Henry IV Character Analysis

Words: 1162
Pages: 5

Prince Hal of William Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part I faces a myriad of influences, but those of his father, King Henry IV, and of his good friend Falstaff impact the prince and his development the most. Both of these men serve as considerably negative influences on Hal; ultimately, the prince must accept the faults of each so that he himself can avoid such mistakes and grow into a truly inspiring leader. Hal’s father is struggling in his throne as members of court, some of whom who had helped Henry IV stage a coup only a year before, grow more and more displeased with his ruling style. Within one meeting, his paranoia and wrath become evident. One of Henry’s former allies, Hotspur, has asked for help to free his brother-in-law, being kept …show more content…
The intensity of the king and his dedication to power and the crown are at once contrasted with the actions of Hal, who is rumored to be lazily spending his days at brothels and drinking. Hal seems careless and privileged at first glance. He, however, later reveals that his debauchery is essentially an ruse; he merely wants the public to have such low expectations of him as king that any decent act will be considered great. Hal, who is far more calculating and has much more foresight than one may initially expect, even says that “nothing pleaseth but rare accidents” (1.2.214). This implies that, at this point, Hal has little respect for his people, as he essentially disregards consistently good actions, as the public would apparently become too accustomed and then unappreciative of these good actions. Such political strategy and planning must have been inspired in some way by Henry IV, who himself dismantled the established lineage of kings through a clever manipulation of …show more content…
The corpulent, agéd knight is a champion of leisure and thoughtlessness and greed. He feels no shame even as he almost immediately agrees to a plot to steal from several traveling pilgrims while Hal wants no part in the plan. Falstaff even says that Hal has “neither honesty, manhood, nor / good fellowship in [himself]… /…if [he dares] not stand for ten / shillings” (1.2.145-148). Falstaff and Hal’s friend, Poins, privately convinces Hal to actually rob the robbers themselves, allowing Hal to choose the somewhat moral option. Hal and Poins successfully raid Falstaff and the other robbers and return to a tavern. When Falstaff and his three companions arrive to meet Hal and Poins, Falstaff carries with him a grand tale of his plunder. Falstaff claims that “a hundred” (2.4.167) men attacked the tiny group of four and continues to embellish the story from there, even adding that he “peppered / two of them” (2.4.200-201). All the while, it was simply the pair of Hal and Poins who managed to rob Falstaff and his companions. Ultimately, Hal forces Falstaff to give up the truth, and Falstaff must allow his image to be tarnished. He had no motive to share such an exaggerated account unless he was seeking approval or glory; in other words, Falstaff was thinking of himself