Connor Sullivan
Help Received: Work Cited
and used sparks notes to fish out details of the play
Henry V and Machiavellianism
Machiavellianism is defined as doing anything and everything you can to get
what you want, including lying, cheating, and stealing (Pearsall, n.p.). Niccolo
Machiavelli wrote a book called The Prince, which details advice to princes that they
should have two types of personalities; a good one and a bad one. The bad
personality is one that should be used when situation calls for it and it aids in
getting whatever the prince wants (Hodgdons, 309-310). Examples of
Machiavellianism are prevalent in Shakespeare’s play Henry V for he uses them to
help take blame off King Henry and they are also used to justify the King’s actions.
Machiavelli writes “that power lies in self-concealment-in knowing how to put on a
necessary, at times unreadable, guise and, above all, in knowing how to read others,”
which King Henry does really well in this play (Hodgdons, 309-310). There are
several examples where he seems to orchestrate situations to go his way and seizes
every opportunity to achieve his goals.
The first scene where Machiavellianism is found is when the Archbishop of
Canterbury and Bishop Ely were talking about the bill that was brought up to take
the church’s wealth away in Act 1 Scene 1. Canterbury tells Ely that the King is
leaning towards the church’s side because the Archbishop gave a large amount of
money to Henry for his war with France (I.i. 7). Then later in scene two King Henry
asks Canterbury if he has a legitimate claim to the throne of France. Canterbury goes
on to say that under French law he could not claim France because of the maternal
lineage that connects Henry to France but under English law Kings can inherit the
throne under maternal lineage so by English standards he does have a claim to the
throne (I.ii. 9-16). This permission to go to war seems very far-fetched because they
are disregarding the French law and going with the English one. King Henry seems
to accept this too easily for a king that wants a legitimate reason to invade. The
reason this can be seen as Machiavellianism is because King Henry seems to have
taken Canterbury’s offer so he could obtain the opportunity to gain more money for
his war, which he would not have gotten unless he agreed to vote in the Church’s
favor on the bill and he seemed to jump at the slightest notion of a legitimate claim
to the throne. From this point of view it looks like King Henry used the Church to
give him a reason to go to war and also accepted their money as bribery, this is a
very Machiavellian thing to do.
This next example relates to the characteristic of Machiavellianism that
princes should be unreadable and being able to read others (Hodgdons, 309-310). In
Act two, Scene two King Henry demonstrates this beautifully. King Henry knows
that Scroop, Cambridge, and Grey were going to betray him so instead of out rightly
accusing them he has them decide the fate of a drunk who spoke against the king.
The three traitors said that the drunk should be punished and shown no mercy.
When the King shows them papers that implement them in treachery they beg for
mercy but the King will not succumb to their pleas; they were executed for their
crimes (II.ii. 26-32). The King knew the entire time he was with them that Scroop,
Cambridge, and Grey were traitors but he did not let them know and then he made
them decide their fate by testing them with the fate of another. He carefully
manipulated them and revealed his true plan and thoughts at the appropriate time
and after they had shown no mercy to a drunk, giving the King no reason to show
mercy to them.
The next example is also an example of being unreadable and being able to
read others along with using his evil personality because necessity dictated it
(Hodgdons, 309-310). When King Henry gets to Harfleur he gives the eloquently evil
speech to the governor showing that he will have no mercy on them if they choose
to fight and make the King’s army begin attacking again. He uses horrible imagery to
convince the governor to yield.
If not- why, in a moment look to see the blind bloody soldier
with foul hand defile the locks of your shrill-shrieking
daughters; your fathers taken by the silver beards, and their
most reverend heads dashed to the walls; your naked infants
spitting upon pikes….What say you? Will you yield, and this
avoid? Or, guilty in defense, be thus destroyed? (III.iii. 48-49)
This speech was made in such a way that the governor believed the King’s intent
and did not want to endure it. This is a perfect example of Machiavellianism because
he does use his evil side to his benefit and does ultimately get what he wants.
King Henry has many good examples of Machiavellianism within the play. He
utilizes these characteristics to get what he wants, which is the throne of France.
When he needs to he uses a darker side of himself to help convince those, like the
governor, to yield to him. He, also, is extremely good at reading people and he
demonstrated this several times throughout the play. King Henry is a Machiavellian
character and uses both the good and the bad side of his personality effectively to
achieve his goals.
Work Cited
Hodgdon, Barbara. The First Part of King Henry the Fourth. By William Shakespeare.
Boston: Bedford Books, 1997. Print.
Pearsall, Judy. Machiavellianism. Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press,
n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2014.
http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/233583?redirectedFrom=machiavellianis
m#eid
Shakespeare, William. Henry V. Ed. Claire Mceachern. New York: Penguin Books,
1999. Print.