1
Sihyun Kim
Dr. John Silva
English 266.0902
16 April 2006
The Question of Leadership in Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part I
In William Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part I, both Prince Hal and Hotspur, the son of the
Earl of Northumberland, seem to share the rightful claim to the English throne. Although Hal by
birth is obviously the heir apparent, his father King Henry continuously questions his son’s ability
to lead the country through his frequent references to Hotspur, a man whom the king views as the
perfect embodiment of valor. Nevertheless, the fallacy of the king’s assumptions becomes
apparent as the plot rapidly unfolds: while Hal’s life of debauchery is in reality a crafty façade he
employs in his preparation for the throne, Hotspur’s pugnacity and fortitude on the battlefield
—attributes that King Henry admires the most—prove to be fatal weaknesses in politics and
diplomacy. In effect, Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part I brings forth a highly compelling illustration
of strong leadership—both the robust spirit of a soldier and the cunning artifice of a dissimulator
are a must for an able king.
In Henry IV, Part I, the conflicting relationship between Prince Hal and Hotspur is
introduced very early on in the play through King Henry. When the king gathers his subordinates
in court in the hopes of initiating a crusade into the Holy Land, the Earl of Westmoreland notifies
him that, because of the recent political strife bringing havoc to the island’s stability, England is on
the verge of civil war. Thus, when he hears about Hotspur’s victories on the battlefield against
Douglas, a Scot in control of a huge rebel army, King Henry declares, “O that it could be proved /
That some night-tripping fairy had exchanged / In cradle clothes our children where they lay, / And
called mine Percy, his Plantagenet!” (1.1.86-89). The king is completely captivated by Hotspur’s
valor in combat to the point that he bluntly condemns his own son in front of his subordinates. In
2
recognition of Hotspur’s gallantry, King Henry goes as far as admitting his wish that Prince Hal
were not his son. This unflattering declaration is no understatement and will ultimately prove to be
one of the main forces driving the plot forward. Indeed, when King Henry finds Prince Hal alone
in court before the impending battle against the Percys, the King once again finds himself
expressing his frustrations:
Now, by my sceptre, and my soul to boot
[Hotspur] hath more worthy interest to the state
Than thou, the shadow of succession
For of no right, nor color like to right,
He doth fill fields with harness in the realm,
Turns head against the lion’s armed jaws… (3.2.97-102)
Instead of seeking solace from his son, King Henry spends the restless moment of respite before
the battle to further question Prince Hal's right to the throne. Amazingly, the fact that Hotspur is
preparing his men against the English crown serves as no deterrent to King Henry's steadfast
admiration. In effect, the king sets forth one of the many underlying ironies that are prevalent
throughout Henry IV, Part I. Through his constant comparisons of Prince Hal and Hotspur, the
King inadvertently brings about the dramatic tension that will ultimately lead to the climatic
confrontation between the two characters.
This underlying irony that is so crucial to the plot of Henry IV, Part I is further fueled by
the fact that the King's assumptions about Prince Hal are downright fallacious. When Shakespeare
first introduces Prince Hal in Act I, scene ii, the heir to the English throne is depicted mingling
3
with the commoners in London. By the end of the scene, it seems that, much to King Henry's
chagrin, the Prince is wastefully idling with scoundrels. Nevertheless, Prince Hal eventually lets
the audience know that his life of debauchery actually serves a purpose: "[H]erein will I imitate the
sun, /Who doth permit the base contagious clouds / To smother up his beauty from the world, /
That, when he please again to be himself, / Being wanted, he may be more wondered at"
(1.2.170-174). Reasoning that grandeur is more appreciated when it is seldom seen by the public,
Prince Hal has shrewdly created a façade of self-indulgence. This highly deceptive front will
indeed serve as a crucial tool in the Prince's ultimate quest for redemption when he, after patiently
listening to his father's emotional pleas before the battle with the Percys, proclaims, "…I shall
make this northern youth exchange / His glorious deeds for my indignities. / Percy is but my factor,
good my lord, / To engross up glorious deeds on my behalf" (3.2.145-148). Through his
unexpected, but highly gallant, words, Prince Hal has rapidly risen from shameful obscurity into a
high profile role that is fit for only the king. Without a doubt, Prince Hal's skills in diplomacy have
dramatically altered the mood of the story, which has, thus far, carefully followed the subtle, yet
powerful, sufferings of an authoritative father figure. But more importantly, Prince Hal has more
than sufficiently satisfied the criteria of an able leader: not only does he possess the delicate
artifice that is crucial in politics, but he also exhibits the indispensable drive to fervently seek
honor on the battlefield.
Of course, the fallacy of the king’s assumptions does not end with Hal: as the plot rapidly
unfolds in Henry IV, Part I, it becomes clear to the audience that his unyielding admiration of
Hotspur is quite misguided as well. The seemingly indomitable prowess that Hotspur possesses
may tremendously help him on the battlefield, but it consistently proves to be a fatal impediment in
diplomacy. Hotspur’s “Achilles’ Heel” cannot be better demonstrated than during the early
4
moments of the Percys’ rebellion against King Henry. When Hotspur, Northumberland, and
Worcester gather to discuss their future course of action after having received an ultimatum from
King Henry regarding the prisoners that Hotspur refuses to hand over, Hotspur spends the bulk of
their secret encounter expressing his anger against the King. Despite Worcestor’s repeated
attempts to quell Hotspur’s emotional outburst, Hotspur unreasonably pays no attention to his
pleas. Eventually, Northumberland too grows weary of his son’s tantrum and severely reproaches
him: “Why, what a wasp-stung and impatient fool / Art thou to break into this woman’s mood, /
Tying thine ear to no tongue but thine own!” (1.3.235-237). At a crucial moment in which strong
solidarity among constituents is vital, Hotspur should not so impulsively engage in a fit of temper
that needlessly endangers what should be an unquestionable bond among family members.
Nevertheless, Hotspur’s incompetence in diplomacy continuously emerges throughout Henry IV,
Part I. When Glendower, the leader of the Welsh rebels, makes the somewhat extravagant
declaration that “[t]he frame and huge foundation of the earth / Shaked like a coward” at the
moment of his birth, Hotspur promptly responds, “Why, so it would have done at the same / season
if your mother’s cat had but kittened, / though yourself had never been born” (3.1.16-20). Given
that Glendower is in control of the biggest army among the rebels, Hotspur should have the
discretion to keep his amusement to himself. However, because of his incompetence in diplomacy,
Hotspur has once again compromised the crucial solidarity without which he cannot hope to
overthrow King Henry. Quite ironically, the intrepid temperament that King Henry has valued the
most in Hotspur is the very thing that will contribute to his ultimate downfall.
In the end, given the continuous comparisons between Prince Hal and Hotspur that King
Henry makes, it is only fitting that the two men should engage each other in a climatic
confrontation on the battlefield. Indeed, it is at Shrewsbury where the highly anticipated encounter
5
between these opponents for the English throne takes place. When Prince Hal and Hotspur raise
their swords in preparation for duel, both men unsurprisingly express their ravenous thirst for
honor at the expense of the other. However, the approaches that Prince Hal and Hotspur employ in
their pursuit of honor are quite different. For instance, Hotspur’s emphasis on honor is so extreme
that, even as he is struggling to stay alive after being mortally wounded by Prince Hal, he states: "I
better brook the loss of brittle life / Than those proud titles thou has won of me. / They wound my
thoughts worse than thy sword my flesh" (5.4.87-89). Astonishingly, even death cannot suppress
Hotspur's drive to secure glory in battle. Prince Hal, on the other hand, shows that he places much
more importance on man's frailty in the presence of death when he delivers his epitaph in
Hotspur’s name: "Fare thee well, great heart; / Ill-weaved ambition, how much art thou shrunk! /
When that this body did contain a spirit, / A kingdom for it was too small a bound; But now two
paces of the vilest earth / Is room enough" (5.4.86-91). According to Prince Hal, man's
insignificance in comparison to the merciless nature of death cannot be overly emphasized. While
Hotspur dreads death without honor, Prince Hal feels that all of the honor in the world cannot
compensate for the "vile" emptiness that death brings about. This fundamental difference in the
interpretation of death that Prince Hal demonstrates is what ultimately makes him such an ideal
leader. While Prince Hal, like Hotspur, does not shy away from necessary confrontations, he
possesses the astuteness to not be blindly swayed by the grandeur of honor.
With his conclusive victory at Shrewsbury, Prince Hal’s claim to the throne seems
hereafter secured. Not only does he courageously eliminate his archrival Hotspur on the
battlefield, but he also redeems his lost honor in clear view of his father King Henry. But more
importantly, Prince Hal’s triumph over his counterpart Hotspur is a clear allusion to the type of
leadership every great king must exhibit. Ultimately, Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part I reverberates
6
the ever influential message found in Machiavelli’s timeless work The Prince: a leader must
possess both the strength of a lion and the intelligence of a fox to succeed. Without a doubt, Prince
Hal has commendably demonstrated his shrewd craftiness in diplomacy as well as his gallant
fortitude in combat in Henry IV, Part I. Therefore, it can be safely assumed by the play’s
conclusion that Prince Hal will rise to be one of England’s greatest kings. As expected,
Shakespeare’s Henry V will prove just that.
Work Cited
Shakespeare, William. I Henry IV. Ed. Gordon McMullan. New York: W. W. Norton &
7
Company, 2003.