The Contrasting Goodness of Kings: Edward of England vs King of Scotland
How does the report of the goodness of the King of England contrast with the nature of the King of Scotland?
The doctor enters to inform the men that King Edward of England is "touching" sufferers in order to help make them well. How does this report of the goodness of the King of England contrast with the nature of the King of Scotland?
Final answer:
The report of King Edward of England "touching" sufferers to help them contrasts with the nature of the King of Scotland, as it portrays King Edward as a benevolent and caring monarch who actively seeks to alleviate the suffering of his subjects. This benevolence stands in sharp contrast to the King of Scotland, who is not depicted as taking similar actions to directly aid his people.
The report about King Edward of England "touching" sufferers underscores his compassionate and hands-on approach to governance. This image of the King is one of a ruler who is actively involved in the well-being of his subjects. This action signifies a sense of responsibility and care towards the people under his rule, which enhances his image as a benevolent monarch.
In contrast, the report implies that the King of Scotland does not engage in such direct acts of compassion or healing. This contrast serves to highlight a potential difference in the leadership styles of the two monarchs. It suggests that while King Edward is actively working to alleviate the suffering of his people, the King of Scotland may not be as directly involved in the well-being of his subjects or may not possess the same reputation for benevolence.
In conclusion, the report highlights the disparity in the way King Edward of England and the King of Scotland are portrayed, with King Edward being depicted as actively involved in the welfare of his people, which contrasts with the nature of the King of Scotland.