Burning Foreheads in Richard III

Claudia McNeilly

998526395

January 28, 2014 

ENG331H1S

Burning Foreheads in Richard III

In Richard III, Queen Elizabeth tells the newly-crowned king to “Hid’st thou that forehead with a golden crown” (iv.4.140). The Oxford English Dictionary states that beginning in 1560 the forehead was “Used for the countenance as capable of expressing shame, etc.” In his essay “Written on the Forehead,” P. B. Roberts documents the phenomenon of forehead branding by stating instances where crimes were punished by searing the forehead with the the first letter of the name of the committed crime. For instance, perjury was punished with the marking of the letter ‘P’ into the forehead. This custom was intended to ensure public humiliation (Roberts 574). He concludes his argument by stating that Elizabeth’s use of forehead imagery in Richard III “means that she is constituting the king as a felon- appropriately enough in a play which represents Richard as complicit in multiple murders” (Roberts 575). While his argument is correct in that it asserts Elizabeth’s conviction of Richard, Roberts fails to state the golden scar Richard attains as a result of his kingship, along with the repercussions this mark causes him to endure. This shortcoming causes Roberts’ claim to be partially inconclusive. In this essay, I will employ Roberts’s claim to prove that Richard’s “golden crown” serves as his own form of branding as I dispel the golden crown’s ability to serve as a public display of the crimes Richard has committed.

In “Written on the Forehead,” Roberts cites prostitution, slavery, Judaism, and perjury as crimes punishable by branding in the sixteenth and early seventeenth century. He states that while the form of punishment was most often reserved for the forehead, it could be employed on other visible areas such as the cheek (Roberts 574-575). The ritual was primarily reserved for the forehead as the area served as both a publicly visible domain, as well as a symbol of beauty in Elizabethan England (Elizabethan England Museum 2013). The forehead as a desirable accessory in Elizabethan England lead to the practice of plucking out the hairs at the front of the scalp in order to give the impression of a larger and more bulbous upper head (Elizabethan England Museum 2013). The act of destroying the forehead and its beauty was therefore not only seen as a means to display public scrutiny, but also as a way of tarnishing an individual's ability to appear desirable or attractive. The breakdown of beauty through the act of branding adds impact to Richard’s own forehead mutilation as Elizabeth’s reference becomes infused with the weight of destroying Richard’s physical appearance even more than it is already documented to be damaged.  

Richard’s forehead is never explicitly mentioned as being the cause of his deformity. Instead, descriptions of a disease resembling scoliosis is made is to blame for Richard’s outward appearance. This is evident throughout the play in lines such as: “To help thee curse this poisonous bunch-baked toad” (i.iii. 246). Lines such as the aforementioned heavily suggest Richard’s disease is primarily located on his back. In this way, Richard’s forehead is left out of his deformity entirely. The omission of his forehead when describing his abnormality intensifies Elizabeth’s command to “Hid’st thou that forehead with a golden crown” (iv.4. 140) as it is in this instance that Elizabeth demands Richard conceal one of the only seemingly regular parts about him. It is at this moment that the instance serves to highlight Richard’s inability to conceal himself in any way, leaving him unable to appear as a regular member of Elizabethan society. 

Throughout the play, Richard’s inability to act or appear as normal causes him to retreat away from the public into a furious power-hungry rage. This retreat from the public is evidenced in Richard’s reluctance to continue his customary monologues towards the end of the play. Richard’s monologues, which once allowed for strains of sympathy, bring with their absence a visible air of cowardice as his murderous rage causes him to spiral from naivety to disillusionment. Elizabeth alludes to this cowardice in her instruction to “Hid’st thou that forehead with a golden crown” (iv.iv.140) as her words further illuminate the act of hiding Richard adopts towards the latter portion of the play. The sentence, which serves as a condemnation of Richard’s cowardice, also act as a prequel to the dishonor Elizabeth anticipates him to feel as a result of his cowardly actions. This is evident as the command to hide one of his only regular body parts displays Elizabeth’s desire for Richard to be unable to appear normal, while also acting as instructions to participate in the cowardly act of shielding oneself in avoidance of punishment. In this sense, Elizabeth reveals her contempt for Richard’s deceitful actions while simultaneously stating the cowardice brought upon himself as a result of his treachery. 

Elizabeth’s desire for Richard to feel shame as a ramification of his actions is realized as he faces Richmond in a final fight to his death. In the scene, which serves as his ultimate degradation, Richard gasps for breath as he yells “A horse, a horse! My kingdom for a horse!” (V.vii.7). The plea, which serves as evidence of Richard’s willingness to exchange his beloved kingdom for his life, reveals his own self interest, unearthing Richard’s own cowardice to the world, and allowing Elizabeth’s desire for his shame to come to fruition. The instance serves to allow Richard to enlist humiliation unto himself, presenting Elizabeth with the revenge she seeks him to find.

Although Elizabeth’s exchange with Richard is evidenced as acting as a multi-layered exchange, her employment of the word “forehead” is the only instance the word is used throughout the play. While this can be seen to fuel its appearance with the distinction of foreign cadence, it also serves to imbue the singular occurrence with a loss of emphasis as the word is hardly brought to attention at all. This contrasts, however, with the employment of the word “face” which the text uses a total of ten times. The imagery of faces to depict loss throughout the play is is evident as Buckingham addresses Richard about his impending Kingship saying: “This noble isle doth want her proper limbs;/ Her face defaced with scars of infamy” (III.vii.125-26). The notion of loss being publicly displayed on the face parallels the Elizabethan practice of branding as it was also used to display the loss of ideals such as innocence, beauty and dignity.

While Shakespeare uses facial imagery as a means through which to express suffering similarly to the practice of branding, a further parallel connects the two strands of punishment. This connection is the fact that branding was not only reserved for the forehead. It was, instead, most commonly administered on the forehead, while simultaneously making appearances on other parts of the face such as the cheek. In this way, while Shakespeare only employs the word “forehead” once through the entirety of the play, his tendency to re-use the image of faces expressing loss adds greater significance to the theme of faces in the play. This lends weight to Richard’s newly-crowned hidden forehead as he too becomes part of the play’s theme of loss.  

Richard’s bereavement was administered by himself as his venomous actions cause him to meet his eventual death. While victims of branding did not administer burns onto themselves and were instead unwillingly marked by others, Richard’s demise echoes that of branding victims as it serves to highlight his wrongdoings to the public sphere. His ability to add insult to injury by inflicting punishment onto himself appears as a direct result of his ignorance towards his responsibilities as king. This neglect of responsibility is apparent in his unquestioning willingness to surrender a kingdom which he has bloodied his hands for in attempt to save himself from pain. In this way, Roberts’ claim that “Elizabeth is constituting the king as a felon” (Roberts 575) lacks cohesively as it fails to state that Richard has constituted himself as a felon as well. The result of this inconclusive clam is a failing awareness towards the scope of Richard’s crime and punishment and a neglect of his self-sabotaging nature. If one is able to perceive Richard’s actions as the self-betrayal they are, the depth of his deceptions drastically increases, allowing the figure of Richard as ruiner to come to complete fruition. 

Works Cited 

"Facial Beauty - Elizabethan Museum." Elizabethan Museum. Elizabethan Museum, 1 Apr. 2013. Web. 12 Feb. 2014.

Roberts, P.B. "Written on the Forehead." Notes and Queries 56.4 (2009): 574-76.EBSCOhost. Web. 12 Feb. 2014.

Shakespeare, William, and Peter Holland. The Tragedy of King Richard the Third. New York, NY: Penguin, 2000. Print.