Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

A Lockean Analysis of the Problem of Sovereignty and Legitimacy in Shakespeare’s King John

Year 2024, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 822 - 837, 29.08.2024
https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.1475846

Abstract

This article examines the representation of authority, political power, and legitimacy in William Shakespeare’s King John through relating them to John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government to put forth that such concepts have parallels within the two works. King John provides a means to examine the dynamics of political power and ambition, as the king has doubtful claims to the English throne when examined from Locke’s point of view. In relation to Shakespeare’s work, Locke’s Second Treatise of Government establishes a philosophical foundation for the principles of political authority and its legitimacy in which there is the possibility of resistance to the King. Locke’s ideas on property rights, consent, and the social contract had an impact on political theory during the Enlightenment. This article, therefore, discusses the impact of Locke’s theories on the political discussion of the era by juxtaposing them with the plot and characters in King John. Finally, the study establishes a correlation between the play and Locke’s work by demonstrating their similarities through an examination of both works which in the end puts forth the basic principles of the idea of resisting the King.

References

  • Ağır, A. B. (2013). The Death of Patriotism: Wilfred Owen’s Dulce et Decorum Est as an Anti-War Manifesto. Tarih, Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2 (2), 212-220
  • Altunsoy, Ş. (2017). Three Soldier-Poets: Rupert Brook, Edward Thomas and Isaac Rosenberg. Selçuk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 37, 361-370.
  • Anderson, T. (2004). “Legitimation, Name, and All is Gone”: Bastardy and Bureaucracy in Shakespeare’s “King John”. Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies, 4 (2), 35-61.
  • Andrew, E. (2015). Locke on Consent, Taxation and Representation. Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory, 62 (143), 15-32.
  • Archer, J. E., R. M. Turley, and H. Thomas. (2012). The Autumn King: Remembering the Land in “King Lear”. Shakespeare Quarterly, 63 (4), 518-543.
  • Armitage, D. (2004). John Locke, Carolina, and the “Two Treatises of Government”. Political Theory, 32 (5), 602-627.
  • Ashcraft, R. (1999). Locke’s Political Philosophy. In V. Chappell (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Locke (pp. 226-251). Cambridge University Press.

Shakespeare’in KralJohn Oyununda Egemenlik ve Meşruiyet Probleminin Lockeçu Analizi

Year 2024, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 822 - 837, 29.08.2024
https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.1475846

Abstract

Bu makale, William Shakespeare’in Kral John adlı eserinde otorite, siyasi güç ve meşruiyetin temsilini John Locke’un Yönetim Üzerine İkinci İnceleme adlı eseriyle ilişkilendirerek incelemekte ve bu kavramların iki eser arasında paralellikler taşıdığını öne sürmektedir. Kral John, Locke’un bakış açısından incelendiğinde kralın İngiliz tahtı üzerinde şüpheli iddiaları olduğu için siyasi güç ve hırs dinamiklerini incelemek için bir araç sağlar. Shakespeare’in eseriyle bağlantılı olarak, Locke’un Yönetim Üzerine İkinci İnceleme’si siyasi otoritenin ilkeleri ve Krala karşı direniş olasılığının bulunduğu meşruiyeti için felsefi bir temel oluşturur. Locke’un mülkiyet hakları, rıza ve toplumsal sözleşme hakkındaki fikirleri Aydınlanma döneminde siyaset teorisi üzerinde etkili olmuştur. Bu nedenle bu makale, Locke’un teorilerinin dönemin siyasi tartışmaları üzerindeki etkisini, Kral John oyunundaki olay örgüsü ve karakterlerle paralel detaylı incelemeyle tartışmaktadır. Son olarak, çalışma, her iki eserin incelenmesi yoluyla benzerliklerini ortaya koyarak oyun ve Locke’un eseri arasında bir ilişki kurmakta ve sonuçta Krala direnme fikrinin temel sebeplerini ortaya koymaktadır.

References

  • Ağır, A. B. (2013). The Death of Patriotism: Wilfred Owen’s Dulce et Decorum Est as an Anti-War Manifesto. Tarih, Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2 (2), 212-220
  • Altunsoy, Ş. (2017). Three Soldier-Poets: Rupert Brook, Edward Thomas and Isaac Rosenberg. Selçuk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 37, 361-370.
  • Anderson, T. (2004). “Legitimation, Name, and All is Gone”: Bastardy and Bureaucracy in Shakespeare’s “King John”. Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies, 4 (2), 35-61.
  • Andrew, E. (2015). Locke on Consent, Taxation and Representation. Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory, 62 (143), 15-32.
  • Archer, J. E., R. M. Turley, and H. Thomas. (2012). The Autumn King: Remembering the Land in “King Lear”. Shakespeare Quarterly, 63 (4), 518-543.
  • Armitage, D. (2004). John Locke, Carolina, and the “Two Treatises of Government”. Political Theory, 32 (5), 602-627.
  • Ashcraft, R. (1999). Locke’s Political Philosophy. In V. Chappell (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Locke (pp. 226-251). Cambridge University Press.
There are 7 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects World Languages, Literature and Culture (Other)
Journal Section EDEBİYAT / ARAŞTIRMA MAKALELERİ
Authors

Mehmet Akif Balkaya 0000-0001-6094-2292

Publication Date August 29, 2024
Submission Date April 30, 2024
Acceptance Date August 12, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 9 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Balkaya, M. A. (2024). A Lockean Analysis of the Problem of Sovereignty and Legitimacy in Shakespeare’s King John. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi, 9(2), 822-837. https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.1475846