 So now that we've looked at important contextual information that influenced Percy Shelley when he was writing England in 1819, let's now do a deep dive in the line-by-line analysis of England in 1819, which is a sonnet. So let's examine Percy Shelley's poem England in 1819, which forms part of AQA's World and Lives Anthology. So this is a really, really powerful poem and of course is written in one stanza, okay? Now the title is really interesting and quite significant, but before I even dive into the title, I'm going to read the entire poem and of course the entire poem is literally just 14 lines. So let me first read it and then we're going to go through a line-by-line analysis. England in 1819, an old mad blind despised and dying king. Princes, the dregs of the dull race, who flow through public scorn, mud from a muddy spring, rulers who neither see nor feel nor know, but leech like to their fainting country, cling till they drop, blind in blood without blow. A people starved and stabbed in the untilled field, an army whom liberticide and prey makes as a two-edged sword to all who wield. Golden and sanguine laws, which tempt and slay, religion chriceless, godless, a book sealed, a senate, time's worst statute, unrepealed, are graves from which a glorious phantom may burst to illumine a tempestuous day. Now let's have a look at this poem, which is quite damning of the monarchy. Now the title of course is quite significant because it refers to a year of chaos on upheaval, especially it's a reference to the Peter Lou massacre that happened in 1819. Now of course, the structure of this poem is used ironically. This poem is written as a sonnet, remember that Stonance traditionally, I love poems that celebrate the object of that person's affection. However of course, Shelley is using this structure ironically to mock and criticise the monarchy. Now let's look at the first line, especially this listing old mad blind despised. Now here, this use of a syndetine, which of course is a structural technique, is quite sharp, it's direct, it's bold, and this opening description is deeply radical, as it sharply criticises the king. So here we can see that Percy Shelley seems to be against divine right of kings, which was significant during this time, everyone believed in it, that's why nobody questioned the king because they believed that God had directly chosen him. Now here, the reference to despised, dying and dregs and dull race, the powerful litteration here of these really forceful D sounds illustrates that nobody from the author's perspective and from the poet's perspective in the royal family should be spared any criticism, they're all just as bad as each other. Also, when the speaker refers to the dregs of the dull race here, dregs means worthless, okay, and you know, it's the most worthless part of something. So what the speaker is saying is that not only should the king go, but even the heirs who are just as useless as the king, they should go, they serve this country, no, they do not serve this country, they're actually terrible. Then in the third line, he talks about the king's children and refers to mud from a muddy spring. So here, this metaphor illustrates the speaker's belief that the king's children are just as corrupt and terrible as their father. Also, he mentions how the monarchs and of course their children, the princes and the princesses, they neither see nor feel nor know, and Polycyniton is used here as well as the rule of three to highlight just how out of touch the royal family is. There's no change possible if they are still in place, okay? Then he refers to how the monarchy, using this really vivid simile, that they're all leeches and they drain England as a whole, right? Rather than enriching it and providing it any direction, they're actually draining it. Then he mentions how the country is fainting, okay, and they cling to this fainting country. So he says, leech like to their fainting country cling. And fainting country cling is really powerful personification and alliteration, furthermore damning of the monarchy as well as his, you know, the king and his heirs, right? They're just clinging onto power to a country that's literally fainting. It's passing out. It's, you know, it's weak and rather than trying to fix it and maybe kind of step aside and give more competent people power, actually, they're clinging onto power quite selfishly. Then he mentions how the king and his children cling to power till they drop blind in blood. And here, what he's doing is he's especially coupled with the previous simile leeches, right? He's comparing the princes, the children of the kings, right, to stuffed leeches who feed off the country without resolving any of their issues before they just dropped it, okay? Then the reference to blind blood blow. These are all plosive sounds, okay? Because they start with B. And these plosives emphasize the speaker's anger, his rage at how is this possible, this monarchy which is so corrupt and terrible, they're leading England to ruin. How is it possible that they're still around? Then he mentions to even make it more damning that it's overseeing a people who were starved and stabbed. And here, the sibilants is used to illustrate how poor people who are a part of English society, you know, the peasants and so on, are worked to death, abused and discarded. And these people, of course, because they're worked to death, they leave the field untilled, okay? So here's referring to the untilled field. And here, what he's emphasizing is just how society is disintegrating as a farmer are not being looked at, farms are not being looked after by people who are starved and stabbed, okay? Then he refers to an army. And here, this assonance is quite accusatory, right? Remember that the army who came in and stepped in in the Peterloo massacre and killed all these people that were, you know, protesting, he sees them as also part of the problem. They also need to be thrown out with the king. Then the reference to liberticide illustrates the speaker's belief that the army is killing liberty by oppressing people, people who try and stand up for change, who try and stand up to the monarchy. Then he refers to how they make as a two-edged sword to all who wield. And this metaphor is really powerful, because what he's basically saying is that the army's attacks on the people, especially as seen in the Peterloo massacre in 1819, is a two-edged sword. As people who are members of the army, they're not members of the monarchy, right? They're also just working class people, right? Hence, they hurt themselves by hurting people and by reinforcing the rules of the monarchy. Then he refers to these rules which are golden and sanguine. Now, the juxtaposing color golden, so gold, which suggests good, and sanguine, which suggests sanguine is red. It's blood. It implies bloodshed. So there's this contrast between gold, which implies something good, but sanguine, which is bloody. And what he's basically trying to say here is that the laws hurt rather than protect people. And of course, he then mentions that these greedy violent laws tempt and slay. They suppress people. They kill people. Then he refers to how religion, christless, godless. So even religion has been profaned. So here, religion no longer has a Christ or a God. This is his direct reference actually to divine right of kings. Religion has for the longest time been used to justify why the king should be in power because they're pointed by God. But actually what we can see here is he's basically saying that the king actually, and this religious belief in divine right of kings, actually no longer serves the purpose that it was originally designed for. Now, this purpose has been profaned. It's been corrupted. Then he refers to a book sealed. And here, what he's basically saying is that the Bible, this Bible that put the king in place is sealed. And he's implying that the church, which is supposed to also be protecting English people is ignoring what's happening. The church, too, is also a culprit. It's corrupt. Then he mentions a Senate. Remember, Senate is the people that serve in parliament. A Senate times worst statute. And here, what he's saying using this publicly is the formation of parliament is just the worst law. Even the parliamentarians who basically just didn't really have that much power during this time. Actually, they're also just as useless as the king. So he's basically saying throw the whole thing away. Then he mentions in the second to last line, graves. And here, this metaphor represents is everything that represents law and order in 1819. Okay, it's broken and dead. Everything that represents order is broken and dead. England at this time from the speaker's perspective is a country that needs serious reform. But then he mentions, however, there's a glorious phantom. And here, what we can see is the speaker has a tiny, tiny little pebble of hope. He hopes that the present law dies. And also, of course, the leaders are completely thrown out, because from the death of this law, from its grave could emerge a spirit, a positive spirit that rises, a positive spirit of reform and revolution. And it can burst. So he uses this dramatic verb to show that there's still kind of promise. And when it does so, it can illumine our tempestuous days. So this change can bring light to the upheaval, the unrest, the chaos that's currently in England. And so there's a little bit of promise right at the final, final line, because here, Shelley hopes for light and enlightenment. So he has a little tiny bit of hope, but this can only happen if the current order is completely overthrown. If there's a revolution, much like, for example, the French Revolution, where the monarchy was completely overthrown, and a republic was established. That's basically the radical message of this sonnet, and even more so why it's so ironic, okay? Because it's basically saying the focus of the sonnet, the king, the princes, and so on, actually need to be overthrown. Maybe even possibly killed that the French did during the French Revolution with the king and queen. So that's really it when it comes to a line by line analysis of this poem. I hope you guys have found it useful. Please do bear in mind that this poem is part of an AQA course that I have, which goes into lots of detail on all 15 poems in the world on life's anthology, but also what I'm going to be doing is also crafting some model answers in terms of how to compare this poem to other poems within the anthology. Okay, so do make sure you sign up for the course. But also, if you do want regular classes, keep an eye out on firstreaches.com where I put up classes, especially English literature, poetry classes, sign up, be part of it, and of course improve in your English literature analysis. Thanks so much guys for watching this and looking forward to speaking to you guys about the following poem.