The drama is dominated by males and the whole issue of kingship, honor and maleness dominate the drama throughout. The critic, Linda Bamber, argues that in Shakespeare ‘s history plays ‘the adult females characters neither participate in history nor challenge it ‘[ 4 ]and this statement is important as the three adult females in the drama are marginally important.[ 5 ]Hotspurs married woman Lady Kate Percy is an blue adult female who has been neglected by her hubby. Shakespeare represents Hotspur as a clown from Northern England who cares more for a Equus caballus than his married woman. Leggatt ( 1988 ) suggests that Act II scene three is a playful, amusing scene ; nevertheless in my sentiment this scene demonstrates patriarchal laterality and is demoing male authorization instead than been a amusing scene. Leggatt ( 1988 ) sees Hotspurs defense mechanism, to Lady Percy ‘s supplication “ Do you non love me? ” ( II. 3. 99 )[ 6 ]as a amusing answer. However I believe Hotspurs answer ; “ Come, wilt 1000 see me sit? / And when I on a horseback I will swear/ I love thee boundlessly ” ( II. 3. 103-105 )[ 7 ]is non a amusing one, it alternatively can be interpreted as what Hotspur demands of Lady Percy, she must sit with him for him to “ love thee boundlessly ” ( II. 3. 105 ) .[ 8 ]This is patriarchal laterality ; Lady Percy must obey her hubby ‘s orders for him to love her.

Womans are presented as sexual existences in Act I scene 1 as adult females mutilate male genitalias. This mention to gender can be seen once more between Hotspur and his married woman Lady Percy. Lady Percy ‘s menace to “ interrupt thy small finger ” ( II. 3. 90 )[ 9 ]is a sexual menace to interrupt Hotspurs phallus. This may be seen as playful, nevertheless in this scene Shakespeare is linking Lady Percy with the unnatural Welshwomen we see in Act I scene 1. Womans once more are associated with menace here ; Hotspur fears that sexual familiarity with his married woman will do him effeminate and soft. Womans can non be trusted harmonizing to Hotspur

This once more shows male patriarchal power in Shakespearian society ; Lady Percy can non be trusted and for the balance of the drama is associated with frights of emasculation. This scene finally portrays gender and domestic life in the Renaissance epoch. Hotspur makes his positions on gender evident throughout the drama, on the conflict field Hotspur is outraged and disgusted by a ‘certain Godhead ‘ ( I. 3. 32 )[ 10 ]who ‘talk [ s ] so like a waiting-gentlewoman ‘ ( I. 3. 54 )[ 11 ]and ‘shine so alert, and smell so sweet ‘ ( I. 3. 53 )[ 12 ], for Hotspur there is no topographic point on the battleground for this feminine soldier.

Glendower ‘s girl is besides presented as a sexual being, she seduces Mortimer. Mortimer would prefer to stay in this summer arbor with his Welsh married woman than travel to conflict. One can see how both Shakespeare and Spenser articulated the same colonial discourse, the power of the native adult female to transform the English male warrior. This assorted race matrimony between Lady Mortimer and Mortimer is presented in the same colonial discourse as Spenser ‘s position of the present province of Ireland in 1596. Spenser presents the Irish as ‘wild ‘ and ‘savage ‘ . Both Spenser and Shakespeare present adult females as a menace to English individuality. In Act III, scene 1 one can see how racial difference hinders Lady Mortimer and her hubby to pass on, here the cultural barriers between the Welsh and the English are presented.[ 13 ]Although Mortimer is unable to pass on with his ain married woman, he himself knows the value of understanding other civilizations and is angered at his inability to pass on,

Leggatt ( 1988 ) develops this issue about a universe which is ‘widely spread and amply varied ‘ .[ 14 ]This is true, I Henry IV is written in a universe that is full of racial difference and accordingly there is an inability to pass on due to linguistic communication barriers.

Hotspurs reaction to Lady Mortimer ‘s address emphasises her strangeness ‘ . Lady Mortimer ‘s vocalizing is equated with the “ Satan ” ( III. 1. 224 ) .[ 15 ]Lady Mortimer is seen as the racial other, her vocalizing is hated more than the Irish “ I had instead hear Lady my subdivision ululation in Irish ” ( III. 1. 230 ) .[ 16 ]Shakespeare ‘s effort to sock the Irish people here can be seen as his effort to see anything non-English as foreign or other. This nexus to the Irish can be seen as a manner of personally prosecuting the audience as the audience would hold gathered the analogues between King Henry ‘s jobs with the Welsh and Queen Elizabeth ‘s job with the Irish rebellion. This seen depicts the issue of racial discourse in this epoch and to be non-English was for Shakespeare to be foreign.

It is apparent in the drama that this is no universe for adult females ; it is strictly about affinity and male authorization, while the Welsh adult females are presented as unsafe and sexual, and this mention to adult female is likewise to the ways in which English adult females are depicted. The critic, Linda Bamber, asserts ‘relations with the feminine return topographic point but do non much affair ‘[ 17 ]because ‘This is no world/ To play with mammets, and to lean with lips ‘ ( II. 3. 94-95 )[ 18 ]but alternatively soldiers ‘Must have bloody olfactory organs, and cracked Crowns ‘ ( II. 3. 96 ) .[ 19 ]