Now hath Phaethon tumbled from his car,
And made an evening at the noontide prick (3HVI 1.4.33-4)
York is compared to ‘Phaethon’. In mythology, Phaethon was the son of Phoebus – the sun-god. Phaethon determined to use his father’s chariot of the sun, even though no one other than Phoebus was capable of driving it. As a result, Phaethon lost control of the chariot and fell to his death . Through the comparison, York’s desire to be king is presented as unjustified succession – based …show more content…
Daedalus builds them wax wings so they can fly away and escape, but Icarus flies too close to the sun, his wings melt, and he dies . The allusion, like the story of Phaethon, cautions against ambition and hubris: do not fly above your station, or risk falling to your death. In 3 Henry VI, Prince Henry is eager to fight for the crown where his father is not. Metaphorically, he is Icarus – flying close to the sun of kingship while his father remains at a distance. With their shared fate – both the Prince and Icarus die – Henry’s speech suggest that the Prince had no business flying towards the crown, and would have done better steering clear from the ‘sun…/Edward’. Using the possessive pronoun ‘my’ and referring to the Prince as a ‘boy’, Henry’s language prioritises the intimate paternal relationship with his dead child over the regal position of himself as king to his son as Prince. In doing so, he seems to renounce his child’s claim to the throne. In this then, a complication arises: if both York and the Prince of the House of Lancaster are metaphorically flying too close to the sun, the audience is left to ponder who exactly is capable of getting close. Only one conclusion seems possible: anyone can be burnt by the crown. Success or failure in securing the throne isn’t dictated by divine right in 3 Henry VI, but by chance. Whoever wins the most recent battle or whoever has the most luck, takes the crown. The solar imagery of 3 Henry VI reflects the ‘hollow crown’ (Richard II 3.2.160) that Shakespeare writes of in Richard II: it emphasises that there is no greater meaning to the monarchy, and the grapple for power is presented as inherently