Restoration politics, when retold through the lens of biblical allusions, is simply not something that interests me in this lifetime.

It seems like a complex and perhaps convoluted way to approach the subject matter.

There are so many other aspects of history and politics that I find more engaging and worthy of my attention.

Maybe in a future life, I will have a different perspective and be more open to exploring this particular way of presenting restoration politics.

But for now, I am content to focus on other areas that resonate more deeply with my current interests and curiosities.

Who knows what the future holds? Maybe one day I will look back on this statement and wonder why I was so resistant to the idea.

But for now, restoration politics through biblical allusions remains firmly outside of my realm of interest.

What's this guy's problem with Jewish people?

It's a rather concerning and puzzling question. Jewish people have a rich and diverse history, culture, and community.

They have made significant contributions in various fields such as science, art, literature, and business.

Any form of animosity or prejudice towards them is unjust and baseless.

It could potentially stem from ignorance, misinformation, or deep-rooted biases within the individual.

Understanding and respecting different cultures and ethnicities is crucial in building a harmonious and inclusive society.

Instead of harboring negative feelings towards Jewish people or any other group, we should strive to educate ourselves, promote dialogue, and foster acceptance.

By doing so, we can break down the barriers of hatred and create a world where everyone is treated with equality and dignity.

Dryden is the Petyr Baelish of English lit.

He is a figure who holds a rather complex and somewhat controversial position. Like Petyr Baelish in the fictional world, Dryden has his own set of intrigues and manipulations within the literary realm.

His works are often marked by a certain shrewdness and a calculated approach to presenting ideas. He is not one to shy away from using his literary skills to achieve his ends, whether it be to gain recognition, influence, or to make a particular point.

Just as Baelish weaves a web of lies and schemes in the Game of Thrones, Dryden seems to do the same in the world of English literature, leaving a trail of literary works that are both fascinating and somewhat mysterious.

His place in the literary canon is thus a subject of much debate and discussion, with some seeing him as a master of his craft and others viewing him with a certain degree of suspicion.

This satire was penned on the eve of the trial of the Duke of Buckingham (the Zimri of the poem). He was charged with high treason for attempting to prevent the accession to the throne of the Duke of York, who later became King James II. Buckingham, one of the leaders of the Whig party, made an unsuccessful attempt to have Parliament declare the Duke of Monmouth (the Absalom of the poem) as the next in line for the throne. The Achitophel is the Earl of Shaftesbury, who, along with Buckingham, led the Whigs. Dryden derived these names from the Bible, chiefly from 2 Samuel, due to the parallels he discovered with the existing situation in England.

It is truly a remarkable book. The way Dryden weaves these historical events and biblical allusions together is both captivating and thought-provoking. The satire offers a unique perspective on the political turmoil and power struggles of that era. It allows readers to gain a deeper understanding of the complex relationships and motives of the key players involved.

Moreover, the use of such vivid and well-known names from the Bible adds an extra layer of significance and drama to the narrative. It makes the story more accessible and engaging, even for those who may not be well-versed in the specific historical context. Overall, this book is a must-read for anyone interested in history, literature, or political satire.

The poem in question is highly political in nature.

It is not just an ordinary poem but a symbolic one, a biblical allegory that holds a hidden meaning beneath its surface.

This poem is centered around two events. One of them is historical, while the other is factual.

Dryden ingeniously uses the historical event to refer to the factual one.

He employs the biblical story of the revolt of "Absalom" against his father "King David" as a parallel to the revolt of the "Duke of Monmouth" against his father "King Charles".

This clever use of the biblical allegory adds depth and complexity to the poem, allowing readers to explore and understand the political situation of that time in a more profound way.

It also shows Dryden's mastery of language and his ability to weave together different elements to create a powerful and thought-provoking piece of literature.

Overall, this poem is a remarkable example of how poetry can be used as a tool for political commentary and social criticism.

A very, very dull poem indeed. It seems that there is a certain justification for his last name being Dry-den. The poem lacks any sort of excitement or vividness. It plods along in a rather monotonous manner, failing to engage the reader's interest. One can't help but wonder if the author was perhaps feeling rather uninspired when penning this piece. The words seem to be chosen more for their simplicity rather than their ability to create a powerful image or evoke strong emotions. It's as if the poem is stuck in a rut, unable to break free and soar to greater heights. Overall, it's a rather forgettable piece that leaves much to be desired.

Absalom and Achitophel is a significant work that delves into a political upheaval England faced between 1679-81. Charles II became King in 1660, and his reign is known as the Restoration.

The poem centers around the succession issue. Charles II married Catherine of Braganza in 1662, but she had no children. He, however, had numerous illegitimate children with his mistresses.

Since he had no rightful heir, the crown was to pass to his brother, the Duke of York, a Roman Catholic. But a large portion of the English population, who were Protestants, were not happy with the idea of a King of the opposite faith.

There were two political parties. The Tories supported the King's decision to favor his brother, while the Whigs opposed it and favored the Duke of Monmouth, an illegitimate son of the King and a Protestant.

The Earl of Shaftesbury was the leader of the Whig Party. The situation became more complex when Titus Oates claimed to have discovered a plot by the Roman Catholics to assassinate the King, the so-called Popish Plot, which was later proven false.

Dryden's poem is based on these events. The Popish Plot is mentioned in certain lines, and there is a Temptation Scene where Shaftesbury tries to convince the Duke of Monmouth of his claim to the throne.

Shaftesbury uses flattery to boost Monmouth's ego and arouse his aspiration to be King. Monmouth initially seems doubtful, but Shaftesbury continues his reasoning and manages to prove the fairness of his claim.

Dryden's use of allegory in the poem is remarkable. It helps raise the poem to a high level, adds humor, and gives an air of impartiality.

The poem's eminence lies in its wit, which is evident throughout, from the opening picture of Charles II's harem to the portraits of his enemies.

Dryden's wit is satirical in his depictions of Zimri, Shimei, and Corah. These portraits, with their use of various satirical devices, contribute to the poem's fame.

The poem was intentionally written to please the King, who was known for his quick wit and love of allusions. Dryden's use of a new blend of heroic acclamation, satire, discourse, and witty commentary was possible because of the King's sharpness.

The brilliance of Dryden's wit can be seen in examples like his description of Achitophel's son and his portraits of Shimei and Zimri.

The importance placed on the moral of a heroic poem by Renaissance critics also helps explain the relationship between Absalom and Achitophel and epic verse. The poem's description as a patriotic and didactic composition that tells a story in a probable, diverting, and surprising manner under the guise of allegory fits it perfectly.

Never mind my earlier wrong opinion. This is hilarious. I initially had a completely different perspective, but now I see the humor in it. It's amazing how a change in perception can turn something that seemed ordinary or uninteresting into something truly comical. The situation has a certain charm and wit that catches you off guard. It makes you laugh out loud and forget about any previous misgivings. I'm glad I was able to see the light and appreciate the hilarity of it all. It's moments like these that remind us not to be too quick to judge and to always keep an open mind. You never know when something that you thought was one way will turn out to be something completely different and entertaining.

When long driven back, at length it stands the ground.\\" He said. The Almighty, nodding, gave consent;

And peals of thunder shook the firmament. / Henceforth a series of new time began, / The mighty years in long procession ran: / \\"Once more the godlike David was restored, /And willing nations knew their lawful lord.

I just read a review that says: \\"I'm still not a fan of Restoration literature\\". I can't help but nod in agreement. Restoration literature has its own characteristics and historical background, but for some reason, it just doesn't resonate with me. Maybe it's the language, which can seem archaic and difficult to understand at times. Or perhaps it's the themes, which may not be as relevant or engaging to me as those of other literary periods. Whatever the reason, I find myself in the same boat as the reviewer. I respect the importance of Restoration literature in the history of English literature, but it's just not my cup of tea.

How fatal ‘tis to be too good a king!

This statement holds a certain truth. A king who is overly good may face numerous challenges and difficulties.

On one hand, being too good can lead to leniency and softness in governance. This might result in a lack of discipline and order within the kingdom, as the king is reluctant to impose strict punishments or make tough decisions.

On the other hand, a good king may be too trusting of his advisors and courtiers. This could leave him vulnerable to being misled or manipulated by those with ulterior motives.

Moreover, a king who is too focused on being good may neglect the more practical aspects of running a kingdom, such as economic development and military preparedness.

In conclusion, while being a good king is a noble aspiration, it is important to find a balance between kindness and firmness, trust and caution, and idealism and practicality. Otherwise, the consequences can be truly fatal.

The description of the Jews is accurate... and it amazes me.

However, regarding David and his sons and those battles for the throne, I deny them because God says that Solomon inherited from David...

This passage seems to express a certain view about the Jews and a particular stance on the events related to David and his descendants. It might imply that the description of the Jews holds some significance or truth that catches the author's attention.

At the same time, the denial of the events concerning the battles for the throne could be based on the author's interpretation of what God has said.

Perhaps the author believes that the inheritance of Solomon from David is a more important aspect and that the other events might not be in line with their understanding of God's plan or the true narrative.

Overall, this text presents a complex set of ideas and interpretations that require further exploration and analysis.

John Dryden penned this work during a period when England was embroiled in yet another religious upheaval. The royals on the throne were shifting their alliance from Protestantism back to Catholicism. England had endured a similar situation over a century earlier. The background notes to this poem detail how Dryden, who had recently converted to Catholicism, was placing himself in a precarious position. This is not unfounded, as England would later revert to Protestantism.

John Dryden, one of England's Poet Laureates, was highly regarded for a brief period. In the context of studying The Enlightenment, this poem is frequently referenced and considered a masterpiece. Consequently, I located it in a book from Gutenberg and perused it.

My initial impressions were less than captivating. The rhyming couplets (one book referring to this poem termed it heroic couplet) served as a reminder of why modern poets sought to break away from this style. For them, this technique was more in tune with its own era. As a result, it was a struggle for me to engage with, compounded by my limited knowledge of biblical stories, which hindered my understanding of the religious allegory. Instead, I found greater enjoyment in reading others' perspectives on this poem. They elucidated how the religious upheaval was complicating the political landscape between the King and Parliament.

To me, Dryden does not emerge as an enlightened figure. Later in life, his conversion to Catholicism was not well-received, and he ultimately died in poverty, almost as if his former high esteem had been forgotten.

This may explain why I had never heard of him before, unlike his contemporaries John Milton and Andrew Marvell. Perusing his page on Gutenberg, it is astonishing to see the sheer volume of work he has produced. Each book is a compilation of his plays and poetry, including a stage adaptation of Milton's Paradise Lost and Shakespeare's The Tempest. Now intrigued by what he has made of these works, I intend to read both this year.

The opening and closing lines of this lengthy poem are as follows:

From Part I, the beginning of the poem
—Si propiùs stes
Te capiet magis—
In pious times, ere priestcraft did begin,
Before polygamy was made a sin;
When man on many multiplied his kind,
Ere one to one was cursedly confined;
When nature prompted, and no law denied
Promiscuous use of concubine and bride;
Then Israel's monarch after Heaven's own heart,
His vigorous warmth did variously impart
To wives and slaves; and wide as his command,
Scatter'd his Maker's image through the land. 10

From Part II, the end of the poem
This year did Ziloah rule Jerusalem,
And boldly all sedition's surges stem,
Howe'er encumber'd with a viler pair
Than Ziph or Shimei to assist the chair;
Yet Ziloah's loyal labours so prevail'd,
That faction at the next election fail'd,
When even the common cry did justice found,
And merit by the multitude was crown'd:
With David then was Israel's peace restored,
Crowds mourn'd their error, and obey'd their lord. 1140