HENRY V.* HENRY V., as Mr. Kingsford reminds us in

the preface of his scholarly and well-written biography, an excellent number of an excellent series, was described by Professor Stubbs as the typical hero of the Middle Ages, and if that be so, then no epoch of history has been more gloriously honoured. For Henry V. was as magnanimous as the heroes of Homer, as brave as Alexander the Great, and one of the soundest diplomatists who have ruled this realm of Britain. While he was adored by the people of his own time, he still seemed the flower of English knighthood to Elizabeth's spacious age, and if to-day we need the inspiration of a national hero, to whom should we look more wisely than to the generous and warlike Henry V• celebrated by Shakespeare ?

Like Alexander and many another great captain, Henry V. displayed the courage and resourcefulness of a man at an age when most boys know nothing beyond their primer. He was Lieutenant of the Welsh Marches at sixteen, and though be was surrounded by able advisers, he was already conscious of princely authority. At the battle of Shrewsbury he and his men came first in the action, and the Prince, wounded in the face by an arrow, refused to leave the field. He would rather die, said he, than stain his honour by flight, and his example so hotly inspired his followers, that charging up the hill, thcy rolled back the right wing of the rebels. Hence- forth unto his death he was a popular hero, whom English- men would follow gladly on any field, in the full assurance that he would share their hardships and bring them the victory. It is no wonder, then, that as Prince of Wales he overshadowed his father in the arts both of war and peace, and when in 1413 he ascended the throne he claimed it by the strongest of all rights,—the will of his people.

A favourite of romance, he has been picturesquely involved in a hundred questionable adventures, and though we cannot accept these many legends as true, there is no doubt that they represent a half-truth with reckless exaggeration, Both the chroniclers and their readers had a love of anecdote, and they would rather invent an episode than sketch an abstract character. But they did not directly oppose the facts. The episodes which they invented were not wholly improbable, however highly coloured they might be by poetic or dramatic imagination. The many stories told by the chroniclers, and embellished by the genius of Shakespeare, are undoubtedly false. The fat knight is a pure and marvellous creation, as unlike as possible to Sir John Oldcastle, the Herefordshire squire, whose acquaintance Henry had made on the Welsh Marches. It is improbable that Prince Henry ever tried on his father's crown, though Monstrelet, who first tells the tale, explains it by saying that Henry IV. was wont to faint until he wore the semblance of death. And the legend of Judge Gascoigne is a full century later than Henry's time. But though we may reject these many • Henry V. By C. L. Kingsford, X.A. London: SE. P, Putnam's Sons. [5s.] fables, we cannot overlook their significance. They mean that Henry V. was a Prince of quick blood and strenuous energy, who was determined to get from life all that it offered of pleasure and excitement, and who at the same time felt most keenly the responsibilities of kingship. That he ever was a rake is impossible ; that he changed the manner of his life when he put on the crown is not improbable ; and while the imagination of his biographers has illuminated his life with the glow of romance, it has done him no sort of dis- honour in the eyes of the prudent.

When he ascended the throne at the age of twenty-six he was a very perfect knight. Tall in stature, and of a well- knit frame, he excelled in all the exercises of war and sport. So fleet was he of foot that he could start a buck from the woodland and run it down in the open.

His oval, handsome face was lit up by bright hazel eyes, " gentle as a dove's when at rest, and gleaming like

a lion's when he was moved to wrath." But it must not be supposed that he was a soldier and nothing else.

If his education had been brief, yet was it sound, and it is possible that he had passed a year or more at Oxford. At any rate, he was tinctured with letters, and a zealous patron of literature. He knew Latin, and he wrote both French and English with spirit and style. Hoccleve and Lydgato enjoyed his patronage, and dedicated their works to his approval. He read Chaucer, as Mr. Kingsford tells us, and

after his death The Chronicles of Jerusalem and the works of St. Gregory were found among the books which he had borrowed. Moreover, it must not be forgotten that he was deeply pious, and the intolerance which he showed at times

must be put down rather to his age than to himself. The severity wherewith he treated the Lollards, who were political as well as religious reformers, need not be construed into cruelty. The King did no more than protect his realm against what he deemed a rebellious spirit, and we can well believe that he profoundly regretted the death of his friend Sir John Oldcastle, though that friend was deep dipped in treason. In brief, as Mr. Kingsford says, be was " stately in bearing and prudent in speech, valiant in arms and provident in counsel, a lover of religion and a great justicer. No ruler ever had a higher conception of his rights or was more stern in their enforcement. His strong sense of personal dignity and of the importance of his kingly office made him seem proud and formal on ceremonial occasions Disobedience and every form of disloyalty he punished with merciless severity."

Such was the victor of Agincourt, terrible in wrath, and amiable in friendship or patronage. To us he appears chiefly eminent as a soldier, and truly St. Crispin's Day was the great day of his life. Not even Crecy nor Poitiers was more glorious than Agincourt, whereat the English army, wearied with its march, met and defeated the army of the French, many times its superior. In two or three hours the English, with their stout archers to aid them, won a complete victory, and themselves lost but a handful of men. The honour belongs to the courage and inspiration of the King, whose scrupulous care and simple speech inflamed the whole army with enthusiasm. " The largess universal like the sun " which Shakespeare eloquently attributes to his "liberal eye" helped no less than the archer's artillery to win the victory. "Upon his royal face," says the poet,— "There is no note

How dread an army bath enrounded him ; Nor doth he dedicate one jot of colour Unto the weary and all watchbd night, But freshly looks and over-bears attaint With cheerful semblance and sweet majesty, That every wretch, pining and pale before, Beholding him plucks comfort from his looks."

Thus Henry, fortunate in prowess, was doubly fortunate in the poet who sang his prowess, and few soldiers have been handed

down to posterity in more splendid terms. His conduct after the battle was no less characteristic than his cheerful courage. He checked the spoilers, he treated the prisoners with considera- tion, and he gave thanks to God. "It was no wonder he had the victory over them," he told the French, " though he claimed no glory for himself. That was the work of God, who was wroth for their sins ; it was a great wonder that worse had not befallen them, since there was no ill deed whereof they had not been guilty." While Henry was valiant in the field he was no mere fighter, to whom the conse- quences of victory were nothing. On the contrary, he was a sound diplomatist, who only accepted war when peace seemed impossible, and who knew perfectly well what was the wisest policy for his country. Above all, this accom- plished soldier determined to secure for England the mastery of the sea. His aim is echoed in the " Libel of English Policy " :—

" Kepe than the see, that is the walls of Englond,

And then is Englond kepte by Geddes sonde."

So he lived ever mindful of England's glory, so he died all too soon to finish his work, or to go forth upon the Crusade • of which he dreamed. In nothing does he proclaim his sympathy with the Middle Ages as in this ambition to fight in the Holy Land. But in all his actions courage and enlightenment shine clear, and in spite of Professor Stubbs, we would hail him the typical hero not of an age but of all time.