It was very important for the audience to have so much evidence for the change in the character of Henry because Shakespeare had to show that Henry could be taken seriously for, if he wasn’t, the people would have rebelled against him thinking that he was still a drunk and a villain as he was when he was the Prince. Therefore, he wouldn’t have made a very good King.
Also, I think Shakespeare has chosen to show the discussion being made by two important bishops concerning Henry’s personality and actions. This is because bishops were important people of the church and in those days the general public would have believed them for they were men of great authority.
Queen Elizabeth was in power at the time the play was written. The play is seen as patriotic and Elizabeth would be pleased that the play reinforced the belief that the monarch was chosen by God. This was because she faced rebellion due to the reformation of the church.
Henry believed that he had claim to the throne of France through distant roots in the French Royal Family and on a very technical interpretation of ancient land laws. Henry says “Can I with right and conscience make this claim”. Here Henry believed he could make his claim and was right in doing so. The church backed Henry’s claim to the throne of France when Canterbury replied “The sin upon my head, dread sovereign, for in the book of numbers is it writ: when the man dies, let the inheritance descend unto the daughter. Gracious Lord, stand for your own, unwind your bloody flag, look back into your mighty ancestors”. In this, Canterbury backs Henry’s claim for the throne of France. It was very important in those days for the monarch to be backed by the church because the church was very powerful and, with their approval and in turn that of God, the public would support the monarch.
Henry believed that he had claim to the throne of France due to ancestral right and when the French Prince, Dauphin, sent King Henry a box of tennis balls, Dauphin was trying to make out that the war will be a game. Henry took this very seriously and then decided to fulfil this claim with force by invading France.
At Henry’s speech at Harfleur, Henry uses persuasive language to motivate his troops before battle. For example, he refers to his men as “dear friends”. This shows his use of flattery by complementing his men; therefore, they fight for him. This acknowledges that Henry thinks of his men as friends not just soldiers.
Another example of persuasive language which Henry uses in his Harfleur speech is alliteration. Henry says “Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood”. Here the repeated letter S shows alliteration which is a persuasive technique. This adds rhythm to the speech, emphasising the importance of the battle, calling his men to be brave.
Again, Henry uses persuasive language when he says “Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide, hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit to its full height”. By saying this, Henry uses a persuasive technique called ‘the rule of three’. This is three ideas put together and is very effective in this case because it motivates the troops and gets them fired up for battle. Henry is asking them to get angry and build up their adrenaline to succeed.
More persuasion is used in Henry’s speech before the battle of Harfleur by saying “Now attest that those whom you call’d your fathers did beget you”. This means prove that the men you call your fathers did truly conceive you. This is persuasive because it refers to the men’s families and leads them to believe that their family is relying on them.
Finally, Henry uses persuasive language when he uses imagery, similes and metaphors. He says “I see you standing like a greyhound in the slips”. This is a simile and is effective in this case because it compares them to fast dogs ready to pounce. An example of a metaphor he uses in this speech is “The game’s afoot!” Here he refers to war as a game, making this a metaphor and its effect is that it takes away the issue of war which isn’t a liked subject and replaces it with game which the men may enjoy. This is also referring to the gift of tennis balls that the Dauphin sent him, possibly being sarcastic.
In Henry’s night before Agincourt speech, he disguises himself as an ordinary soldier and wanders among one of the English camps. In this speech he uses persuasive language when he says “Our debts, our careful wives, our children and our sins lay on the King”. Here he uses persuasive techniques such as the rule of three and repetition. The rule of three makes debt, wives, children and sins all seem together as if they are linked. Also, the repetition of “our” is an effective technique because it emphasises and makes it clearer to the men that they belong to them.
Another persuasive device is the use of questions. In this speech there are lots of question marks, many of which are rhetorical. For example “What infinite heart’s ease must Kings neglect that private men enjoy?” This is an example of a rhetorical question because it does not require an answer. Rhetorical questions are effective because they make the men think about ho important it is for them in winning the battle.
At Henry’s Agincourt speech he rallies the troops for battle and addresses them attempting to raise their fighting spirits and encourage them to victory. Once again, he uses persuasive techniques such as repetition, rule of three and flattery when he says “We few, we happy few, we band of brothers”. Here Henry uses the rule of three by putting the ideas few, happy and brothers together. He uses repetition to emphasise the word “we”. Finally, it contains flattery because calling the men brothers of the King, is a way of complementing them.
Another act of persuasion Henry uses is that he mentions the Feast of St Crispin. Here Henry says “This day is called the Feat of St Crispin”, telling the men that if they are victorious and come home, there will be a feast every year in honour of them. Also “This shall the good man teach his son” means that they will be remembered for generations to come.
In addition, Henry says “That him which hath no stomach to fight, let him depart; his passport shall be made, and crowns for convoy put into his purse: we would not die in that man’s company”. This means that whoever is not brave enough to fight – let him go home and we shall pay for his journey for he isn’t worthy of dying amongst us. This may be persuasive because it shows the men that they are loyal. It is a form of flattery because he complements the men for not going home and fleeing the battle.
Also, this may persuade any of the men who were debating running away from the battle to do otherwise.
The play is seen as a patriotic play. Lawrence Olivier performed the vole of Henry during world war two. This would have had a great impact on the audience who would see the pressure of going to war.
In conclusion, Henry’s rhetoric would have greatly inspired his men because over all he used lots of persuasive techniques and devices in both of his battle speeches. Henry’s leadership skills are presented well and all the men pay attention to him and listen to what he has to say for they respect him in his position of King.
Personally, my particular favourite part of the performance of which I watched was when the character of Pistol tried to steel some crowns from one of the French soldiers but because he couldn’t speak the language, he failed in his attempt. This I found amusing and entertaining.
If I were to present a production in today’s society, I would present it at a small theatre such as the Octagon Theatre in Bolton where the audience are very close to the stage. The effect of this would draw the audience in and make it seem to them that they are a part of the production.
