and confirm the original relationship that has been established between David and God. Throughout the verse form that relationship is reconfirmed by association, by direct averment, and by the fallen characters & # 8217 ; version of what is asserted to be the true order of things. Those reconfirmations of David & # 8217 ; s relationship with God & # 8211 ; particularly the increasing accent on David & # 8217 ; s kingly function & # 8211 ; work to transform David from private male parent to public male monarch.

Once more the godlike David was restored,

And willing states knew their lawful Godhead. ( l. 1030-31 )