Hello and welcome to the Discourse. The Medal was another satirical political poem by John Dryden that was published in 1682. The poem has 320 lines composed in seven different stanzas of different lengths written in Heroic couplets.
In his previous poem (Absalom and Achitophel), John Dryden caricatured the Earl of Shaftesbury and then in Nahum Tate’s Absalom and Achitophel part II, Dryden contributed while satirically criticizing Thomas Shadwell. The Medal is again a satirical poem that targeted Whigs politicians and raised the issue of the controversial acquittal of the Earl of Shaftesbury after he was charged and imprisoned for sedition. The grand jury dismissed all charges against the Earl of Shaftesbury and the Whigs' supporters celebrated the decision during which a medal was struck to commemorate the event. John Dryden was infuriated by the decision and the following outrageous celebration. Thus he wrote a satirical poem that not only criticized the Earl of Shaftesbury and the Whigs' supporters but also targeted the grand jury.
The Medal is a work full of unsparing invective against the Whigs, prefaced by a vigorous and plainspoken prose “Epistle to the Whigs” in which the poet dedicates the poem to the Whigs. Dryden characterized the jurors who freed Shaftesbury as ignoramuses, and his followers, who cast a medal celebrating his "innocence," as ignorant revelers. The subtitle of The Medall is A Satyre Against Sedition.
Characters: The narrator of the poem is never named. The poem is written in third person narrative speech in which the narrator accuses, satirizes, and criticizes different entities including the Earl of Shaftesbury indirectly mentioned as the Man, the grand jury, and other Whigs supporters. The Earl of Shaftesbury is not directly addressed in the poem. However, he is mentioned as an evil leader of a seditious sect trying to overthrow the crown of London. The narrator whole-heartedly wished that the Earl of Shfestbury was convicted for high treason but he was acquitted. The narrator likened sedition to a sickness that captured the British empire. The narrator also describes the Whigs Party, the sect of evil leaders as a mass of brainless followers of a sect that only seeks to do evil. The Whigs are trying to challenge the absolute monarchy for a constitutional monarchy and their desire is indirectly compared with regicide and the eating of ministers for breakfast. The High Jury is only mentioned in the sidenote. The narrator makes it clear that the high jury didn’t act according to the law while acquitting the Earl. The narrator clearly mentions that much harm could have been avoided if the jury had acted according to the law and likens the witnesses of the High Jury as leeches that suck all blood out of the English system. The Medal isn’t personified but it is the main subject of the poem.
Theme: The main theme of the poem is Absolutism against Constitutionalism. The narrator believes in the absolute power of the King that has been challenged by the Whigs in support of the constitutional monarchy. The narrator criticizes the acts of Whigs that are diluting the absolute power of the ruler. Dryden uses mythological comparisons either explicitly or purely metaphorically to evoke some additional emotional connotation to the topic. Dryden also uses religious symbolism and refers to the values and history of the Christian faith. The Whigs are described as a sect that goes against the word of God, consequently destroying heaven, should they succeed.
Summary:
The narrator begins the poem with a colorful depiction of the Medal in question. He says that a group of idiots has visited to see the medal. These idiots never had a chance to see anything like this medal before and they are awe-struck by it. The narrator depicts the nature and art of the medal and says that it is golden without base and shallow within. The narrator describes both sides of the medal and the inscriptions that have been carved on it. He says that Loetamur is inscribed on the medal, a Polish word meaning Rejoice. He then mentions that though God took one day for the creation of Man and to develop mankind, it took five days to create this medal. He then mentions Lucifer and says that who knows how many days God took to create Lucifer, suggesting a comparison between the Medal and Satan.
In the second stanza, the narrator describes the Man to be honored by the medal. He says that the Man has a shifting personality and it would have been difficult for the engraving artist to exactly describe the Man on the medal. The narrator says that this is the reason why the engraver chose to stick to the regal depiction. The narrator then describes the various personalities the Man exhibits in a criticizing manner and scolding tone. The character is described as a war hero, unwilling to stay loyal, a powerless chief, and a disgusting vermin working with the enemy. This all is hidden behind the golden saint depicted. However, the truth cannot be hidden, according to the narrator.
The narrator further describes the man as traitorous, who used subterfuge and lies to escape punishment for his evil deeds. The narrator then criticizes the jury for granting acquittal to the man and says that the jury is full of corrupt individuals, allowing the clever lies to cloud their judgment.
The narrator then acknowledges the audience and pleads with them to do everything possible to create justice. He mentions interesting Greek mythical stories and explains that the wisdom of the crowd is boundless, but can shift either way and that religion often hinges around these powerful motions started by crowds throughout history. This leads to the conclusion that prudent men allow a succession of kings to lead them, as this creates peace and property. At the end of the first stanza, the narrator warns the public about the evil intentions of the man and claims that his aim for power and anarchy has the potential to destroy England.
In the second stanza, the narrator attacks the rotten justice system and claims that the law is being misused. He likens the witnesses to leeches on the festering wound of justice. The third stanza likens the river Nile to the city of London. Both give life and create prosperity, but also both breed monsters in their slimy depths. The narrator again criticizes the acts of sedition by the man.
The use of similes continues when London is compared to a person with a healthy head, meaning the rich and noble, and some rotten hands, meaning the inconvenient and loud opposition. The latter is compared to a sect, where doing evil like stealing has become so much part of their nature that they are willing to go as far as follow their leader into the depths of high treason against the rightful king.
In the fourth stanza, the narrator questions the arguments of the defendants of the man for his seditious acts. Their argument becomes invalid, and the narrator compares their crime to the betrayal of Jesus in the vineyard, where the betrayer gets rich from the fall of his king. The narrator goes on in describing that their pretend loyalty will end in them limiting the power of the king to become a simple pawn to dispose of. At the end of the fourth stanza, the narrator says that Britain cannot live without its just ruler, as democracy is not meant for the isle.
In the fifth stanza, the narrator directly attacks the man (Earl of Shaftesbury) and says that his evil ways will lead him to his own suffering. The narrator describes him as the leader of a sect that has infiltrated already way too many minds. It is that his godless ways will lead, even in his success, to his friends becoming his foes. In the end, the narrator criticizes the religious bigotry of the seditious leader and says how dull heaven would become, should his vision of religion be the real one.
In the sixth stanza, the narrator explains that the only way Britain can prevail and not sink into madness and chaos is through the rightful ruler at the top. The republican wishes of the traitors will only lead to the utter destruction of all they hold dear. People will cry out for help from God, the traitor’s generals will defy him and all followers will cast him from their lands.
In the seventh (last) stanza, the narrator expresses and describes his loyalty toward the king, who helped the nation out of squalor into a peaceful rest.
John Dryden has used very colorful religious and geographical similes that make this poem very interesting.
So this is it for today. We will continue to discuss the history of English literature. Please stay connected with the Discourse. Thanks and Regards.
