By Lily Daher (Fall 2022)
The play Henry V is a historical play that was written by William Shakespeare at the beginning of the seventeenth century. William Shakespeare is one of the most notable authors in Western Literature with his works ranging from plays to poems. He began writing at the end of the sixteenth century and wrote through the seventeenth century. When Shakespeare began playwriting, he wrote tragedies such as King Lear and Macbeth, romances like The Tempest, and comedies and historical plays as well. Henry V is a historical play that is Shakespeare’s adaptation of the 100 Years’ War in Britain, modeled after conflicts between England and France during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The plot follows King Henry’s pursuit of the French throne as a part of England. The play is mostly written in prose but also offers pieces of more structured poetry to emphasize particular scenes and dramatize the events that occur. Politics are the foundation of the story’s conflict in Henry V. It is the power in politics that encourages King Henry’s pursuit of France. He desires a throne he believes to be rightfully his, especially after the church, an institution whose advice he valued, encouraged him that this was his birthright. King Henry creates a narrative where those are the reasons he goes to war that he presents to the public but in reality, he is being swayed by those who are manipulating him to latch onto their own sense of power. There is a theme here in which social powers are indirectly responsible for the outcome of a decision the monarch makes, and also allows them to retain their social power. It is a cycle that applies to modern politics as well. Societal powers are able to sway the opinions of the people in power making decisions that allow for them to remain unscathed should something happen and continue to retain that power. The power dynamics which existed in politics within Henry V are demonstrated in the overall outcome of the play given that societal powers are able to influence the monarch’s decisions, how relationships between countries are formed is crucial, and how the conclusion sets up a political nightmare for England’s future leader.
In the beginning of the play, King Henry searches for evidence that France is rightfully his. With this in mind, he goes to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Ely who have already discussed this idea for King Henry to assume France as part of England. Prior to this decision being made, the two clergymen discuss the potential bill that could be signed that would take away land and money from the church and repurpose it to go to the people. The Archbishop and Bishop plot to encourage King Henry that the best course of action would be for him to bring war to France because it would delay the signing of the bill. The church hierarchs are focused on maintaining power through their land ownership, which is why they are so adamant about Henry pursuing France since it would distract him from signing the bill. Additionally, supporting him would contribute to the overall standing of the church socially. By being in good favor with the King, they are able to maintain their social influence and political one.
King Henry eventually invades France with the first city he takes as Harfeur. He leaves some of his troops there before gradually moving throughout France and taking more locations. As the English are gaining more territory in France, they establish battle settlements. The night before a battle near Agincourt, King Henry disguises himself and spends some time with his soldiers in order to learn from them. After he spends some time with them, he makes a speech, inspiring them despite the fact that the French have more military power than England. Despite all odds being against England, they win against the French. At the end, King Henry wins the hand of Princess Catherine after making peace with France and unites the two nations through their marriage.
Henry V is a play that is a combination of prose and verse. About half of the play is written in prose. When prose is visible in the play, it is commonly seen amongst characters whose stage-time is short-lived. The use of prose in the play is not as prominent as the verse in the play. It is very similar to how people speak, which makes it stand out when it is used versus prose. However, the use of iambic pentameter, as opposed to prose, negates the effect that otherwise powerful dialogue could have. Iambic pentameter, also referred to as blank verse, enhances the dramatic effect of a phrase by stressing every second syllable of a phrase. Usually there are five “iambs” or “feet” that contain ten syllables total. In the first scene of act one when the Bishop of Canterbury and Bishop of Ely are discussing the bill that could take away the Church’s power, the Bishop of Canterbury speaks heavily in iambic pentameter. During this scene the Bishop of Canterbury states “Which I have opened to his Grace at large, As touching France—to give a greater sum,” (Henry V, 1.1, 83-84), in which he indicates that financially supporting the king will shift his focus from signing the bill that would take away from the church. The wording here is written to dramatize the point that the church is using its power to influence the king. If this were written in prose, it would not have the same effect on the audience to highlight the political scheming that exists in the play.
Shakespeare’s use of prose versus verse in different scenes stresses the dramatic effect of more notable events within the play. In the opening act of scene two, King Henry’s former tavern partner, Bardolph, is speaking with characters named Pistol and Nym who are engaged in a fight over Pistol’s wife. These three less notable characters are written in prose which stresses the class (and notability) distinctions amongst characters in the play. Iambic pentameter is spoken amongst more notable characters and is used in about sixty percent of the play. The chorus speaks in iambic pentameter placing emphasis on particular plot points. Act 2 begins with the chorus speaking in iambic pentameter and foreshadowing the French hiring three men to kill King Henry in order to avoid a British invasion. In the following scene, the characters speak in prose as they are at a tavern and the following scene transitions back to iambic pentameter. This transition between iambic pentameter between the two scenes is especially important because in Act 2, Scene 1 the three noblemen in the tavern are speaking in prose, emphasizing that they are less important than the rest of the characters. When the following scene switches back into verse, it is used in the presence of royalty driving the idea that iambic pentameter is selective. In describing the plot in iambic pentameter through the chorus, Shakespeare distinguishes them as separate from the rest of the play as well, emphasizing the notability distinctions.
The opening act of the play begins with the Bishop of Ely and Bishop of Canterbury discussing a bill that would take away power from the church. After some discussion between the two Bishops, they decide that the church will financially support King Henry as he pursues France. Their decision to finally support Henry incentivizes the young King to go to war. This is not only because they provide him with financial means, but also because the Church’s endorsement gives him moral power and represents support from the people given the church’s social power at that time. The church was a notable societal influence, so in having King Henry’s trust, they could easily sway him in a certain direction for their own benefit. Shortly after their declaration of support, the Bishops are called in by King Henry as he wants to provide the people with a legitimate explanation as to why he should pursue France, and not just from his own ideas of taking what is “rightfully” his. The Bishops take advantage of King Henry’s current indecision by telling him that France is rightfully his since France has misused the law in order to prevent him from taking the throne. The Bishop of Canterbury explicitly states, “King Pepin’s title and Hugh Capet’s claim, King Lewis his satisfaction, all appear To hold in right and title of the female. So do the kings of France unto this day, Howbeit they would hold up this Salic law To bar your Highness claiming from the female, And rather choose to hide them in a net Than amply to imbar their crooked titles Usurped from you and your progenitors,” (Henry V, 1.2, 92-100). In this scene, the bishop implies that France holds an illegitimate throne that they had stolen from King Henry’s ancestors. This line also means that French law prohibits inheritance from a woman. In Britain, this means that King Henry is the rightful heir to France because of his lineage, however, in France he would not be recognized as king unless it is through other means, like a marriage. A societal power like the church is usually meant to serve the people’s interest. However the church loses sight of what and who they are supposed to serve and furthermore abuses their political influence diminishing into something that modern readers interpret as corrupt. This corruption within politics is the foundation for modern politics. Societal powers constantly have the ear of governmental figures in modern politics which make it easy for them to bend their allies in power to pass something that would benefit a smaller percentage of people as opposed to the people who need it more. In both the play and modern contexts, this is driven by a selfish desire to benefit their own needs. The power dynamic between the church and the King exists because the church is so esteemed that the King, even as a political power, values their influence. Politics in general are based on the relationship dynamic between those who are in power and the people they are supposed to serve, whether that be people who have direct influence, like the King, or people who have indirect influence, like the church. In medieval times, the church was a prevalent figure in medieval times that was viewed as institutional. This would be divided into a church with hierarchs, like archbishops, who would overlook dioceses. They were an esteemed figure amongst people and monarchs since they were, “basic unit of the Christian community, providing the sacraments required by the lay community,” (Bovey, The Church System) which is what enhanced their social influence. In medieval times, people turned to the church as a constant figure in their lives. Since the church is so esteemed amongst both the people and royalty, it was able to influence the political climate at the time while also being able to remain unscathed should something bad happen and there is someone to be held accountable.
In Act 5 Scene 2 of Henry V, King Henry marries Princess Katherine of France under the promise of a peace treaty between France and England. Their marriage is arranged in order for French royalty to have a semblance of control in how their country is usurped from them, and as a way to maintain a peaceful relationship with Britain. Although this idea of a peace treaty is mostly political, there are complexities about their marriage that further evolve the political implications of King Henry’s conquest over France. The marriage to Princess Katherine was King Henry’s greatest accomplishment towards acquiring France given that the princess was the heir to the throne and a patriotic symbol for her people. His obsession over taking power over France evolves into his desire to marry Princess Katherine. France sees Princess Katherine to be the rightful future leader of their people, so in marrying King Henry, not only do the British see their rightful leader taking another throne as a conquest, but their political allegiance gives King Henry the upper hand in the sense that a marriage is a legitimate way to unite two countries. Again that deeper understanding of the intricacies behind their political marriage is evident since Henry views Katherine’s heart as “politically tantamount to a successful military campaign, if not superior, ” (Purnell, paragraph 5), as he only longs for the additional power he assumes with his conquests. The political set up in modern England parallels this because even though King Henry and Princess Katherine’s marriage was made in an attempt to peacefully surrender France to England, this trope of a perfect marriage exists in modern times. Frequently in history, or even literature, or in this case a piece of historical fiction, marriages are used to form alliances between two families or countries. This idea of an allied marriage is complex because there are always intricacies involved that one side usually is opposed to. Even in the play, their marriage only offers a temporary peace as King Henry’s son, Henry VI, assumes the throne of two battling countries despite Henry V uniting the two countries somewhat peacefully.
King Henry V is portrayed as a great uniter of people as he rallies his troops to beat France despite their unlikeliness to win, and after he successfully claims France. Although he can be seen as one of Shakespeare’s less problematic protagonists, King Henry still makes a few poor moral choices that compromise his character. However, those morally questionable decisions are outweighed by the popularity he gains for the good that he does subsequently. The city of Harfleur was his first conquest, and in taking over this city, he demanded that the people there should swear their loyalty to Britain or would otherwise be driven out of the city. About 2,000 people, including women and children, were driven from the city instead of killing them which shows that he is not as cruel as he could be and can be perceived as objectively “good”. Even though politically he is seen as a good leader, he is still a human who has made mistakes and even goes as far to deny the moral responsibility for his people in claiming that he is only human and is incapable of assuming such a position. This is analogous to ideas in modern politics about how we see objectively good leaders, but undermine poorer decisions they may have made. For example, John F. Kennedy, a president whose approval rating is over 70%, was overall a “good” president. The level of accountability he faced for poor decisions was diminished due to his popularity and the extent to which the people admired him. This ideology of objectively good politicians feeds into the ego of the person in charge, allowing poor choices to be overlooked because the good outweighs the bad emphasized by the idea that “both Shakespeare’s King Henry and President Kennedy took violent actions toward external enemies, but played the role of magnanimous leader to their people,” (Bateman, 3). This is a clear example of how social power is translated into political power. Social interactions heavily influence power dynamics, and this is something that can be seen through time, both in the case of the power as a social institution in Henry V to other political narratives we see globally today.
Overall, the biggest takeaway from Henry V is that the power that a monarch or one particular governing individual has is not entirely their own and is made up of social power and other lasting institutions that even permit him to have power in the first place. In this way, his decisions are not entirely his own and he is a vessel for other people’s political and societal goals. In the play, political complexities affect not only the characters involved but the civilians the people lead which is why understanding its relation to modern politics is important. Given the different factors into how King Henry functions as a monarch, it is important to recognize how the idea of power can interfere with decisions that may or may not benefit a larger number of people.
Works Cited
Bateman, Virginia. William Shakespeare’s Henry V: Influencing Political Vision. https://dc.cod.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1198&context=essai.
Bovey, Alixe. “The Medieval Church: from Dedication to Dissent.” British Library, https://www.bl.uk/the-middle-ages/articles/church-in-the-middle-ages-from-dedication-to-dissent.
Shakespeare, William. “Henry V, Entire Play.” The Folger SHAKESPEARE, 12 Nov. 2019, https://shakespeare.folger.edu/shakespeares-works/henry-v/entire-play/.
Purnell, Mary. “Henry and Katherine’s Politicized Relationship.” Shakespeare’s Henry and the Archives, https://shakespeareshenriad.weebly.com/henry-and-katherines-politicized-relationship.html.
“William Shakespeare Biography.” Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, https://www.shakespeare.org.uk/explore-shakespeare/shakespedia/william-shakespeare/william-shakespeare-biography/.
This work is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
