Essay On Chivalry In Battle Of Agincourt

Essay on Chivalry in Battle of Agincourt
Connie Jara
HS101–51
Professor Tangeman
November 29, 2015
Connie Jara
HS101–51
Professor Tangeman
November 29, 2015
Chivalrous Actions in the Battle of Agincourt
Chivalrous Actions in the Battle of Agincourt
The word chivalry is often associated with knights of the medieval ages. This term was used during
the 11th and 12th century. The code of chivalry is a code of conduct that reflected bravery and
service to others. This code of conduct was expected of the medieval knights. In his book, La
Chevalerie, Leon Gautier wrote the ten commandments of chivalry which were the following: 1.
Believe the Church's teachings and observe all the Church's directions, 2. Defend the Church, 3.
Respect and defend the weak, 4. Love your ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The French army knights followed the code of chivalry as they were nearly all knights. They fought
bravely and fairly. The English army was not composed of brave knights. On the contrary it was
composed of yeomen and poor dishonorable peasants.
The reason for the battle was because the English King Arthur V wanted to recover his former lands
and the lands that he had lost in the Hundred Years War. With a small army at hand, the English
started the battle with a siege of a Harfleur in Normandy. The fresh did not fight the English and
surrendered the gate allowing the English the entrance. Later on, neither army wanted to start the
battle due to military strategic reasons. The English begin lacking food and other provisions and
therefore they decided to 'provoke' the French army by loosening the first flight of arrows. Their
execution was successful and the French were indeed provoked. The French army begin the first
attack but didn't succeed at breaking the English and they actually suffered many loses due to the
English Archers. After their retreat they decided to strike again. This time the English archers
dropped their bows and began using the weapons that the French had abandoned in the first attack.
These weapons included, axes, mallets, and swords. It is often said that the winners of the battle of
Agincourt were the English archers but in fact they did not actually use their bows to cause the most
casualties. They used more advantageous weapons in hand–to–hand
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Character Analysis Of Henry V
In this time of feudalism, people knew Henry V as an important leader who gives his glory and
honor to not only a few individuals, but to each and every person who is serving physically as a
knight and doing any actions made to build status into their country. The speech that he gives before
the battle clearly states the loyal characteristics on how much of hard work he put into training his
men whether they were from noble birth or from the poorest and lowest of classes. With the
following statements, they show his gamely character meaning to speak out with courage with a
purpose. First, he states how he and his army can have the achievement they fight for even if there
are only a few men to fight in a chaotic battle like this, then he forms a type of honorable day and
group remembered for fighting in this battle dead or alive, so that there would be no level on which
individual was better than the other, and last he makes it loud and clear that he would even treat
those men as if they were his brothers because they were the only few men that would support him
and fight with him against their enemies. The three big examples here are the political expectations
on what a group of men needs from a leader like Henry V and a true king with the power of his
absolute anarchy.
First, he plans to share his own honor to the few men that join him for their sacrifices and not to a
group or army increased because then that honor won't be that memorable. He even states "God's
will! I

Battle Of Agincourt Research Paper
On October 25, 1415, the Battle of Agincourt occurred. Two months before, Henry V (the current
king of England) had laid siege to Harfleur in Normandy with over 11,000 men. After five weeks,
the town surrendered. However, King Henry V lost half of his men due to disease and casualties
from battle. Due to this fact, King Henry V and his exhausted army decided to march to Calais,
where they would meet the English fleet and return to England. Marching towards their destination,
the army unfortunately ran into the French army at Agincourt. The French army was massive, with
around 20,000 men, greatly outnumbering the English army. However, the French army had several
disadvantages at the time. The battlefield lay on one thousand yards of open ground between two
forested areas. The ground itself, however, was very muddy. Unfortunately for the French, most of
their knights had to cross the muddy battlefield with their bulky armor. Most likely realizing this, the
English decided to initiate the battle before the French could hunker down. The English also brought
something new to the table: a longbow. This longbow was capable of reaching up to 250 yards.
While ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
First of all, I would've organized my troops better. They were too close together, thus making them
an easy target for the archers on the English side. While I wouldn't have made them spread too far
apart, I would definitely break up some of the larger portions of my army. Secondly, I would've
changed the armor my knights were wearing. While offering great protection, the armor was too
heavy (around 50–60 pounds), being more detrimental than useful. This was one of the main reasons
why the French lost. I would've made them change into a lighter armor, suited for both mobility and
protection. Thirdly, I would've made my army hunker down, in case of anything unexpected
happening. When the English army initiated the battle, the French were

William Shakespeare 's Henry V
In times where kings were references to God, and tariffs were set upon to pardon sins. In which the
Great Chain of being dictated the order
on to which place you ought to be or were born into. William
Shakespeare's Henry V, narrates the story of one of England's greatest monarchs. Shakespeare,
exploits a specific time period in
Medieval History, The battle of Agincourt, France versus England, in
Henry's lead to what we sought and claimed the French Crown, to whom he was denied his but later
culminated on win win in The Battle of Agincourt, and in his marriage with Katherine of France,
King Charles VI daughter.
Shakespeare who's considered to be a liberal Christian for some scholars, decides to incorporate a
dualist personality on ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
of the Great Chain of Being's first principle is sought to be that everything is a hierarchy, and the
higher you are in the chain the nearest you are to
God. As for to be expressed in the play, King Henry V is the nearest
to God in England. Furthermore, when talked about the King, one must
relinquish itself in obedience to whatever the King would decide on.
In this excerpt, Shakespeare makes a clear distinction on the closeness of the King to the lord, our
God. However, Renaissance
Humanism, goes past the adulation of the King, on to terms of precisely self–concern and humane
reason, lack of praise for actions sought as to be the Kings qualities. This is why when Shakespeare
presents the Archbishop of
Canterbury talking to the Bishop of Ely, regarding a bill, he doesn 't
want to be passed, because it will affect the church's monetary situation, his mortal reason takes the
first place, in trying to manipulate the King, no praise, no adulation, only raw human control
among another at first when Arch. Of Canterbury states his main real
interest, the church possessions "It must be taught on. If pass it

against us, we lose the better have of our possessions" (ACT I,
Scene I, Lines 7–8). In addition to this, there is some adulation in
accordance with the Great Chain of Being, but just partially, because

Why Does Henry V Continue to Be Such a Famous and Popular...
King Henry V, son of Henry IV, forged his legend in a little over nine years. He made England one
of the strongest kingdoms in Europe and academic KB McFarlane even described him as "the
greatest man who ever ruled England". Even though Henry V was said to be brave, fair, likeable and
a great warrior, he was also arrogant, ruthless, cruel on campaign and organised massacres. So, how
did such a man come to be a national hero? Henry's fame started to build when he was a teenager
after showing his abilities on the battlefield by taking part in the Battle of Shrewsbury, in Wales. In
that battle, he was wounded in the face by an arrow but refused to leave combat, fighting until the
end. The King's army was victorious against the Welsh rebels and Young Henry was recognised
throughout England for his courage. Despite his early entry into public life, Henry was well
educated. Henry V was the first King of England since Norman invasion to use English as his
primary language and who could both read and write in the vernacular language. Henry's accession
to the throne was broadly welcomed by the population of England because they were desperate for a
strong monarch, something England had lacked since the reign of Edward III. And he did not
disappoint them. Henry fulfilled every criteria by which kings were judged: good justice, sound
finance, true religion, political harmony, accepting consel and nobility. Only one remained: success
in war but it was no long before he fulfilled that

Essay on The Flawed King in Shakespeare's Henry V
The Flawed King in Shakespeare's Henry V
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 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Approaching the play through mere historical reconstruction limits the potential for insight into
society and threatens to create a stagnant historical account. Although the situation to which the play
refers no longer exists, a connection can be made between spectator and stage. The Chorus
facilitates this connection. Shakespeare obviously intended that the Chorus help the audience
visualize the proceedings of history. The Chorus has a dynamic role in inviting each audience
member on a journey through time. They have to assemble for themselves the model ruler of Henry,
in accordance with the instructions given, for "it would be falsification of history to pretend that [the
play] could contain a clear–cut and unambiguous ideal" (Iser 186). The Chorus provides a sense of
individual responsibility in creating an image; a product of the imagination and not a fact of history.
The Chorus bridges the gap between the past and the present. The spectator is encouraged to walk
on an illusionary plain with Henry and share in his experiences.
The communication by the actors is emphasized in this production, as there will be little in terms of
stage decor. The Chorus is a dictionary, so to speak, for this new method of a raw and pure rendition
of Henry V. It is "explicit about how much stage and actors will do, how much the audience must do
for itself" (Beauman 6).
Think, when we talk of

King Henry V Character Analysis Essay
"The mercy that was quick in us but late/ By your own counsel is suppressed and killed. / You must
not dare, for shame, to talk of mercy," (2.2.85–87). In Shakespeare's Henry V, King Henry V, uses
multiple personas towards certain people to gain the French throne. He justifies his right to the
French throne by his descent from French royalty through the female line. Henry is still being seen
as his young self and uses role play to prove that he is worthy of the French throne. Henry's role
playing is for the purpose of gaining the French throne. Henry manipulates his soldiers and
opponents for his selfish want of the throne. Henry uses different personas while giving speeches
and physically disguising himself to gain the French throne. Henry, in preparation of the battle at
Harfleur, portrays a friendly persona to rally his troops. Henry goes to France to fight and declines
an offer of useless dukedoms and their princess. He declines the offer, because he wants the throne
and is dedicated to get it. At Harfleur, Henry encourages his troops by saying, "Once more unto the
breach, dear friends, once more, / Or close the wall up with our English dead!" (3.3.1–3). Henry
calls his troops his friends and encourages them to continue the battle and try their hardest to fight
for England and win. Henry concludes his speech saying, "Follow your spirit, and upon this charge/
Cry "God for Harry, England, and Saint George!"' (3.1.36–37). Henry allows his troops to call him
Harry and keeps his troops spirits' alive to go on and fight in Harfleur. Encouraging the king's troops
helps the soldiers know why they should be fighting in the war and makes them feel patriotic for
England. Henry rallying his troops, manipulates them to try their hardest and win the battle, which
gets Henry a step closer to have the French throne. Henry rallying his troops in a friendly way,
makes his troops feel more patriotic and gets them to want to fight at Harfleur for England. Henry
tries to portray himself either as a major threat and merciful to the soldiers of Harfleur. A parley is
sounded and Henry gives a speech to the soldiers of Harfleur telling them to surrender and if they do
not surrender, what Henry will do to Harfleur, which

King Henry Symbolism
A Contradictory King: "The King is but a Man as I Am"
Among all the characters of the play, I am most interested in the personalities and the changes of
King Henry. The bishop Ely declares, "We are blessed in the change," so are all the English people
(1.1.39). His changes are from a youth to an adult and from a man without power to a king. The
changes of his status accompany the changes in his characteristics. Finally, As Rabkin questions:
Can the manipulative qualities that guarantee political success be combined in one man with the
spiritual qualities that make one fully open and responsive to life and therefore fully human?
(Rabkin 37)
It is my purpose of this essay to study the alternations of King Henry's character, and decide whether
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Actually, I like the king much better after he disguises himself with the cloak of Erpingham. There
his superficially contradictory character is finally thrown off like a discarded cloak, and the youth in
him comes out again: Then, he starts to joke around with his former friend Pistol, telling him, "Do
not were your dagger in your cap" on Saint Davy's day lest Fluellen "knocks that about yours"
(4.1.57–8). This is the first joke that he tells in the play, showing that he is not serious throughout
time. He also shows much fear when he meets the three soldiers, saying to Williams, "Though I
speak it to you,/ I think the King is but a man as I am" (4.1.98–9) With the word "though," the king
is in fact implying that "I should not say so." This is not only because it is contradictory to condemn
himself, but also because he believes that a king should not show any cowardice. He should not
possess this fragile human side in his heart, as "Adam" or other human beings do. Nevertheless, he
still feels that for a king, "when he sees reason of fears as we do, his fears, out of doubt, be of the
same relish as ours are" (4.1.105–6). We prefer this speech of the king because he tells us that every
man is the same. We prefer this moment of the king because by seeing his weakness, we see also
ourselves. We prefer this form of the king because with a cloak and disguise, he is truest to himself
and to us, without

Battle Analysis Essay: The Battle Of Agincourt
Battle Analysis Paper The Battle of Agincourt, waged by Henry V, king of England, against Charles
VI, king of France, was England's way of asserting Henry V's right to the French Throne.
Negotiations for marriage with Charles' IV daughter, which would have made a son of the union heir
to both thrones, had stalled. Furthermore, England was hampered on many fronts by French
interference and incursions. Diplomacy failed. Combat did not. England's resounding victory against
vastly superior numbers decimated the French nobility, and won Henry V the French Princess to
wife and the French crown. The English success resolved the issue of France interfering in English
affairs and confirmed the English as a force to be reckoned with. History The Battle of Agincourt
marks the beginning of the Lancastrian Phase of The Hundred Years' War, was comprised of a series
of battles between England and France to determine who would control France. The Hundred Years'
War is divided into three parts, and the Lancastrian Phase is the middle phase. The Battle of
Agincourt, waged by Henry V, king of England, against Charles VI, king of France, to assert his
right to the French Throne. Henry claimed his right to the French throne through his grandfather,
Edward III. Fig.1 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Franco–Scot alliance had the general effect of further checking English power to the advantage
of both. (13) Additionally, the treaty granted protection by the Scots to French piracy along the
English coast. The French justified their actions by claiming that the English were pirating in the
English Channel. And so, Henry V, having gained battle experience from success in his war with
Wales, as well as the backing of the Grand Council, turned his attention to dealing with the French
and claiming his right to the French

Essay On King Henry The Fifth Essay
Thesis King Henry makes many decisions in his life as the leader of England. His decision making
and leadership skills are on full display as he leads England in the conquest of France. King Henry's
inter–personal skills, out of the box thinking, positive attitude, forward–thinking, and trust in God
made the victory over France's numerically superior army possible and the healing of wounds
afterward.
Introduction
William Shakespeare's play King Henry the Fifth is a historical play about King Henry the Fifth
who became the King of England at a young age. He changed overnight from a fun loving carefree
noble to a King when the burden of governing was placed upon him. King Henry was forced to
negotiate discord between England and France ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, the French leaders still remember the wild Prince Henry. The French ambassador relays
what Louis, the Dauphin, thinks of the wild Prince Henry by delivering a "treasure" of tennis balls.
He repeats what he is told to say, " that you savor too much of your youth and bids you be advised
there's not in France that can be with a nimble galliard won. You cannot revel into dukedoms there."
(Shakespeare, trans. 1988, Act 1, Scene 2, 74–77). This immature person is how he is remembered
in France, and the leaders cling to this impression of Harry, dismissing him as one who could lead
and win. The character Louis, the Dauphin, sends him a "treasure" of tennis balls as an insult. The
treasure has great significance in how he views King Henry as still the playboy adventurer. This
view of Henry does not change in the French leadership, and the inability to change their view of the
foe has extreme consequences for their army, country, and king. (Herbel, 2015). This
underestimation of how much the king has changed and grown since his princely days has profound
consequences for the upcoming battles between England and France and shows inept leadership on
the part of the French leaders even though King Henry warns them. King Henry warns the French
when he says that they are not taking into consideration just how much he learned and how useful
those wilder days were for him. (Shakespeare,1988). King Henry V uses weapons he has available
in different ways compared to

Macbeth Evil
Shakespeare's play Macbeth shows the roots of all evil, our own human nature. The play is centered
on the coexistence of good and evil. Macbeth, unlike any other Shakespeare play has the protagonist
convert to evil. In the beginning of the play, Macbeth is shown as a hero in the Scottish army, that is
ironic because Macbeth defeats a traitor and he himself becomes one later. Macbeth knows his place
in the world. He is fully capable of distinguishing between right and wrong. Macbeth purposely
disregards his own moral judgment to rise to power which is again ironic and goes against his own
beliefs. Macbeth stands as a symbol for Satan's sin of ambition. Like Satan, Macbeth's thirst for
power and ambition drives him to commit evil.Contrary to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
The king does this so that the governor will surrender and Henry can conquer Harfleur without a
bloody battle. Although his speech sounds menacing, a quality not found in the characteristics of a
hero, it is only a tactic Henry uses to achieve the outcome he wants. Henry's reluctance to make
good on his promise of this massacre is proven when he states, "use mercy to them all" (III.3. 54).
Henry is not the monster he appears to be; instead, he is a leader using any method he can to gain
land while keeping his troops out of harm's way. At the final Battle of Agincourt, Henry's ragged
army expresses concern about their odds against the French; the British are outnumbered five to one.
Henry's Cousin Westmoreland. Henry, being the talented rhetorician that he is, soothes the army's
fears by delivering the inspirational speech: "[...] If we are marked to die, we are now To do our
country loss; and if to live, The fewer men, the greater share of honor. [...]But if it be a sin to covet
honor, I am the most offending soul alive." (IV.3. 21–30). Henry explains that there is a certain
amount of honor to go around once the British defeat the French. It is fortunate of those soldiers that
are at the battle that they do not have to share that honor with men who are fearful and therefore
unworthy of honor. Henry says that honor is most important to him and that it should also be
important to

Pride And Nationalism In Henry V By William Shakespeare
In the play "Henry V", William Shakespeare, to a strong extent, seeks to evoke nationalistic fervour.
In the play, this patriotic sentiment is often used to display one's sense of pride and belonging in
what they may believe to be the best country and is often manipulated by the main characters to
influence one's emotions. This sense of patriotism is expressed through the Archbishop's statement
towards Henry to invade France, the prosecution of the three traitors who were set out to kill King
Henry and the use of nationalistic fervour by King Henry to motivate the English soldiers into war
against France,
The Archbishop of Canterbury shows concern in giving up the church's prime assets to the king and
instead persuades him to go to war with France. He tells the king to "look back into your mighty
ancestors." The dialogue portrays the lineage of previous kings which King Henry carries the
bloodline of. Therefore allowing King Henry to take pride in the true strength of the British, and
gives him assurance that he is able to win against the French, based on the previous successes of the
English. The archbishop then goes on "behold his lion's whelp" "with half their forces the full pride
of France." The "lion", a symbol of strength and bravery is used to metaphorically liken the English
as brave, strong soldiers." In comparison, the whole strength of the British is described by just one
singular lion. Whereas the French are described as a "full pride [of lions]", further

A Comparison Of Leadership In Henry V And Saint Joan
The Struggle for Leadership In the plays Henry V by Shakespeare and Saint Joan by George
Bernard Shaw, there is a distinct prevalence of how social class impacted both of their societies. In
"Henry V", King Henry was an elite member of his society who was viewed as a hero and a noble
leader. Although status can create an impact on leadership and trust, not all heros were shown to
have high social status. In Saint Joan, Joan was a peasant girl who still, despite her rank in society,
was able to become an impactful leader and women's rights activist. Throughout both of these plays,
two people both had the drive to become significant leaders, despite their varying social statuses.
Along with analyzing the social status of each of the characters, both also incorporate forms of
ethos, pathos, or logos to influence their audience. Although both of the speeches provide supporting
evidence of ethos, pathos, or logos, Shakespeare is more successful in providing a speech and a
strong, male lead character to inspire and motivate his audience, while Joan of Arc lacks the appeals
based on her social status and the impact her gender has in society. In Henry V, King Henry V
delivers an empowering speech, Saint Crispin's Day Speech, which is argued it is one of the greatest
motivational speeches of all ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
His use of appeals proves this to his men. His sense of ethos provides a sense of equality and pathos
which incorporates an emotional draw to the troops. King Henry's speech not only empowers, but
also is successful in proving to his troops that they can win the battle. Through this speech,
Shakespeare's use of providing a sense of equality, despite Henry's social status, as well as using
emotion to prove their ability to win the battle, provides clear evidence of how empowering the
Saint Crispin's day speech is in comparison to Saint

Henry V Character Analysis
Henry V is Shakespeare on leadership. Shakespeare celebrates this English monarch, displaying
what makes him a good leader. Henry expels justice and mercy, he listens, he motivates, and his is
gravely aware of his responsibilities as king. Young Henry is presented with a chance to rally great
Britain (England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales) with a common cause and prove himself: by
claiming and conquering France. Without a common cause his noblemen may quickly quarrel with
each other and challenge the king's authority. King Henry can make claim to France because his
grandmother was a French princess, However, the French have a Salique law which prohibits the
French crown from being inherited by the line of the female but the law is interpreted to only block
the Germans from the Salique land from claiming the throne. Henry is a good listener, he is well
advised because he takes council from his nobles and the Bishop of Canterbury. Studying law is
dominated by the Catholic church in the fifteenth century. The bishop advises the King that he
indeed has a claim to the French throne. But a previous scene reveals that the bishop has interests of
his own. "May I with right and conscious make this claim?" asks Henry. "It is a sin upon my head."
replies Canterbury. Thus Henry receives the approval and the blessing of the church with the advice
that since the French do not think the same about the Salique law France can only be taken by force.
His advisor and uncle Exeter says

Advantages Of The Battle Of Agincourt
French Drawbacks The Battle of Agincourt could have, and should have, been an easy victory for
the French. They outnumbered their opponent with fresh troops and fought on their own turf. All
signs pointed to victory. However, this caused them to become overconfident, which led to hasty
decisions as well as the neglect to consider terrain and prior encounters with palings. Intelligence
Assets Spies have always been a part of warfare in one form or another. Christine de Pisan's book
The Book of Deeds of Arms and of Chivalry (as cited in Arthurson, 2013) suggested that one should
be "curiose & diligent to send forthe here & there his espies subtylli...to [u]nderstande [the] purpose
of his enemyes" (p. 136). With the threat of imminent battle looming, scouts, riders, and runners
would provide intelligence on the status of enemy formations and their disposition. Both the English
and French used scouts as Henry's army marched toward Calais. In one instance, English scouts
found six thousand French guarding a river crossing that forced them to find another route.
Similarly, the French tracked the progress of Henry's army to block his advance as they amassed
troops. From their scouts, the French also learned that the English were few, short on supplies, and
weary from the march and illness. Such an easy target excited the French, who rushed ahead to
intercept Henry and his forces before they could escape. Additionally, this attracted many French
nobles, eager to take part in the

Joan Of Arc Causes
The France and England have been battling at war from the beginning of time. When Charles IV of
France dies leaving only daughters. His sister Isabella of France who was also the the wife of the
King of England. She claimed the French throne for her son Edward III of England because he is the
closest male relative. However the french nobles favoured Philip VI because they didn't want a
foreign king. The One Hundred Years War started in 1337 to 1453 and had many Kings during that
time period. England was winning most of the war but because of the help Joan Of Arc France came
back into the war. She gave France life and without her they would have lost the war and England
would have took over France. At the beginning of the war England was dominating ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
At the age of thirteen she says she started having visions of God and other important figures telling
her to fight the war. She went to the King at the job and told him about her visions. France was
losing the war and their back was up against the wall so they figured she couldn't hurt anything. She
served in the army dress up as a man and gave a lot of advice to the king. She came up with the plan
to take back Orleans. After they took back Orleans she marched to Reims with Charles VII the King
Of France. The War was pretty much over after that both sides was done fighting at the time because
they couldn't loss anymore troops. A few years later the war resumed but didn't last long until France
came out on top. During the end Joan of Arc was captured by Burgundy and offered back to France
for a ransom but they said no. She was a prisoner of war until England got her and burned her to
death for being a witch. Without Joan the war would have ended sooner with England winning but
because of her she gave the France life. She hyped them up and got them into the war and gave great
advice to take back cities like Orleans and

Hundred Year War Research Paper
The Hundred Year War was a war between the French and English in the 13th and 14th century. The
war was a conflict over land, titles and rights between both the French and English. This involved
several generations of French and English who have claimed a period of more than a hundred
years(Hundred Years' War, pars.1). This was said to last form around 1337 to 1453 by the House of
Plantagenet. It was accompanied by some significant battles and people during this time period of
the Hundred Year War. The origins of the Hundred Years War included Joan of Arc Liberates the
Orleans, The Battle of Agincourt and Philip VI. Joan of Arc liberates the Orleans was one of many
events that occurred during the Hundred Year War. Joan's passion and influence on the French
inspired and unified the French army. In the beginning of the war she led the first troops to enter
Orleans on April 28, 1428.The French split into two columns, but they entered easily into the city of
Orleans. They burned and English fortress that had been guarding a bridge across the Loire. The
French had done two consecutive masses. As the English saw how the French could achieve these
forces under Joan's leadership they began to retreat before the second mass was ... Show more
The origins of the Hundred Years war included Joan of Arc Liberates the Orleans war, The Battle of
Agincourt and Philip VI. All of these battle and people had a huge impact to this war with both the
French and English. They had many disputes and disagreements within these wars and many had
greats wins and horrific defeats. The Hundred Year war was related to another war called The Battle
of Crecy. This war was also between both the French and English and was a resounding victory for
the English. Philips army attacked but were soon overwhelmed by Edward's 10,000 longbowmen.
This marked a rise for the English as a world Power( The Battle of Crecy,

Analysis Of Kenneth Branagh's Much Ado About Nothing
Kenneth Branagh's Much Ado About Nothing is remarkably different in tone from the other plays
discussed. Unlike the other two comedies, Taming of the Shrew and Merchant of Venice, there are
far fewer comedic aspects that do not translate well to modern audiences. The film has much less
violence in it than the others and even its chief villain is more like a cartoon villain than an outright
evil manipulator.
The tragedies are known for their fascinatingly complex villains such as Richard III or Iago, but
Keanu Reeves' Don John comes across as a character lost in the wrong movie. He lurks in the
shadows and is not really given a compelling motive for his cruel actions. He does not even enact
the rare few scenes of violence in the film. In a different play, the ineffectual portrayal of the villain
could ruin the whole production, but Branagh understands that Much Ado About Nothing's most
important parts are the dynamics between the two sets of couples, something this film does quite
well.
It is this toning down of violence and dark undertones that allows the film to be so successful.
Claudio's striking of Hero is the most noticeable physical violence and it is quickly followed by a
romantic scene between Beatrice and Benedick to restore the tone. It comes across well as a modern
romantic comedy, with just enough darkness to drive the plot forward. To make the film darker than
it has to be would diminish how enjoyable and fun to watch it is.
Henry V is similar in some ways

King Henry V Character Analysis
Throughout history, it has been difficult to have a dynastic succession produce good leaders.
However, in William Shakespeare's Henry V, King Henry V is acclaimed as the dynastic successor
to England. Henry has a valid claim to the French throne, but France already has a successor, the
Dauphin. With some convincing and financing from the clergy, Henry decides to fight for his place
as the French heir. In the Battle of Agincourt, Henry demonstrates strong leadership at a young age.
As previously explained in Act I, Henry's father died when he was young, and Henry V gained a
new demeanor and changed his wild ways into proper ethics for royalty. Henry's personality change
leads to his noble leadership, and he seems to lead by example and in words even as a young king.
King Henry's conduct causes him to be a just ruler. King Henry's morality, impartiality, and
authority cause him to be a just ruler. King Henry's morality causes him to be a just ruler. When
Henry rises to the throne, he sheds his reckless personality as much as possible, and he even
distances himself from an old friend, John Falstaff. King Henry becomes a morally and mentally
sound king for England. Henry gains important morals for a ruler such as humility, grace, piety, and
wisdom even at his young age. Henry shows a glimpse of his humility when he addresses the
soldiers before the siege of Harfleur to inspire them for battle. Henry says that they all must go
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once / more" (3.1.1–2). By addressing the soldiers as dear
friends, Henry acknowledges them as equals and even goes as far as saying that they are his
comrades. His humility is loved by his people, so they respond as motivated and united front for
England. A good leader must never hold his/her head higher than his/her subjects because this makes
the ruler more popular when he/she considers all people equally. Also, Henry is loved by the Church
for his piety and other morals. As the Bishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Ely discuss the bill
about to be passed which would tax the church, the Bishops mention that Henry V is "full of grace
and fair reward. / And a true lover of the Church" (1.1.24–25Whn Henry gains piety after his father's

John Keegan 's The Face Of Battle
John Keegan's The Face of Battle and Sir Charles Oman's The Art of War in the Middle Ages
provide insight into how historians approach the subject of battle. When discussing warfare,
historians typically approach the subject from a procedural point of view, but it has also become
normal to focus on combatants' experiences. By cross comparing Keegan and Oman's descriptions
of the Battle of Agincourt, it is apparent that both the procedural method and the method of focusing
on individuals have merit. However, Keegan and Oman's alternate depictions of the battle
demonstrate how combining both perspectives give a more complete understanding of the past.
Historical writings have evolved from procedural accounts of events to inquisitive reflections on
combatants. Focusing on weapons, strategies and generals' perspectives the procedural approach
quickly provides in–depth information, but often in a distorted way 1. It is important to remember a
commander's actions and the events of their battles are often exaggerated to support current political
goals . Alternately, a slightly more encompassing approach to warfare considers the conflict's
decisiveness in addition to the battle's statistics and facts 1. That is to say, what influence did the
battle have on future events and how were people's lives changed by it. Beyond these procedural
approaches, modern historians now use a more inquisitive method that combines personal
experiences and facts. This more inclusive method allows

Identity In Shakespeare's Hamlet And Henry V
At first glance, the Shakespearean plays Hamlet and Henry V are not similar. This is because they
truly are not similar – not in genre, since Hamlet is a tragedy and Henry V is a historical play; not in
plot, since the protagonist in Hamlet hides in the shadows of conflict while the protagonist of Henry
V charges head–first into it; and certainly not in tone, where Hamlet is disastrous and Henry V is
triumphant. It is these dissimilarities of context that make Henry and Hamlet's similarities in identity
all the more interesting. Both Shakespearean protagonists are faced with extreme circumstances, and
in such extreme circumstances, they both resort to the same human response: they question. In both
plays and both characters, Shakespeare seems to explore the depth of such questions as they pertain
to human identity and as they pertain to each character's sense of control, thus seeming to pose a
question himself: what does it mean to control one's identity? To examine Shakespeare's exploration
of identity as a means of control, it is important to understand what all constitutes each character's
identity. In the case of Henry, for one, it is apparent that the actions of his past alter his perceived
identity throughout the play. Before Henry speaks his first lines in the play, the Bishop of Ely calls
Henry a "true lover of the holy Church," to which the Archbishop of Canterbury replies, "The
courses of [Henry's] youth promised it not" (1.1.23–24). This reckless reputation follows Henry
further into the play when an ambassador from France delivers a message to Henry from the
Dauphin: "...the prince our master says that you savor too much of your youth and bids you to be
advised there's naught in France that can be with a nimble galliard won: you cannot revel into
dukedoms there" (1.2.250–254). Along with this message, the Dauphin included a gift of tennis balls
meant to further insult Henry. Even later in the play, after the English won the battle at Harfleur, the
noble Frenchmen continue to underestimate Henry's ability as a leader: "What a wretched and
peevish fellow is this King of England, to mope with his fat–brained followers so far out of his
knowledge" (3.8.120–122). What these instances show is that the

Battle Of Agincourt Analysis
The Battle of Agincourt in 1415 is one of the most famous battles in history. Made popular by
Shakespeare's play Henry V, many people have forgotten or are unaware of the true details of the
actual battle. Myriad details have never been satisfyingly resolved. One of the controversies
involves the fact that Henry V ordered the deaths of the French prisoners that he had gained during
the battle. According to most historians, Henry commanded his soldiers to kill the prisoners after the
battle was already won, though he may or may not have realized it at the time. In regard to this fact,
researchers have called Henry everything from a clever strategian to a cruel tyrant. There are a few
eyewitness accounts, called chronicles, but ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Shakespeare introduces the notion that Henry commissioned his invasion of France upon the
instability of his position on the throne as his main focus, as well as his claim to the French throne.
Therefore, his determination was authentic, possibly making him resolve to win at all costs as he
faced the French army that reputably was much larger than his own. According to Shakespeare's
tale, the killing of the prisoners during the battle of Agincourt seems to have been induced by a
sudden panic on the part of Henry V when he heard a sudden commotion and realized that his army
was being attacked from behind, just as his victory seemed assured. While this latter concept
corresponds fairly well with the original accounts, Shakespeare's rendition of the event must be
handled with caution as historical fiction, not historical fact. Additionally, in the play, immediately
before this happens, he hears a vivid account of how one of his relatives died in the battle, and his
grief may have played a part in the suddenness of the order (Shakespeare, 1599, Henry V, Act IV,
Scene VI) Five accounts currently exist that have survived from the time of the battle in which the

Agincourt And Crécy: Battle Analysis
The Battles of Agincourt and Crécy from the Hundred Years' War are two major battles that greatly
showcase the use of terrain in the effectiveness of combat. Agincourt and Crécy were just two of
many engagements of the Hundred Years' War, however, they are remembered in the annals of
English history with national pride and have been immortalized in verse by Shakespeare himself.
This is due largely by the fact that the French should have annihilated the English campaigning
forces. The three deciding factors of these conflicts were the innovation of the English longbow, the
use of the terrain, and the formation of the English infantry. When used in combination with each
other, the English demonstrated the perfect use of terrain against a larger force. ... Show more
Edward III was crowned King of England in 1327. The king was only 15 years old and had inherited
a country beset by conflict in Aquitaine, the area known as Northern France, and Scotland. With
conflict set on two sides of his kingdom, Edward quickly discovered that it was impossible to
muster enough nobles to fight in both Scotland and France. In 1332 Edward fashioned a new
military tactic that called for using large battalions of longbows to kill the heavily armored knights
before they reached his own lines. In doing so, Edward would require fewer knights to fight battles.
In 1333 Edward first tested this military theory against the Scots at Halidon Hill. Even while having
a smaller force, the English prevailed and slaughtered the Scottish army because of the massed use
of the longbow. From this victory, Edward would draw the strategy that would ultimately culminate
during his campaign against France in the 1340s. This would etch the power of ranged units into the
art of war forever, and still influences the way wars are fought to this

Character Analysis Of King Henry V
King Henry is one of the most successful kings of England. He brought two warring kingdoms
crashing together, and melded them into one united country. Henry is an extremely interesting and
dynamic character. From a young age he associated with criminals, drunkards, and other lowly
citizens. When his father was on his deathbed, he requested that Henry stopped being a criminal, and
begin acting like a king. Henry made that oath, and stayed true to it until his dying day.
As a king, he became a king after being a criminal. He went from a criminal prince to an upstanding
kind king who understands justice and follows the righteous path for the rest of his life. It is such a
crazy transformation; from criminal hiding crimes from the king to ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Directly after that event, he judges three people to death for attempting treason. Reasons like this are
the reason Henry progresses the story as the main protagonist. He is the main driving force that is
pushing the plotline forward. Every time he is in a scene he enhances it, and brings the act more
color and flare.
While Henry does adapt his ways often, he doesn't always change. One of the examples of him
sticking to old ways is how he is a religious man. Early in the story, he listens to the Archbishop,
and starts this war because of him. The Archbishop is the prophet of god, which correlates with
being a pious person. The English win the Battle of Agincourt in an astounding manner; only losing
less than 30 men while the French lost 10,000 men. He decides the reason behind them winning the
battle God's will. Another example of this is his choice to end people's lives.
Henry V is a man of God, which is again shown on the eve of the Battle of Agincourt when he is
talking with his men. One of his men wishes they had more men fighting, yet Henry wishes the
opposite. If God has chosen them to lose this battle then more men would die. On the
other hand, if God had chosen them to win, extra men wouldn't be needed, so they can use those
extra men to suppress the Scottish rebellion.
Henry doesn't blame always blame the innocents for others crimes either. There is an example in
which Henry V has no quarrel with the innocent. The time arrives when

Hoes Does Shakespeare Portray Henry V? Essays
What Type Of Leader Does Shakespeare Show Henry V To Be?
Select Three Scenes/Experts To Support Your Views.
The qualities I believe a leader should possess are the ability to keep control but be firm and forceful
against the people causing trouble for them and their country. Good manners are also important as
with anyone, regardless of whether a leader or not. They should also believe in equality and be able
to make decisions that will benefit their country, and not be over serious and maintain a good sense
of humour.
In Henry V, Shakespeare paints Henry to be a charismatic leader whom motivates his troops into
battle.
Section 8.
In this section, Henry is preparing to go to battle. He is making the famous St. Crispian's day
speech. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He is saying that he doesn't care who eats at his expense, and he doesn't care if people borrow his
clothes, because he doesn't care about such concrete things.
'But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.'
Here he is going onto say that if it is therefore a sin to be selfish about honour, then he is the one
who offends the most. This shows that Henry is interested in honour and not how many men are on
his side. Henry carries on making his famous St Crispian's day speech in which he is motivating his
soldiers to fight. Using lines like:
'That he which hath no stomach to this fight, Let him depart; his passport shall be made,'
Shakespeare is showing that Henry is determined to have only the best and only the soldiers that are
determined and have courage in his army. Basically, those who have no courage and those who are

William Shakespeare 's Henry V, The Victorious King Henry
Following the battle of Agincourt in Shakespeare's Henry V, the victorious King Henry sits down for
a meeting with Charles, the King of France to discuss the aspects of peace. During the negotiation,
Henry asks for a private meeting with Katherine of Valois, the princess of France. In this,
Shakespeare sets up a dialogue with dual interpretation, both existing simultaneously. The first, is a
scene based on a plea for love. The second, however, suggests that each person is representative of a
larger, international relationship, subject to conquest, deceit, and the achievement of political goals.
This conversation opens with a relatively innocent (and romantic) dialogue, centered around the
difficulty of the language barrier between King Henry and Kate. The king starts the dialogue very
formally, and in perfect iambic pentameter, similar to how he speaks with the monarchs of France
shortly before their exit. He is formal and polite. As Katherine struggles to understand his meaning,
the King's speech devolves and what occurs then is a progression of shifting meanings: "Do you like
me, Kate?... I cannot tell vat is 'like me'... An angel is like you, Kate, and you are like an angel"
(V.II.106–8). King Henry uses the word "like" as an attempt to better understand Kate and her
feelings for him, but because of the disconnect between language and culture, she cannot
comprehend his meaning. His language shifts again to something otherworldly and more imaginary.
As the short exchange

Critical Analysis Of Henry V
Henry V is the last of the eight history plays that Shakespeare wrote about the Hundred Years War,
and is a pivotal moment in the whole series. It is technically the third installment of the series but
was written last. The play takes place right after King Henry V is crowned king of England. Due to
his past of not being the most royal prince, Henry wants to prove his worth, by making claims on
how he should rule France as well. We see Henry's journey through both of Henry IV, as a dissolute
youth, but soon comes into his own, a reformed character, as the greatest warrior king in England.
Throughout the play, we are informed on how the war with France was started, with multiple major
battles, especially The Battle of Agincourt, and what happens after. What is most unique about
Henry V, is that Shakespeare uses an old theatrical tool, a chorus, to help tell the story. This was a
dramatic tool used by Ancient Greek Theatre. It was a group of masked performers who looked like,
and spoke all at the same time. The chorus was there to be the voice for the people and move the
story along. Shakespeare used the chorus in a very different way than the Greek and was something
he never really used before in his plays. The chorus is completely self–aware that they are in the
play and talk about how theatre can't be used to replicate these major battles; that we need to use our
imaginations to tell the story. Some great ways that he utilized the chorus was with the time frame.

Last 100 Years War
I. Introduction
Question, what was the100 Years War and did it really last 100 years?
II
The 100 Years War was an on and off war between France and England from 1337 to 1453 over who
was the rightful heir to the French throne, among other disputes. Small disputes had been going on
for years but the fight really escalated when King Charles IV of France died without a male heir. He
did have a sister Isabella the mother of Edward III. Therefore, Edward believed that because of this,
he should be king of France. The French however, decided that a cousin of Charles, Philip, should
be crowned king.1
III
There were several battles during the 100 Year War but, some of the most significant battles
included: Battle of Crecy led by Edward III, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Encyclopedia Britannica. N.p., 2007. Web. 25 Feb. 2017.
"Castillon: Last Battle Of The Hundred Years' War". Warfarehistorynetwork.com. Web. 5 Mar. 2017.
Cavendish, Richard. "End Of The Hundred Years War | History Today". Historytoday.com. N.p.,
2003. Web. 19 Jan. 2017.
Cohen, Jennie. "7 Surprising Facts About Joan Of Arc – History Lists". HISTORY.com. N.p., 2013.
Web. 24 Feb. 2017.
"End Of Europe's Middle Ages – Hundred Years' War". Faculty.umb.edu. N.p., 1998. Web. 19 Jan.
2017.
Hickman, Kennedy. "End Of An Era: Battle Of Castillon". ThoughtCo. N.p., 2016. Web. 25 Feb.
2017.
"Hundred Years' War – New World Encyclopedia"
Newworldencyclopedia.org. N.p., 2014. Web. 13 Jan. 2017.
"Hundred Years' War (1369–89)". En.wikipedia.org. Web. 18 Jan. 2017.
"List Of 5 Most Significant Battles Of The Hundred Years' War – History Lists". Historylists.org.
N.p., 2017. Web. 18 Jan. 2017.
"Siege Of Orléans – Facts & Summary – HISTORY.Com". HISTORY.com. N.p., 2009. Web. 3 Mar.
2017.
"Siege Of Orleans – World History Online". Heeve.com. Web. 29 Jan. 2017.
The World Book Encyclopedia H Vol 9. 9th ed. Chicago: World Book, 1977. Print.
"Treaty Of Troyes". En.wikipedia.org. N.p., 2016. Web. 18 Jan.

The King's Character in a Cinematic Production of...
Although labeled as a history, the strength of Shakespeare's Henry V lies not in the events that occur
in the play, but in the delicate portrayal of the characters involved. Shakespeare's audience would
have already known the story of Henry V's campaign on France and thus would have had no reason
to watch a play that simply re–enacted past events. Therefore, the appeal of such a play, as well as
the themes and the content, would have been dependent largely on the characters themselves.
It is obvious that the most prominent character is the man whose name the play carries – Henry V.
The entire story centers on his deeds. He serves as the catalyst for the action, the driving force
behind all that takes place. Without him there is no ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The subtleties of such ambiguities make any direction a complex task as one tries to reconcile
conflicting viewpoints. In doing so, there are two widely respected cinematic versions of Henry V
that may be considered: Laurence Olivier's 1944 production and Kenneth Branagh's 1989 version.
Olivier's version is pure patriotism, while Branagh's is grittier and much darker. Olivier's is more
stylized and innocent, giving it a more chivalric and fairy–tale atmosphere. Branagh's, on the other
hand, is more realistic in its portrayal of Henry's invasion of France. However, as Shaw points out,
in each case the king emerges as the hero through cinematic and textual editing decisions. The most
glaring omission common to both is Henry's order to kill the French prisoners taken at the Battle of
Agincourt. This scene is omitted because it is one of those textual ambiguities that may leave an
audience of the original play uncertain as to the quality of man that the Henry is. This would have
been in opposition to both Branagh and Olivier's heroic depictions.
This would not, however, be the route chosen for this production. Henry V, as Norman Rabkin
describes it in Shakespeare and the Problem of Meaning, is "a work whose ultimate power is
precisely the fact that it points in two opposite directions, virtually daring us to choose

Explain Why Did King Henry Win The Battle Of Agincourt
On October 25, 1415 England won a miraculous victory against France in the Battle of Agincourt
that inspired William Shakespeare's King Henry V. The battle of Agincourt was one from a series of
encounters between France and England, which was known as the Hundred Years' War (1337–
1453). The English were trying to regain their lost territory from France over the centuries. King
Henry V's tactics and determination helped win the battle for England, but there were other external
causes that helped win the war. Although King Henry's army was much smaller than the French
army they were much more strategic and more efficient usage of armory and weaponry against
France. In addition, the English started the battle after a rainy night causing for the battleground to
be very muddy. Given the disorganization of the French army and the circumstances of the weather
it cost France the battle. Henry won ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
King Henry V fought the war masterfully. There were many reasons that England won the battle of
Agincourt. The weather and the muddy battlefield caused the French to sink into the ground with
their heavy artillery and armory. The battlefield was very narrow that they couldn't fit all their
soldiers. On the other hand, King Henry V set up his army masterfully. He acknowledged that his
army size was no match of the French's army and therefore he made sure that his army was mainly
of archers. On the day of the battle, he split his army into archers and as they marched closer to the
French. He signaled to his archers to start aiming at the French. Now, historians believe that the
Battle of Agincourt was the first time the longbow showed its effectiveness and was the main cause
of winning the battle. The reason the English won the battle of Agincourt was the circumstances of
the weather, strategic placement of soldiers, organization, weaponry, and

William Shakespeare's Henry V Essay
William Shakespeare's Henry V
Shakespeare's, Henry V, was written in the late sixteenth century, this composition will focus upon
how Shakespeare portrayed Henry V, using factual knowledge and Shakespeare's own interpretation.
I will look at the character, language, structure and history of the play.
Most Shakespearian, historical, plays were based upon Holinshead's Chronicles, these were mostly
true but often Shakespeare adjusted the figures and facts to emphasise parts of his play's, and create
tension and drama, such as when he is attempting to woo Katherine, to make a more interesting play.
Many of Shakespeare's plays were historical, based upon actual happenings. Henry V was one of
these ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
At the beginning of the play the Bishop reminds Ely that Henry was once wild and offensive, "The
breath no sooner left his fathers body but that his wildness, mortified in him seemed to die too: yea,
at that very moment consideration, like an angel came and whipped the offending Adam out of him."
However Ely refers to the good in Henry, "The strawberry groweth underneath the nettle" Ely is
saying that Henry was still growing, surrounded by people who are bad, but is still a good person
underneath that eventually blossomed and became a good person. This is a good example of
Shakespeare's imagery. He needed lots of imagery as the stage and scenery were very sparse and the
actors were nothing more than peasants. Prologues in a number of Elizabethan plays were used to
set the scene, give important information and ask the audience for applause. Acting during these
times was also incredibly poor, so prologues helped compensate for this. Shakespeare's
interpretation of Henry V makes him a very controversial character. On one side he makes Henry
look like a heroic figure, on the other, a ruthless, uncaring king. This shows that Shakespeare tried to
make the play more realistic, by showing the Henry was not just good or bad, but changed his
attitudes to accommodate different situations. Examples of this can be found when before the great
battles in which he manipulates

Comparing The Battle Of Waterloo And The Battle Of...
Drill and discipline, are what make it possible for a victory in battle. If warriors going into battle are
not accurately trained in the practice of drill and discipline it can result in a mere senseless blood
brawl ending with large amounts of casualties and grave losses. In the battle of Agincourt 1415 is
was a battle between King Henry V of England whom wanted to reclaim lands both "won and lost
during the previous century" from France which was under the rule of King Charles VI although the
army outnumbered the English, it was in this battle the French suffered many casualties due to poor
strategy. In the battle of Waterloo 1815 two hundred years later it was a battle between the English
army commended by the Duke of Wellington and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Moreover, though their Calvary was great it was foolish to send them off against archers though the
men wound not be completely harmed by the arrows horses would be put into a panic and their own
men would be trampled by their horses. The French had set themselves up for failure as the chaos in
battle must have put "pressure of numbers and desperation [which evenly] caused the French to spill
from their columns" resulting an unorganized and disastrous attack against the English. In the battle
of Waterloo there are noticeable changes compared to the battle of Agincourt besides the change in
weapons. The first is the size and organization of military units on the field as show in John
Keegan's diagram, cavalry and infantry are spread throughout the field with artillery placed within
infantry units, this is has created a spread out line rather than a tight knit line used in the battle of
Agincourt, allowing more movement and opportunity to inflict more damage on the enemy. The
second noticeable difference is the men used in battle, rather than it being aristocratic vassals of the
king and their vassals, it was men as

Strategies In The Battle Of Agincourt
The Battle of Agincourt is known as one of the greatest because of the circumstances surrounding it.
Arguably, it is among the most distinguished battle wins of the English because nobody expected
them to defeat the French. The reason was that the French army had four times more troops than it
did, and everyone expected it to lose because of this. However, there are a number of factors that
were at play that surpassed the numbers the French had and necessitated the English win. Such
factors had to do with the strategies that were employed by the English, the conditions at the
battlefield, and, most importantly, the leadership in place. It is true that history is written by the
victors. While it is commonly agreed that the French army heavily outnumbered the English, the
exact numbers are open to debate. Undoubtedly, as the years passed and Agincourt became the
perfect never–give–up example, it is quite possible that the numbers advantage the French had
wasn't as large as initially seen. Anne Curry, in her book Agincourt: A New History, maintains that
the actual advantage the French had was roughly 12,000 to 9,000, rather than the 4:1 ratio most
historians argue for (Curry 192). If this is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The gear was especially a burden in the hand–to–hand combat because it prevented the French from
doing anything. They could not match the speed that the less–armored Englishmen had, which thus
prompted their lack of effectiveness. The dressing doubled the energy that the French used in the
battlefield and is actually said to be among the most significant contributors to their loss. The
muddiness, as mentioned above, made the match to the battlefield quite cumbersome to the French.
As such, they were already tired by the time they reached the place for the actual battle, which made
them less

Comparing Saint Joan And King Henry V
Both being a symbol of honor and unity, Saint Joan and King Henry V were very different people.
Living at different times, leaving legacies in opposing countries, and leading their armies into
gruesome battles, they are to be remembered as great. Against all odds Joan changes her fate
through the will of God and convinces her people to let her become their leader despite being a
young peasant girl. Although Henry did die just before Joan became known to the world, his
impactful speeches to his desperate soldiers are comparable to those of Saint Joan with their
intellectual language of persuasion. And yet their words are contrastable in the way they choose to
relate to the ones they led. King Henry was born to lead, as the next in line for the throne he was
raised expecting the tasks that he had to face in adulthood. He knew as he drove his men to the
Battle of Agincourt that they, as the lower class, would have no motivation to die for him. In his
speech during Act III scene I he says, "...dear friends, attack it once more...on, on, you noblest
English, whose blood is fet from fathers of war–proof, fathers that, like so many Alexanders..." (88,
line 17). This quote shows his attempt at making his men feel honorable and noble. He is telling his
people that they are great, and need to fight as their ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Empowering and inducing, their speeches work for their benefits. Joan, despite being a woman, used
the imagery of greatness convince the Dauphin to give her a chance. Henry did the same with his
men, but he did almost the opposite in a way. He had to convince the lower class of England that
they would become great through this battle, whereas Joan had to persuade a person of high class
that they should desire to be of the highest class. The two of them left different legacies in the world,
but they both used the art of language and persuasion to achieve what defied all

Henry The V ( Twelfth )
Henry the V (5th) is one of William Shakespeare's famous plays and is patriotic and exciting play
that is centred around Henry V's responsibilities as King and his personality while on his conquest in
France. The play covers the many problems that occur throughout the journey and Henry's Victories
in the main battles. Henry's life before he was Kings was mostly drinking and fighting even though
he was prince these problems would highly affect his peoples' support. Henry had a couple of
Drinking companions: Bardolph , Nim , Pistol and Falstaff, all who were Henry's best friends. When
Henry was made King he had to take up his important responsibilities as king and that would mean
abandoning his friends and forgetting about his past life and start anew). Henry's life changed
dramatically after he was made king and become one of England's Best Kings, Henry was mature,
calm, intelligent and is highly religious which are the good qualities for a king (Quote): "We are no
tyrant, but a Christian king". Henry shows these qualities when he makes a claim to French land and
send a message to the French King to inform him of his rightful claim, however The Dauphin
decides to reply to Henry by Sending him a box of Tennis balls to mock his age as king, the dauphin
is insulting Henry by saying he's a child and is not fit to be King, Henry Is infuriated by this
however he stays calm (Quote): "We are glad the Dauphin is so pleasant with us; His present and
your pains we thank you for".

Henry V Theme Of War
Known as one of the greatest warrior–kings in all of English history, Henry V has left a hefty
impression. In Shakespeare's play of the same name, the monarch battles literally with France for
the throne and figuratively with accountability and being a just ruler and conqueror. Through the
story, we can see the values Henry holds and how the real implications of war aren't something the
king cannot deal with in a proper manner. The debate between King Henry and the common soldiers
like Williams and Bates illustrate fundamental problems with Henry's rule and asks important
questions about the motives behind war itself. In Act 4, Scene 1 of Shakespeare's Henry V, the king
does incognito in a cloak to interact with the everyman of his army. This ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
He ignores the responsibility of the king for putting all these lives in danger. He denies the fault of
the king for waging the war, and instead deflects the blame onto the will of God. Basically, his
response to the soldiers is that they must be spiritually prepared when they go into battle because the
king is not responsible for their deaths. This is a believe that is horribly ignorant and unfair to the
people who might actually lose their lives. When the king conquers the French port on the mouth of
the Seine, he insults them and states that God is on their side. Eventually, he implies that the French
should feel badly for being responsible for the death of their many citizens at the hands of English.
However, the same doesn't apply for himself when he could be leading his men to their deaths. This
might be because he thinks God's favor lies with England but it is of course foolish and hypocritical
to believe this. Using religion as a shield is a method Henry uses throughout the play, stating the
kingdom of England has God on their side on multiple occasions. This aversion of guilt continually
demonstrates Henry's doubt in himself and fragile

King Henry Rhetorical Analysis
Throughout history there have been many motivational speakers that had the ability to reach out to
all social statuses. A few of these people start with Presidents, Morgan Freeman, Martin L. King Jr.,
and others. The main time period in history we are focusing on dates back to the 1415 and he goes
by the name of King Henry the fourth. He was a great motivational speaker as he was able to
connect with all social groups from the poor to the wealthy. In battle of Agincourt, he gave a very
powerful speech to the soldiers as they were greatly outnumbered with many lines that reached out
to both the poor and the wealthy men on the battlefield. These quotes were not only brawn but also
diverse, so that it appealed to all the different classes of soldiers in the group. Out of Henry's speech,
the first line that fascinates me is "what feats he did that day: then shall our names". This line means
a lot because they are fighting on a day while everyone else in England is off work and enjoying
Saint Crispin's Day. If they are victorious, they will be able to earn lots of honor for what they were
doing on such a day that others were resting. As the years roll around, and Saint Crispin's Day
comes up again, they can show their battle scars and explain where they came from earning them
more fame to their own name throughout the years. King Henry tried to motivate all of his men with
him for the battle through this speech by using lines that attracted all levels and not just one group.

The Battle of Agincourt Essay
The Battle of Agincourt occurred in the middle Ages, on October 25, 1415. This battle is one of the
most memorable and strategically fought battles between England and France. The Battle of
Agincourt involved England and France near Agincourt. The Battle of Agincourt happened during
the "Hundred Years War". The hundred year War began in 1337 and ended in 1453. The hundred
years war actually lasted 116 years. The Hundred Years war included England, France and later
Burgundy. Sometimes England won the battles and sometimes France won (Keegan 79).
The Battle of Agincourt happened because of The Treaty of Bretigny. The Treaty of Bretigny came
about because of Henry V's great–grandfather King Edward III. King Edward III mother was the ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In 1405, King Henry IV got sick and Prince Hall took over most of his duties until his death in 1413.
Prince Hal became King, took on the name of King Henry V. King Henry V fell into his role as king
quickly, and got involved in other battles prior to the Battle of Agincourt that prepared him for that
battle (Middle–Ages.org).
King Henry V wanted to continue the negotiations with France and made some demands that the
French thought was ridiculous. King Henry V was willing to give up some items in the Treaty but
only if France paid 1.6 million crowns; part of the debt owed his ancestors for the capture of John II.
In addition, he wanted the France to give up Aquitaine, Normandy, Touraine, Anjou, Brittany,
Flanders and other territories. King Henry would marry the Princess of France, King Charles VI
daughter and received pay of 600,000 crowns (Keegan 80).
France refused to negotiate; so King Henry asked the Parliament to tax France for the inheritance
that they owed him. France ignored England's demands. On April 14, 1415, King Henry V asked the
Parliament to sanction war against France. The Parliament agreed and the Battle with France will
soon follow. England was preparing for the Battle of Agincourt (Middle–Ages.org).
King Henry V began to inspire his army with speeches that gave them pride, courage and hope.
Shakespeare's St. Crispen's Day Speech puts in perspective how Henry V led his army to fight the
French.
The title of the speech was in honor of two

Henry V Rhetorical Analysis
Emily Albertell
Professor Romack
ENL 4333: Shakespeare
28 September 2017
From Rowdy to Rhetorical: Shakespeare's Henry V
Shakespeare's Henry V presents a man transformed from rowdy teenager to righteous king. With the
death of Henry's father, Henry's "wildness.../Seemed to die too" (1.1.26–27). While Henry has
seemingly transformed into a powerful man awarded praise, his actions at times seem morally
questionable and disingenuous as he continually deflects blame on others and contradicts his notions
for peace. Throughout the play, Henry's speeches persuade and manipulate audiences as he
effectively uses the power of rhetoric to achieve his goals. He has the power to intimidate his
enemies, uplift his soldiers, and mold himself into whoever he needs to be. With the change of
Henry's character came a greater title and the responsibility for an entire nation, causing him to
abandon his outwardly destructive behavior and dissemble. Shakespeare thus contends that there is a
difference between being a good person and a successful leader; national heroism and effective
kingship is not necessarily attained through moral actions, but rather through the art of powerful
rhetoric and the ability to seem moral and virtuous rather than to be moral and virtuous, thereby
mimicking some characteristics of how a successful ruler should appear, as suggested in
Machiavelli's The Prince. While Henry is certainly ruthless at times, his ability to assume the roles
necessary for successful leadership is what makes him a great king.
In Henry V, Henry uses the power of his rhetoric to achieve his goals and to effectively
communicate with nobility, commoners, churchmen, and enemies. Henry claims to have once
assumed the role of a commoner as he threatens the Dauphin, "For that have I laid by my
majesty/And plodded like a man for working days...tell the pleasant Prince this mock of his/Hath
turned his balls to gun–stones" (1.2.277–278, 282–283). Prior to the Battle of Harfleur, Henry
injects confidence into English nobles and farmers and asks them to "dishonor not [their] mothers"
and to prove "that [they] are worth [their] breeding" (3.1.22–28). He encourages hostility in his
troops and urges them to act as tigers: "But when the blast of

Essay On Chivalry In Battle Of Agincourt

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Carmen Sanborn

More from Carmen Sanborn (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Essay On Chivalry In Battle Of Agincourt