How Does Henry Change Hal's Character
Henry V ruled England from 1413 to 1422. Before that, his father Henry IV ruled while his son, then known as Hal, spent his time with criminals and even took part in some of their crimes. Hal and his friends were led by a big time drinker, John Falstaff. Henry at that time was seen as a very bad future King, simply because of all of his bad habits, and was even threatened to lose his future position on the throne. As soon as Henry IV died Hal changed drastically, and even banished his old friend John, whom he was very close to. This in my opinion is a very harsh thing to do to an old friend. According to the book King Henry V by Shakespeare, John even dies of a broken heart because Henry rejected him: “His heart is fracted and corroborate”
…show more content…
This can however, be supported by the fact that John Falstaff was actually a criminal, and a wimp during war. This may be the reason that Henry rejected him. We also see in Henry IV part two, Hal’s future intentions to banish all of his criminal friends. This I think is actually quite two-faced, because as soon as Henry gained power, he rejected his friends.
Henry V has many traits that a good King should have. Firstly, he has the ability to not judge the person by his relationship with them, but by their acts.
Bardolf is another criminal friend of Henry’s. He robbed a church and was bought to Henry. Henry, however, who could have bailed him out with one word, decided to hang him. This can be seen as both psychopathic, or extremely fair, with absoloutely no discretion towards the one who commit the crime.
This is supported by the phrase that Henry then applies: “We would have all such offenders so cut off”
There are many other situations in which Henry V does not judge, but instead applies a fair punishment. For example when he was insulted by an apparently drunk man, he forgave him, and released him from prison: “Enlarge the man committed yesterday, that railed against our person: we consider it was excess of wine”
This was followed by Scroop of Masham, Cambridge and Grey.
Henry intercepted their letters to the King of France, who had plotted to murder him. This was treated in a very similar way to Bardolf’s case.
All three of them were extremely close to Henry V, however Henry ordered them to their deaths. Henry, however, did not damn them in front of God, so he was giving them a chance in heaven. Henry in this scene showed lots of cunning, he displayed the letters to them quietly, and opened up slowly, that he found out about their treason. Henry makes a speech after that, he makes Scroop, Cambridge and Grey feel extremely guilty about what they had done. Henry also gained respect in front of his own men when he threatened them like a cold blooded killer: “The mercy that was quick in us but late, By your own counsel is suppressed and killed. You must not dare, for shame, to talk of mercy”
Henry also orders the slaughter of the French prisoners at, a command that would shock even a modern audience. “The French have reinforced their scattered men. Then every soldier kill his prisoners.”
Although the command is shocking, and a war crime, we have to remember that Henry’s army was outnumbered five to one, so he had no time, or necessary soldiers to deal with the French prisoners.
The French will also commit a war crime, they will slaughter all of the English baggage boys. This will in fact force Henry to repeat his command of slaughtering the French prisoners.
Since Henry V murdered all of the French prisoners, he can be seen as an incredibly ruthless King, in my mind, this is probably the only thing that really puts Henry into the perspective of a tyrant.
Henry had a very good attitude towards the lower classes, partly because of his long time in the Boar’s head tavern with all of his criminal friends.
When Henry snooped around at night in disguise, he looked for opinions of what the soldiers thought of him. The Chorus called this: “A little touch of Henry in the night”
What Henry found out, is that the soldiers all respect him, but some doubt his cause to invade France. He came across one of his old friends, Ancient Pistol, who shows his affection towards Henry, even though Henry killed one of Pistol’s best friends, Bardolf: “The King is a bawcock, and a heart of gold,, A lad of life, an imp of fame…”
I am led to believe that Henry V was an ideal King with some traits that could show him as a ruthless tyrant.
I believe that Henry had a very good ability to make quick and effective decisions.
All of the quotes supported that Henry was a ruthless tyrant. They can all however be backed up by Henry’s intentions to make the situation more efficient. When he murders the French prisoners, this is by far, in my mind the worst thing that he did. He did it to save time and soldiers, however, in my mind it was not worth the French prisoner’s lives to save a couple of soldiers and a bit of
time.
I also believe that Henry V still has some of his criminal youth left over in him. He does make his country and barons very happy, but he does it with some sacrifices, even though this can sometimes be the more effective way.
I could see why Henry hung Bardolf, but them being old friends really makes him come through like a bit of a psychopath. However he maintains a good relationship with his soldiers even after the hanging of Bardolf.
This can however, be supported by the fact that John Falstaff was actually a criminal, and a wimp during war. This may be the reason that Henry rejected him. We also see in Henry IV part two, Hal’s future intentions to banish all of his criminal friends. This I think is actually quite two-faced, because as soon as Henry gained power, he rejected his friends.
Henry V has many traits that a good King should have. Firstly, he has the ability to not judge the person by his relationship with them, but by their acts.
Bardolf is another criminal friend of Henry’s. He robbed a church and was bought to Henry. Henry, however, who could have bailed him out with one word, decided to hang him. This can be seen as both psychopathic, or extremely fair, with absoloutely no discretion towards the one who commit the crime.
This is supported by the phrase that Henry then applies: “We would have all such offenders so cut off”
There are many other situations in which Henry V does not judge, but instead applies a fair punishment. For example when he was insulted by an apparently drunk man, he forgave him, and released him from prison: “Enlarge the man committed yesterday, that railed against our person: we consider it was excess of wine”
This was followed by Scroop of Masham, Cambridge and Grey.
Henry intercepted their letters to the King of France, who had plotted to murder him. This was treated in a very similar way to Bardolf’s case.
All three of them were extremely close to Henry V, however Henry ordered them to their deaths. Henry, however, did not damn them in front of God, so he was giving them a chance in heaven. Henry in this scene showed lots of cunning, he displayed the letters to them quietly, and opened up slowly, that he found out about their treason. Henry makes a speech after that, he makes Scroop, Cambridge and Grey feel extremely guilty about what they had done. Henry also gained respect in front of his own men when he threatened them like a cold blooded killer: “The mercy that was quick in us but late, By your own counsel is suppressed and killed. You must not dare, for shame, to talk of mercy”
Henry also orders the slaughter of the French prisoners at, a command that would shock even a modern audience. “The French have reinforced their scattered men. Then every soldier kill his prisoners.”
Although the command is shocking, and a war crime, we have to remember that Henry’s army was outnumbered five to one, so he had no time, or necessary soldiers to deal with the French prisoners.
The French will also commit a war crime, they will slaughter all of the English baggage boys. This will in fact force Henry to repeat his command of slaughtering the French prisoners.
Since Henry V murdered all of the French prisoners, he can be seen as an incredibly ruthless King, in my mind, this is probably the only thing that really puts Henry into the perspective of a tyrant.
Henry had a very good attitude towards the lower classes, partly because of his long time in the Boar’s head tavern with all of his criminal friends.
When Henry snooped around at night in disguise, he looked for opinions of what the soldiers thought of him. The Chorus called this: “A little touch of Henry in the night”
What Henry found out, is that the soldiers all respect him, but some doubt his cause to invade France. He came across one of his old friends, Ancient Pistol, who shows his affection towards Henry, even though Henry killed one of Pistol’s best friends, Bardolf: “The King is a bawcock, and a heart of gold,, A lad of life, an imp of fame…”
I am led to believe that Henry V was an ideal King with some traits that could show him as a ruthless tyrant.
I believe that Henry had a very good ability to make quick and effective decisions.
All of the quotes supported that Henry was a ruthless tyrant. They can all however be backed up by Henry’s intentions to make the situation more efficient. When he murders the French prisoners, this is by far, in my mind the worst thing that he did. He did it to save time and soldiers, however, in my mind it was not worth the French prisoner’s lives to save a couple of soldiers and a bit of
time.
I also believe that Henry V still has some of his criminal youth left over in him. He does make his country and barons very happy, but he does it with some sacrifices, even though this can sometimes be the more effective way.
I could see why Henry hung Bardolf, but them being old friends really makes him come through like a bit of a psychopath. However he maintains a good relationship with his soldiers even after the hanging of Bardolf.