The Appalling Leadership of King Henry V

1259 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: henry iv part 1 politics

In Henry V, the actions of King Henry portray him as an appalling leader. Among Henry's many negative traits, he allows himself to be influenced by people who have anterior motives. This is problematic because the decisions might not be the best decisions for the country, or neighboring countries. The bishops convinced Henry to take over France because they would be able to save land for the Church. Henry doesn't have the ability to accept responsibility for his actions, placing the blame on others. Before Henry begins to take over a French village, he tells the governor to surrender or risk having English troops terrorize civilians. This way, if the governor declines, it would be the governor's fault for the atrocities that would occur. Henry has gotten his troops to go along with the take over by manipulating them. He tells the soldiers that what they're doing is noble, and that they should be proud. In fact, they're attacking another country in order to conquer it. Henry's character comes off as coldhearted and careless. Henry shows ruthlessness towards civilians, threatening them with atrocities. He's careless with his soldiers, thoughtlessly allowing their executions, or playing hurtful games with them. France' takeover is mostly due to Henry's accepting advice from the bishops who had a motive for their judgment. In Act 1, Scene 1, Henry is promised a large sum of money by the Church to help fund his takeover of France. In order for Henry to receive the money he would have to vote against a certain bill that the bishops, Ely and Canterbury find obstructive to the Church. Soon, Henry goes to Ely and Canterbury to help him decide whether it's alright for him to take over France under Salic law. Clearly, Ely, and Canterbury would have a good reason to suggest Henry take France since he would have to accept the Church's money, and thus vote against the bill. Canterbury tells Henry he should pursue the take over arguing that it is illegal for France to use the Salic law since it originated in Germany. As well, he argues that the manner in which previous French kings have claimed the throne would have been in violation of the law. So with this argument Henry decides to go ahead with taking over France. The problem is that Henry's decision was motivated by a goal of the Church. A decision that holds thousands of lives at stake is decided on so one group of people could benefit.

Show More
Related

  • Henry Vi's Weaknesses

    473 Words  | 1 Pages

    Henry VI had a lot of weaknesses with foreign policy, his inability to make decisions, patronage, Richard duke of York, finance and evil council. With foreign policy he showed weakness in defending his country, after his father Henry VII had conquered land in France, he lost it. He lost Normandy and Gascony in 1451 due to defeat in France. This affected morale and the incomes of nobles because they had lost, reducing their reputation, especially as they had lost some of their own land, and the incomes went down because money was spent on war, so less money was available to give as income. This could have been a reason for the outbreak of conflict because the people would not have been happy with their situation. Henry's next weakness was his inability to make decisions.

    Read More

  • King Henry Viii's Consolidation Of Power Essay

    915 Words  | 2 Pages

    The given documents are examples of the monarch’s ability to assert their authority through word. The different proclamations illustrate the problems of the time, and how the assumed power of the monarch addressed it. It is assumed that their power goes to include power over the church and all papal authority, ultimate power over Parliament, power over other lands, and it goes as far as suggesting that their power has been bestowed upon them by God. The assumed nature and extent of the Tudors’ power alters over time, each king reacting to a different situation. King Henry VII establishes a strong and clear claim to the crown for the Tudors when there were doubts about his claim. King Henry VIII extends the power of the monarch by annexing the

    Read More

  • King Henry Iv Part 1

    1098 Words  | 3 Pages

    Passage Analysis - Act 5 Scene 1, lines 115-138. Shakespeare’s ‘King Henry IV Part I’ centres on a core theme: the conflict between order and disorder. Such conflict is brought to light by the use of many vehicles, including Hal’s inner conflict, the country’s political and social conflict, the conflict between the court world and the tavern world, and the conflicting moral values of characters from each of these worlds. This juxtaposition of certain values exists on many levels, and so is both a strikingly present and an underlying theme throughout the play.

    Read More

  • Henry V: A Biased Shakespearean Portrayal

    1735 Words  | 4 Pages

    When analyzing this specific passage of Henry V, one of the most prevalent literary elements within King Henry’s monologue is his usage of hyperboles to symbolize the anger and vengeance he wishes to impose on the Dauphin when he threatens, “And tell the pleasant prince this mock of his Hath turned his balls to gun stones,” (293-294). This line exemplifies not only King Henry’s ruthless behavior, but also his seriousness of approach to war in comparison to the Dauphin, as his threat to unleash cannonballs upon France indicates the importance of war to him as monarch, and that he is prepared to defend himself and his country’s honor when necessary. It also suggests the maturity Henry possesses in dealing with the subject of war, as the Dauphin’s threat actually backfires on him when Henry responds in a passionate and

    Read More

  • The Failure Of Leadership In Prince Escalus And Richard II

    993 Words  | 2 Pages

    The characters that portray leadership in Shakespeare’s plays like dukes, kings, and generals are chaotic at best and are at times questionable in their leading roles. From characters like Duke Vincentio to more subtle rulers like Prince Escalus, all have had their fair share of leadership mishaps which sometimes proved as a huge mistake. Throughout history we are able to analyze the successful rulers and the unsuccessful rulers and the flaws that they did and did not possess compared to others. So what makes a good ruler and what qualities separate the true leaders from the not so good leaders?

    Read More

  • Henry VI's Incompetence as the Cause for the Outbreak of the Wars of the Roses

    923 Words  | 2 Pages

    Henry VI's Incompetence as the Cause for the Outbreak of the Wars of the Roses

    Read More

  • The Restoration of Strong Government Under Henry VII

    558 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Restoration of Strong Government Under Henry VII Henry VII’s relations with the nobility are controversial, but views of his success are subjective. When discussing degrees of success, there must be criteria on which to judge the subject. In this case ‘restoration of strong government’ can be measured by a close study of what Henry VII set out to achieve and whether he fulfilled his aims. He appreciated the nobility’s importance in local governance and did not want to ‘crush’ them, but merely control and limit their power, preventing rebellion and civil war.

    Read More

  • King Henry VIII and his Great Impact on the History of England

    2162 Words  | 5 Pages

    King Henry VIII was one of the most powerful rulers in the fifteenth century, who had a very captivating life many people are not aware of. Most people know Henry VIII as a berserk king with too many wives, but there is more to Henry VIII than that. Many few people know about his life and what he truly contributed to our world. Henry VIII was an almighty leader in England who won’t soon be forgotten.

    Read More

  • Henry V, An Ideal Machiavellian Ruler

    1041 Words  | 3 Pages

    For hundreds of years, those who have read Henry V, or have seen the play performed, have admired Henry V's skills and decisions as a leader. Some assert that Henry V should be glorified and seen as an "ideal Christian king". Rejecting that idea completely, I would like to argue that Henry V should not be seen as the "ideal Christian king", but rather as a classic example of a Machiavellian ruler. If looking at the play superficially, Henry V may seem to be a religious, moral, and merciful ruler; however it was Niccolo Machiavelli himself that stated in his book, The Prince, that a ruler must "appear all mercy, all faith, all honesty, all humanity, [and] all religion" in order to keep control over his subjects (70). In the second act of the play, Henry V very convincingly acts as if he has no clue as to what the conspirators are planning behind his back, only to seconds later reveal he knew about their treacherous plans all along. If he can act as though he knows nothing of the conspirators' plans, what is to say that he acting elsewhere in the play, and only appearing to be a certain way? By delving deeper into the characteristics and behaviors of Henry V, I hope to reveal him to be a true Machiavellian ruler, rather than an "ideal king".

    Read More

  • Henry VII was Successful in Limiting the Powers of the Nobility

    860 Words  | 2 Pages

    I side with Loades on this as despite resentment from the nobles, after the Perkin Warbeck imposture there were no more serious uprisings which strongly support the success of Henry’s policies. Whilst most nobles would see his methods as unjust (especially the wide of use bonds and recognisances) Henry succeeded in increasing the crown’s standing at the expense of the nobility, securing his position whilst weakening the nobles. Through most of his policies Henry was successful in limiting the powers of nobility. Henry sought to restrict the noble’s power and yet at the same time needed them to keep order and represent him at local levels, therefore Henry sought not to destroy the nobles but to weaken them enough that they did not pose a threat, he needed a balance of control over the nobles and strong nobility.

    Read More

  • Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death Speech

    757 Words  | 2 Pages

    Through high moral character Henry established credibility with the audience through creating a setting that aroused feelings in the people at the convention in order to convince them they had to fight for more than just peace. The goal Henry had when he spoke about war was to be honest with the crowd and point out that they needed to do something now or they would loose not just what he loved, but what they also loved. Henry said “If we wish to be free, if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending...and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight!”. In this quote the tactic of ethics is apparent in that Henry wanted to achieve a personal level of connection with the audience and establish his credibility. By relating losing the war it also meant the lose of their feelings of comfort and contentm...

    Read More

  • Henry V Christian King Essay

    526 Words  | 2 Pages

    After letting the church convince him to go war something changed in henry. His mood changes because he was ready for war after the unexpected gift of tennis balls from the Dauphin. Henry stated whatever happens it’s the will of God. Yes, the childish gift from the Dauphin offends him but instead of conquering France out of anger. The Church influences him to fight with God on his side and God will lead him to victory. As Henry put all his trust in God that demonstrated another characteristic of an ideal Christian king. Regardless of what he might face, he has no fear because he knows that God is with him.

    Read More

  • Qualities and Weaknesses of Shakespeare's Henry V as a King

    740 Words  | 2 Pages

    Henry V is not a simple one as it has many aspects. By looking into

    Read More

  • The Flawed King in Shakespeare's Henry V

    1567 Words  | 4 Pages

    To turn Henry V into a play glorifying war or a play condemning war would be to presume Shakespeare's intentions too much. He does both of these and more in his recount of the historical battle of Agincourt. Although Shakespeare devotes the play to the events leading to war, he simultaneously gives us insight into the political and private life of a king. It is this unity of two distinct areas that has turned the play into a critical no man's land, "acrimoniously contested and periodically disfigured by opposing barrages of intellectual artillery" (Taylor 1). One may believe that Henry is the epitome of kingly glory, a disgrace of royalty, or think that Shakespeare himself disliked Henry and attempted to express his moral distaste subtly to his audience. No matter in which camp one rests, Henry V holds relevance for the modern stage. Despite containing contradictions, Henry is also a symbol as he is one person. This unity of person brings about the victory in the battle of Agincourt.

    Read More

  • Leadership in William Shakespeare's Henry V

    3282 Words  | 7 Pages

    Leadership in William Shakespeare's Henry V. At the time when "Henry V" was written in 1599, England was in chaos. facing many dilemmas and challenges. The country was coming to the end of the Elizabethan era. Queen Elizabeth was in the final years of her reign. and she was getting old, which must be taken into consideration.

    Read More

More about The Appalling Leadership of King Henry V

Open Document