@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:00027964,
 author = {Nakamura, Miki},
 journal = {IVY},
 month = {Oct},
 note = {In the 1590s the Elizabethan government waged successive wars ; the first war against Spain, and later expeditions into France and Ireland. The consecutive military affairs had several consequences for the country. One of them was the problem of the returning soldiers. The soldiers' condition after service was largely harsh : having lost former jobs, most of them slid into a life of beggary or crime. Although the government repeatedly issued laws for the relief of the discharged soldiers, their situation did not improve. Rather, people saw them as a nuisance to society : the reward for service was contempt and indifference. The soldiers' difficulties after war indicate a point to which the subjection to the Queen leads. Having served in her army, they were rewarded by a worsened social position. In the late 1590s, the merits of such obedience were called into question. The value of obedience was contested as the discharged soldiers began to voice their discontents. King Henry V, first performed in 1599 when these voices reverberated through the society, intervened in the same political field as it gave Henry's soldiers a site of enunciation and grappled with the problem of obedience. The purpose of this paper is to show how the idea of obedience is questioned in King Henry V and to consider the way in which the play affects the contemporary English politics. In the first section I survey the conditions of the returning soldiers and the state policy in Elizabethan England. The inadequacy of governmental care and the demonizing process of ex-soldiers become clear. The anonymous play A Larum for London, which records a voice of a lame soldier, is also introduced. In the second section I show how the official code of obedience is disrupted in the play by the rebels, Williams, and Pistol. Although Canterbury endorses the authoritative view of obedience as natural, the rebels' act discloses the arbitrary nature of obedience. Moreover, Williams criticizes the difference and inequality legitimated by the idea of obedience. Finally, Pistol as the returning soldier discerns the rewardless quality of his service and compels the state to take responsibility for his post-war condition. In the last part of the paper I consider the political function of King Henry V in the late 1590s.},
 pages = {1--31},
 title = {Pistol's Scars : War and Obedience in King Henry V},
 volume = {31},
 year = {1998}
}