From Oblivion To Influence: Rediscovering Milton’s Eikonoklastes In Political Thought – OpEd

Introduction:

“Eikonoklastes” is a polemical work written by John Milton in 1649, directly responding to “Eikon Basilike,” a work attributed to Charles I that presented the executed king as a pious martyr. Commissioned by the Commonwealth government, Milton’s “Eikonoklastes” aimed to counteract this royalist narrative, defending the actions of the Parliamentarians and justifying the regicide. The book is a substantial treatise, characteristic of 17th-century political and religious discourse, spanning several hundred pages of dense, scholarly prose.

Belonging to the genre of polemical literature, “Eikonoklastes” is a piece of political and religious advocacy. It falls within the broader category of pamphlet literature, a common medium for public debate during the English Civil War and Interregnum. Milton’s polemic is intended to persuade and influence public opinion through rigorous argumentation and rhetorical strategies, showcasing his engagement with Puritanism and republicanism.

Milton wrote “Eikonoklastes” in English, making it accessible to a wide audience in England. The language of the text is sophisticated and erudite, reflecting Milton’s extensive education and mastery of classical rhetoric. His complex and forceful use of English aims to convince readers through the power of his arguments and the clarity of his prose.

 The Influence of Religious Forces:

Religion played a crucial role in shaping Milton’s arguments in “Eikonoklastes.” As a staunch Puritan, Milton was deeply influenced by the tenets of personal piety, moral rigor, and opposition to religious corruption. These beliefs permeate “Eikonoklastes,” where Milton critiques the religious hypocrisy of Charles I and argues for a more authentic Christian leadership. His Puritan convictions are evident throughout the text, reflecting his deep-seated belief that true Christian governance must align with scriptural teachings and moral integrity.

Milton criticizes the portrayal of Charles I in “Eikon Basilike” as a saintly martyr, arguing that the king’s actions were inconsistent with true Christian values. He writes, “He who would have thought himself most wronged, and counted it half no less than treason to have been so cited, if this were a question, whether he loved God or no; and yet being able to bring witness of his not loving him, should lose by the verdict.” This critique of Charles’s religious hypocrisy is central to Milton’s argument, as it undermines the royalist portrayal of the king as a pious and just ruler. Milton exposes the disparity between Charles’s public persona and his actual deeds, emphasizing the king’s failure to embody the virtues he purportedly espoused.

Furthermore, Milton challenges the notion of divine right, asserting that political legitimacy must be based on reason and justice rather than hereditary privilege. He argues that the misuse of religion by monarchs like Charles I undermines true Christian governance and leads to tyranny. Milton writes, “For it were a kind of treason to his person, and a sacrilege to the commonwealth, to judge that he who is their King should be their enemy.” This critique of the divine right of kings is a recurring theme in “Eikonoklastes,” reflecting Milton’s belief in the separation of religious and political authority. He contends that kings who exploit religious sentiment to bolster their authority are guilty of corrupting the very foundations of Christian ethics and governance.

Milton’s disdain for the abuse of religious authority by monarchs is evident in his condemnation of Charles’s supposed piety. He criticizes Charles I’s public prayers as hypocritical, pointing out the inconsistencies between the king’s religious posturing and his political actions. “He that prays for the peace of his people, but does not endeavor to promote it, is not a peacemaker but a deceiver,” Milton writes, highlighting the gap between the king’s words and deeds. This moral indictment of Charles I serves to dismantle the sanctified image presented in “Eikon Basilike,” revealing the king’s duplicity and moral failings.

Questioning the Divine Right of Kings:

Why does Milton vehemently oppose the divine right of kings? For centuries, this doctrine justified the absolute power of monarchs, arguing that their authority was derived directly from God and therefore unquestionable. Milton’s critique strikes at the heart of this belief, asserting that political legitimacy must be based on reason and justice rather than hereditary privilege. He contends that when monarchs misuse religion to justify their actions, they undermine true Christian governance and lead their people into tyranny. “For it were a kind of treason to his person, and a sacrilege to the commonwealth, to judge that he who is their King should be their enemy,” Milton writes, highlighting the betrayal inherent in the misuse of divine right.

Political Advocacy and Republicanism:

Milton’s political beliefs were profoundly shaped by his support for the Commonwealth and republican principles. He believed in the sovereignty of the people and the accountability of rulers, and these beliefs are evident throughout “Eikonoklastes.” Milton’s arguments against tyranny and for rational governance reflect his commitment to republicanism and his opposition to monarchical autocracy. His political philosophy is rooted in the idea that legitimate authority derives from the consent of the governed, rather than divine mandate or hereditary succession.

In “Eikonoklastes,” Milton employs a range of political arguments to justify the execution of Charles I and defend the actions of the Parliament. He critiques the notion of royal inviolability, arguing that kings, like all rulers, must be accountable to the people. Milton states, “Kings most commonly, though strong in legions, are but weak at arguments; as they who ever have accustomed from the cradle to use their will only as their right hand, their reason always as their left.” This critique of the inherent weakness of monarchical rule underscores Milton’s belief in the importance of rational governance and accountability. He portrays kings as being unaccustomed to reasoned debate and reliant on brute force, contrasting this with the rational deliberations of a republican government.

Milton also highlights the importance of liberty and the dangers of tyranny. He writes, “For indeed none can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license.” This statement reflects Milton’s belief that only virtuous individuals can truly appreciate and uphold liberty, contrasting with the corrupt and arbitrary rule of tyrants like Charles I. Milton argues that genuine freedom is grounded in moral virtue and rational governance, whereas tyrannical rule represents a perversion of liberty into mere license.

 Accountability of Rulers:

Why must rulers be accountable to the people? Milton’s belief in accountability is grounded in his commitment to republican principles. He argues that the power of rulers must be derived from the consent of the governed and that they should be subject to the same laws and moral standards as their subjects. In “Eikonoklastes,” Milton contends that Charles I’s actions had consistently undermined the commonwealth and the welfare of the people. “When a king instead of defending becomes a destroyer of his people, a patron of evil-doers, and a persecutor of good men,” Milton writes, “he forfeits his right to govern and becomes an enemy of the state.” This powerful indictment of Charles I’s reign serves to justify the regicide and the establishment of a government that prioritizes the common good over monarchical privilege.

Narrative Techniques and Rhetorical Strategies:

Several narrative techniques are employed by Milton in “Eikonoklastes” to strengthen his arguments and engage readers. He often uses direct address, speaking to the reader with second-person pronouns to create a sense of immediacy and involvement. This technique helps to draw the reader into the argument and emphasize the urgency of his message. By directly addressing the reader, Milton fosters a sense of personal engagement with the political and moral issues at stake.

The book is structured around the method of refutation, systematically deconstructing the claims made in “Eikon Basilike” point by point, showcasing Milton’s analytical skills. This methodical approach allows Milton to address each of Charles’s claims in detail, providing a comprehensive rebuttal that dismantles the royalist narrative. By engaging directly with the text of “Eikon Basilike,” Milton demonstrates his thorough understanding of the arguments he opposes and the rhetorical strategies he employs to counter them.

As a devout Puritan, Milton frequently references the Bible, using scriptural allusions to bolster his arguments and align his political stance with religious authority. He employs biblical imagery and quotations to lend moral weight to his critique of Charles I and to frame his political arguments within a broader theological context. This use of scriptural references serves to legitimize Milton’s arguments and to appeal to the deeply religious sensibilities of his contemporaries.

Engaging the Reader:

How does Milton engage the reader effectively? Direct address and rhetorical questions are key techniques. Milton often speaks directly to the reader, using second-person pronouns to create a sense of immediacy and involvement. This direct address fosters a sense of personal engagement, making the reader an active participant in the debate. Additionally, Milton uses rhetorical questions to challenge the assertions of “Eikon Basilike” and provoke critical thinking. These questions are designed to undermine the royalist narrative and highlight the contradictions in Charles I’s portrayal. By posing rhetorical questions, Milton encourages readers to question the validity of the claims made in “Eikon Basilike” and to consider alternative perspectives.

In addition, Milton employs analogies and metaphors to illustrate his points and make complex ideas more relatable. For example, he likens Charles I’s manipulation of religious imagery to the actions of a deceiver, enhancing the reader’s understanding of his critique. By using vivid and accessible metaphors, Milton makes his arguments more engaging and persuasive.

The Reception and Impact of “Eikonoklastes”:

“Eikonoklastes” was published in October 1649, just months after the execution of Charles I, at a time when public opinion was deeply divided. The royalist narrative presented in “Eikon Basilike” had gained significant traction, and many viewed Charles I as a martyr. Milton’s work aimed to counter this narrative and provide a justification for the Parliamentarian actions. While Milton’s arguments were persuasive to some, they did not completely neutralize the impact of “Eikon Basilike.” However, “Eikonoklastes” contributed to the broader pamphlet wars and the ongoing ideological battle between royalists and Parliamentarians.

The Restoration of the monarchy in 1660 led to the suppression of works like “Eikonoklastes.” The re-establishment of royal authority involved a campaign to erase the memory of the Commonwealth and the regicide. Works that defended or justified the execution of Charles I were suppressed, and Milton himself faced persecution for his republican writings. Many copies of “Eikonoklastes” were destroyed or fell out of circulation during this period of royalist retribution.

About the authors:

• Punitha Andrews, Asst Prof of English Dept of Humanities, Acropolis Institute of Technology and Research, Research Scholar* at SABVGACC, Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya, Indore
• Dr S S Thakur, Prof of English, Govt Holkar Science (Auto & Model) College, Bhanwarkua, Indore.