Hotspur: A Perfect Image of Honor?
Eric Brown
Henry Percy, also known as Hotspur, is closely connected to the concept of honor in Henry IV Part 1. The first instance of the word “honor” coming up in dialogue in this play is actually in reference to him. Speaking of Hotspur’s accomplishments and notable captures in battle, King Henry decries, “is not this an honourable spoil? A gallant prize?” (I.i.745-756). Hotspur demonstrates fearlessness and passion in battle. King Henry goes so far as to claim he envies Northumberland, Hotspur’s father, for producing “a son who is the theme of Hhonour’s tongue” (I.i.80). This dialogue comes before the audience meets Hotspur, so the idea that he is basically the embodiment of honor serves as the first impression of him. Is Henry’s characterization of Hotspur accurate? There are two competing theories for how to answer this question.
One interpretation is that Hotspur is indeed a perfect mirror of honor. His rebellion against King Henry is the major plot point that would seem to call this assertion into question. But Shakespeare introduces aspects of the situation that serve to support Hotspur’s decision to rebel, perhaps even making it an honorable decision. One of the initial points of tension between Hotspur and King Henry comes when King Henry demands Hotspur’s prisoners of war. King Henry’s demand, according to A.R. Humphreys, is actually illegal (8). The law of arms entitles Hotspur to retain his prisoners, so it is actually King Henry who acts dishonorably in this moment. Hotspur’s eventual decision to rebel comes after his father and uncle explain to him that Mortimer, Hotspur’s cousin, is the rightful heir to Richard’s throne. Hotspur’s rebellion, then, is not purely dishonorable treason, but a genuine effort to restore the monarchy to its just line. Shakespeare gives Hotspur at least justification, and maybe even virtuous motives supporting his choices and actions.
Hotspur, as his name suggests, is hot-tempered, quick to become passionately angry, which, like his act of rebellion, does not necessarily detract from his standing as an honorable figure. This character trait, according to Norman Council, actually serves to encourage the interpretation of Hotspur as a perfect image of honor. Philosophical ideas stemming from Plato suggests that honor has its root in anger and desire, and so Hotspur’s angry outbursts continue to define him “as a man who perfectly embodies all the characteristics of the honourable man” (45). Hotspur, with all his courage and temper, is Shakespeare’s presentation of what honor is really all about.
A different idea is that Hotspur’s fate represents the consequence of being overly ambitious for honor. In Of Honour, a book published near the turn of the 16th and 17th centuries, author Robert Ashley warns that ambition causes men to hunt after honor, which is a “base minded” activity (p. 41). Apparently, there is a line between seeking honor in a positive way, and hunting for it, and Hotspur may function on the latter side. In the Book of the Courtier, Baldassare Constiglione emphasizes “enduring patience,” and “temperance,” as virtuous qualities to possess during times of war, qualities that Hotspur conspicuously lacks (65).
Hotspur’s decision to rebel is rooted in a desire for the honor of restoring the rightful king, but this desire seems to blind the pragmatic instinct necessary for success. When he is rallying his troops, preparing them for battle, Hotspur shouts – “Doomsday is near. Die All, die merrily” (IV.i.14234). This speech places Hotspur in clear contrast with Hal, who, in a similar moment before the battle of Harfleur, urges his soldiers to look forward to the day in the future when they can point to their wounds and say they were at this battle years ago. According to this reading of the play, Hotspur, unlike Hal, seeks honor recklessly, and so fails to achieve it.
One interpretation is that Hotspur is indeed a perfect mirror of honor. His rebellion against King Henry is the major plot point that would seem to call this assertion into question. But Shakespeare introduces aspects of the situation that serve to support Hotspur’s decision to rebel, perhaps even making it an honorable decision. One of the initial points of tension between Hotspur and King Henry comes when King Henry demands Hotspur’s prisoners of war. King Henry’s demand, according to A.R. Humphreys, is actually illegal (8). The law of arms entitles Hotspur to retain his prisoners, so it is actually King Henry who acts dishonorably in this moment. Hotspur’s eventual decision to rebel comes after his father and uncle explain to him that Mortimer, Hotspur’s cousin, is the rightful heir to Richard’s throne. Hotspur’s rebellion, then, is not purely dishonorable treason, but a genuine effort to restore the monarchy to its just line. Shakespeare gives Hotspur at least justification, and maybe even virtuous motives supporting his choices and actions.
Hotspur, as his name suggests, is hot-tempered, quick to become passionately angry, which, like his act of rebellion, does not necessarily detract from his standing as an honorable figure. This character trait, according to Norman Council, actually serves to encourage the interpretation of Hotspur as a perfect image of honor. Philosophical ideas stemming from Plato suggests that honor has its root in anger and desire, and so Hotspur’s angry outbursts continue to define him “as a man who perfectly embodies all the characteristics of the honourable man” (45). Hotspur, with all his courage and temper, is Shakespeare’s presentation of what honor is really all about.
A different idea is that Hotspur’s fate represents the consequence of being overly ambitious for honor. In Of Honour, a book published near the turn of the 16th and 17th centuries, author Robert Ashley warns that ambition causes men to hunt after honor, which is a “base minded” activity (p. 41). Apparently, there is a line between seeking honor in a positive way, and hunting for it, and Hotspur may function on the latter side. In the Book of the Courtier, Baldassare Constiglione emphasizes “enduring patience,” and “temperance,” as virtuous qualities to possess during times of war, qualities that Hotspur conspicuously lacks (65).
Hotspur’s decision to rebel is rooted in a desire for the honor of restoring the rightful king, but this desire seems to blind the pragmatic instinct necessary for success. When he is rallying his troops, preparing them for battle, Hotspur shouts – “Doomsday is near. Die All, die merrily” (IV.i.14234). This speech places Hotspur in clear contrast with Hal, who, in a similar moment before the battle of Harfleur, urges his soldiers to look forward to the day in the future when they can point to their wounds and say they were at this battle years ago. According to this reading of the play, Hotspur, unlike Hal, seeks honor recklessly, and so fails to achieve it.