Journey Motif Is Pervasive in Global Literature,

Journey motif is pervasive in global literature, attributed to the existence of collective symbols common to all human societies as archetypes (Zhang, 2008). Both Homer's Iliad and Shakespeare's Henry V incorporate the journey motif as a literary technique. This serves to elevate the status of the protagonist to the heroic level, as the character struggles to meet challenges and overcome obstacles without the familiar trappings of home, family, and social status. War is one of the reasons that heroes undertake journeys, and war indeed figures prominently in both the Iliad and Henry V, driving the plot and transforming their respective protagonists. Journeying occurs on actual and symbolic levels in both these texts. In Homer's Iliad, Achilles undergoes several changes of heart during the war. His journey is introspective, taking him from a point of habitual action through a stage of vengefulness, and finally, onward to spiritual, social, psychological, and political reconciliation. A similar progression occurs for Henry V in Shakespeare's play. Henry V begins his journey as a king lacking maturity and astute leadership skills. His propulsion to power forces him to confront enemies, within and external to the state. After dealing with his feelings of anger and vengeance, Henry V reaches an ultimate point of peace that parallels that of Achilles in the Iliad, because of its being both internal and manifest in political reality. Therefore, real and symbolic wartime journeys in Homer's Iliad and Shakespeare's Henry V offer the central characters opportunities for personal growth, spiritual transformation, and the execution of sound leadership skills.

Wartime journeys are unique in that they focus on brutal conflict that causes confrontation with mortality. Unlike journeys undertaken for personal, financial, or spiritual quests, the wartime journey automatically challenges the protagonist to take sides and build character. Character building in the face of war requires existential reflection. Even though Henry V starts out as one of the last characters that would use self-reflection, the young King is confronted by his own mortality relatively soon after he takes the throne. Being faced with death will change anyone, including a King. In Act I, scene I of the play, the Archbishop of Cantrrbury points out that his early brushes with mortality have forced Henry V to undertake a journey of self-reflection that is surprising given his caddish youth. "The courses of his youth promised it not. / The breath no sooner left his father's body, / But that his wildness, mortified in him, / Seem'd to die too," (lines 62-65).

Throughout the remainder of Henry V's wartime journeys, the threat of death propels him to meet challenges with aplomb. The challenges that Henry V encounters are not necessarily physical ones; they are also social, political, and psychological challenges that bring about his growth and successful wartime endeavors. In The Iliad, Homer creates a similar scenario for Achilles in which confrontation with personal mortality promotes a spiritual and political journey.

Achilles' personal journey evolves when he distances himself from Agamemnon. This symbolic distancing mirrors a physical journey, in which the hero determines his own fate independently of the people he represents. Achilles has been mortally insulted by Agamemnon's presumptuous and arrogant approach toward the women, and as a result Achilles forges his own path. Yet just as Henry V is keenly aware that his personal wartime journey parallels the wartime needs of England, Achilles also comes to realize that his journey cannot be distinguished from that of his people. Achilles realizes his, once again, through the confrontation with mortality. He is directly responsible for the death of Patroclus. Knowing this fact helps Achilles redirect his vengeful spirit from Agamemnon, one of his own, toward the Trojans, which are the real mortal enemies of his people.

War is also the arena on which Henry V proves what he learns on the inward journey he undertakes throughout the play. This is true for Achilles in The Iliad, too. Both Henry V and Achilles confront their own inner demons as they play themselves out on the stage of war. The duality of war -- the fact that there is a "good" and "bad" side to the equation, helps the heroes define their own roles within the conflict. Their role in the war reflects their personal psychological growth, as they take charge of their emotions and overcome the insults to their personal pride. His journey permits Henry V distance from the comfort of the throne, allowing the king to set sights on new territories and avenues for exploration. Likewise, Achilles' symbolic journey inward permits the Achaean hero to establish new boundaries for himself.

Therefore, war becomes the opportunity for both Henry V and Achilles to prove their leadership abilities and to manifest good leadership skills. Nowhere is the theme of Henry V's opportunity for leadership change more apparent than it is in the prologue of Act IV, when he goes out to speak to the troops in disguise. Speaking to the troops in disguise is like a journey within a journey. Henry V takes himself out of his typical character and role and king, in order to learn and grow so that he can help achieve the collective goals that will benefit his people. Had Henry V not been reminded of his own personal mortality, he might not have been aware as poignantly of the collective mortality faced by political loss. His personal and physical journey offers Henry V the same types of opportunity for leadership skills development as Achilles receives in Homer's Iliad. Having witnessed what failed (the delegation of wartime heroism to Patroclus), Achilles learns that it is his personal responsibility to lead the Achaeans to victory over the Trojans. Thus, Achilles becomes a hero because he was willing to learn from his mistakes, in ways opposite to that of a classic tragic hero. Neither Henry V nor Achilles are tragic heroes; they are heroes in the more archetypal sense in the tradition of Joseph Campbell and Carl Jung (Zhang, 2008).