Thursday, May 30, 2024

Is King Lune too Kind? (Part 1)

King Lune is the king of Archenland during Narnia's Golden Age under the Pevensies. In our first personal encounter with him in The Horse and His Boy, King Lune is described as, "the jolliest, fat, applecheeked, twinkling eyed King you could imagine." King Lune very much lives up to the implications of this description. He is welcoming, gracious, an understanding father, and a king who appears to have one the respect of his people by having respect for them. And, of course, he is kind even to his enemies. 

It is this last characteristic that I would like to examine. Is King Lune very kind, or kind to a fault? We have two situations in which this question arises: in his treatment of the Lord Bar and in his judgment of Prince Rabadash. Let us examine the first situation in this post.

The Lord Bar was King Lune's Lord Chancellor. Presumably the function of the Archenlandish Lord Chancellor was similar to that found in the United Kingdom, to ensure the functioning and administration of the Judiciary. The problem of course, was that the Lord Bar was embezzling funds that were presumably earmarked for the courts. This led to his dismissal, but beyond that, as described by Cor, "Nothing else was done to him and he was allowed to go on living in Archenland."

Was the punishment appropriate or too lenient? 

Well, that he needed to be dismissed is obviously necessary. Such a betrayal of trust of that sort clearly renders someone unfit for office. 

But what sort of sin is embezzling? Clearly it is theft, but it may also be treason?

If the situation was simply theft, we would expect the punishment to be at least to pay back the sums he stole. Biblical law prescribes that the thief pays back double as a type of fine (unless he himself admits that he stole). It would also seem reasonable that the reason for Lord Bar's dismissal was publicly proclaimed so that no one should trust him either. 

Should he have been allowed to continue living in Archenland? Well, simple theft does not seem to warrant exile. People steal for all sorts of reasons and of course we want to leave a door open for the person to repent. 

However, if the embezzling was treasonous, exile would seem to be very appropriate. Was Lord Bar's motives investigated? Was he in the pay of the Tisroc before or only after he was caught stealing? Was he the type of person who would seek and/or have the means to take revenge on the crown? 

These all seem to be relevant and important questions especially for someone who betrayed his office: Lord Bar was in charge of the sources of justice but was very much unjust himself.

Of course, we know what happens. Lord Bar is not exiled and eventually is able to kidnap the crown prince. That this outcome fts Aslan's plans is irrelevant. All outcomes can fit Aslan's plans. But, whether King Lune was too kind is an open question. And one that we can further explore in the next scenario: his treatment of Prince Rabadash, the Crown Prince of Calormen.   

No comments:

Post a Comment

Aslan's Table and the Binding of Isaac

The binding of Isaac is one of the bible's most gripping and controversial stories. This is not the place for retelling or interpretati...