======================================================================
= Henry_IV,_Part_1 =
======================================================================
Introduction
======================================================================
'Henry IV, Part 1' (often written as '1 Henry IV') is a history play
by William Shakespeare, believed to have been written no later than
1597. The play dramatises part of the reign of King Henry IV of
England, beginning with the battle at Homildon Hill late in 1402, and
ending with King Henry's victory in the Battle of Shrewsbury in
mid-1403. In parallel to the political conflict between King Henry and
a rebellious faction of nobles, the play depicts the escapades of King
Henry's son, Prince Hal (the future King Henry V), and his eventual
return to court and favour.
'Henry IV, Part 1' is the first of Shakespeare's two plays that deal
with the reign of Henry IV (the other being 'Henry IV, Part 2'), and
the second play in the Henriad, a modern designation for the tetralogy
of plays that deal with the successive reigns of Richard II, Henry IV,
and Henry V. From its first performance on, it has been an extremely
popular work both with the public and critics.
Characters
======================================================================
'Of the King's party'
* King Henry the Fourth - King of England.
* Henry, Prince of Wales (nicknamed "Prince Hal" or "Harry") - eldest
son of Henry IV
* John of Lancaster - represented in the play as the King's second
son, although he was actually the third
* Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland - the King's brother-in-law
* Sir Walter Blount ("Blunt")
'Eastcheap'
* Sir John Falstaff - a knight and friend of Prince Hal's
* Ned Poins
* Bardolph
* Peto
* Mistress Quickly - hostess of the Boar's Head Tavern
* Francis - tapster
* Vintner - tavern keeper
* Gadshill
* Two Carriers (Mugs and Tom)
* Ostler
'Rebels'
* Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland
* Thomas Percy, Earl of Worcester - Northumberland's brother
* Harry Percy (nicknamed "Hotspur") - Northumberland's son
* Edmund Mortimer - Hotspur's brother-in-law and Glendower's
son-in-law
* Owen Glendower - leader of the Welsh rebels
* Archibald, Earl of Douglas - leader of the Scottish rebels
* Sir Richard Vernon, 8th Baron of Shipbrook
* Richard le Scrope ("Scroop"), Archbishop of York
* Sir Michael - a friend to the Archbishop of York
* Lady Percy ("Kate", though her real name was Elizabeth) - Hotspur's
wife and Mortimer's sister
* Lady Mortimer (Catrin) - Glendower's daughter and Mortimer's wife
'Other Characters'
* Chamberlain
* Sheriff
* Travellers
* Servant to Hotspur
* Lords, Officers, Drawers, Messengers, and Attendants
'Mentioned only'
* Robin Ostler, deceased character who preceded the current Ostler,
concerned with the price of oats
* Gilliams, courier sent by Hotspur
Synopsis
======================================================================
The play follows three groups of characters who initially interact
only indirectly. These groups grow closer as the play progresses,
coming together at the climax during the Battle of Shrewsbury. The
first is centred around King Henry IV and his immediate council, who
contrive to suppress a growing rebellion. The second is the group of
rebel lords, led by Thomas Percy, Earl of Worcester, and including his
brother, the Earl of Northumberland, and energetic nephew, Harry Percy
("Hotspur"). The Scottish Earl of Douglas, the Welshman Owen
Glendower, and Edmund Mortimer also join. The third group, the comic
centre of the play, consists of the young Prince Hal (King Henry's
eldest son) and his companions, Falstaff, Poins, Bardolph, and Peto.
From the play's outset, Henry IV's reign is beset by problems: His
personal disquiet at having usurped the throne from Richard II would
be solved by a crusade to the Holy Land, but trouble on his borders
with Scotland and Wales make such an act impossible. Moreover, he is
increasingly at odds with the Percy family, who helped him to his
throne, and with Edmund Mortimer, Richard II's chosen heir.
King Henry is also troubled by the behaviour of his eldest son and
heir, Hal (the future Henry V). Hal spends little time in the royal
court, preferring instead to drink in taverns with lowborn and
dishonourable companions. This makes him an object of scorn to the
nobles and jeopardises his legitimacy as heir; early in the play, King
Henry laments that he can "See riot and dishonour stain the brow of
young Harry." Hal's chief friend is Sir John Falstaff, a cowardly,
drunken, but quick-witted knight whose charisma and zest for life
captivate the Prince.
In the first scene, the political action of the play is set in motion.
King Henry and Hotspur fall out after a disagreement over the
treatment of hostages: Hotspur withholds, against the King's orders,
hostages taken in recent action against the Scots at the Battle of
Homildon Hill, while King Henry refuses to pay Owen Glendower (a Welsh
rebel) the ransom for Hotspur's brother-in-law, Edmund Mortimer. This
disagreement, and the King's harsh treatment of the House of Percy
generally, drives them to ally with Welsh and Scot rebels, resolving
to depose "this ingrate and cankered Bolingbroke."
Meanwhile, Hal meets with Falstaff and his associates at the Boar's
Head Tavern. Falstaff and Hal are close, but Hal enjoys insulting
Falstaff, and, in a soliloquy, makes it clear that he does not plan to
continue in his present lifestyle forever: Hal aims to re-assume his
high place in court by proving himself to his father. Indeed, Hal
reasons that by suddenly changing his ways he will be even more
popular among the nobility than if he had behaved conventionally all
his life. Nevertheless, he is happy to carry out a plot against
Falstaff: after performing a highway robbery, Hal and Poins will slip
away from Falstaff, disguise themselves, and rob Falstaff, purely for
the fun of hearing the older man lie about it later, after which Hal
will return the stolen money. The plot is carried out successfully.
As the revolt of Mortimer and the House of Percy grows, the Prince
makes up with his father and is given the command of an army. He vows
to fight and kill the rebel Hotspur, and orders Falstaff to recruit
and lead a group of foot soldiers. Falstaff uses the appointment to
enrich himself by taking bribes from those who do not want to be
pressed into service, and, in the end, recruits only the very poor,
whose wages he withholds.
All the parties meet at the Battle of Shrewsbury, a crucial moment for
all involved: if the rebels are not defeated outright, they will gain
a considerable advantage; other forces (under Northumberland,
Glendower, Mortimer, and the Archbishop of York) can be called upon in
the event of a stalemate or a victory for the rebels. Though Henry
outnumbers the rebels, Hotspur, wild and skilled in battle, leads the
opposing army personally. As the battle drags on, the king is hunted
by Douglas. Prince Hal and Hotspur duel, and, in an important moment
of noble virtue for the young prince, Hal prevails, killing Hotspur in
single combat.
Left on his own during Hal's battle with Hotspur, Falstaff
dishonourably feigns death to avoid an attack by Douglas. After Hal
leaves Hotspur's body on the field, Falstaff revives in a mock
miracle. Seeing he is alone, he stabs Hotspur's corpse in the thigh
and claims credit for the kill. Hal allows Falstaff to claim the
honour of the kill. Soon after Hal's generous gesture, Falstaff states
that he wants to amend his life and begin "to live cleanly as a
nobleman should do".
The play ends at Shrewsbury, after the battle. The loss of Hotspur and
the fight has dealt a serious blow to the rebel cause. King Henry is
pleased with the outcome, not least because it gives him a chance to
execute Thomas Percy, the Earl of Worcester, one of his chief enemies
(though previously one of his greatest friends). Meanwhile, Hal
demonstrates his mercy by ordering Douglas--now a prisoner of war--to
be released without ransom. However, the rebellion continues, now led
by the Archbishop of York and the Earl of Northumberland. This
inconclusive ending sets the stage for 'Henry IV, Part 2'.
Sources
======================================================================
Shakespeare's primary source for 'Henry IV, Part 1', as for most of
his chronicle histories, was the second edition (1587) of Raphael
Holinshed's 'Chronicles', which in turn drew on Edward Hall's 'The
Union of the Two Illustrious Families of Lancaster and York'. Scholars
have also assumed that Shakespeare was familiar with Samuel Daniel's
poem on the civil wars. Another source for this (and the following
Henry plays) is the anonymous 'The Famous Victories of Henry V'.
Date and text
======================================================================
'1 Henry IV' was almost certainly in performance by 1597, given the
wealth of allusions and references to the Falstaff character. The
earliest recorded performance occurred on the afternoon of 6 March
1600, when the play was acted at court before the Flemish Ambassador.
Other court performances followed in 1612 and 1625.
The play was entered into the Register of the Stationers Company on 25
Feb. 1598 and first printed in quarto later that year by stationer
Andrew Wise. The play was Shakespeare's most popular printed text: new
editions appeared in 1599, 1604, 1608, 1613, 1622, 1632, 1639, and
1692.
The Dering Manuscript
=======================
The Dering Manuscript, the earliest extant manuscript text of any
Shakespeare play, provides a single-play version of both Part 1 and
Part 2 of 'Henry IV.' The consensus of Shakespeare scholars is that
the Dering Manuscript represents a redaction prepared around 1623,
perhaps for family or amateur theatrics, by Edward Dering (1598-1644),
of Surrenden Manor, Pluckley, Kent, where the manuscript was
discovered. A few dissenters have argued that the Dering MS. may
indicate that Shakespeare's 'Henry IV' was originally a single play,
which the poet later expanded into two parts to capitalise on the
popularity of the Sir John Falstaff character. The Dering MS. is part
of the collection of the Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington,
D.C.
Themes and interpretations
============================
At its first publication in 1597 or 1598, the play was titled 'The
History of Henrie the Fourth', and its title page advertised only the
presence of Henry Percy and the comic Sir John Falstaff; Prince Hal
was not mentioned. Indeed, throughout most of the play's performance
history, Hal has been staged as a secondary figure, and popular
actors, beginning with James Quin and David Garrick, often preferred
to play Hotspur. It was only in the twentieth century that readers and
performers began to see the central interest as the coming-of-age
story of Hal, who is now seen as the starring role.
In the "coming-of-age" interpretation, Hal's acquaintance with
Falstaff and the tavern lowlife humanises him and provides him with a
more complete view of life. At the outset, Prince Hal seems to pale in
comparison with the fiery Henry Percy, the young noble lord of the
North (whom Shakespeare portrays as considerably younger than he was
in history in order to provide a foil for Hal). Many readers interpret
the history as a tale of Prince Hal growing up, evolving into King
Henry V, in what is a tale of the prodigal son adapted to the politics
of medieval England. The low proportion of scenes featuring the title
character, the king, has also been noted, with some authors suggesting
that the play contrasts the authority of Henry IV, and his struggle to
stay in control of the situation, with the chaotic forces of the
rebels and Falstaff.
Honor and Falstaff's Catechism
================================
A major theme in Henry IV Part 1 is the expression of honour and the
intersection and contrasts between honour and war. In Act 5 scene 1,
Falstaff delivers a soliloquy, scholastically referred to as
Falstaff's Catechism, which asserts his pragmatic and matter-of-fact
perspective on war. The soliloquy reads: ’Tis not due yet. I would be
loath to pay Him before His day. What need I be so forward with Him
that calls not on me? Well, ’tis no matter. Honor pricks me on. Yea,
but how if honor prick me off when I come on? How then? Can honor set
to a leg? No. Or an arm? No. Or take away the grief of a wound? No.
Honor hath no skill in surgery, then? No. What is honor? A word. What
is in that word “honor”? What is that “honor”? Air. A trim reckoning.
Who hath it? He that died o’ Wednesday. Doth he feel it? No. Doth he
hear it? No. ’Tis insensible, then? Yea, to the dead. But will ⌜it⌝
not live with the living? No. Why? Detraction will not suffer it.
Therefore, I’ll none of it. Honor is a mere scutcheon. And so ends my
catechism. (5.1.128-142) In this soliloquy, Falstaff dismisses honour
as an abstract concept that has no tangible benefits. His repetition
of the word "honor" and the subsequent reduction of it to "air"
underscores his cynical perspective, suggesting that honour is an
empty, meaningless concept that holds no practical value. He questions
whether honour can "set to a leg" or "an arm," implying that honour
cannot heal wounds or restore life. This practical viewpoint starkly
contrasts with the romanticised notion of honour as a noble pursuit
worth dying or seriously injuring oneself for. Falstaff's rhetorical
questions serve to undermine the glorification of honour in martial
society, pointing out its inability to provide any real, physical
benefit to those who seek it.
The passage contrasts the other views expressed in the play, and is
also unique for its deviation from Falstaff's character, giving him a
moment of philosophy distinct from his usual dismissive prose.
Shakespeare’s intent with the soliloquy has been debated between
academics. While some believe that the passage serves to juxtapose
Falstaff’s pragmatic philosophy with the romantic, valour driven views
of the rest of the cast, others assert that Falstaff’s catechism
highlights his cowardice and can be played comedically.
Professor Clifford Davidson drew parallels between Philippe de
Mornay’s 1582 treatise De la verité de la religion chrestienne, which
would have already been translated into English at the time of writing
Henry IV Part 1: They that attaine to honor, are in continuali
torment, spightfull or spighted, doing mischiefe, or receiving
mischiefe, over-mated, or over-mating. What is this but many evils for
one, and a multiplying of miseries without number, for the obtainment
of one silly shadow of felicity? We will leave the residue to
declamers: what are the fruits of these hellish torments, what are
they? Forsooth Honor, Reputation, and Power or Authority. What is all
this but winde, which cannot fill us, nor scarcely puffe us up? I
shall be saluted as I goe abroad, I shall sit highest at meetings. In
having these things, what have I, which a wicked man may not rather
have than I? And if it be a good thing, how is it given to evill men?
De Moray’s passage and Falstaff’s catechism use similar language, both
reducing honour to “air” and following a catechetical structure. As de
Moray’s passage highlights the dangers of pursuing honour for
reputational benefits rather than out of virtue, so Shakespeare uses
Falstaff to critique the ill-intentioned pursuit of honour in early
modern England. Davidson writes, “Who will pursue the ‘shadow’ of
reputation rather than the ‘body’ of virtue?” Falstaff seemingly
rejects both the “body” and the “shadow,” denouncing both the virtue
of honour and the praise that comes with it. However, at the end of
the play, Falstaff accepts praise for Hotspur’s death, suggesting that
his wisdom may in fact be a facade for pure cowardice.
In the broader context of "Henry IV, Part 1," Falstaff's soliloquy
offers a counterpoint to the play's exploration of heroism and honour.
His catechism challenges the audience to reconsider the true value of
honour and to question the societal pressure to uphold it. Through his
catechism, Falstaff juxtaposes both Hotspur’s misguided and vengeful
pursuit of honour and Hal’s virtue.
Oldcastle controversy
=======================
'Henry IV, Part 1' caused controversy on its first performances in
1597, because the comic character now known as "Falstaff" was
originally named "Oldcastle" and was based on John Oldcastle, a famous
proto-Protestant martyr with powerful living descendants in England.
Although the character is called Falstaff in all surviving texts of
the play, there is abundant external and internal evidence that he was
originally called Oldcastle. The change of names is mentioned in
seventeenth-century works by Richard James ("Epistle to Sir Harry
Bourchier", ) and Thomas Fuller ('Worthies of England', 1662). It is
also indicated in detail in the early texts of Shakespeare's plays. In
the quarto text of 'Henry IV, Part 2' (1600), one of Falstaff's speech
prefixes in Act I, Scene ii is mistakenly left uncorrected, "Old."
instead of "Falst." In III, ii, 25-6 of the same play, Falstaff is
said to have been a "page to Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk"--a
statement that is true of the historical Oldcastle. In 'Henry IV, Part
1', I, ii, 42, Prince Hal calls Falstaff "my old lad of the castle".
An iambic pentameter verse line in 'Henry IV, Part 1' is irregular
when using the name "Falstaff", but regular with "Oldcastle". Finally,
there is the explicit disclaimer at the close of 'Henry IV, Part 2'
that discriminates between the two figures: "for Oldcastle died [a]
martyr, and this is not the man" (Epilogue, 29-32).
There is evidence that Falstaff was originally called Oldcastle in
'The Merry Wives of Windsor' as well, the only play (outside of the
two parts 'Henry IV') that contains the character. When the First
Folio and quarto texts of that play are compared, it appears that the
joke in V.v.85-90 is that Oldcastle/Falstaff incriminates himself by
calling out the first letter of his name, "O, O, O!," when his
fingertips are singed with candles--which of course works for
"Oldcastle" but not "Falstaff." There is also the "castle" reference
in IV.v.6 of the same play.
The name change and the Epilogue disclaimer were required, it is
generally thought, because of political pressure: the historical
Oldcastle was not only a Protestant martyr but a nobleman with
powerful living descendants in Elizabethan England. These were the
Lords Cobham: William Brooke, 10th Baron Cobham (died 6 March 1597),
Warden of the Cinque Ports (1558-97), Knight of the Order of the
Garter (1584), and member of the Privy Council (1586-97); his son
Henry Brooke, 11th Baron Cobham, Warden of the Cinque Ports and Knight
of the Order of the Garter; and Frances Brooke, the 10th Baron's wife,
and 11th Baron's mother, a close personal favourite of Queen Elizabeth
I.
The elder Lord Cobham is known to have had a strongly negative impact
on the lives of Shakespeare and his contemporaries in the theatre. The
company of actors formed by Shakespeare (the Lord Chamberlain's Men)
in 1594 enjoyed the patronage of Henry Carey, first Lord Hunsdon, then
serving as Lord Chamberlain. When Carey died on 22 July 1596, the post
of Lord Chamberlain was given to William Brooke, Lord Cobham, who
withdrew what official protection they had enjoyed. The players were
left to the care of the local officials of the City of London, who had
long wanted to drive the companies of actors out of the city. Thomas
Nashe, in a contemporary letter, complained that the actors were
"piteously persecuted by the Lord Mayor and the aldermen" during this
period. The interval did not last; when Cobham died less than a year
later, the post of Lord Chamberlain went to Henry Carey's son George,
2nd baron Hunsdon, and the actors regained their previous patronage.
The name was changed to "Falstaff", based on Sir John Fastolf, a
historical person with a reputation for cowardice at the Battle of
Patay, whom Shakespeare had previously represented in 'Henry VI, Part
1'. Fastolf had died without descendants, making him safe for a
playwright's use.
Shortly afterward, a team of playwrights wrote a two-part play
entitled 'Sir John Oldcastle', which presents a heroic dramatisation
of Oldcastle's life and was published in 1600.
In 1986, the 'Oxford Shakespeare' edition of Shakespeare's works
rendered the character's name as Oldcastle, rather than Falstaff, in
'Henry IV, Part 1' (although not, confusingly, in 'Part 2'), as a
consequence of the editors' aim to present the plays as they would
have appeared during their original performances. No other published
editions have followed suit.
Adaptations
======================================================================
There have been three BBC television films of 'Henry IV, Part 1.' In
the 1960 mini-series 'An Age of Kings', Tom Fleming starred as Henry
IV, with Robert Hardy as Prince Hal, Frank Pettingell as Falstaff, and
Sean Connery as Hotspur. The 1979 'BBC Television Shakespeare' version
starred Jon Finch as Henry IV, David Gwillim as Prince Hal, Anthony
Quayle as Falstaff, and Tim Pigott-Smith as Hotspur. In the 2012
series 'The Hollow Crown', 'Henry IV, Part 1' was directed by Richard
Eyre and starred Jeremy Irons as Henry IV, Tom Hiddleston as Prince
Hal, Simon Russell Beale as Falstaff and Joe Armstrong as Hotspur.
Orson Welles's 'Chimes at Midnight' (1965) compiles the two 'Henry IV'
plays into a single, condensed storyline, while adding a handful of
scenes from 'Henry V' and dialogue from 'Richard II' and 'The Merry
Wives of Windsor'. The film stars Welles himself as Falstaff, John
Gielgud as King Henry, Keith Baxter as Hal, Margaret Rutherford as
Mistress Quickly, Jeanne Moreau as Doll Tearsheet and Norman Rodway
as Hotspur.
BBC Television's 1995 'Henry IV' also combines the two Parts into one
adaptation. Ronald Pickup played the King; David Calder, Falstaff;
Jonathan Firth, Hal; and Rufus Sewell, Hotspur.
Adapted scenes in flashback from 'Henry IV' are included in the 1989
film version of 'Henry V' (1989) with Robbie Coltrane portraying Sir
John Falstaff and Kenneth Branagh playing the young Prince Hal.
Gus Van Sant's 1991 film 'My Own Private Idaho' is loosely based on
Part 1 of 'Henry IV', as well as 'Henry IV, Part 2' and 'Henry V'.
The one-man hip-hop musical 'Clay' is loosely based on 'Henry IV'.
In 2014, playwright and actor Herbert Sigüenza adapted the play to 'El
Henry', a post-apocalyptic Chicano gang version set in "the year 2045,
and to a place identified as 'Aztlan City, Aztlan. Formerly San
Diego.'"
In 2015, The Michigan Shakespeare Festival produced an award-winning
combined production--directed and adapted by Janice L. Blixt--of the
two plays focusing on the relationship between Henry IV and Prince
Hal.
In 2016, Graham Abbey combined 'Richard II' and 'Henry IV, Part 1'
into a single play called 'Breath of Kings: Rebellion'. 'Henry IV,
Part II' and 'Henry V' together became 'Breath of Kings: Redemption'.
Both adaptations were staged at the Stratford Festival in Stratford,
Ontario. Abbey, in the productions, played Henry IV (Bolingbroke).
The 2016 app
[
https://web.archive.org/web/20160924191718/https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cycle-of-kings/id1146239768?mt=8
Cycle of Kings] features the entire play 'Henry IV, Part 1' in
interactive form, as well as a modern English translation.
In 2019, Netflix released the film 'The King', an adaptation of the
play directed by David Michôd and starring Timothée Chalamet, Robert
Pattinson and Joel Edgerton.
In spring 2024, Robert Icke adapted and directed the play (along with
'Henry IV, Part II') into a new version called 'Player Kings' which
starred Ian McKellen as John Falstaff, Toheeb Jimoh as Hal and Richard
Coyle as King Henry IV. The production ran at the Noël Coward Theatre,
in London's West End before going on a UK tour.
Legacy
======================================================================
The famous Sherlock Holmes catchphrase "The game is afoot" is taken
from Act I, Scene 3, line 615, where the Earl of Northumberland says:
"Before the game is afoot, thou still let'st slip."
The phrase was also later used by Shakespeare in 'Henry V', Act III,
Scene 1, by the title character:
:"I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,
:Straining upon the start. The game's afoot:
:Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
:Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'"
See also
======================================================================
* List of idioms attributed to Shakespeare
References
======================================================================
* Barker, Roberta. "Tragical-Comical-Historical Hotspur." 'Shakespeare
Quarterly' 54.3 (2003): 288-307.
* Bevington, David, ed. 'The Complete Works of Shakespeare'. Updated
Fourth Edition. University of Chicago, 1997.
*
*Duthie, George Ian. 'Shakespeare'. London: Routledge, 1954.
* Greenblatt, Stephen. "Invisible Bullets: Renaissance Authority and
Its Subversion in 'Henry IV' and 'Henry V'." In 'Political
Shakespeare', edited by Jonathan Dollimore and Alan Sinfield, 18-47.
1985.
* Halliday, F. E. 'A Shakespeare Companion 1564-1964.' Baltimore,
Penguin, 1964.
* Saccio, Peter, 'Shakespeare's English Kings', 2nd edn, 2000.
* Sanders, Norman. "The True Prince and the False Thief." 'Shakespeare
Survey' 30 (1977).
* Weil, Herbert and Judith Weil, eds. 'The First Part of King Henry
IV', 1997 (New Cambridge Shakespeare).
* Wright, Louis B, and Virginia A. LaMar, eds. 'The Folger Library
General Reader's Shakespeare: Henry IV, Part I'.
*
External links
======================================================================
*
* [
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1516 'Henry the Fourth part 1'] at
Project Gutenberg.
*
License
=========
All content on Gopherpedia comes from Wikipedia, and is licensed under CC-BY-SA
License URL:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
Original Article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_IV,_Part_1
