Henry V: A Person Who Led

         William Shakespeare’s Henry V is the tale of a king who claims the throne of England and wishes to claim that of France and he is willing to use whatever means necessary to achieve this end, especially war. After gaining powerful allies (and financial backers) in the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Ely, he travels to France to fight the French king in a determined bid for the crown. There are strong undercurrents of corruption and selfishness in the events of this play, stemming mainly from Henry.  He is a fiery young man prone to outbursts of rage, both warranted and unwarranted. His cause for putting so many of his people in danger was most unjust, but he was nothing if not an effective leader. Examples of his leadership are apparent in his two speeches, before the siege of Harfleur and before the battle of Agincourt. He offers a moderately inspirational speech at Harfleur, but his “magnum opus” was not to come about until he, knowing that the morale of his soldiers was spiraling downward, gave his memorable speech on St. Crispin’s day.

The war with France was, according to all medieval standards “unjust.” Henry dragged his troops into a fight for what was not rightfully his—the French crown. Aside from an insult paid him as he was already  contemplating war, Henry had no reason to invade France. In fact, the French were so eager to avoid war that they offered their princess to be Henry’s bride—but he wasn’t having any of it. He would not take a part of what he wanted, he would take all that he wanted. So, he invaded France, laid siege to Harfleur, and then fought the bloody battle of Agincourt. Hot-headed as Henry was, he was not a complete fool, he was capable of spurring his men on to victory—no small feat when they did not consider

their cause to be just. 

After the English are handed  the village of Harfleur, the troops advance to Agincourt. In the time leading up to the battle, Henry descends from his “throne” and mingles incognito with his troops and talks with a couple of men of the coming battle. It is here that he meets a common soldier who expresses his true thoughts of the king and what he wishes the king would do instead of involving countless lives in battle: “ I would he were here alone…and many a poor man’s lives saved." Henry replies and says that he doesn’t mind accompanying the king, “his cause being just and his quarrel honourable,” but the soldier

does not agree. 

After this discouraging exchange, which one could only assume would represent  the opinions of most of the army, Henry makes his memorable speech.  In it, he plays to the need of humans to be remembered. He tells his troops that those who survive will someday “stand tip-toe when this day is named” and that they will be part of “we few, we happy few, we band of brothers." His eloquent speech is riveting and his men are spurred onto victory. It is not an ordinary leader who can so potently inspire those he leads.

Henry’s fight with the French is not just. It is based on selfish greed and appetite for more power. He drags his men into a war that is not honorable and they know it. They stop believing in him and his cause, a problem that no king wants to have. But Henry manages to pull them up with pride and hope of glory, a sign that he is an effective (if not particularly wise) leader. King Henry V is an example of the phenomenon that is seen in the modern day; a person is an stirring orator, one that can practically hypnotize those willing to be entranced—but whose experience and wisdom is not necessarily that of a great head-of-state. Someone who is good at leading is not necessarily a good leader.