“King Henry's competence as a ruler in Henry V”Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Often remembered for his wild and childish characteristics, King Henry assures his fellow Englishmen and those who oppose him that he has evolved from Prince Hal into a competent king. Although some of Henry's actions in battle have immoral implications, he defines a "competent" king as one who fully exercises the responsibilities of a ruler, as seen in his response to the Dauphin's statement that Henry is still only a youth. Henry's composed demeanor and well-crafted rhetoric when speaking to various characters reveal that he is confident in his abilities as a ruler. Therefore, Henry's rhetoric serves to convince the other characters and the audience, rather than himself, that he is capable of holding up the throne of England, as he has grown from his past as Prince Hal and will "show [his] sail of greatness" on the “throne of France” (I.ii.275-276). After receiving tennis balls as a gift from the Dauphin, which symbolize Enrico's image as a simple sportsman with no ability to govern, Enrico responds with intelligent and serious rhetoric. The Dauphin's insults do not dismantle Henry's behavior, revealing how much the English king has matured: Henry says he is "glad that the Dauphin is so kind" and grateful for the Dauphin's "present" and "sorrows" (I.ii. 260 -261). As Henry converts the image of a tennis match into that of a war, his words and attitude become very severe; he states that England “in France, by the grace of God, will play a set” and “strike [King Charles's] crown in peril” (I.ii.263-264). Henry acknowledges the Dauphin's references to the wild Prince Hal by claiming that he never appreciated his position in England. Henry claims, however, that he made use of his past as a boy. “To be like a king,” Henry states, “he will display [his] sail of greatness,” and the Dauphin's mockery will “mock the mothers of their children.” , pretend to demolish the castles” and leaves the unborn child cursing at the Dauphin's mockery. (I.ii.275-288) Henry's rhetorical tactics carry a weight of severity that is somewhat masked by his earlier wordplay. Comparing the war to a tennis match, Henry appears to casually express threats, but, towards the end of his speech, uses rhetorical manipulation to attribute the cause of the impending war to the dauphin's derision. The audience already knows that Henry made the decision to declare war on France before speaking to the ambassador, but Henry makes it seem as if the Dauphin's insults caused him to declare war. Henry's manipulation also makes it seem like he is ready to get angry, thus providing the image of a serious ruler who is capable of taking over the French empire. The primary function of rhetorical manipulation, however, is to convince the Dauphin and France that Henry is a competent ruler; he could have simply stated that he had declared war, but his tactics places the blame on the Dauphin, revealing hasty and clever decision making. In his discussion with Michael Williams, Henry's rhetoric serves to justify his duties as king and convince his soldiers that a competent ruler is not responsible for the deaths of his soldiers. Williams states that King Henry is responsible for the graceless deaths of his soldiers because those who die, because they were led into battle by Henry, could not disobey orders since they are the king's subjects. Henry counters with a series of analogies that focus on thestructure of people who die in the process of carrying out the orders of a superior. Henry argues that a king's duties do not require him to "answer [to] the end of his soldiers," just as his father and masters "do not aim at the death of their [subjects] / When they propose their services" (IV.i .151- 154). Although a soldier, a son, and a servant are subject to their superiors, Henry argues that a king requires service from his men but does not order them to die. Henry's refusal of responsibility serves not to diminish his power as king, but to assert that those who die in battle suffer God's vengeance because of their personal sins. A king, Henry argues, is no more “guilty of [his soldiers'] damnation than he was before those impieties / for which [his soldiers] are now visited” because those who die should be prepared for God's justice (IV.i.169-171) Arguing that "every subject's duty / is the king's, but every subject's soul is his own," Henry shifts the responsibility for death to the soldiers. (IV.i.171-172) Addressing the souls of the soldiers, Henry targets their most intrinsic parts; soldiers are essentially forced to clear their consciences before battle for fear of suffering an unpromising afterlife. Henry is once again clever in his rhetorical manipulation because the soldiers are both forced to follow their king and also left with the responsibility of their own deaths. If a man dies without repenting of his sins, he deserves them because of his lack of faith, and if he dies after repenting, it is to his advantage because his conscience is clean before the judgment of God. If a soldier should live after having clearing his conscience, Henry argues, would mean that he has been blessed by God for his preparation and should therefore advise others to prepare for death. Henry's logic and manipulation convince the audience that he is a capable ruler by avoiding his soldiers' statements of belief, and thus avoiding the negativity of death produced by war. By shifting responsibility from himself to his soldiers, Henry creates a system that encourages his soldiers' obedience and at the same time makes their fate strictly a product of repentance and God's will. After his discussion with Williams and Bates, Henry expresses, in a soliloquy, how he is burdened with the lives of all his people. The responsibilities entrusted to Henry bring him only pain, because the only reward he gets from being king is a ceremony, which has no value to Henry. In an attempt to find value in its ceremonies, Henry addresses “Ceremony” directly, asking its value and why he should admire it. Henry states that the Ceremony provides only "place, rank, and form," things that simply instill fear in others through "poisoned flattery" (IV.i.236-243). Henry finds no satisfaction in the fame and glory that kingship supposedly brings because everything that is produced by the Ceremony is superficial and meaningless. Since Henry sees that Ceremony as all that separates him from an ordinary man, he argues that the Ceremony's only reward cannot even cure him of the disease, thus depriving him of immunity to a danger common to all living things. Henry's reference to the disease places him on the same level as his people, thus underlining the fundamental uselessness of Ceremony. This rhetorical tactic proves effective because Ceremony is inanimate and therefore cannot oppose Henry's argument. While Henry refutes every supposed benefit of the Ceremony, his argument stacks up with clear reasoning, which later helps convince the audience of his competence as king. Henry even goes so far as to claim that..