Sir John Falstaff has the title of a knight but is, according to everyone who knows him, a liar, a criminal, and a conman. As established in Henry IV, Part 1, he is also quick-witted and eloquent, which grants him the ability to talk himself out of any situation. This remains the case in Henry IV, Part 2. When two police officers come to arrest him due to his debt to Mistress Quickly, for example, he ends the scene by convincing Mistress Quickly to pawn her possessions and give him the money. He is similarly about to convince Justice Shallow to lend him £1,000 that, by the end of the play, he is unlikely to be able to pay back. Falstaff is always short of money and constantly churning out lies to anyone who will listen, but his charm means that even those who know that he cannot be trusted, like Mistress Quickly and Justice Shallow, are convinced to give him money nonetheless. 

Falstaff benefits from being surrounded by criminals who are even less trustworthy than him. Bardolph, for example, lives in the same manner as Falstaff but lacks Falstaff’s eloquence. Ancient Pistol demonstrates greater military prowess than Falstaff, yet he is considered uncouth and dangerous due to his violent disposition. Falstaff distinguishes himself through his charm and his wit, which is even reflected in the structure of the play: Despite his relative insignificance to the plot, he has frequent opportunities to offer up soliloquies and insights, even more so than the title character or protagonist.

Yet hidden behind Falstaff’s bluster and charm is pathos. The play offers occasional glimpses into the raw humanity that grounds his character: He is an old man whose life has been consumed by alcohol and lies, and who has begun to recognize this. Each speech in praise of sack reinforces the extent to which he depends on the drink to give his life meaning. He even says that, if he had a son, he would impress on the son the need for sack, suggesting that he would seek to pass on what, by the standards of the time, amounted to a moral vice. This linking of drink and children implies a void at the center of Falstaff’s life that the promise of a future generation might otherwise fill. In fact, it was filled, at least temporarily, by Prince Hal: As drinking companions, their relationship took on the dynamic of father and son, but this has drawn to a close. The prince is distancing himself from Falstaff, who feels the increased distance as though he has lost his surrogate son. 

The lack of an heir implicitly renders Falstaff more cognizant of his ill health, making him a vehicle for the text’s exploration of Confronting Aging and Mortality. That he implores those around him not to talk about death suggests that he feels the limitations of his life and the absence of tangible achievements in his existence, which mortality renders acute. What Falstaff fears the most is losing the confidence and certainty that fuel his eloquence, and his lack of loved ones and his old age are threats to his sense of self.

Even at the end of the play, however, Falstaff is sure that his friendship with Prince Hal will endure when Hal becomes king. He rides hard through the night from Gloucestershire to London to be present at the coronation of King Henry V, a demonstration not only of his material interest in the new king but also his emotional investment in the prince himself. This investment makes King Henry V’s disavowal of Falstaff all the more devastating for the latter. In front of everyone, King Henry V confirms Falstaff’s own fears by telling him that he is a worthless, anonymous old man. Falstaff is left jabbering about meetings in private and public appearances, trying to convince himself as much as those around him that his old friend has not disowned him. However, Falstaff cannot live in this false reality for long. As the Lord Chief Justice approaches to enforce Falstaff’s banishment, Falstaff must recognize reality, and the Epilogue foreshadows that this realization will strike a mortal blow. For a man so consumed by his own ego as Falstaff, public humiliation is fatal.

Falstaff’s downfall resonates symbolically, underscoring Hal’s rejection of the life of pleasure that Falstaff embodies, as well as the human cost of this kind of life; King Henry V emerges as a colder person than the Prince Hal he once was. At the same time, Falstaff’s character offers a foil to King Henry IV, another aging man preoccupied with questions of legacy and betrayal.

Though King Henry IV is the title character, he is neither a protagonist nor a major driver of the narrative; rather, he is a distant and decaying figure who is preoccupied with his imminent death. By the time Henry IV, Part 2 begins, the forces that posed such an existential threat in the previous play have abated. Hotspur and his army are defeated. The leader of the Scottish rebels is captured. Owen Glendower, such a mystical and looming threat in the previous play, dies off-stage, his death barely mentioned in passing. With only a small group of rebel lords left to conspire against him, King Henry IV is in a position of imminent triumph, yet he is not able to enjoy the prospect of success. His political and military strength increases in direct opposition to his rapidly declining physical health: With each message that brings news of success on the battlefield, he feels his health slipping away from him. The irony of King Henry’s triumph is that he is never able to enjoy it, which in itself is a comment on the nature of kingship.

As his death approaches, King Henry turns inward. Rather than think of his enemies and his victories, he begins to think of his fate. He begins to dwell on the way in which he ascended the throne and the prophetic words of his predecessor. Richard II denounced him, warning that he would die without ever achieving his goals or satisfying his ambitions, and King Henry comes to see these words as a pronouncement on the fleeting nature of life itself. This speaks to the irony of his intended goals as king: After winning the crown and becoming ruler of the country, his chief aim was to go on Crusade to the Holy Lands, but he has instead found himself distracted by former allies who have risen against him. That he cannot fight in what he sees as a holy cause because of border disputes and domestic troubles comes to symbolize the dubious legitimacy of his rule, which similarly began in rebellion. More broadly, it prompts him to realize that those who wear the crown experience it as a burden first and foremost, as his reign has been shaped by forces beyond his control.

King Henry’s anxieties also center on the importance of his son to his legacy. Prince Hal—the son with whom he shares a name—will inherit the throne, but his unruly reputation means that King Henry IV fears that his son will squander the kingship that Henry struggled to attain. As a father, he is also concerned that he has failed in his duties. In his dying days, then, his real victory comes from the realization that his son is a mature and introspective figure. The king dies in the room named after Jerusalem, rather than Jerusalem itself, but he takes comfort in the knowledge that his son will be a good king. Moreover, King Henry IV comes to see his achievement as freeing up the space, time, and opportunity for his son: His son will not be weighed down by the same burden as his father because his legitimacy is less in question. Through his son, King Henry thus hopes to achieve his ambitions, and he dies with a newfound sense of optimism regarding what his son can achieve.

The Lord Chief Justice is a character known only by his title. This reflects his role in the play, which is to function as an extension of the English legal system and the king’s authority. Amid the sensuality and absurdity of Falstaff and his companions, the Lord Chief Justice stands out as a dignified embodiment and enforcer of social mores. Not only is he beholden to the law, but he is also responsible for enforcing the law on others. He accepts the nuances and contradictions that this entails, such as when he puts aside his obvious dislike of Falstaff due to Falstaff’s recent conduct in the Battle of Shrewsbury, which the Justice concedes, warrants some kind of clemency. 

The strictness with which the Lord Chief Justice enforces the law and the extent to which he follows the king’s desires led to a situation in which he imprisoned young Prince Hal. At the time, Hal was associated with Falstaff and the other less-than-reputable characters, and the Lord Chief Justice was acting on the orders of the king, who sought to discipline his wayward son. When Prince Hal becomes King Henry V, it therefore places the Lord Chief Justice in a precarious position. He worries that his rigorous application of the law will now meet with reprisal, illustrating the complexity and the subjectivity of English law at this time, which often resembled an extension of the monarch’s will rather than an abstracted, objective idea of justice. Yet King Henry V chooses not to punish the Lord Chief Justice, instead crediting the Lord Chief Justice for his work. This respect and admiration surprise the Lord Chief Justice, who notes the suddenness with which his impression of the new king has changed. He recognizes Hal’s maturation into an able ruler, his response an indicator to the audience of the rapidity with which Hal has changed and the extent to which the people of England should be optimistic about their new leader.