Comparison Of King Henry V And Sir Winston Churchill

King Henry V and Sir Winston Churchill were very different people, living in very different times. However, they did have some strong similarities because of what they did and how they did it. Both King Henry V and Sir Winston were of high social ranking and power, a King and a Prime Minister. Both of these men were important leaders in difficult times of conflict. Both had armies, whom they led into battle. Though they were often victorious, the armies of both Churchill and King Henry V were not particularly strong armies, with few skilled fighters and were often outnumbered and thought to be unable to win. But both armies, whilst considered underdogs, were known for their courage in battle and perseverance in fighting. The men fighting in

these armies needed inspiration to keep going, as conditions were harsh and difficult and it is always very easy to give up. However both Churchill and King Henry V would inspire their armies to persevere and fight with powerful war speeches. The speeches that both Churchill and King Henry V wrote and delivered were largely successful because of their ability to rally their people with the power of their words and their oratory skills. Both leaders used similar techniques to rouse their men before and during battle. In this paper two famous speeches will be compared, King Henry V’s ‘St. Crispin’s Day’ speech and Sir Winston Churchill’s ‘We Shall Fight on the Beaches’ speech. In these famous speeches the techniques used include, but are not limited to, pathos, egos, logos and peroration. The use of these techniques from both speeches will be analysed and explored.

The literary technique pathos engages by appealing to the audience’s emotions. Churchill uses this effect when he says: “We shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender.” This emotional appeal and repetition engages and invigorates the audience. These phrases use emotional appeal to the people of England to fight with courage wherever and whenever needed. Churchill uses phrases such as “our island” or “the breaches” as the people of England can relate to these places and would be willing to fight because it is part of their home. The language is very inclusive- Churchill repeats the phrase “we shall” because it brings about the message that the people of England are in this together. On the other hand, King Henry uses the technique of pathos in a different way when he says:

“This day is called the feast of Crispian.
He that lives this day out and comes safe home,
Will stand tiptoe when the day is named
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.”

This quote appeals to emotion of the people by mentioning the feast day of St Crispian, a special belief for all people, because he suggests that through fighting their social hierarchy will rise, and then on this day in the future they will be remembered, because they fought. This is a powerful suggestion– that ordinary men will be remembered on this Feast day for their bravery and sacrifice. King Henry V is affiliating the soldiers with a Saint, in a culture where religion was important and Saints days were celebrated with feasts. This speech was very effective and this emotional appeal moved many people and got them to fight for King Henry V. Pathos is a common technique in war speeches and when used well it can be very powerful. It reminds people of the things most important to them. It helps them to engage people in a fight for a cause because of the emotional appeal and the alignment with their values.

The technique of ethos is related to the credibility or ethical appeal of the speaker. This is important in a War speech, because a speech delivered by a highly influential and respected person can be very different to a speech delivered by somebody with a little or no reputation. Both Winston Churchill and Henry V’s ethos was their reputation when they were delivering battle speeches. Their social and political status as well as the things they had done throughout their lives spoke for this matter. The key difference between Winston Churchill and Henry V is that in King Henry’s speech, he lowers himself to the peoples level. He does this by using inclusive language such as: “We few, we happy few, we band of brothers”. King Henry finds a good balance between bringing himself to the peoples level and showing the people that he has authority by rising above. The affect of lowering himself to the peoples level is that his people become a lot more comfortable with what he is saying. The people were therefore not as frightened of him and they were more likely to follow his instructions. Even though the war is purely for Henry, his ethos ensures that nobody questions his decision to fight this war. Winston Churchill’s speech was different, because their country was fighting to stop Hitler, who if not stopped, could have potentially changed the world for the worse. Most people fighting for England knew this, and would not have been in need of as much convincing. When compared to King Henry’s soldiers, Churchill’s army would’ve been more likely to fight because of the different causes and circumstances of the conflicts.

Logos, the technique of persuading by the use of reasoning, is an important technique in any war speech. King Henry V and Winston Churchill both use this to effect in their speeches. Logos provides reasoning behind the main point of the speech and helps convince through logical sequences. In their respective speeches, both leaders use logos to explain what they want and why they want it. King Henry V, he used logos when describing why he does not want the wrong sorts of men fighting for him. He says:

“The fewer men, the greater share of honor.
God's will!

I pray thee, wish not one man more”

On the other hand, Winston Churchill uses logos with more depth when he talks about the progress of the Army, the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force during the war. He provides information on what is going on, what needs to happen and what he expects his people to do. Both leaders to explain their certain strategy to an extent and why they want what they want to happen through the use of logos. This helps to build trust and convince people that this is the right way forward. This is known to be an effective strategy for gaining widespread appeal and support.

The final technique used is called peroration. The final part of a speech is very important, as it needs to summarise what has been said. Peroration is an important technique in the final rousing part of a speech as it serves to remind the audience of the main points and influences their final decision. This strategy is very important because it ties the speech back to the main point. It reminds the audience of the whole point of the speech, why it was written, delivered and what relevance it has to the group it is being delivered to. This technique is common in war speeches because it is just a summary of the main point of the speech, why you should fight and what you are fighting for. Churchill uses this technique when he says, “turning once again, and this time more generally, to the question of invasion. ” This reminds the audience of his focus and importance. King Henry

V also uses this technique when he reminds his army at the end of his speech:

“And gentlemen in England now abed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhood cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.”

Not only is King Henry recapping what he has just said, but also what the consequences are of not being here on this day. This technique is important because when used it reminds everybody what the point of the speech is. Peroration is the vital technique that must be used to conclude any war speech. Winston Churchill and King Henry V both use this technique in their war speeches to make sure that the audience of the speech understands what is being discussed and how to react.

In conclusion, both of these speeches are orated by two very successful military leaders: Winston Churchill and King Henry V.

Both of these men are considered successful leaders because of the battles they have led their armies to win and the way they have rose to defeat severe circumstances on the battlefield. The reason behind the success of the armies led by these men is the inspiration that their soldiers have had to fight. This inspiration came in the form of war speeches, which were very effective because of the techniques incorporated into both of these speeches. The techniques discussed that overlap in both King Henry V’s ‘St. Crispin’s Day’ speech and Winston Churchill’s ‘We Shall Fight on the Beaches’ speech include pathos, egos, logos and peroration. These techniques provide a large contribution to why both of these speeches were so renowned, why they led to military success and why they were so galvanizing to the armies and people when delivered.

“I have never accepted what many people have kindly said, namely that I inspired the nation. It was the nation and the race dwelling all round the globe that had the lion's heart. I had the luck to be called upon to give the roar.”

-Winston Churchill,

1954

When I hear this quote, two questions emerge. The first is the query of whether Churchill is trying to come across as a very humble man or whether this is genuinely his opinion. Another question raised is whether Churchill was a great leader or whether he led a great country. Churchill states in this quote that his impact on the people during the war was minimal. He states that the English people already had the courage and he just called them to arms. This quote would have raised a great amount of national pride from the people of Britain. Churchill shows great skills in public relations here – by his humility in this quote he is rousing national pride in a time of difficulty, where many are mourning the dead or physically and mentally still recovering from the war, but he is also ensuring his popularity and the love of his people.

Although he claims that he only led a strong country many believe he was a very strong leader. He had numerous worthy tactics during the war and this is why he became Prime Minister of England. Unlike Neville Chamberlain, he saw Hitler as a major threat and decided that he must be stopped immediately at all costs. Without making such a decision, the world would be very different to what it is today. Churchill’s army looked very weak against the forces of Hitler, but it was the inspiration that he gave his country to keep on fighting that secured their success in World War II.

In closing, it’s reasonable to believe that this quote by Churchill may be more of a humble gesture than a genuine statement to maintain national pride in a difficult time for the people of England. This can be said when we consider all that Churchill had done whilst leading England. Churchill continues to be considered as one of the greatest leaders of all time because of his engagement with the people of England.