Henry IV Essay: The Case Against Hotpsur

Heroism in Henry IV: The Case Against Hotpsur

For me, one of the ultimate acts of heroism in Shakespeare’s Henry IV occurs in Act V, Scene IV of the play when Prince Hal rushes onto the battlefield to save his father, King Henry, from being killed by rebels. The rebellious Douglas is standing over Henry and is about to kill the king just as Hal bursts onto the scene and challenges Douglas: “Hold up thy head, vile Scot, or thou art like / Never to hold it up again!” (41-42). In risking his life for his father, Hal reveals his true courage and nobility in this moment, as previously the prince had been intentionally hiding his noble qualities during the beginning of the play to further his strategies. Hotspur’s arc, on the other hand, is the

opposite: he appears to be heroic in the beginning of the tale, but he is steadily revealed to be a base and an unheroic character. Some readers of the story perceive Hotspur to be the hero of the play, but this is a position that I disagree with. Hotspur is not the hero in Shakespeare’s Henry IV because the plot reveals him to be self-centered, obsessed with glory, and excessively rash.
As the play begins, it seems as if Hotspur is the real hero.

In the first scene of the Act I King Henry is proud of Hotspur for playing a pivotal role in an early battle. He claims that it is as if “some night-tripping fairy had exchang’d / In cradle clothes our children,” because the king sees Hotspur more as a son than his own Prince Hal (87-88). But in the end, it turns out that Hotspur is King Henry’s biggest traitor. Hotpsur and his family were responsible for helping Henry IV come to power, but they felt the favor was never repaid, so a rebellion is started in Act II Scene IV against the king in which Hotspur is a leader: “that roan shall be my throne” (74). This reality is a great example of Hotspur’s unheroic self-centeredness. He did not help King Henry become king in the first place because he thought Henry was a good man or would make a good king; he only did it because he wanted something in return. And when he helped to start the rebellion against Henry, he did not do so because he thought Henry was a bad man or a bad king; he rebelled only because he stood to gain power and wealth if he succeeded. Hotspur’s self-centeredness prevents him from being a true

hero.
Hotspur’s blind lust for glory is another reason he could never be a true hero. Traditionally, sincere heroes are thought to be altruistic, humble, empathetic, capable, and not vain, but Hotspur is largely motivated by only one thing throughout Henry IV: the desire to attain more and more glory. In Act II Scene IV Hotspur has already established himself as a good soldier, but when he comes home to rest one evening, his wife, Lady Percy, finds him to be restless in his sleep. She says that she has heard him murmuring of “tales of iron wars, / … Of basilisks, of cannon, culverin, / Of prisoners’ ransom and of solder’s slain” (52-58). This shows that both Hotpsur’s conscious and unconscious minds are totally obsessed with gaining glory through war, to the point that even when he is asleep it is all he can talk about. The rebellion against King Henry that breaks out in the play is just as good an excuse for Hotspur to gain more power as it is for him to gain more glory. Hotspur’s ravenous hunger for fame and prowess prevents him from being a true hero.
Lastly, Hotspur is much too rash and explosive of a character to be the real hero of Shakespeare’s Henry IV.

Hotspur constantly acts impulsively throughout the entire play and is never able to see the potential consequences of his actions beyond how he wants the future to play out. For instance, in Act II Scene III Hotpsur is reading a letter from a friend he has recently written too. Hotspur requested for this friend to join him in the rebellion against the king, but the friend states that “The purpose you undertake is dangerous” (12). There is no indication in this letter that the friend was trying to say anything but that the plot was too risky for their participation, but Hotspur immediately jumps to the conclusion that they are going to betray Hotspur’s treason to the king. He leaves at once to join the rebel’s camp, even though it cannot be demonstrated that he was in any real danger at that point at all. Hotpsur is much too rash to be the hero of the play, as heroes are traditionally analytical and

patient.
In conclusion, Hotspur seems to be no more than a basic knave. Hal shows himself to have patience during the play, while Hotspur shows himself to be rash. Hal is revealed to be a master political strategist, whereas Hotspur rushes ahead at the first thought of battle. Lastly, Hal saves the lives of others, while Hotspur is only interested in saving his self-interests. Hal is the true protagonist of Shakespeare’s Henry IV and serves as a foil to Hotspur throughout the play, while Hotspur seems to only exist in the text to make Hal’s eventual rise that much more significant. If the events of Henry IV could be expressed through the analogy of a chess game, then Hotspur is the player who moves first and begins a rapid and risky board-wide assault, while Hal is the player who sits back, analyzes the situation, and then piece by piece dismantles Hotspur’s attack. In this sense, Hal has all the qualities it takes to be an effective king, and Hotspur has all the qualities it takes to be a bad king. Hotspur is not the hero of Henry IV, but he does help Hal, the real hero of the play, achieve his fate.