Context
Plot Overview
Character List
Analysis of Major Characters
Themes, Motifs & Symbols
Act I, scene i
Act I, scene ii
Act I, scene iii
Act II, scenes i–iii
Act II, scene iv
Act II, scene v
Act III, scene i
Act III, scene ii
Act III, scene iii
Act IV, scenes i–ii
Act IV, scenes iii–iv
Act V, scenes i–ii
Act V, scenes iii–v
Important Quotations Explained
Key Facts
Study Questions & Essay Topics
Quiz
Suggestions for Further Reading
|
Henry IV, Part 1 William Shakespeare
Act I, scene iii
Summary
I then, all smarting with my wounds being
cold —
To be so pestered with a popinjay! —.
Hotspur has answered the summons of King Henry and has
come to see him at Windsor Castle in order to explain his refusal
to hand over the prisoners he captured in Scotland. Hotspur’s father,
the Earl of Northumberland, and his uncle, the Earl of Worcester, accompany
him.
Henry, angry at Hotspur’s rebellious refusal to deliver
the prisoners to him, speaks to Hotspur in threatening language.
When Worcester, already hostile toward Henry, reacts rudely, Henry orders
him out of the room. Hotspur and Northumberland now try to explain
that Hotspur’s refusal to return the captives was not meant as an
act of rebellion. The very moment that Hotspur’s battle against
the Scots ended, it seems, a prissy and effeminate courtier arrived
with Henry’s demands for the prisoners. Wounded, tired, and angry,
Hotspur refused and insulted the foolish messenger in the heat of
the moment.
But Henry’s anger is not soothed. Hotspur still refuses
to hand over the prisoners—unless the king pays the ransom that
the Welsh rebels demand for the release of Hotspur’s brother-in-law,
Lord Mortimer, who was captured after the Welsh defeated his army. Henry
refuses, calling Mortimer a traitor. He has learned that -Mortimer
recently married the daughter of the Welsh rebel Glyndwr
and believes that Mortimer lost his battle with Glyndwr on
purpose. Hotspur denies this charge against his kinsman, but Henry
calls him a liar. He forbids Hotspur to mention Mortimer’s name
ever again and demands he return the prisoners instantly or face
retribution.
After Henry and his attendants leave the room, Worcester returns
to his brother and nephew, and Hotspur unleashes an enraged speech.
He alleges that Henry may have ulterior motives for refusing to
ransom Mortimer: before he was deposed, Richard II, Henry’s predecessor,
had named Mortimer heir to the throne. Since Henry obtained his
crown by deposing Richard illegally, -Mortimer’s claim to the kingdom
might be better than Henry’s own. Hotspur is also bitter because
his own family members helped Henry overthrow Richard in the first
place, and they were instrumental in Henry’s rise to power. Hotspur
is thus angry that Henry seems to have forgotten the debt he owes
to the Percy family.
Worcester and Northumberland have some trouble getting Hotspur
to quiet down, but finally Worcester succeeds in explaining that
he has already formulated a cunning (and complicated) plan. He says
that the Percys must seek an alliance with the rebel forces in both
Scotland and Wales and all the powerful English nobles who are dissatisfied
with Henry. For now, Hotspur is to return to Scotland, give all
his prisoners back to their people without demanding ransom, and
establish an alliance with the Douglas, the leader of the Scottish
rebellion. Northumberland is to seek the support of the Archbishop
of York, who is unhappy because Henry executed his brother for conspiring
against the king’s life. Worcester, meanwhile, will go to Wales
to discuss strategy with Mortimer and Glyndwr.
Analysis
Hotspur’s dialogue in this scene is typical of his speeches
throughout the play: he is a very eloquent speaker and can use words
powerfully, but he has a hard time keeping his temper and is always
interrupting others. The difficulty Northumberland and Worcester
have in getting him to be quiet so that they can discuss their conspiracy indicates
that Hotspur’s impatience, which helps win him glory on the battlefield,
may cause him difficulty in his personal interactions. It also suggests
that while he is a brave fighter, he is a bad strategist, since
his rashness makes him prone to alienate even his own allies.
Hotspur’s military, aggressive, masculine nature is behind
his contempt for the effeminate messenger who chattered at Hotspur like
a “popinjay” after Hotspur’s victory (I.iii.49).
Based on the account that he gives to Henry, it seems that Hotspur
reacted to the prissy courtier not only with scorn but also with
an unreasonable anger (since he is using his reaction to the messenger
as an excuse, however, he may be exaggerating the extent of his
anger). In line with his soldierly existence, Hotspur is highly
concerned with honor, which he demonstrates in his rants about his
eagerness to face down Henry. His often-quoted words
By heaven, methinks it were an easy leap
To pluck bright honour from the pale-faced moon,
Or dive into the bottom of the deep,
. . .
And pluck up drownèd honour by the locks
(I.iii.199–203)
emphasize not only that he is perpetually ready to face
any danger in pursuit of glory but also that he has a very tangible
conception of honor. Whereas Falstaff sees honor only as an abstract
and therefore useless entity (“What is honour? A word. What is in
that word ‘honour’? . . . Air” [V.i. 133–134]),
Hotspur sees it as a physical object to be “pluck[ed] up,” a buried
treasure at “the bottom of the deep.”
But a comment by Worcester suggests the shallowness of
this value system. Realizing that Hotspur is not paying attention
to the important plan he is trying to explain, Worcester says of
Hotspur: “He apprehends a world of figures here, / But not the form
of what he should attend” (I.iii. 207–208).
Hotspur’s tendency to chase after ideals instead of thinking practically
is a serious flaw in his ability to perform as a strategist and
soldier. Harry, in contrast, possesses the ability to hold back
and think things through, as he demonstrates in his manipulation
of his tavern friends.
This scene also provides a window into the moral ambiguities
at the center of the play. Many readers and critics feel that there
is no clear-cut good or bad side in this and the other Henry plays.
It remains ambiguous whether the Percys have a legitimate grievance, or
if the king is right in dismissing their claims as the excuses of power-hungry
rebels. Even the bare facts behind the coalitions are difficult
or impossible to confirm. To some extent, the setup of the play
urges identification with the side in power (King Henry and his allies).
But the richness of the play derives from the ambiguous and mixed
motives that drive its action and so many of its characters.
  Help |
Feedback |
Make a request |
Report an error |
Send to a friend
|
|