“What do the different worlds in Henry IV Part 1 reveal about the characters in the play?

In the history play King Henry IV Part 1, William Shakespeare invites the audience to make
comparisons between specific characters and accentuates the intertwining of different worlds.
Although the play opens with the nobility of the royal court, King Henry’s political realm is continually
juxtaposed with other fields such as that of battle and rebellion, and the lowly world of the tavern.
Beyond using these worlds to comment on the English social context – shown by the depiction of
tavern culture as a representation of moral decay – Shakespeare employs different settings to
reveal the qualities and desires, both personal and political, of his characters. Whilst Falstaff’s
indulgence and the impetuous Hotspur’s yearn for honour are both unequivocal embodiments of the
worlds they represent, characters such as Hal are less permanent, in that the prince’s “reformation”
sees his transition between two different realms – Hal ultimately banishing his “unyoked humour”
when he realises his obligation as future king.

The air of nobility and authority permeating through King Henry’s political sphere reveals the
leader’s admirable control in the midst of private and public troubles. At the play’s opening, Henry is
plagued by a sense of guilt at the usurpation of “that sweet lovely rose” Richard II, and
consequently, feels his authority is undermined by the illegitimacy of his “borrowed title”.
Shakespeare employs imagery and personifies the “thirsty entrance of this soil” and the “short-
winded accents” of the exhausted landscape to highlight that England is currently being ravaged by
“civil butchery”. Nevertheless, despite the political instability, Henry adopts a façade of royalty and
composure in an attempt to unite England by joining the Crusades. This decision combined with the
grace of the blank verse, “so shaken as we (royal pronoun) are so wan with care”, reveals that
Henry is a tactical ruler who possesses internal strength and holds the interests of his people at
heart. Moreover, when Henry is annoyed, he displays ‘dignified anger’ asserting that he is “unapt to
stir at indignities” – contrasting significantly with Hotspur’s impulsive interjections of annoyance
when he repeatedly exclaims “Revolted Mortimer”! The intertwining of Henry’s personal life in the
world of politics reveals his strained father-son relationship with Hal. Perhaps best exemplified by
the public juxtaposition of Hal, who is marred by “riot and dishonour”, with Hotspur, who Henry
praises as “the theme of honour’s tongue”, the king implies a strong desire for Hal to remove himself
from “vile participation” and redeem his dishonourable behaviour.

Remaining within the world of politics, the field of battle and rebellion reveals the dire consequences
of idealism and hasty decision making when attempting to overthrow authority. Motivated by a
sense of injustice at Henry’s mistreatment of the Percy’s despite their assistance in Richard’s
deposition, it would seem that the figureheads of the rebellion are the older leaders, Worcester and
Glendower. Nonetheless, Shakespeare’s likening of Hotspur to a wild beast emphasises that it is
the youth’s animalistic scent for battle, “upon my life, I smell it”, which drives the Percy rebellion.
Hotspur’s eagerness for battle is demonstrated in the rousing language of his rhyming couplets,
“Doomsday is near. Die all, die merrily”, and is desire to “pluck bright honour from the pale faced
moon” as if honour is something tangible, when in reality, honour, as explored in Falstaff’s soliloquy
in Act 5 Scene 2 is “air … a mere scutcheon” which does not “live with the living”. This world of
manipulation, treachery and deceit concentrates Hotspur’s search for honour to the exclusion of all
other qualities, with Shakespeare perhaps revealing that Hotspur’s idealistic “apprehension of a
world of figures” and impulsive nature are his harmartias.

Beyond providing comic relief from the gravity of the political sphere, the world of the tavern
highlights the relaxed attitudes of members of this lower class and reveals their enjoyment in excess
and indulgence. Life in the Boar’s Head Tavern is characterised by an indifference to politics and
significant informality, mirrored in Shakespeare’s employment of prose in almost all scenes which
take place outside Henry’s realm. This casualness of language is further seen in the use of
colloquialisms, “What a plague have I to do with a buff jerkin?”, Mistress Quigley’s malapropisms
and Falstaff’s zeal for wordplay, “To die is to be a counterfeit, for he is but the counterfeit of a man
who hath not the life of a man”. Perhaps this world reveals the most about “huge hill of flesh”
Falstaff, from “Sir John sack and sugar’s” hearty appetite for life to his dishonourable behaviour.
Shakespeare’s juxtaposition of the robbery at Gad’ s Hill with the Percy rebellion – with the former
group of rebels out to steal material crowns whilst the later group more interested in stealing the
crown itself – highlights the cowardice of characters such as Falstaff when compared to the bravery
of Hotspur and Hal. Whereas Falstaff “roars for mercy” and “carries his guts away with quick
dexterity”, Hal valiantly offers to fight Hotspur single-handedly “to save the blood on either side”.
Hence, not only does Shakespeare explore the nonchalant attitudes of the tavern folk, but he also
exploits the indignities and neglect for chivalry which many of them possess.

Many of the characters in the play remain stagnant in their own comfortable worlds; however, Prince
Hal’s pledge to “pay the debt [he] never promised” sees him act as a go-between, transitioning from
the lowly world of the tavern to the realm of his father, ultimately revealing that Hal has the potential
to be a king. Whilst Hal claims in his soliloquy (Act 1 Scene 3) that his “loose behaviour” is a
deceptive appearance and part of an elaborate plan which will see others lowering their
expectations of him, the prince’s actions throughout the play contradict his pledge and raise
ambiguity about the sincerity of Hal’s words. Nonetheless, regardless of whether his soliloquy is a
merely an excuse for his “unyoked humour” or not, Hal’s speech foreshadows future events, with
the prince banishing his reputation as a “minion of the moon” and instead “imitating the sun” –
Shakespeare heightening Hal’s transformation through the use of antithetical imagery of the moon
and the royal symbolism of the sun. Hal’s potential to follow his father’s footsteps is revealed in his
eagerness to play the role of the king in the play extempore in Act 2 Scene 4, and is also shown by
his reply that he will banish Falstaff, “I do, I will” – the change in tense foreshadowing Hal’s
inevitable division from the “white bearded Satan” when he becomes a king. Hence, Hal’s transition
from the Boar’s Head to the realm of honour and politics reveals that Hal is better suited and
perhaps destined to lead the people of England.

Shakespeare’s King Henry IV Part 1 explores the relationship between public and private personas
and meditates on how the different worlds of the play reveal much about the characters which they
represent. From Henry’s composure in the political realm, Hotspur’s irrationality in the world of
rebellion, and Falstaff’s indulgence and cowardice in the tavern, perhaps the bildungrsoman reveals
the most about Hal, whose transition from a life of dishonour to chivalry accentuates the fact that the
prince possesses innate leadership and the potential to be a fine ruler.