Henry V - Benevolent King Or Scheming Politician?

However, this question of Henry’s morals is more difficult than it seems at first glance. Henry is a model of traditional "heroism”, but his value system is confusing - after all, his patriotism (or land lust, depending on how you look at it) leads him to invade a non-aggressive country and to slaughter thousands. He sentences former friends and prisoners of war to death, while giving the impression that he will show mercy; he never acknowledges that he holds any responsibility for the bloodshed he has initiated. The brilliance of Henry's speeches, his oratory and his careful development of his image make him an eff

The play is full of patriotic speeches that show how proud you should be to be English. Shakespeare even uses a Chorus to introduce each act with a glowing, but somewhat misleading, build-up of what you are about to see. Henry is shown as a strong man with great powers of leadership - the qualities seen as essential in a King in violent times. The play also shows the horror and brutality of war and its destructive effect on civilian life, there is conflict between what the King does as a military leader and his instinctive human feelings, highlighting the difference between the opinions of benevolence or him being a scheming politician. The decisions he makes because of his position and patriotism against the validity of any glory he may receive because of this choice. By using words and images of the fame and glory of victory to be shared by only those who are willing to fight, and that “if it is a sin to covet honour I am the most offending soul alive”. Henry will fight with the honour expected by a loyal Englishman; this will encourage the others to fight similarly. When the French messenger arrives asking Henry to prepare a “ransom”, King Henry sends back a surprisingly even-tempered and humble reply: he admits his army has tired, and he would rather not fight the French if he can avoid it. Yet he will continue to march on because he believes he is in the right, and he thinks he will eventually be victorious. This shows his patriotism and faith in God as well as his possible arrogance and an indication of how the Church has corrupted his view. Later in the play Henry’s scheming political nature comes to the forefront, when he is with Katherine the pleasantries only mask an obvious power activity. Henry's manners are immaterial to his chances of success. Katherine is being used as a political pawn, and she barely understands the language in which her suitor is courting her. This type of transaction was a common practice among the aristocracy of medieval and Renaissance Europe, though the modern reader may revile it. Katherine's eventual consent can be read as being given with good will, or as the action of one who realizes she has no other choice.

As a history play, Henry V has to draw considerably on events prior to it, as well as the fact that the outcome is known ahead of time. For Shakespeare's audience, who could draw on their own knowledge of history as well as the previous three plays by Shakespeare, this made the play more interesting and compelling for the audience. However, this interconnectedness aspect of the four plays is often difficult for a modern audience to understand as the history is not widely known and has been distorted through the generations. Henry V cannot be viewed as a single work, but must be understood as part of the whole “tetrology”. It is our knowledge of the civil wars that both precede and follow the reign of Henry V that helps us to admire his achievements even more. Henry is the only King in Shakespeare’s works to have kept England in a stable state, without having to deal with domestic or international wars, as mentioned earlier.

Shakespeare draws the connection between this play and contemporary events as strongly as in a lot of other plays. Elizabeth had mobilized England for a major campaign against Ireland to be led by the Earl of Essex. This generated a great deal of patriotic excitement similar to that of Henry V's battles in France (However, the Earl of Essex lost disastrously in his campaign.). England was becoming more powerful all the time, and it soon became obvious that she could defend her own borders without any trouble. This meant that expansion soon became possible, with Ireland and the Netherlands nearby, as well as much of the New World to conquer. The exploits, and representation on stage of Henry V fuelled the desire for expansion as contemporaries of Shakespeare pushed for more aggressive military exploits. Henry V may have to appear benevolent t

Some topics in this essay:
King Henry, Shakespeare Chorus, Governor Harfleur, Elizabeth Shakespeare’s, Scheming Politician, Excess Falstaff, Henry IV, Fluellen Pistol's, Bardolph Pistol, Canterbury Ely, king henry, henry iv, french town, value system, military exploits henry, elizabeth shakespeare’s, successful king, military exploits, exploits henry, richard ii, henry perfect, father henry iv, elizabeth shakespeare’s patron,