Discuss the position of women within this play.

Each of the three women in the play poses a unique threat to men. The Countess of Auvergne is a schemer who tries to entrap Talbot. However, she fails in her attempt, which makes her the least dangerous woman in the play. Meanwhile, Joan la Pucelle presents an obvious threat. She is a formidable warrior, but she is also dangerous for the way she plays a traditionally masculine rule and seems eager for the power of military command. An ambiguous and contradictory figure, she slides between being a holy virgin (for the French) and a whoring sorceress (for the English). But whatever danger she presents is ultimately purged when the English send her to die at the stake. Arguably, the most dangerous woman in the play is Margaret of Anjou. Although she doesn’t set out to entrap the king through marriage, she does become involved in this entrapment through the manipulation of Suffolk. The earl treats her as something of a Trojan Horse—an intriguing gift to his sovereign that nonetheless conceals a threat. Margaret herself isn’t yet fully aware of her power, but this only makes her more dangerous. Furthermore, unlike Joan, she is a threat that can’t so easily be purged.

Consider Shakespeare’s portrayal of the Wars of the Roses. Is his treatment of this conflict biased? Does he encourage us to support one side over the other? If so, how does he achieve this?

The scene in the Temple Garden seems at first to represent both sides with equal favor. Shakespeare never fully reveals the disputed details at the heart of the argument, so we have no basis on which to judge the ensuing conflict. And both sides appear equally absurd in their squabbling over who will wear what color rose. Yet by the end of the play, the audience likely leans more toward the white rose of York and away from red rose of Somerset. For one thing, Richard Plantagenet’s desire to reclaim his father’s land and title isn’t just about power; it’s about a struggle for legitimacy in a political sphere that would otherwise denigrate him. Once the king makes him the duke of York, he becomes a team player. Meanwhile, Somerset holds tight to his grudge—so tight, in fact, that he later delays sending cavalry to York’s standing army. This act indirectly results in the tragic death of Lord Talbot, not to mention a major defeat for the English. York’s ultimate commitment to unity over division encourages the audience to side with him over the petulant Somerset.

Shakespeare’s history plays are traditionally named after the monarch in power during the era portrayed. If not for that convention, would you have named this play after Henry VI, or would you have chosen another title?

Henry VI has a rather minor role in the play that bears his name. His first appearance doesn’t occur until act 3, and even then, he is not a major actor. Indeed, he is a young man with no experience and limited authority. By the end of the play, he begins to make decisions that will have real impact on the events that follow. But even so, the play has very little to do with King Henry VI. To come up with an alternative title, then, we must think about what Shakespeare has chosen to emphasize in the play. For instance, considering the thematic focus on the danger of political and military division, another title might emphasize the imminent Wars of the Roses and the Hundred Years’ War. Alternatively, the play could have been named after the figure who stands at the heart of its central tragedy: Lord Talbot.