The purpose of Absalom and Achitophel is explicitly political. To be more precise, Dryden sets out to exalt the reign of Charles II and damn his most implacable enemies.

By the time Dryden wrote his mock-epic masterpiece, Charles had been on the throne for 21 years, and thus he was inevitably subject to a growing chorus of criticism from his more restive subjects. Critics were scathing of what they saw as the air of immorality and corruption hanging over the royal court. Even by the traditionally lax moral standards of kings, Charles, the "Merry Monarch" was something of a libertine, engaged in numerous extra-marital relationships and fathering a large brood of illegitimate offspring.

Even more seriously, in the eyes of his critics, Charles was trying to turn himself into an absolute monarch on the lines of his first cousin, Louis XIV of France. On the whole then, Charles was under attack from numerous quarters, and what he really needed was a good old-fashioned piece of propaganda that would defend his reign and expose his opponents to public ridicule and contempt.

Enter John Dryden. In writing Absalom and Achitophel, he sought to present Charles II in the guise of King David: a flawed but ultimately sympathetic character who, despite his many shortcomings, deserves the loyalty and respect of his subjects. That being the case, it is simply unconscionable for anyone such as Absalom, an allegorical figure representing the Duke of Monmouth, the pretender to the throne, or Achitophel, representing the Earl of Shaftesbury, to attempt to overthrow God's appointed monarch.

Both Monmouth and Shaftesbury participated in a rebellion against Charles, as neither wanted the King to be replaced on the throne by his Catholic brother James, Duke of York. As both a Catholic and a loyal monarchist, Dryden sets out to expose what he sees as the folly and treachery of such an undertaking, relating it to the Biblical story of Absalom and Achitophel, who likewise tried to topple King David from his throne.