CRITICISM

Abrams, Richard. “Rumor's Reign in 2 Henry IV: The Scope of a Personification.” English Literary Renaissance 16, No. 3 (Autumn 1986): 467-95.

Expounds on the role of rumor and hearsay in the two Henry IV plays.

Barish, Jonas A. “The Turning Away of Prince Hal.” Shakespeare Studies 1 (1965): pp. 9-17.

Analyzes the rejection of Falstaff.

Bennett, Robert B. “The Golden Age in the Cycles of History: Analogous Visions of Shakespeare and Chekhov.” Comparative Literature Studies 28, No. 2 (Spring 1991): 156-77.

Compares the supper scene in Justice Shallow's orchard in Henry IV, Part II and Chekhov's Cherry Orchard, characterizing both scenes as similar in their innovative use of the tradition of the Golden Age.

Burelbach, Frederick M. “Name-Calling as Power Play in Shakespeare's 1 Henry IV.” Literary Onomastics Studies 16 (1989): 17-20.

Analyzes the impact of name-calling in Henry IV, Part I, labeling it as a form of authorship and as an instrument that maintains social norms.

Findlay, Heather. “Renaissance Pederasty and Pedagogy: The ‘Case’ of Shakespeare's Falstaff.” The Yale Journal of Criticism: Interpretation in the Humanities 3, No. 1 (Fall 1989): 229-38.

Theorizes that Falstaff's character is representative of the development of early modes of the capitalist economy.

Hoegberg, David E. “Master Harold and the Bard: Education and Succession in Fugard and Shakespeare.” Comparative Drama 29, No. 4, (Winter 1995-96): 415-35.

Compares Fugard's Master Haroldand Henry IV as political plays that trace the attempts of two new regimes to solidify their power, while also focusing on the development of their leaders.

Kastan, David Scott. “Killed with Hard Opinions: Oldcastle, Falstaff, and the Reformed Text of 1 Henry IV.” In Textual Formations and Reformations, edited by Laurie E. Maguire and Thomas L. Berger, pp. 211-27. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1998.

Traces the historical origins of Falstaff's name and character as represented in Henry IV, Part I.

Krims, Marvin B. “Hotspur's Antifeminine Prejudice in Shakespeare’s Henry IV.” Literature and Psychology 40, Nos. 1-2 (1994): 118-32.

Discusses Hotspur's phallocentric attitudes in the play.

Reid, Robert L. “Humoral Psychology in Shakespeare's Henriad.” Comparative Drama 30, No. 4 (Winter 1996): 471-502.

Chronicles Shakespeare's use of the four humors in the Henry IV plays.

States, Bert O. “Hamlet's Older Brother.” Hudson Review 39, No. 4 (Winter 1987): 537-52.

Compares and contrasts the characters of Prince Hal and Hamlet, noting the similarities in their temperament and tempo.

West, Gillian. “Falstaff's Punning.” English Studies: A Journal of English Language and Literature 69, No. 2 (December 1988): 541-58.

Presents an analysis of Falstaff's puns in both Henry IV plays, and contends that Falstaff's use of language is more complicated than he is given credit for.

Willems, Michèle. “Misconstruction in Henry IV.” Cahiers Elisabethains 37 (April 1990): 43-57.

Analyzes misunderstandings and misconstructions of events and characters in Shakespeare's plays, characterizing these as common devices that allow the dramatist to engineer complicated plots and character depictions.

Wood, Nigel. Introduction to Henry IV, Parts One and Two, by William Shakespeare, edited by Nigel Wood, pp. 1-34. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1995.

Offers a detailed overview of Henry IV, Parts I and II.