Character analysis
The King of England (Monarchy as Institution)
in Common Sense by Thomas Paine
In Common Sense, Thomas Paine views the King of England not as an individual but as a representation of an institution—one that the monarchy creates and maintains. This abstract figure becomes Paine's main ideological target, enabling him to criticize not just George III's personal shortcomings but the whole hereditary system. He begins his critique by tracing kingship back to its roots in conquest and usurpation, arguing that the first kings were essentially successful bandits whose power was legitimized over generations through a guise of divine right. He references the Bible, especially the Book of Samuel, to show that God himself warned the Israelites against wanting a king, positioning monarchy as a violation of divine authority.
As an institution, the King of England exemplifies what Paine calls the "crowned ruffian" issue: hereditary succession ensures that the throne may eventually fall to the foolish, the wicked, or the inexperienced, with no way to correct this. Paine provides historical examples of monarchs who dragged their nations into conflict out of personal pride. This figure is inherently static—lacking a redemptive journey, inner depth, or the ability to change. This inflexibility is a key point in his argument: monarchy cannot be reformed, only abolished. By depersonalizing the king into an institution, Paine redirects colonial discontent from appealing to a single person to challenging a system, making independence the only reasonable solution.
Connected characters
- Thomas Paine
Paine is the institution's relentless prosecutor. He systematically strips the King of England of mystique, divine sanction, and practical legitimacy, recasting the role as an affront to reason and scripture. Every rhetorical move Paine makes—biblical citation, historical analogy, economic argument—is aimed at delegitimizing this figure so thoroughly that reconciliation becomes unthinkable for colonial readers.
- King George III
George III is the living instantiation of the institutional King of England. Paine deliberately blurs the line between the man and the office: George's specific acts of tyranny (closing ports, hiring mercenaries, burning towns) are presented as inevitable products of the monarchical system rather than personal aberrations, reinforcing Paine's argument that the institution itself, not just its current occupant, must be rejected.
- The American Colonists
The colonists are the institution's victims. Paine frames their suffering—taxation, military occupation, denial of representation—as the predictable output of a system designed to enrich and empower the crown at the subject's expense. Awakening colonists to this structural relationship, rather than a fixable personal dispute, is the pamphlet's central persuasive mission.
- William the Conqueror
William the Conqueror functions as the institution's founding moment and original sin. Paine cites him to prove that English kingship began in violent conquest, not divine appointment or popular consent, thereby undermining any claim that the monarchy rests on legitimate historical foundations.
- The British Parliament
Parliament is the institution's enabler and co-conspirator. Paine argues that Parliament, far from checking royal power, has become an instrument through which the crown extends its reach into colonial life—passing the very acts (Stamp Act, Intolerable Acts) that make the King of England's tyranny operational and enforceable.