1 Henry IV—Study Guide

1 Henry IV was written probably late in 1596. It was printed first in 1598, published (for all you fans) by Andrew Wise. It was an immediate best-seller, and was published seven times before it appeared among the Histories in the 1623 Folio. The first printing survives only in a fragment of eight pages, presently in the Folger Library. The play was equally successful on stage, no doubt on account of the popularity of Falstaff (who is mentioned more in early commentary than any character other than Hamlet). Falstaff, however, was originally named Sir John Oldcastle, an historical figure who had been burned a Lollard heretic in 1417 (about 14 years after the events the play portrays). Oldcastle held the title of Lord Cobham, and the family of the Elizabethan holder of the title seems successfully have pressured Shakespeare and the acting company to change the name to prevent the lampooning of their ancestor.

1. The play is called even on the quarto title pages a “History”, yet it has more invented material than any other of the “history plays”. Does the presence of the comic plot weaken the play’s claim to being a history? What functions does the invented comedy serve?

2. Why is Henry so “shaken” and “wan with care” at the play’s opening? Does he actually intend to undertake a pilgrimage? What might a pilgrimage achieve?

3. What do you make of Hotspur’s chivalric values? How do they “fit” in the world of the play. (Shakespeare has gone out of his way to make Hotspur a foil for Hal; historically he was three years older than King Henry. How does the parallel work?)

4. In the eighteenth century, Mrs. Inchbald declared that ‘This is a play which all men admire and which most women dislike’; why might she have said this? Is it true in your view? What roles do woman play?

5. Look at the economic language of the play (from the King who knows “what time to promise and when to pay” to Hal who will “pay the debt I never promised” to Falstaff who claims he is not a “counterfeit” to Hotspur’s desire to make “cracked crowns . . . current”). What is the purpose of this language cluster?

6. How does the play understand honor? Is it a worthy chivalric ideal or merely, as Falstaff would have it, “a word”?

7. What is the role of the Welsh in the play.

8. Is Falstaff a healthy force in the play, puncturing the lies of power (Bloom says “those who do not care for Falstaff are in love with time, death, the state, and the censor”), or is he a self-indulgent, anarchic force who must be restrained? Both? Neither?

9. What difference might it have made if Falstaff had retained his original name Oldcastle? How might that affect a reading of the play? (Think about the play’s religious language.)

10. Does the play end successfully (i.e. is it stable)? or is Part Two a necessity? As you read the second play, think about whether it is a sequel)