겨울 이야기에 나타난 보통법 전통과 절대주의의 대결

This paper aims to examine the conflict between the common law tradition and absolutism through William Shakespeare’s play, The Winter’s Tale. When James I, King James VI of Scotland who believed in the divine right of kings, ascended to the throne of England after Queen Elizabeth I died in 1603, the English saw their first Stuart king with a look of anticipation and concern. While James I at first showed respect for the religion of England as well as for the common law and Parliament, his support of the theory of divine right of kings at his court posed a danger of clashing with the constitutional tradition of England. In this precise regard, the ruling of the Bate’s Case (1606) enabled James I to enforce the absolute royal prerogative that the previous kings had never experienced. This absolute royal prerogative provided James I and his supporters with the possibility of strengthening the king's authority as much as the absolute monarchs of the European continent exercised. The Winter’s Tale not only showcases the tension and conflicts between the common law and absolutism that developed after James I's ascension, but also critiques the cruel realities of court politics dominated by absolutism through divine retribution against Leontes. Later, the constitutional history of England has proved Shakespeare right in his dramatic representation of the absolute royal prerogative as something to be denied thoroughly and absolutely, considering that England's tradition of respecting the common law and Parliament was restored through the Glorious Revolution of 1688. Therefore, we claim for The Winter’s Tale as a satire and criticism of absolutism whose tyrannical attempt to contest England’s indigenous constitutional tradition is a failure.