Honor In Henry IV, Part 1, And Achilles

How important is it to be honored? To gain glory in this life? To secure a lasting legacy? To the Greeks and Trojans in Homer’s famous epic, The Iliad, these were the most important things in life. The Greeks of Homer’s time believed that personal honor and glory was just that, personal. Honor and glory belonged to the individual who was skilled and accomplished enough to obtain it for himself. This honor and glory was held in the highest regard, and the worldview that honor and glory are the most important things in life is strongly depicted by Homer throughout The Iliad. The Judeo-Christian worldview depicted in the Old Testament of the Bible contrastingly teaches that all honor and glory belong to God. The heroes of the Old Testament did not attempt to secure the honor and glory of their actions and deeds for themselves, rather they gave it to God. The Greeks, however, saw gaining and maintaining personal honor and glory as foundational to life. They never missed an opportunity to gain personal honor and glory, and certainly never gave away the credit for their deeds. Throughout The Iliad, the characters’ choices and actions revolve around their desire to gain and maintain personal honor and glory. Gaining personal honor and glory--through great deeds, revenge for slights, and through one’s legacy--is a main theme in Homer’s The Iliad. Homer’s clear descriptions of the actions of the heroes in his epic give modern people a clear view into the psyche

Hotspur, on the other hand, is always seen as "honorable" even though he has caused this whole war; there is no way, therefore, for anyone to correctly say what brings honor and what dishonors. The second time the word "honor" appears in the play, it is on the lips of Hotspur, who is damning the King and urging his father and Worcester to "redeem / [their] banish'd honors and [to] restore [them]selves..." (I, iii). The reader can easily see Shakespeare's notion that the concept of honor and its embodiment seldom come together in the reality of a single person—certainly the way that Hotspur wants his father and uncle to redeem themselves (by dethroning the king) is not very honorable, yet his honor is from battles won in the king's name. So despite his treasonous thoughts, his honor from battle remains with him for the rest of his life, as even the prince calls him "valiant." (V, i) Both Hotspur and the King believed in the undegenerate chivalric conception of honor, which was a lofty one. Under it, trial by battle, and war, became religious affairs. Hotspur also talks of "honor" as a symbol for a trophy of victory: he

Honor can be described as many things, such as sacrificing yourself to reach a greater goal, having respect for others, or coming together to achieve a common goal. These concepts of honor can be seen through “The Charge of the Light Brigade”, Much Ado About Nothing, and The Wave. “The Charge of the Light Brigade”, written by Tennyson, is about British soldiers going into combat against Russian soldiers who they have no chance against. Much Ado About Nothing, one of Shakespeare's works, is a play that demonstrates how important honor is and that through deception it can be hard to bestow honor. Then The Wave, written by Strausser, is about a teacher who creates this group called the Wave where everyone is equal and everyone has to follow the rules in order to bring honor to the group. The

The importance of honor is shown when characters in the Illiad have chosen the glory of fighting, over their own lives. Two main examples are shown in Hektor and Achilles. Hektor is displayed

Honor is defined as a high respect given to an individual that brings credit. To receive honor is paralleled to being crowned with jewels and being regarded as a role model to all. The society that the Iliad portrays is “centered on the battlefield of achievement and its rewards” (Homer, xxi). The figures in Homer’s epic poem, the Iliad, partake in events that will allow them to “receive more honor and more material rewards” even if it means that they must indulge themselves in heightened risks that could end in death (xxiii). Hector, one of the most pivotal characters in the poem, illustrates the lust for glory and ignorance of everything else that holds just as much importance. As his character is strengthened, it can be seen that every

Intro: In the Greek society, honor is found on the battlefield, amidst the glory of war. In The Iliad, with the thousands of deaths, murder and the wrath of the gods, the betrayal, the beauty of one woman which caused the war and the heroes in the story, they all fight for honor.

In Act one scene one line 80 it shows that Hotspur theme of it honor means the theme of honor tongues. It shows that the king thinks Hotspur is the most perfect example of a man of honor. King Henry describes how he would love to have a son who has an ideal image of honor and a honorable man. Henry said, “ Whilst I, by looking on the raise of him, see riot and dishonor stain the brow of my young Harry. O that it could be proved that some night tripping fairy had exchanged in cradle clothes our children where they lay and called mine Perry and his Plantagenet (Act 1 Scene 2 Lines 83-89). Both Hotspur and Hal are looking to gain honor by defeating another in battle. However, Hal wants to take Hotspur’s honor for himself by defeating him. The king sees that Hotspur as honorable because he is fearless, successful in battles, and his time is royalty. Hotspur thinks if he takes action it's a way to redeem honor. He even plans to overthrow the king. As you can see falstaff and Hotspur holds diverse beliefs concerning the main theme of honor. When you look at honor it shows that they have good kingship. Honor is a big word that people look up

After feigning death to avoid being killed in combat, Falstaff explains that honor in death is much worse than dishonor in life. “‘Sblood, ‘twas time to counterfeit… Counterfeit? I lie. I am no counterfeit. To die is to be a counterfeit, for he is but the counterfeit of a man who hath not the life of a man; but to counterfeit dying when a man thereby liveth is to be no counterfeit, but the true and perfect image of life indeed” (5.4.115-122). Falstaff’s remarks show that his actions, despite being dishonorable in the eyes of others, are irrelevant to anyone but himself. Falstaff states that by counterfeiting death, he is not a counterfeit, and this holds true as he survives because of his actions. He does not attempt to appear honorable, because those who act honorably sacrifice the “true and perfect image of life” in doing so. Falstaff uses his dishonor to his advantage and survive. This allows him to find success in places where the honorable would never venture. Furthermore, upon seeing the body of Sir Walter Blunt, Falstaff remarks upon the nature of honor in death. “Soft, who are you? Sir Walter Blunt. There’s honor for you. Here’s no vanity.” (5.3.34-36). Falstaff’s initial inability to identify Blunt proves that in death, honor is a title bestowed for a fruitless result. He states that Blunt finally achieved honor in his death, and rather than be rewarded for this, he is left lifeless, without vanity. Hal is doomed to follow the path of Blunt and other fallen nobles because his quest for redemption through honor was never bound to yield fruitful results. Because of Hal redeems himself, which is what he wanted in the beginning, he is compelled to continually fight on the behalf of the King. Although this may seem like a reward for Hal’s actions, this crusade is doomed to result in his failure,

1. 133 & 134). He feels that honour is something that is given only to someone who has died and Falstaff desires to live, so he’ll have “none of it” (138). This idea of honour being associated with death is further depicted through Falstaff’s discovery of Sir Walter Blunt’s body on the battlefield. Sir Blunt was someone who was seen as an honourable man, so upon finding him dead, Falstaff exclaims, “there’s honour for you!”-- as if he has found something to validate his previously mentioned impression (5. 3. 32). Falstaff continuously proves that he is not an honourable man through actions such as his thievery, referring to his recruits as “food for powder” (essentially implying that they are only there as targets for the enemy and are meant to die), and claiming that he himself killed Hotspur in Battle, even though it was truly Hal (4. 2. 61).

Shakespeare creates a composite view of honor in Henry IV part I, that challenges its existence. From the opening speech, we see the characters struggle to grasp its complexity. Throughout the entire play, they toy back and forth with the distinctions and social expectations of both internal and external honor. Allowing themselves to fight an internal struggle with the conflicting views, weight and consistency of an honor that doesn’t truly exist.

No” (Henry IV Part 1, 5.1.130-132). Falstaff then concludes that “honor is a mere scutcheon” (5.1.138). Falstaff knows that Hal like the others on the battlefield are fighting for “honor,” but Falstaff sees that honor is really nothing. His lifestyle is drink and thievery is worth more than the lives lost for the reward of that honor. In “The Courage of Falstaff” from his an essay on the Dramatic Character of Sir John Falstaff (1777), Shakespearean literary scholar Maurice Morgann argues that Falstaff found an issue with honor “as well as every thing else, in ridiculous lights, and began to renounce its tyranny” (Maurice Morgann).

Then makes another plan to let Falstaff and others rob them alone, then to rob from Falstaff afterwards. After all that at the tavern in Eastcheap, Falstaff begins to retell the story about fighting a gang of thieves who robbed him of his goods from them at Gads Hill (2.4.9). To end that Hal tells him it was them and then laughs it off (2.4.28) this shows he would do such trickery to Falstaff and still have no remorse for his actions and this makes Hal also looks funnier in front of everybody making him look superior. On the other hand Hal protects Falstaff when the sheriff comes inside the tavern looking for the thief who robbed the King's exchequer at Gads Hill. (2.4.70) Prince Hal then robs him though which contradicts the belief of their friendship. In reality though if he was to turn Falstaff over to the sheriff it would make the tavern lose their respect for Hal as a superior. In the final analysis of Hal's' actions towards Falstaff, it is very noticeable he only cares about looking good and keeping superiority over the

What is honour asks Falstaff in the Shakespeare's play Henry the fourth. Supposing that Shakespeare drew from his own person opinions when using the character Falstaff to answer this question we can gain some insight into Shakespeare's viewpoints on honour, or at the very least a view of honour that some people subscribe too. During Falstaff soliloquies on honour, he makes several points to devalue the idea of honour. In comparing the ideas brought fourth by the character Falstaff the aim of the paper is to contrast Falstaff view with that of his opposition the church. The church in question was probably the Catholic church but, for the sake of this essay his ideas will be contrasted with those of the New Church.

Some argue that honor is the central theme of Henry the IV (part 1),after reading the play and watching it I strongly agree with that statement. Throughout the play, the two main characters Hotspur and Prince Hal desired to feel honored.Even though they didn't truly understand its value and how to receive it in a precise way they still wanted to feel entitled. William Shakespeare never gave the idea of honor a definition, he created a play that reflects honor through the three main characters Prince Hal, Harry Percy also known as Hotspur and Sir John Falstaff personality rather than giving the audience the definition.

A person of honor has dignity, high public esteem, and honesty. It is no surprise that Shakespeare doesn’t make the concept of honor simple, specifically in his play King Henry IV: Part One, the word becomes ambiguous. The value and interpretation of the theme changes with each character; some consider the framework as praiseworthy while others argue it is completely insignificant. The characters Hotspur, Falstaff, King Henry IV, and Prince Hal present their own understandings of honor which mirror their personalities and consciousness. In comparing and contrasting each of their translations, the character’s true being is better understood.