For most of Henry IV, Shakespeare handles honor in an indirect way. Although nearly every character stakes some claim to honor, the audience is left without a fundamental definition of it on which to  build an understanding and more importantly, against which the “honor” of a character may be measured. There is, however, a notable shift away from this pattern of the indirect treatment of honor in Act 3, Scene 2, when King Henry and Hal are reunited after the Prince’s self-imposed “exile” to discuss the “villainous news” (2.4.334) of the Percy rebellion. During his discussion with his father, Hal’s description of honor implies that he perceives it as form of property, i.e., a thing whose ownership of can be transplanted. This notion of honor as property not only deepens our understanding of the rivalry between Hotspur and Hal, but also helps us find a better bearing on the dynamics of honor in Henry IV.

The idea of honor as property can be found in Hal’s passionate response to one of his father’s accusation. The King is convinced that his son’s degeneracy is so great that he expects that Hal will soon join the Percy’s rebellion and aid in his destruction (3.2.126). Hal assures his father that this will not be the case, and that upon meeting “this [] child of honor and renown,/ This gallant Hotspur, this all praiséd knight” (3.2.140-141), he will redeem himself by slaying him in battle, making himself “a bloody mask/ which, washed away, [will] scour [his] shame with it ” (3.2.136-137). Hal clarifies the significance of slaying Hotspur and introduces the idea of honor as property as well when he claims that on the day of their meeting “[he will] make this northern youth exchange/ His glorious deeds for [his] indignities” (3.2.145-146).  Hal’s use of the word “exchange”  bears connotations to  notions of ownership and property, and when we take into consideration that it is being used to refer to deeds (i.e., honor), we realize that Hal is  blurring the line between the tangible and the intangible. Furthermore, Hal identifies Percy as “[his] factor,” (3.2.147) his agent, through which he can “engross up glorious deeds,” (3.2.148) and he assures Henry that he will “call [Hotspur] to so strict an account/ That he shall render every glory up” (3.2.149-150). There is no denying that Hal’s word choices are teeming with economic connotations–agent, engross, account, render–and one must recognize that Shakespeare does this deliberately. As such, when we take into consideration that what Hal is referring to throughout this speech is honor,  it becomes clear that he does not see honor as an idealized abstraction, but as a very real  form of property which he is determined to usurp from Hotspur.

By referring to honor with economic vocabulary in this scene, Shakespeare makes it a much more tangible thing–if only by clarifying how honor can be gained or lost.