Tragic hero or self-pitying schmuck — What will it be Mr Khan?

Perhaps one of the most fiercely debated scenes in Shakespearian scholarship is the crowning of Henry IV. After being exiled by Richard II, Henry returns with an army of nobles formerly loyal to Richard II and ousts him from power. To make the change of guard seem legitimate in the eyes of the court, Henry makes Richard renounce his throne and hand him the crown publicly and willingly. 

In response, Richard does hand over the crown but uses the public platform to deliver one of the bard’s most cleverly disguised speeches. In words he abdicates, but between the lines he declares Henry a usurper and an upstart — risking civil war in an already beleaguered Tudor England. When Henry senses the temperature of the room shift because of Richard’s oratory, in a moment of frustration he asks why Richard is behaving so when he has come willing to resign. “My crown I am; but still my griefs are mine: You may my glories and my state depose, But not my griefs; still am I king of those,” responds the erstwhile King. 

As the scene reaches dramatic crescendo, the audience is forced to ask itself. Who is Richard II? Did he bring his own fate upon him by exiling Henry in the first place out of hubris and hunger for power, or is he the victim of an unwarranted coup? In short, is Richard II a tragic hero, or a self-pitying schmuck?