Abstract

William Shakespeare’s history plays illustrate interesting examples of various forms of authority, the leaders’ and the subjects’ attitude towards it, and its political significance. In her analysis, the author follows the classification of types of authority proposed by Max Weber (traditional, charismatic, and legal) and Claudia Rapp (pragmatic). She then applies these notions to the portrayals of power as presented in the plays Richard II, Henry IV part 1 and 2, and Richard III and distinguishes a pattern in the subsequent representations of authority. Richard II exercises traditional authority of an anointed king, yet he lacks control in other aspects. Henry IV demonstrates his pragmatic and charismatic authority by managing to overthrow an inadequate monarch, however, this triumph deprives him of any hope for achieving the divine status of his predecessor. Prince Hal exerts charismatic and pragmatic authority and represents a change in the attitudes towards power, believing that acting as a legitimate king is more important than actually acquiring traditional authority. Richard III, following the shift in the modern understanding of power, does not respect the traditional authority of a divinely sanctioned king and establishes his rule on charismatic authority, which withers shortly after his ascension to the throne. Subsequently, the author examines the contemporary representations of power, using Polish President Andrzej Duda and American President Donald Trump as examples. In the times of democracy, legal authority has prevailed and although it may seem the most just and appropriate to our current value system, it still proves fallible.

Keywords: William Shakespeare, history plays, Max Weber, types of authority, contemporary politics

Streszczenie

Kroniki historyczne Williama Szekspira prezentują interesujące przykłady podejścia do władzy, sposobów jej sprawowania oraz konsekwencji politycznych, które ze sobą niosą. Analiza przeprowadzona w artykule opiera się na typologii władzy opracowanej przez Maxa Webera (tradycyjna, charyzmatyczna i legalna) oraz Claudię Rapp (pragmatyczna). Wyróżnione źródła legitymizacji władzy wykorzystane są następnie do analizy metod panowania przedstawionych w Ryszardzie II, Henryku IV część 1 i 2 oraz Ryszardzie III, co prowadzi do wyróżnienia schematu kolejnych przedstawień władzy. Ryszard II posiada władzę tradycyjną, jednak w jego sposobie panowania wyraźnie brakuje pozostałych cech charakteryzujących dobrego władcę.