Henry IV

Explain what Henry 4th PT.1 might have said to a member of an early
modern audience about the nature of kingship and the role of the
King.
How did early modern theatrical techniques and Shakespeare's use of
language help to convey these ideas?

Which is the better claim to the throne: birthright or political
effectiveness? It is thought that Henry Bolingbroke introduced the
latter. 'To many, the reign of Richard II seemed to have been the last
time when the old world-order was completely present.' ( McEvoy, p158 )
The "old world-order" was feudalism, the system which ran on bonds of
loyalty (lords to the king, knights to the lords, yeomen to the
knights, and peasantry to the yeomen). As Henry Bolingbroke ruled, the
significance of a King changed. Now a King was a man anointed and
chosen by God to rule the country. In other words, he had a God-given
right to be there.

At the turn of the century and early 1600s, Elizabeth was growing old
and had no heir. The people of England feared that someone like
Bolingbroke would take advantage of the Queen's frailty and seize the
throne. She, herself, is supposed to have declared once "I am Richard
II, know ye not that?" To the early audience, the parallels between the
two times would have been very obvious. Shakespeare has also used
anachronisms to make the audience identify with the action onstage. For
example, in Act 5 Scene 3 Falstaff offers Hal a pistol,
"?Thou gets not my sword, but take my pistol if thou wilt"
But pistols had not been invented 200 years earlier. At many points in
the play, Falstaff is seen drinking 'sack': very popular in the 1590's
but unheard of in Henry's time. 'The presence of anachronism is not, as
some early critics thought, explained by supposing Shakespeare to have
been ignorant. In fact these anachronisms work to ensure we have a
double perspective on the action.' ( McEvoy, p158 )

Throughout the play Shakespeare plays on the idea of what makes a good
king. He makes us, the audience, question the traits of several
characters. Would Hal, the heir to the throne, be a good king? What
about the chivalrous but rash Henry Percy, son of the Earl of
Northumberland (known as Hotspur), whom the king wishes was swapped at
birth with his own son? As the plot unravels, we find that not
everything is as it first appears.

As the play began, the audience would know immediately that the theme
was kingship. The early modern stage would have been almost completely
bare, and therefore the few props that were used were very significant.
A throne, crown, sceptre and perhaps another couple of props were all
that would have been used. As the action progressed, the parallels
between Henry's time and Elizabeth's would have become very
clear.

The play opens with the speech of the grieving Henry Bolingbroke. He is
racked with guilt about the murder of Richard II, plagued with the
threat of civil war, and worried about his heir, who is constantly in
the company of thieves and ruffians. When he hears word of the
victories of Hotspur, it is very upsetting, especially when
Westmoreland says:
"In faith, it is a conquest for a prince to boast of." ( I, 1, 76
)
The thing that hurts the king is the fact that it is not actually the
prince who has acted so honourably. At this moment in the play,
Shakespeare makes us think that Hotspur, a noble soldier, would make a
better king.

Hal is down at the tavern, mixing with the commoners and dirtying his
good name. This is not the behaviour the audience would expect of a
future king. However, at the end of Hal's first scene, Act1 Scene2, he
tells the audience in a soliloquy how he is going to change for the
better. He uses an extended metaphor: "Yet herein will I imitate the
sun," and claims he will come out from behind the "clouds" that are his
commoner friends. (This also draws upon the classic image: the King is
to his country what the Sun is to the stars and planets.) His theory is
that when he reforms he will be wondered at because of his previous bad
reputation. His good behaviour:
"Shall show more goodly, and attract more eyes
Than that which hath no foil to set it off." ( I, 2, 174-5 )
In other words, if he was good all the time people would take it for
granted, but after his unruly behaviour people will be impressed at
such a transformation.

Meanwhile, the friends of his who are not royalty believe that he will
make an excellent king because he will give them all favours. Falstaff
even makes requests:
"Do not when thou art king hang a thief." ( I, 2, 48-9 )
Poins seems to have a less serious view of Hal's royalty. In Act 1
Scene 2 he jovially calls Hal "sirrah" which is a name that one might
use to a child, or someone lower than oneself. It was also commonly
used as a deliberately sarcastic insult. However he then leaves the
Prince with:
"Farewell, my lord." ( I, 2, 154 )
This could be respectful (he could be showing that he really does
honour Hal) or ironic and joking. It could be said that a good king
would not allow himself to be ridiculed by the lower-classes.

From his father's perspective, certainly, Hal should not be seen with
commoners. Henry says that a King should not be something you see every
day and should not become ordinary. He claims that when he was on his
way to the crown he was admired because he was seldom seen:
"Thus did I keep my person fresh and new." ( III, 2, 55)
When Henry speaks to Hal of what was wrong with Richard, he describes
him as a "skipping king" and says that he:
"Mingled his royalty with capering fools
Had his great name profaned with their scorn." ( III, 2, 63-4 )
This is what Hal has been doing, and he needs to put an end to it, or
he will have no respect when he becomes King.
In typical Shakespeare style, the subplot of the play reflects very
much on the main story line. In the Gadshill robbery ( II, 2 ), Hal
rights the wrong of his father-figure, Falstaff, when he and Poins play
their trick on the thieves. It is a small act, but it shows that Hal is
serious about doing such good deeds in the future, on a larger scale.
He will right the wrongs of his actual father. Then in Act 2, Scene 4
another mirroring is clear. Hal speaks to Francis, a lowly worker in
the tavern, and asks him how long he has left to serve before he has
completed his apprenticeship. Francis replies:
"Forsooth, five years..." ( II, 4, 35 )
Although his job is not particularly interesting or important, and
although Francis is not the brightest of people, he knows that if he
stays with it, and works hard, he'll get his reward in the end. In a
way, this shows Hal up because he, unlike loyal Francis, is shirking
his duty, even though it is extremely important.

In that same scene, Hal makes the first step towards his
transformation. Falstaff and Hal play-act a scene between the Prince
and his father. At first, Falstaff, speaking as Henry, chides Hal for
where he has been going and the company he has been keeping:
"This pitch...doth defile, so doth the company thou keepest." ( II, 4,
341-2 )
And then he begins to speak of himself, perhaps he is aware of the fact
that Hal is soon going to leave him,
"A goodly portly man, i'faith, and a corpulent; of a cheerful look, a
pleasing eye, and a most noble carriage." ( II, 4, 348-9 )
This angers Hal, who says they must swap roles. He begins to insult
Falstaff with a series of colourful epithets:
"...that trunk of humours, that bolting-hutch of beastliness, that
swollen parcel of dropsies, that huge bombard of sack, that stuffed
cloak-bag of guts..." ( II, 4, 371-3 )
This language is designed to make the audience laugh, but at the same
time it is convincing and persuasive. As the audience hear such a list,
they too would begin to be disgusted in Falstaff; one can't help be
affected by such imagery. Falstaff is pleading with Hal not to leave
him, but Hal finally expresses his decision:
"I do, I will." ( II, 4, 99 )

From just before Hal's insulting speech, Shakespeare begins to show
similarities between Falstaff and the devil. First, Falstaff himself
says:
"...beat thee out of thy kingdom with a dagger of lath..." ( II, 4,
115-6)
He is referring to a wooden dagger used by the evil character, Vice, in
medieval morality plays. Falstaff has made a connection without
thinking. Then, Hal uses two precise descriptions of him:
"There is a devil haunts thee in the likeness of an old fat man." (
II, 4, 370-1 )
"...that old white-bearded Satan." ( II, 4, 383-4 )
In Act 5 Scene 4, when Falstaff fights with Douglas and falls down,
presumably killed, he then rises as if from the dead. Again, this
reference is taken from old plays. The devil character would be
defeated and then rise from the dead. Shakespeare is making an obvious
connection between the two. Therefore it is as if Hal is resisting the
Devil when he resists his friend. The point made is that a good king
will resist temptation no matter what form it is in.

From that point on, Hal begins his transformation. In Act 3, Scene 2,
he asks for forgiveness from his father for his previous behaviour, and
speaks of what he is going to do now that he has taken on the full
responsibility of his duties. To demonstrate this, he declares that he
is going to fight with Hotspur and swap the other man's honour for his
own shame:
"...I shall make this northern youth exchange
His glorious deeds for my indignities." ( III, 2, 145-6 )
He does not want his father to be ashamed of him any more:
"And in the closing of some glorious day
Be bold to tell you that I am your son." ( III, 2, 133-4 )
In this same speech he says something that everyone in the early
audience would recognise as very noble:
"This in the name of God I promise here." ( III, 2, 153 )
The first thing looked for by the audience in any good king would be
submission to God. Therefore this line would have been very
significant.

Whilst honour is very important in kingship, it can't be the deciding
factor when determining whether a certain person would make a good
monarch. This is proved with the character of Hotspur, who is a
character honourable in the extreme:
PRINCE: "...this same child of honour and renown,
This gallant Hotspur, this all-praised knight." ( III, 2, 139-40
)
DOUGLAS: "Thou art the king of honour." ( IV, 1, 10 )
KING: "and is not this an honourable spoil?" ( I, 1, 74 )
At the beginning of the play he seems to be the best candidate for
King, but we soon see that he would not fit the role at all well.
However chivalrous he may be, he is hot-tempered, has very bad
judgement, and does not usually think before he acts. When he receives
the news that his father is ill, and therefore cannot fight with the
rebels, he becomes enraged:
"Zounds, how has he the leisure to be sick?" ( IV, 1, 17 )
He twists the facts in his head until it seems to him that the Earl of
Northumberland is sick on purpose. He is soon informed that, in fact,
his father might have died. Hotspur continues to rage about the
injustice, until he suddenly changes his mind:
"A perilous gash, a very limb lopped off -
And yet in faith it is not..." ( IV, 1, 43-4 )
He immediately decides that they can easily do without his father, and
that it will be even more impressive to beat the King with lesser
numbers. As he is informed of still more people who are unable to help
them, he becomes more and more rash. Finally, he declares:
"Doomsday is near. Die all, die merrily." ( IV, 2, 134 )
These are not the decisions that an audience would want a King, or a
potential King, to make. It could be said that a King must have good
judgement, and be able to keep his head in a difficult situation.

Falstaff has a very different view of honour:
"Who hath it? He that died a' Wednesday. Doth he feel it? No." ( V, 1,
134-5 )
He says that honour cannot heal you or stop grief. Honour is nothing
but a word and a word is nothing but air. He wants to know what use
honour is to anyone. In his opinion, honour is not particularly
inviting because it only gets you killed.

Meanwhile, Hal has made his transformation. When Vernon reports to
Hotspur about the other camp, he makes a beautiful speech about how
magnificent Hal looks:
"...like feathered Mercury,
...As if an angel dropped down from the clouds." ( IV, 1, 106-8
)
In fact, during the battle scenes, the actor playing Hal would begin to
wear a circlet of gold around his head. This would signify his
transformation into the responsible heir; it would show that he has
taken on his duty.

Audiences in Shakespeare's time would have expected verse to be spoken
by high-status characters and prose by lower characters. For most of
the play, Hal fluctuates between verse and prose. When in the court he
uses verse, as he would be expected, but when he is in the tavern he
speaks in prose, like Falstaff and his other friends. However on the
battlefield he suddenly uses verse to speak to Falstaff:
"He is indeed, and living to kill thee
I prithee lend me thy sword" ( V, 3, 46-7 )
Although it might not be so to an audience watching the play in our
day, the early spectators would have immediately heard this change in
style. It would have been an extremely clear indicator of Hal's
transformation.

So does Hal live up to the audience's expectations of a good king?
There are different sides of this argument. Much depends on the way
that Hal is acted. It has become quite common in modern productions to
see Hal drinking with his friends. However there is nothing in the
script to suggest that the Prince drinks at all. The only person seen
drunk or consuming alcohol is Falstaff. Our opinion of Hal is very much
changed if he, too, is indulging. Another uncertain aspect is what
Hal's opinion is towards his friends. Is he like his father: using
people until they become of no more use to him? It could certainly be
played this way. He is pushing his old friends away, as Bolingbroke did
the Percies. When Hal makes his soliloquy about being like the sun, is
he going to act in that way because he has had it planned? Or is it
because he is finally facing up to his duty? Hal could be either cold
and calculating, or honest and with good intentions. It all depends on
the way that a director chooses to have him played.

Bibliography:

Henry IV Part I, Shakespeare, Cambridge School Edition
Shakespeare: The Basics, Sean McEvoy, Routledge