When "Richard II" opens, we are set upon with a king too concerned with worldly possessions, fashion, and cronies, and not nearly focused enough on his own monarchial duties. He is disconnected with the common man, and this makes it very easy for Henry Bolingbroke to usurp him.

Bolingbroke does just that, and the first comparison of kings can be drawn. Richard is a poet, and uses highly stylized poetry throughout the play to express himself. In fact he seems to use his poetry to pretend his problems do not exist, a theme that was used when first Bolingbroke was banished from England. Bolingbroke, now Henry IV, is quite different. He is a pragmatist and refuses to see the world through the rose colored glasses of his cousin and predecessor. He also shows that he is (at least on the surface) more connected with the people, and has their favor. Thus it was fairly easy for him to sway the current nobility to his cause and take the

It is also in this play we see our first comparison of the up and coming prince. Hal, who will soon have to assume the throne, is compared to Hotspur, a young lord of the Percy family who seeks claim to the throne. Henry admires the young man for his temperament, and his resolve to fight and serve his country and family. He criticizes Hal for not being more like this youth.

Henry's moral fiber is called into question again in war. As king, and as a result of his lineage, he has a claim to France. But why invade at all? He is running a good kingdom, and he must focus his efforts on that kingdom to be a truly good king. In this he shows faults much the same as his father and second cousin and allows himself to be occupied with concerns other than the kingdom. And Henry does not take blame for his actions, first blaming them on the archbishop should his claim be illegitimate, then on the Dauphin for his jest, and later on the French for not recognizing his claim to the throne. It is not until the final scene Henry realizes the gravity of his actions, when the common people he sits in camp with argue the point.

In "I Henry IV" Henry shows guilt. He is saddened with the way he gained the throne. He also starts to show that he too is consumed with worldly things; he wishes to wage war. Later, he would try to repent by joining the crusade, but would die before this dream was realized. He must stave off constant civil war and becomes quite miserable and old before his time.

The first of this is tasted when he rejects Falstaff in "2 Henry IV". More comes when he allows his friends to hang. Are these acts of a moral person? I must say they are. Henry knows his lot in life, as did his friends around him. Falstaff took this as an invitation to party on the king's dime, just like old times sake. That Hal used Falstaff to further his education and merriment I have no question. That this justifies Falstaff wanting to use him as king, I cannot agree. As to Bardolph and is friend being hanged, I can offer much the same. Bardol

Some common words found in the essay are:
Henry's Henry, John Falstaff, IV Henry, Archbishop Canterbury, Henry IV, Country Henry, Hal Falstaff, Hal Henry, , Hal Monarch, henry iv, 2 henry iv, king concerned, 2 henry, iv henry, common people, claim throne, hal henry, falstaff king, rejects falstaff, richard ii, henry iv henry,
Approximate Word count = 1384
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)