Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of William Shakespeare
Machiavelli ideas of leadership
Downfall of Kingship in Shakespeare's writing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Analysis of William Shakespeare
Shnyar Gharib April 5th, 2018
LIT 403 Dr. Fredrick Monsma
The Perfect Leader Henry V is a history play written by William Shakespeare, it focuses on the story of England’s king Henry V, and the events that happened before and after the battle of Agincourt. Henry is in most ways an example of an ideal king. A king who is wise in using the power he possesses, just in ruling a nation, and courageous in leading an entire army of men to fight his battles for him. According to Machiavelli’s The prince, a book that talks about the monarchal rule and how to be the ideal ruler, Henry V does not seem to be the perfect leader. Because although he seems to have the virtues needed in an English king, he also exhibits some qualities that make him seem
…show more content…
He shows great courage in leading his men into battle by giving motivational and poetical speeches, and also fighting alongside them. Which makes him seem like he considers himself one of them who is ready to die at any moment just like any of these men who come from different backgrounds. He doesn’t act like he is just a leader who gives his army commands, who supervises from afar but is not ready to go down with them. While there is no doubt that this displays Henry’s great character as a leader, especially how he seems to have knowledge on military and war, which is a quality that Machiavelli insists on being a must in a perfect ruler. But later on when they get to Harfleur he makes some outrageous threats that are vile to the point where it takes away from his possibilities of being a perfect leader according to Machiavelli. Because in The Prince Machiavelli clearly states that although cruel acts are sometimes necessary, especially when done to establish one’s power, a perfect ruler knows how to balance between being cruel and lenient. And cruel acts that are repeated more than once make the people go against you and start hating you, which is very different from being feared. A wise leader will not let his people think that he is using favoritism, that he favors a group of people over the other and is being unjust in his merciful acts and rewards or punishments. Henry V giving his speech and …show more content…
And this is a very important point because compassion and personal honesty are characteristics needed to make a perfect leader. Later in the play when King Henry V is in France, he meets King Charles VI’s daughter Princess Catherine and tries to woo her and make her fall in love with him by sweet taking her and using words to win her heart. This shows a good side of King Henry V in speaking from his heart as a “plain soldier” and someone who is not good with words. But it also shows his dishonesty, King Henry knows that he has already won the battle and that makes him be in a much better place than the French king and his daughter, so he doubts the princess will reject his proposal. He knows that he has gotten her by his side so he puts on the act of being a simple soldier who does not know what to say to win her over, he makes himself look flustered and out of the right words to say to make him seem more sincere. King Henry V is being manipulative and dishonest here, someone who is choosing lies and morally ill actions to get what they want. And this in Machiavelli’s opinion is not something a perfect ruler does, because it is not virtuous. According to his beliefs, although King Henry V has strong will power and energy but since he has chosen
After many failed attempts to obtain a divorce from his first wife Catherine of Aragon, King Henry VIII took momentous steps that led to "The Reformation," a significant occurrence in the history of religion. Prior to the reformation, all of England's inhabitants including King Henry VIII prescribed to Catholicism. In fact, King Henry VIII was such a strong supporter that he was given the title "Defender of the Faith" by the pope for his efforts in protecting Catholicism against the Protestants. However, all these changed upon the pope's denial of Henry's request for a divorce.
When we look at Henry as a king we have to look in the context of
Machiavelli’s advice to a prince who wanted to hold power is that they have to instill fear into the people. He believes fear is important because it restrains men, as they fear being punished. Love will never help you hold power because it attaches people to promises. Machiavelli believes that since humans are wicked, they will break these promises whenever their interests is at stake. Men will devote everything to you if you serve their interests, but as soon as you need help, they turn on you. Therefore, creating fear in them is the perfect strategy. I feel like Machiavelli is being sarcastic and did this to get attention. He knew his way of thinking was different and would get the attention of the people.
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.
However, he didn't listen to the duke of york who desperately wanted a say. This could have been another reason for the outbreak of conflict because the people didn't think he always made the right decision and the duke of York didn't like not being listened to. Another problem was with patronage, as Henry was overgenerous, but only to some people, he would give lots of patronage to Somerset and Suffolk but none to York. This was even worse because he had borrowed from York and instead if paying him back, gave patronage to others. He gave away more and more money and land so that there wasn't much left for important times like war and to make people happy or come onto his side.
Shakespeare has twisted our thinking so it seems Henry is truly the ideal Christian King. For example Henry’s Christian virtues are strongly highlighted in his own thoughts spoken out loud before the battle of Agincourt. Also he is more concerned about his country and what must be completed as a king. This is also a tremendous characteristic of a leader and this would add warmth of the character of Henry and his image of being the ideal king.
The character of Henry V, in Shakespeare’s Henry V, displays several characteristics of a Machiavellian ruler. However, the most prominent is his ability to not only use cruelty well, but to appear merciful as well. Henry V is also a great actor, as seen in the second act with the conspirators, and uses his natural acting abilities to appear as though he is a moral and religious ruler. For Machiavelli himself says that although a ruler doesn't have to really be merciful, humane, honest and religious, it is useful for a ruler to appear to be all of these things (The Prince, 70).
Henry in Henry V The bishops refer to Henry in the first scene as "a sudden scholar" who can "reason in divinity. " Canterbury says, "The king is full of grace, and fair regard. Ely quotes "and a true lover of the holy church. The two bishops, pretty much have the same view on Henry, they think highly of him.
Henry V is not a simple one as it has many aspects. By looking into
King Henry IV is saddened and ashamed of Harry’s drinking and stealing and wonders if he will ever become a capable leader. King Henry IV even questions if some...
For the simple fact that when Henry VI was younger and not allowed to take an active role in leading England, he did not really care about running the country. Henry was such a spiritually deep man that he lacked the worldly wisdom necessary to allow him to rule effectively (Wikipedia). Henry was more of an indecisive pushover.
Machiavelli in his famous book “The Prince” describes the necessary characteristics for a strong and successful leader. He believes that one of the most important characteristics is to rule in favor of his government and to hold power in his hands. Power is an essential aspect of Machiavelli’s theory, and a leader should do whatever it takes to keep it for the safety of his country because “the ends justifies the means.” To attain and preserve the power, a leader should rather be feared than loved by his people, but it is vital not to be hated. As he states, “anyone compelled to choose will find far greater security in being feared than in being loved.” If a leader is feared, the people are less likely to revolt, and in the end, only a threat of punishment can guarantee obedienc...
‘Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more’, one of the most celebrated openings to, arguably, the most famous passage within the entire Henry V Shakespeare play. Through this opening we can tell that Henry is a character of perseverance and fortitude as he drives his troops into war. Shakespeare’s presentation of Henry is without doubt one of a hero and protagonist as he is presented as a man with a degree of intelligence and allure with motives that are not focused on a lust for power, like most kings, but to his obligations and responsibilities as an exalted rank. It is also apparent from Henry’s unquestionably rousing speeches that Shakespeare intends for us to view Henry as a hero, or, at the very least, as an estimable king.
Henry IV is a play that concerns itself with political power and kingship in English history. References to kingship are prevalent throughout the play, especially in the depiction of the characters. Although most of the characters in this play could teach us about kingship, I would like to focus my attention to Prince Henry. I think that this character helps us to best understand what kingship meant at this particular time in history.
Niccoló Machiavelli claims in “The Qualities of the Prince” that a prince must have certain qualities that will allow him to seize and maintain his power as a ruler. Machiavelli asserts that these qualities will guarantee the ruler to be able to govern his subjects effectively. According to him, a prince must study the art of war, must understand generosity and to what extent he must be generous to be effective, must choose to either be loved or feared, and be able to keep his word to his citizens according to the situation. These qualities can still apply in today’s politics, and will be useful for a modern time politician as long as they are used carefully.