In this text, I wish to reinforce the idea that there is an intended association of Hotspur and Falstaff [1] by pointing out a parallel between two scenes in 1 Henry IV and 2 Henry IV, the first play culminating in Hotspur’s death, and the second in Falstaff’s rejection (entailing his death as narrated in Henry V).
Before moving to the actual comparison, consider that there is, by coincident or not, a funny echo of Hotspur’s fight with Prince Hal, ensuing which Hotspur ends up dead, having obtained a thigh wound by Falstaff who claims the dead on him. (See my earlier post).
After Falstaff has thrown out Pistol, with Bardolph’s help, Doll asks him: “Are you not hurt i’th’Groyne? me thought hee/ made a shrewd Thrust at your Belly.” (1231-1232) This is interesting, given my earlier arguement concerning Hotspur’s post-mortem thigh wound as applied by Falstaff (See my earlier post).
The main argument of this text is concerned with paralleling Hotspur’s farewell scene from 1 Henry IV with Falstaff’s farewell scene from 2 Henry IV as both must take leave of their respective lovers Kate and Doll to go to the wars. Let us first at the episode featuring Hotspur and Kate and then compare it with the one featuring Falstaff and Doll.
To begin with, the context is that Hotspur must leave Kate to go off to the wars, that he “must leaue you within these two hours” (884) as he says to Kate, who rightly supposes that “Mortimer doth stirre about his Title, and hath sent/ for you to line his enterprize” (929-930).
Much later, Hotspur and Kate appear again, this time effectually in company with Mortimer and his Welsh wife, and Mortimer assures her that “she and my Aunt Percy/ Shall follow in your Conduct speedily.” (1730-1731) Then follows a song sung by Mortimer’s wife after which Hotspur and Mortimer finally leave (1805 ff.).
Granted, its Mortimer and his wife, who are desperate about being separated; we are told about the latter that “shee’le not part with you” (1728), and after the song we are told that Mortimer is “as slow,/ As hot Lord Percy is on fire to goe” (1809-1810). Accordingly, Hotspur had assured Kate earlier that “when I am a horsebacke, I will sweare/ I loue thee infinitely” (946-947).
Let us move on to Falstaff and Doll in 2 Henry IV. Falstaff must off to the wars, [2] and at the Hostess’ place, Doll says to him:
Thou art going to the Warres, and whether I/ shall euer see thee againe, or no, there is no body/ cares. (1091-1094)
Then follows the interlude with Pistol and after Falstaff got rid off him with Bardolph’s help, he thinks that he spends romantic time alone with Doll (1229-1306)—he is unaware that Hal and Poins in drawers’ disguise are eavesdropping from 1256 on; notably, musicians have entered to play for Falstaff and Doll (1247 ff.). After Hal and Poins have revealed themselves, Peto enters with the message that Falstaff must off to the wars, saying that
a dozen Captaines,/ Bare-headed, sweating, knocking at the Tauernes,/ And asking euery one for Sir Iohn Falstaffe. (1385-1387)
Falstaff then takes leave of the Hostess and Doll with heavy heart (1401 ff.), though it is implied that Doll is being sent after him once more as Bardolph bis her again to “come to my Master” (1417).
Concluding, in both 1 and 2 Henry IV there are similar scenes of farewell involving Hotspur (and Mortimer) and Falstaff. Both must off to the wars and take leave of their lovers, that is, Lady Percy (and Mortimer’s Welsh wife) and Doll. In both cases, romantic music is involved, and both farewells are emotionally charged.
Granted, there is no exact structural parallelism in terms of episode or scene; for example, Kate and Hotspur‘s intimate exchange comes early in 1 Henry VI, while the music session and actual farewell come only later. Similarly, in 2 Henry IV, Doll and Falstaff‘s time together is not only interrupted by Pistol but also by Poins and Hal.
There is no proof then that the parallelism is meaningful, but I suggest that the relation between Falstaff and Hotspur is thereby reinforced and that it may well have been intended thus.
————————————–
[1] Such an intended relation coheres with similarities between those figures observed independently, see S. A. Small, “Hotspur and Falstaff,” The Shakespeare Association Bulletin 16, no. 4 (1941): 243-248. A parallel seems also implied in the following text, though it was not available to me. L. L. Levin, “Hotspur, Falstaff, and the Emblem of Wrath in ‘1 Henry IV,’“ Shakespeare Studies 10 (1977), 43-65.
[2] To be sure, that Falstaff must off to the wars we know from early on as the Lord Chief Justice declares that he must against the enemy “with Lord Iohn of Lancaster” (460), and who complains again that “you loyter heere too long being you/ are to take Souldiers vp, in Countries as you go” (789-790).
First published on May 18 2025 on Ko-fi