This website uses cookies to ensure you have the best experience. Learn more

The Leadership Of Henry V Was Responsible For English Success In France 1415 1420, How Far Do You Agree?

825 words - 4 pages

The leadership of Henry v was responsible for English success in France 1415-1420, How far do you agree?
The leadership of Henry V was partially responsible for the English success in France during 1415-1420, however it can be argued that luck is a far greater factor to the English’s success, as luck was essential in several battles such as the mud in Agincourt and the fact that the Burgundian and Armagnac division was tearing France apart did also contribute which can be attributed to luck.
Henry V’s leadership skills were obviously a very key factor to the English success in France however, the fact that luck was heavily involved for Henry to exploit. One of the first factors of Henry’s ...view middle of the document...

His decision in the conquest of Normandy to march onto Calais was a very bold decision, Henry however saw it differently, to him this was a win-win situation he was confident that if the French chose to fight him, his army would win, whereas if France chose to do nothing, they would be greatly humiliated. However had the French divisions not been rife then the English may not have been so successful in the battles and sieges, as France couldn’t unite under one banner with so many inner divisions. The fact that the |Dauphin never arrived at the battle of Agincourt is an example of luck on Henry’s part as under one leader France may have been able to take advantage of the vast numerical advantage and not done their own thing throughout such as the failed cavalry charge.
Another factor that can be attributed to English success in France is the English’s alliance with the Burgundians, this gave the English an advantage as the Burgundians were accustomed to all the French terrain the English had encountered, they also had a mutual hatred of the Armagnac’s which in battles proved very fruitful for the English. Also the Burgundian clergy drew up the treaty of Troyes, however this did guarantee the English total success, but meant that England would rule two places...

Other Papers Like The Leadership of Henry V Was Responsible for English Success in France 1415-1420, How Far Do You Agree?

How Far Do You Agree That the Limited Appeal of Mazzini's Ideas Was the Main Reason for the Slow Progress of National Unity in the Years 1815-48?

1530 words - 7 pages goals from other states, in slowing the progress of unification were much more important than the lack of support for Mazzini. Mazzini's one overriding aim was to create 'the brotherhood of the people', an independent state based on democracy with a guarantee of individual rights. He wanted a revolution from below, with the people seizing power and rising up against their oppressors. Unfortunately, this meant that Mazzini completely alienated

How Far Do You Agree That the Economy of Tsarist Russia Was Transformed in the Years Up to 1914?

1089 words - 5 pages How far do you agree that the economy of Tsarist Russia was transformed in the years up to 1914? During Alexander III reign, the Country of Russia and its economy was in a very backward state. We saw the Country suffer with extremely low industrialisation, as many of their workforce focused on agriculture. They struggled to sell enough grain at export, in order to fund large scale industrialisation as the serfs were forced by lack of freedom to

‘The Weimar Government completely Recovered in the period of 1924-1928’. How far do you agree?

572 words - 3 pages ‘The Weimar Government completely Recovered in the period of 1924-1928’. How far do you agree? After thorough research in this topic I am swayed more into agreeing that the Weimar Government did recover. This is because of multiple strong reasons that indicate they recovered. The Weimar was able to stabilise the economy using the Stressman’s Rentmark and taking loans from the USA. With a stable economy this shows that the Weimar

War Was the Most Significant Factor in Causing Change in Russia from 1856-1964. How Far Do You Agree?

2246 words - 9 pages the Tsar. The final factor which was significant in causing change in Russia during this period was foreign influence, as the ideology and power of the west would have had an impact on how Russia was managed to compete with them. The production of the Hydrogen Bomb (1953) and the Space Race (1961) show that Russia were willing to compete with the USA and others. However, the desire for peace, the end of war, conflict and associated famine in a

Opposition Was the Main Problem Facing Alexander3. How Far Do You Agree with the Statement?

1343 words - 6 pages remarkable by his conservative views, being part of Slavophiles movement. It was easy for him to influence Alexanders views far before he became Tsar and even after his influence kept pursuing the young Tsar. Because of Pobedonoscevs doctrines Alexander believed in order for Russia to modernise it needs to follow old traditions, so he will be safe from repeating his fathers fate. Pobedonoscev taught Alexander that basis of political stability

How far do you agree with the view that America was a land of opportunity during the 1920s?"

1732 words - 7 pages "How far do you agree with the view that America was a land of opportunity during the 1920s?" Explain your answer using sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and your own knowledge. (40 marks) The 1920s are widely known as the 'Boom Era', or the 'Roaring Twenties' and a "decade of lively economic growth" (Source 3), due to the sheer economic success and advancement, and the emergence of the motor car, Hollywood, consumerism and

How Far Do You Agree That the Impact of the Second World War Was the Main Reason Why the Position of African Americans Improved in the Years 1945

1461 words - 6 pages How far do you agree that the impact of the Second World War was the main reason why the position of African Americans improved in the years 1945–55? The impact of the Second World War was, without a doubt, crucial in improving the lives of black Americans over the years 1945-55, as it led to federal support of the cause. However, it wasn’t as important as the use of direct action which, for the first time, was able to convert de jure into de

.How Far Do You Agree with the View That the Development of the Cold War in the Period 1945-50 Was the Result of Stalin’s Foreign Policy?

3210 words - 13 pages .How far do you agree with the view that the development of the Cold War in the period 1945-50 was the result of Stalin’s foreign policy? Development of the Cold War, in the five years between 1945 and 1950, could be argued as taking place for a number of reasons and due to various individuals. It could be easy to simply site Stalin as the main reason responsible for it’s outbreak and growth, clear through his approach on communist expansion

How Far Do You Agree with the View That the Development of the Cold War in the Period 1945-50 Was the Result of Stalin’s Foreign Policy?

3182 words - 13 pages simple to solve due to Stalin’s insistence on the fact that it should be put in Soviet hands as they were responsible for releasing it from Nazi occupation. The West were reluctant to concede on this issue, not wanting another full blown Communist convert, and as a result it was agreed that Stalin would be given a majority of Poland but not the entire country, and only on the condition he upheld free elections there and in Eastern Europe. Agreements

“Singapore’s Separation from the Federation Was Inevitable.” How Far Do You Agree with This Statement? Discuss

522 words - 3 pages Question) “Singapore’s separation from the federation was inevitable.” How far do you agree with this statement? Discuss. I agree with this statement to a large extent as during the two years when Singapore was part of Malaysia as there was an irreconcilable political difference between PAP and UMNO. Malaysia also thought of Singapore as an economical rival. The only thing that kept the two parties together

How Far Do You Agree That a Study of Russia in the Period from 1855 to 1956 Suggests That Change Was Always Imposed from Above?

1048 words - 5 pages How far do you agree that a study of Russia in the period from 1855 to 1956 suggests that change was always imposed from above? Throughout the period 1855-1956, it’s clear that with both the Tsars and the Bolsheviks, change was, often implemented from both the leaders and the people, However, under both Tsars and the Bolsheviks, they were ruthlessly prevented from striking, having trade unions or really having any control over the future

Related Essays

How Far Do You Agree That Trotsky’s Leadership Of The Red Army Was Responsible For The Survival Of The Bolshevik Government? (30 Marks)

1497 words - 6 pages How far do you agree that Trotsky’s leadership of the Red Army was responsible for the survival of the Bolshevik government? (30 marks) There were many factors that contributed to the survival of the Bolshevik Government, ranging from Trotsky’s leadership of the Red Army to the failings of the Bolsheviks’ rivals for power. This essay shows that the main reason for the Bolsheviks’ continued survival through the period was not Trotsky’s great

‘German Aggression Was Responsible For The Outbreak Of A General European War In August 1914.’ How Far Do You Agree With This Judgement?

1246 words - 5 pages that Germany may have provoked Austria-Hungary into “premature war”, they were not the only nation causing general war. The fact that France forced Russia into “fatal mobilisation” suggests that most people ignored other nation’s flaws and their contributions to war, scapegoating Germany in the process. Furthermore, this also argues how Germany’s aggressive Schlieffen Plan was not fully responsible for general war. Furthermore, the 1905-06

How Far Do You Agree That Lenin’s Leadership Was The Main Reason For Why The Bolsheviks Were Able To Seize Power In 1917

1350 words - 6 pages How far do you agree that Lenin’s leadership was the main reason for why the Bolsheviks were able to seize power in 1917. Lenin was a very significant figure during the Russian revolution, under his strong leadership and the advice of some of his advisors, Lenin helped the Bolsheviks come to power. However I would not agree that his leadership was the main reason to why the Bolsheviks were able to seize power as factors such as the weakness

How Far Do You Agree That The Most Important Reason For Wolsey’s Fall From Power Was His Failure To Gain A Divorce For Henry Viii?

957 words - 4 pages The most important reason for Wolsey’s fall from power was his failure to gain a divorce for Henry VIII, how far do you agree? Wolsey’s dismissal from Henry’s court came in September 1529, though Wolsey had a plethora of failures before, his fall his failure to get a divorce for Henry VIII proved to be the most significant. This is because Wolsey’s strength of position depended on whether he got Henry what he wanted and the divorce was the