King Henry V appears to wage a righteous war motivated by a pious claim to the throne of France, but in Act I scenes one through two, evidence suggests manipulation by others and selfish motives have forced the invasion. In the first place, the bishops who support the righteousness of the war secretly seek to use it as a means to distract the King from a unplayable debt the church owes. Through a convincing argument , the Bishop of Canterbury, in a sense , manipulates history to illustrate Henry’s lineage to the throne of France. In reality, the lecture picks at an old scab and urges Henry to continue a blood feud, “ Stand for your own, unwind your bloody flag,/ Look back into your mighty ancestors.”(I. 101-102) In addition, when the King inquires on the ethicalness of his claim to the French throne, the Bishop of Canterbury almost evades the question, “ The sin upon my head sovereign.” (I. 97) Furthermore, his answer suggests that former kings of England who fought for this cause have justified the pursuit; this remains unconvincing. In effect, by continuing this warring with France, King Henry, rekindles a jealousy between the two countries from perpetually hot coals. What's more, Exeter and Westermoorland push the King towards war by persuading him that it is expected of him as Exeter says, “…all expect that you should rouse yourself..” (1.123) In conclusion, the insolence of the headstrong Dauphin which appears to persuade the King to wage war, seems a mediocre evil. One does not expect a Christian king to put his own men in harms way over a harmless insult towards himself received from a impertinent young fool of a Dauphin.

Notes:
Wrote this for a disscussion on King Henry the V