To understand William the conqueror's character one must take into account his behaviour since he was a child and the behaviour of those around him. William had a wide range of qualities, though morality was not one of them. He was an excellent hunter and warrior, very capable in battle, uneducated and yet very intelligent.1 However, among his worst qualities were ruthlessness, ambition and opportunism,2 traits associated with normans and the typical medieval monarch.3 (It can be argued that) his immoral behaviour did not cease until his last days.
William's character plays an important part in the way he governed. He was indeed a successful ruler as he developed a system of government that allowed him to control and rule over the country while he was in Normandy or engaged in war. As a result he succeeded in improving the Anglo-Saxon government, retaining control of the church and his subjects, and setting the political and economic bases for the future success of England.4
As a child, after his father's death, William grew up in anarchy surrounded by violence, rebellions and murder. For he was an illegitimate son who inherited the duchy of Normandy at an early age, he had to face many revolts from barons who benefited more from his death than his succession to the duchy. Concequently, all his four guardians encountered violent deaths either trying to protect him or because they were using him for their own ends.5
Therefore, the normans' violent nature and all the difficulties that he had confronted thoughout his childhood might have shaped William's cruel and immoral character, as he used the same ruthless methods adopted by the normans to reinforce his power in Normandy and specially in England.
When he conqu...
... middle of paper ...
...igious belief, his life would be spared as soon as he confessed his sins, thus becoming a moral man in the eyes of God with his final act of redemption.
Works Cited
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/643991/William-I
William the conqueror, David R Bates, introduction http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/418283/Norman http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon22.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_the_Conqueror#Background The English and the Normans : Ethnic Hostility, Assimilation, and Identity 1066- c.1220. Hugh M Thomas http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/normans.htm Makers of history, William the conqueror. Jacob Abbott.
A history of England: David Harris Wilson http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/domesday.htm The Oxford Illustrated History of Britain. Edited by Kenneth O. Morgan
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/643991/William-I
Kapelle, W.E. ‘The Norman conquest of the North:The region and its transformation 1000-1135’ (Croom Helm 1979)
William the Conqueror and his Patronage William I, better known as William the Conqueror, began his medieval and political career at a young age when his father left him to go on a crusade. Effectively William became the Duke of Normandy. He had to fight against other members of the Norman royalty who desired William's land and treasure. William learned at an early age that the men who ruled Europe during the middle ages were primarily interested in their own greed at the expense of all else, including the concepts chivalry and honor. He soon became a feared military commander, conquering all in Normandy who would oppose his interests.
Richard Jones-Nerzic, (2005), “Why did the Normans Win the Battle of Hastings?”, International School History (International School of Toulouse), [Accessed on the 29th June, 2010]
William behaviors can all be described as someone with low self-esteem. However, this does not make William a bad person, just negative. William cares about others, as when he states he do not want to scare anyone, he enjoyed other people’s discomfort. At first, William had trouble interacting with Fekadu by avoiding eye contact, feeling uncomfortable, and trying not to engage in conversation. Fekadu continued to talk and caught William's attention with the story of losing his family. William and Fekadu, from two different cultures and two different lives, reiterate the importance of love and family. Paths cross for reasons and when the paths cross they can have substantial impact on someone’s life. Some readers may view William as harsh and bitter, but I see him as a caring man trying to cope in cruel world.
William had a youth of clean life and of much natural piety, while the years of storm and stress through which he passed gave him an endurance of character which lasted to his life's end. During the time of anarchy in Normandy he became a skilled military leader and defeated his enemies, uniting his duchy. Once he began fighting, rumor has it that he never lost a battle. In 1047 a serious rebellion of nobles occurred, and William with the aid of King Henry of France, gained a great victory at Val-ès-Dunes, near Caen.
This quote by William the Conqueror pretty much describes his whole philosophy: “Life yields only to be conqueror. Never accept what can be gained by giving in.” William the Conqueror is best remembered for the fact that he ruled over England and Normandy for many years and had won several battles against several armies. He also is known for the fact that he won the Battle of Hastings against Harold Godwinson after William’s uncle handed the throne to him. William’s career as a leader actually began at an early age. (Bio.com)
The death of the monster would not even weigh on his conscience, since it is God’s will.
There is no question that Beowulf was a great leader. His fearlessness, selflessness, and faith in God all aided in shaping him into the great warrior and the great king that he was. Ancient civilizations and modern populations alike should all strive to live their lives in accordance with the characteristics of a great leader that Beowulf demonstrated, no matter where they come from or who they are.
...der to maintain success. King Henry showed that he is restricted to one language which resulted him to not gain the lower class power and it then lead him to focus on his political status. On the other hand, Hal presented himself to the viewers as a friendly character, yet he sustained to manipulate and lie to others to achieve his goals. Henry IV n, Part 1 presents the idea of political power and the different characteristics leaders follow. The lesson for audiences, then, is to develop relationships with different people who will expand one’s area of inspiration and the ability to advance success. One can learn from the mistakes of King Henry and remember to be visible and properly positioned, so society can see one’s strengths and talents.
Henry’s personable nature is formed to enhance his ability to connect to his men. He uses this side of himself when he pretends to be a commoner before the battle of Agincourt. From his earlier vagabond years, Henry understands the psyche of the common man, and he uses this experience to make himself accessible as a person. Henry understands morale is low, and that his troops need to feel support so they do not give up. To do this, Henry disguises himself and speaks as a friend to his men to understand their opinions of the battle ahead. This persona differs so greatly from what most men see of Henry that his men can not even recognize their own king. Henry even drops the name “Harry le Roy,” with le roi being French for the king. The goal of this encounter is to retrieve unbiased intelligence about how his men feel without the intimidation that is associated with talking to the king. With this persona, Henry gets such candid results that he is insulted by a man named Williams. By disguising himself and changing his persona, Henry manipulates his own personality. He uses experiences from his previous lifestyle, builds on them, and then uses...
Henry V, like most characters created by Shakespeare, is very complex, and cannot by defined in black and white or as good or bad. However, he is the sum of his actions, and his actions and decisions during the campaign during the campaign in France lead him to be classified as a war criminal. A politician who works for his own good and through that, the good of his country, Henry’s decisions are often cold and calculated, designed to manipulate those around him.
Gloucester knows that he will get in trouble for helping Lear. “Go to say nothing there is Davion between the dukes”. Edmund already knows of the strife between Cornwall and Albany. Gloucester has received a letter which promises that punishment will come to those who have hurt the King.” And a worse matter that than… I have received a letter this night-tis dangerous to be spoken-I have locked the letter in my closet”. Therefore, this results Gloucester to console Edmund to side Lear, telling him that Lear is bound to retaliate. Therefore, the army has arrived to aid the king.” Injuries the king now bears will be revenged name. There is part of a power already footed. We must incline to the king”. This proves Gloucester then tells Edmund that he will secretly find Lear and offer him support. He then asks Edmund to keep the king busy o be won’t notice that act of kindness.
King Lear by Shakespeare portrayed the negative effects of power resulting in destruction caused by the children of a figure with authority. Through lies and continual hatred, characters maintained a greed for power causing destruction within their families. The daughter’s of Lear and the son Gloucester lied to inherit power for themselves. Edmund the son of Gloucester planned to eliminate his brother Edgar from his inheritance.
In spite of the weaknesses, Ivanhoe and King Richard demonstrate true chivalric characteristics. They exemplify integrity, loyalty to the king, a love for adventure and bravery. Through this book, the reader learns the meaning of moral guidelines due to the examples set by King Richard and Ivanhoe. These examples challenge us to search for our own moral guidelines. Without these, we have nothing to strive for.
One of Geoffrey's less believable main characters is the Knight, for reasons of chivalry. The knight displays many traits which make him seem almost too good to be true, and a true gentleman that rarely exists in reality. The narrator sums up the knights character by stating that "Though he were worthy, he was wys,/And of his port as meeke as is a mayde." (pg. 5, The Canterbury Tales) The knight holds four main admirable traits, making him the most liked traveler in "The Canterbury Tales," and also amplying the doubt of his realism. The reader is prepared to learn of each of his noble accomplishments and importance when the narrator remarks that" A knight ther was, and that a worthy man,/That fro the tyme that he first bigan/To ryden out, he loved chivalrye,/Trouthe and honour, fredom and curteisye." (pg. 4, The Canterbury Tales) From the characters impressive introduction, it is clear that this man is the most valued and honorable traveler among the group. This perfect gentleman holds a love of ideals that are often not displayed by people. First and foremost, he believes in the ideals of chivalry, and always stays true to its principles. He also feels that one should be honest, truthful and faithful, which many people are not all of these ideals. The knight thinks one should only do what is right, and what will gain him honor and reputation. This character also believes in freedom and generosity towards all, and displays this ideal repeatedly throughout the novel. And lastly, the knight also strongly feels that any proper person should display courtesy and elegance at all times. Another aspect of this character's life which makes him seem too prestigious to be truthful is his impressive military career. He fought in the holy war, known as the Crusades and was involved in 15 "mortal battles." In the prologue, the narrator informs the reader that "Ful worthy was he in his lordes werre,/And therto hadde he riden, no man ferre,/As wel in Cristendom as hethenesse,/And ever honoured for his worthinesse.