by Dani Mancini, Blogging Circle 1
In class today, we mentioned the clergy a few times as a jumping-off point to discuss both Henry V’s legitimacy as a ruler, and whether or not it is functional to begin the play with such characters. One point that we almost discussed, but managed to avoid, is how the clergy is portrayed by Shakespeare in Henry V as a play. I think that the clergy are represented as unsavory and possibly corrupt. The opening scene of the play features the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Ely discussing the possibility of a war in France. During the discussion, the topic turns to a law that may cause a portion of the Church’s lands and funds to be redistributed to the military and to the poor. Canterbury says,
It must be thought on. If it pass against us
We lose the better half of our possession,
For all the temporal lands which men devout
By testament have given to the Church
Would they strip from us …
And to relief of lazars and weak age,
Of indigent faint souls past corporal toil,
A hundred almshouses, right well supplied;
And to the coffer of the King beside,
A thousand pounds by the year. Thus runs the bill (1.1.7-18).
Ely replies shortly after with: “But what prevention?” (1.1.21). I don’t understand how men who are supposed to be devoted to the Church and a life of service are attempting to avoid their wealth and land being redistributed to those who need it more. Two old men have very little need for large amounts of wealth when they are supposed to be living holy lives. The most shocking part of this is how they would rather keep their wealth than allow for it to go to the poor who are starving or the sick who are dying.
Later on in the scene, King Henry calls upon the clergy to tell him whether or not he is going to invade France for a just reason. Canterbury tells Henry about his lineage and his relation to King Edward III and how it relates to the current King of France, ensuring him that he has every right to invade. Henry reminds Canterbury that he must tell the truth not only because he is a man of God, but if there is any problem with the invasion due to Henry’s legitimacy, it will be Canterbury’s responsibility instead. By making such a huge deal in the beginning of the play about how Henry is extremely concerned with making sure that he won’t be the one to blame in case his invasion goes sour, it seems to me like it could be a large foreshadowing technique to let the readers know that something is about to go wrong. Judging by the way the rest of the Henriad has unfolded, it is difficult to assume that the war in France will be easily won for King Henry.
Additionally, I think Shakespeare ties this foreshadowing technique in with his commentary on the clergy of this time period. It is unlikely that Shakespeare is trying to depict them in a positive light if he is showing Ely and Canterbury to be money-hungry men who care very little about the poor and are willing to allow thousands of people to die in a war so they can hold onto their wealth for a year or two longer. We shall see if Canterbury or Ely makes it to the end of the play or if they will be imprisoned (or worse) before the final scene.
I like that yu touched upon King Henry’s going to these men for morality. The question that comes is what does it mean that the ones meant to goide morality are those that are so far from it. There is that question of is this purely a commentary on the church, or is it going further- commenting on the system of inhereting the crown.
It really did irk me too that men of God are being so corrupt, but it does highlight a reality of Shakespeare’s time and even occasionally in our time. Now that we’ve finished the play, I do wonder if the clergymen are ever given punishment, merit or something in between. Can Henry really punish these men of religion without disrupting his own image? His morality would have come into question if he did not abide by God-given paths. Henry got his excuse to pursue the French issue, but did he consider that he was being manipulated? I wonder how much praise the clergymen got for the luck Henry and the soldiers had in the battles with the French, because this success can only look good on them.
Hi Dani!
I didn’t look at these clergy men as ultimately the voices or path of God, so this post evokes further exploration of the Clergyman in that light. I saw the Clergyman the voice of reasoning and or advice. the clergyman could be seen as representing morality and values that one should have or embrace no matter of class status. I do find that the clergy should take some responsibility for the decisions Henry made based on their advice. He didn’t have to take said advice but they did give it so following through is implied.
I like how you focus on the clergy and morality. I agree that it’s unsettling that the clergymen are selfish about giving up land when charity is one of the fundamental keys of Christianity. It tells a lot about how corrupt the government is– something that is timeless. And Henry’s need to avoid being blamed for an invasion gone wrong reminds me of the scene where he gets the conspirators to decide their punishment. In both cases, Henry goes to the other party for some kind of validation. He lets others justify his actions.
Hi Dani,
I too was thinking about this sketchy clergy business when reading this play. Almost the whole first scene is the Bishop and Archbishop talking about how they can manipulate King Henry into letting them keep their land, and making it look like it’s really his best interest they’re looking out for. They don’t seem to mind that this plan will involve fighting with the French, either. It plays into that whole idea of disguises we’ve been talking about so much in our discussion of the play. Even the clergy, who are supposed to be these spiritual figures, aren’t who they seem to be.
I really like that you address how corrupt the clergymen seem to be in this scene, and what that might mean about Shakespeare’s view of the clergy. Not only do they discuss how to best manipulate Henry into letting them keep their lands (by distracting him with a war and the prospect of gaining even more land), they talk in circles while speaking to him. I think it’s interesting (with the 20/20 vision that comes with hindsight) that the clergymen don’t actually come back to finish off the play by being somehow punished, as you predicted they would. They encouraged Henry to go to a war with France that ended up being England’s one major taste of power and identity for a long time—as Henry won the war and gained lands, but those lands were later lost after his reign.
Great web site you have here.. It’s hard to find high-quality writing like yours these days. I really appreciate people like you! Take care!!
Karya Bintang Abadi
ping back : chromebook
Your articles offer invaluable insights that I truly appreciate. I’ll make sure to bookmark your blog and visit regularly for updates. I’m confident that I’ll uncover a wealth of new information here! Wishing you the best of luck with your future posts!
Cat Exercise Wheel Treadmill
Ich finde Ihre Artikel unglaublich aufschlussreich und wertvoll. Ich werde sicherstellen, Ihr Blog zu bookmarken und regelmäßig für Updates zu besuchen. Ich freue mich darauf, hier mehr wertvolle Informationen zu entdecken, und wünsche Ihnen alles Gute für Ihre zukünftigen Beiträge!
Asbestsanierung