Nathanael Nading
Mrs. Nading
Shakespeare and Poetry
February 23, 2018
Henry V: Alexander the Pig Among those who study and interpret Shakespeare, there is an ongoing debate over Henry V's title of, "...the mirror of all Christian kings" (Shakespeare, 39). Following the obvious meaning of the phrase, Henry is the model of a Christian king - valiant, just, bringing joy to all in his company. In a more twisted view, Henry is, as a reflection shows the opposite of the reality, the opposite of a Christian king - power-hungry, domineering, and uncaring. Henry V is given the characteristics of both kings as he strives to achieve his aim - the conquering of France for England. Dramatically, in a final battle - the battle of Agincourt - England defeats …show more content…
Rallying his soldiers, Henry ordered, "...imitate the action of the tiger: stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, Disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage" (Shakespeare, 52). Obviously, this is violent; but some can excuse, claiming that this is a normal way to rally soldiers. However, Henry delivers another speech a short time later, now to the governor of a French town: "...to our best mercy give yourselves or… the flesh'd soldier, rough and hard of heart, in liberty of bloody hand shall range with conscience wide as hell, mowing like grass your fresh fair virgins and flow'ring infants." There is no excuse for this manner of speech. There is also no excuse for his hypocritical actions. As was mentioned before, while Henry fought in England, Mortimer - the better heir to England and France - stayed in prison. Also, when a man was executed for stealing from a church, Henry remarked, "We would have all such offenders so cut off" (Shakespeare, 62). However, the church funded this war in the first place, so is Henry not "stealing" from the church himself? In order to ignore these important contradictions, Henry did not thoroughly think through his decision. This is why when the Battle of Agincourt came, his men were deeply outnumbered, and Henry began to doubt his cause was just. The night before the war was decided was not the time to consider the justification of his actions; before he committed to them and his …show more content…
However, the consequences did not match his hopes. Henry's "victory" only prolonged what is now called the Hundred Years' War between France and England. His son, Henry VI, lost France to uprisings and Joan of Arc's actions. This means that even though Henry "won" the battle and France, it was all for naught when France won the war. This means that Henry's actions resulted in needless death from France and England. Since Henry prolonged the war, more deaths resulted from more battles in a larger war. Also, all of these deaths were pointless because reason for them - complete control of France - was never
Mrs. Nading
Shakespeare and Poetry
February 23, 2018
Henry V: Alexander the Pig Among those who study and interpret Shakespeare, there is an ongoing debate over Henry V's title of, "...the mirror of all Christian kings" (Shakespeare, 39). Following the obvious meaning of the phrase, Henry is the model of a Christian king - valiant, just, bringing joy to all in his company. In a more twisted view, Henry is, as a reflection shows the opposite of the reality, the opposite of a Christian king - power-hungry, domineering, and uncaring. Henry V is given the characteristics of both kings as he strives to achieve his aim - the conquering of France for England. Dramatically, in a final battle - the battle of Agincourt - England defeats …show more content…
Rallying his soldiers, Henry ordered, "...imitate the action of the tiger: stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, Disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage" (Shakespeare, 52). Obviously, this is violent; but some can excuse, claiming that this is a normal way to rally soldiers. However, Henry delivers another speech a short time later, now to the governor of a French town: "...to our best mercy give yourselves or… the flesh'd soldier, rough and hard of heart, in liberty of bloody hand shall range with conscience wide as hell, mowing like grass your fresh fair virgins and flow'ring infants." There is no excuse for this manner of speech. There is also no excuse for his hypocritical actions. As was mentioned before, while Henry fought in England, Mortimer - the better heir to England and France - stayed in prison. Also, when a man was executed for stealing from a church, Henry remarked, "We would have all such offenders so cut off" (Shakespeare, 62). However, the church funded this war in the first place, so is Henry not "stealing" from the church himself? In order to ignore these important contradictions, Henry did not thoroughly think through his decision. This is why when the Battle of Agincourt came, his men were deeply outnumbered, and Henry began to doubt his cause was just. The night before the war was decided was not the time to consider the justification of his actions; before he committed to them and his …show more content…
However, the consequences did not match his hopes. Henry's "victory" only prolonged what is now called the Hundred Years' War between France and England. His son, Henry VI, lost France to uprisings and Joan of Arc's actions. This means that even though Henry "won" the battle and France, it was all for naught when France won the war. This means that Henry's actions resulted in needless death from France and England. Since Henry prolonged the war, more deaths resulted from more battles in a larger war. Also, all of these deaths were pointless because reason for them - complete control of France - was never