Leadership can be defined as "a process of social influence, which maximizes the efforts of others, towards the achievement of a goal." i Throughout history, leadership has played a major role, either on the battlefield or in everyday lives. In the battle of Agincourt, King Henry V showed both satisfactory and questionable examples of leadership. To begin with, the battle of Agincourt took place on October 25, 1415 during the Hundred Years' War, which lasted from 1337 to 1453. "Before the battle, Henry and his troops, some 30,000 men strong, landed in France during August near the mouth of the Seine River." ii After slowly realizing that his plan was taking a lot of time to execute, he began to move his army north to an English port, attempting …show more content…
One thing that was a smart idea was how he "moved his smaller army towards the French and then used his archers when the French were in range to cause a devastating effect."xi I believe this was a great idea because when he first arrived, the French were ready to fight. They were ready to give everything they had to go up against the English, which I feel may have made them a little overconfident. I think he knew that the French were expecting him and his soldiers to be completely shocked by the surprise attack and therefore had Sir Thomas ready his archers to strike. By doing this, the archers had their minds focused and worked with the unexpected, attacking straight on. Another thing that showed great leadership skills was the fact that Henry was willing to fight alongside his men. He fought on foot during the battle while France's King Charles VI was left in a place of safety. "Charles was weak and mentally ill at the time and therefore handed authority over to Charles d'Albert and Boucicault. Both men were experienced soldiers but their ranks, however, were not considered high enough to deserve respect from the French nobles and consequently led to their commands being largely ignored. In my opinion, the thing that set King Henry V off from the two appointed leaders and King Charles, was that he was "widely regarded as a charismatic commander and was greatly respected by his troops."xii He worked for the …show more content…
When he landed in France, he decided to travel by foot to Calais, his original destination. "He was faced with the fact that the French were now surrounding him and decided to assemble his council. The councilors tried to persuade him that the scheme was pointless and that he could easily get to Calais by sea. They told him that he did not have to risk his army by marching through the front of powerful French forces and hazarding the crossing of the Seine and Somme Rivers."xiv I believe that if he would have listened to his council, he would have completely avoided the battle and saved the deaths of the prisoners they took. I dislike how he treated the prisoners he captured and feel like it was mostly out of fear and cowardness. Instead of killing the men, he could have, at the very least, let them live on. Living while a friend or compadre dies is almost as painful as dying itself. Another example is that Henry also had the chance to turn back. "He had invaded Normandy in hopes of making a quick conquest of Harfleur but the town's stubborn defense delayed him. Sensible advice suggested that Henry should cut his losses and sail back to England, but he had borrowed huge amounts of money to invade France and all he had to show for it was the port Harfleur. He believe going home looked suspiciously like defeat."xv In this example, Henry let his ego get in the way of
In the summer of 1944, General George S. Patton and his 3rd Army successfully broke through heavy German Forces resistance from the Normandy invasion. German forces were in total disarray by the end of August 1944. Patton pleaded with his boss, General Omar Bradley, that if 3rd U.S. Army could be allocated as little as 400,000 gallons of fuel, he could be inside Germany in two days. Time was crucial before the inevitable reaction by the Germans to shore up their defense, preventing Patton from advancing. General Bradley refused Patton's request for more fuel; Unfortunately, General Patton advanced to Germany. Morale ran high throughout Patton’s Army, and there was no sign of heavy resistance before the German border. Consequently, by early September, the 3rd U.S Army had ground to a virtual halt along the flooded Moselle River. In places, Patton's tanks and vehicles ran out of fuel on the battlefield and their swift momentum outran their supply lines (Fugate, 1999). Lack of logistics allowed the German forces to take advantage of Patton’s Army and initiate one of the largest tank battles of World War II, the Battle of Arracourt.
...families siding for and against the king. Had Henry understood politics, he would not have agreed to ceding Anjou and Maine. If he had known how to govern, he would not have revealed the weakness of his government by handing out pardons to every hard-luck story he heard. In short, had Henry VI even an inkling of how to rule, the Wars of the Roses would not have happened.
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.
1. What is the difference between Introduction 2. What is the difference between History 3. What is the difference between a's Planning / Preparation 4.
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.
Henry VIII became interested in the navy and toke on learning of new subjects. His new found interest led to the new design of war-like plans on France. Henry VIII followed an English army across the Channel in 1513, “and personally took part in the successful sieges of Therouanne and Tournay and the battle of Guinegate” (Jokinen, 2012), which led to the peace of 1514. Ferdinand deserted the English alliance and everything Spanish. There was talk of a divorce between Henry VII...
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.
William, the Duke of Normandy, led an army into England. He won this battle and
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.
The Hundred Years War was a battle between the French and English in hopes for possession over the French kingdom. The war started when the English King, Edward III, claimed the French throne. At first, England's new weapon, the longbow, and its stronger, more centralized government were enough to overcome the larger yet disorganized French population. But as France gained a national identity, the English began to suffer defeats.
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.
rest of his army lost the will to fight. It is said that “Henry was crowned on the battlefield
The civil war had resulted in the ever-changing amount of kings over the years. This lack of stability could result in Henry being faced with a lack of support from his subjects. Their faith in a king who would guide the country was low, and their interest in the monarchy was fading. They needed consistency, which Henry could not offer considering his unsteady path to safeguarding his position on the throne. The nobility was another issue he had faced. Growing power of nobility in England could be met with resistance to Henry being on the throne. Henry was a calculated king, whom was not interested in the common characteristics of a king; drinking, constant lavish gatherings… Henry was more interested in being a strong and strict king. An opposition from the nobility could result in large reluctancy to follow Henry, further causing insecurity. However, he still had the more favourable opinion than Richard, who was strongly disliked in England, apart from in the north of
What is leadership? Leadership is defined as a process by which a individual will influence others to obtain goals. Leaders will guide, direct motivate, or inspire others. Leadership is defined by not only traits but actions as well. Leaders are inspirational, trustworthy and charismatic. Many people may think a manger is leader. Although leadership and management go hand in hand, they are not the same. Everyone has their own beliefs about what characteristics an effective leader should have. To me, communication skills, critical thinking skills, and having a vision are few characteristics of becoming an effective leader. A leader is not only born, but made. Some are born as leaders or some are made to be leaders.
Many people believe that leadership is simply being the first, biggest or most powerful. Leadership in organizations has a different and more meaningful definition. A leader is someone who sets direction in an effort or task and influences or motivates people to follow that direction. The power point presentation explains leadership is the influence that particular individuals exert on the goal achievement of others in an organizational context.