ABSTRACT
Both Richard II and Richard III evoke memories of coronation rites, although no coronation is ever staged. Richard II uncrowns himself in a climactic scene, deposed by Henry Bolingbroke. In Richard III, Edward, Prince of Wales, talks of his imminent coronation (III.1.62), but ends up murdered by his uncle, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, whose subsequent coronation we never see. If the course of true love never did run smooth, as Lysander laments in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, seldom does the transfer of power run smooth in Shakespeare. Richard II and Richard III are no exception, their focus on troubled royal succession amounting to what Ronald L. Grimes calls ritual criticism. ‘Ritual criticism,’ as Grimes defines it, ‘is the interpretation of a rite or ritual system with a view to implicating its practice’. 2 Why might one engage in ritual criticism? Grimes lists several reasons, among them, ‘to enable the revision and construction of more effective rites’ and ‘to protect oneself from exploitation by ritual means’. 3 This chapter argues that Richard II and Richard III implicate the practice of monarchical succession with a view to inviting audiences and readers not only to protect themselves from exploitation, but also to revise and construct more effective rites.
