The concept of honor is seemingly as old as time itself. Knights in fairy tales are known for their bravery in the face of danger, chivalry to others, skill in battle, and on and on. They protect the weak, defend the innocent, and fight evil in any form. Sir William Segar writes:
[A knight] must be of good constitution and convenient strength . . . [H]e should be well favored of face and comely. He should be of bold aspect . . . sober, and discreet, not inclined to vain delights or effeminate pleasures; obedient, vigilant and patient, faithful and loyal; constant and resolute . . . (Segar 336)
Slightly less well known is how important honor was to the public as a whole. In 17th century England, during the Modern period, honor was seen as an essential part of any gentleman’s persona. In William Shakespeare’s 1 Henry IV, this concept of honor is challenged by several characters, and questions many of the societal norms of the time.
More than simply being a part of how a man acted, or generally how a man carried himself, honor in this time period was seen as a part of how a man was viewed by others. It was an important part of any man’s identity and social status. Everybody possesses a sense of pride in some form, although what exactly individuals pride themselves on may differ. According to Faramerz Dabhoiwala, professor of history at Oxford University, “men in different ranks and circumstances attached greater or lesser importance to lineage, wealth, occupation, and conduct as measures of reputation” (203).
As an individual climbed the rungs of the social ladder, all of the above traits became even more important. Upper class citizens would be judged heavily by others by everything, right down to the clothes they were wearing. In stark contrast to all of these traits is the knight Falstaff. Falstaff makes ends meet primarily as a thief, and through some freeloading. His reputation is cemented after he is put in charge of soldiers for the upcoming battle against the rebel Hotspur. Instead of filling the ranks of his brigade with the best fighters that he could find, he chose to enlist the wealthiest members of society, who quickly offered bribes to avoid their obligation. The result is a decrepit group of men who joined simply because they didn’t have any better prospect (Shakespeare 91-2). It is unclear where exactly in his lifetime he diverted from the expected behavior of a true knight, if he ever was one. Falstaff serves to display all of the traits that were undesirable to a gentleman of the early modern European time period. He was a source of comedic relief, but primarily existed in the play to serve as an example of how everybody is human. A title does not make a man.
The king, as the leader, must exemplify all of the characteristics expected of him. In the beginning of the play, Prince Harry is living the good life with Falstaff and their group of vagabonds, without a care in the world. After his aside to the audience concerning his plans to lower everybody’s expectations before becoming more king-like, the audience is unsure what to think of him. He did, indeed, make good on his word after being severely chastised by his father, but would a true king (or even king to be) choose to live a carefree life when he could have been bettering himself to assume the role?
In the end, Prince Harry rose to the occasion, defeated Hotspur, and regained his father’s love. He exemplified all of the aspects of a good leader that would be looked up to by his followers. While not following all of the traits that were widely seen as the aspects of honor, a king doesn’t keep a kingdom together by wearing fine clothes or having a respected lineage. The audience can’t identify with someone who’s perfect all the time. Much like how Falstaff displayed that not all knights are in shining armor, Shakespeare used the character of Prince Harry to demonstrate how a man who may not have had the most socially “correct” definition of honor could still serve his kingdom.
Works Cited
Shakespeare, William. The First Part of King Henry the Fourth. Boston: Bedford Books, 1997. Print.
Dabhoiwala, Faramerz. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. JSTOR. Web. 11 September 2014.