Henry IV, Part : Garments of Necessity

"In the evening, I return to my house, and go into my study. At the door I take off the clothes I have worn all day, mud spotted and dirty, and put on regal and courtly garments." - Machiavelli

"Sovereignty, though its meanings have varied across history, also has a core meaning, supreme authority within a territory" (Stanford). Sovereignty is more than a birthright - its success relies on a consensus by the people. In Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part 1, Hal realizes this and befriends the hoi polloi - he does not assume that because he is the heir apparent he will be accepted as such. To be a great king and have sovereignty over his people he will need their consent. This theme of struggle between natural law and sovereign rights of kings highlights an advanced monarchy's need to balance a perceived right of dominion and acceptance by the people: Hal's acknowledgement of this concept is visible throughout the play as he develops casual relationships with the common man, culminating in Act III, Scene II in which he and his father square off over their differences; during this interplay between father and son, Hal -with Machiavellian-like prowess- controls the encounter through his remarkable ability to assess a situation and act accordingly.

But how does one achieve ultimate authority and avoid being constantly challenged by those who question your power and ability? While Hal was quickly maturing into his princely role, his father fails to evolve within his own realm: ignorance and unconcern of his subject's needs leaves Henry at risk from upstarts like Hotspur who attempt to usurp his throne by assembling an army, made possible by earning the commoner's loyalty. Yet, Henry IV blasts his son for colluding with the ordinary people and advises him to adopt his own behavior: "My presence, like a robe pontifical, /Ne'er seen but wond'red at, and so my state,/ Seldom but sumptuous, show'd like a feast"(56-58). Conversely, Henry describes King Richard as "...ambl(ing) up and down,/with shallow jesters, and rash bavin wits" (60-61), effectively establishing a counterpoint that too much familiarity breeds contempt; the king must be somewhat untouchable and majestic- he must not be perceived as an ubiquitous fool. However, Henry's absolutistic methods were not entirely successful and the seeds of discontent fired up Hotspur's rebellion.

On the other hand, Hal's ability to adapt to his environment and learn from shrewd advice portends that he will be a more effective ruler than his father. Hal is a brilliant strategist - like a chameleon he becomes what is expected of him at the necessary moment. He advances this even more so when in crisis: "... I will wear a garment all of blood/ And stain my favors in a bloody mask,/ Which, wash'd away shall scour my shame with it" (135-137) Previously he hid behind his youthful indiscretions to become acquainted with the common man. Yet, Hal learns from his father's speech that unless he maintains a healthy distance from his subjects, his reign could go the way of King Richard.

A truly effective leader cannot rule without man's consent; consent minimizes discontent, anarchy, and full-blown civil war. Queen Elizabeth more than likely accepted Shakespeare's message of balanced leadership as kudos for a job well done - she had earned the love of her countrymen as well as the respect.: "I have but the body of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a king... and think foul scorn that any Prince in Europe should dare to invade the borders of my realm." I do believe that the Queen understood Shakespeare's message that a wise ruler can preserve her power through recognizing the natural rights of the common people while keeping a healthy balance of approachability and aloofness.

Works Cited

"Sovereignty." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 18 June 2003.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sovereignty/