Was Henry II a good king?

Answer 1

It's a matter of opinion. In my opinion he was a very strong king. He changed the law of justice to keep firm controll if the counrtry he ruled. He had done some bad things too though, like being blamed for the murder of Thomas Becket.

Answer 2

Henry V, son of Henry IV of Bolingbroke, had overall a successful reign, but also failed in some aspects of his reign. His famous victory at Agincourt in 1415 boosted his reputation greatly, and Shakespeare's play, named 'Henry V', glorified him in many ways. One of his greatest failures was in fact his heir, who received the throne at the youngest age of any English monarch: 9 months old, making the monarchy very unstable. He is remembered as a truly competent king, but in many aspects, he was no better than any other monarch to come before or after him.

The Southampton Plot of 1415 was a conspiracy against Henry V, aiming to replace him with Edmund Mortimer just before Henry went off to France. The Earl of March informed Henry about the plot, and the three men were arrested and executed. This plot was therefore nothing significant. The Treaty of Troyes was an agreement that Henry V and his heirs would inherit the French throne upon the death of Charles VI. It was signed in Troyes on 21 May 1420 in the aftermath of the Battle of Agincourt.

As previously mentioned, his victory at Agincourt was his greatest military success and probably one of the greatest military successes in early history. Henry was very motivated and made a powerful speech right before the battle and was outnumbered 6:1, with only 5,000 men, up against 30,000 French soldiers. One of the reasons for Henry's victory was the Longbow; it was vital. Each English archer was strong enough to fire at least 10 arrows per minute (50,000 per minute in total), making it very difficult for the French to attack. The tactics, strategies and attributes of the English were better and of a higher standard than the French. The fact that there were so many disadvantages to the English made Henry's victory even greater. Many of the men were still suffering from dysentery, and of course, they were hugely outnumbered. In the end the French lost 10,000 men and the English only lost 400. There were also a few advantages for Henry: the days of rain had turned the field into mud, ruining the French's cavalry charge, and Henry's 5000 archers were superbly trained and effective. This can be seen as one of the more successful points of Henry's reign, and it is definitely understandable that he is well known for this, even though Henry's advantages are often not taken into account.

Typically Shakespeare was and is regarded as the greatest writer of all time, writing a total of 36 plays, amongst which was the play 'Henry V'. This play, although written in 1599 (177 years after the end of Henry's reign) put Henry in a very good light, making the spectators who never actually lived at the same time as Henry regard him as a memorable English monarch. It also made people think that he must have been successful to have a whole play based on him. The play itself focused on the important events of his life, mainly before and after the Battle of Agincourt. Also, Shakespeare wanted to please Elizabeth I, the queen at the time. He did this by deifying Henry V as Elizabeth's father was Henry VIII, making it seem like all Henrys and their descendants are great. It was also important for Shakespeare to make Henry V seem like a good warrior as many people at the time were unsure about Elizabeth's fighting capabilities, as she was a woman.

Henry V's victory at Agincourt helped persuade parliament to fund Henry's Normandy campaign of 1417-19; they granted him the massive sum of £136,000. But 'after the Treaty of Troyes the cost of his permanent army of 5000 men in Normandy' began to cause outrage in England. Henry married Catherine of Valois in 1420. Their only child was Henry, who became Henry VI of England. When Henry V died in 1422, 'his brothers…were left to rule England and Normandy' as regents for the king, who was only 9 months old. When the King of France died a month after Henry V, 'Henry VI became King of England and France - the only king to have this title'. However the heir to the French throne, proclaimed himself king of France and was crowned in 1429 as Charles VII. The growing costs and continuous military defeats eventually caused the loss of the French throne for Henry VI. Perhaps the fact that Henry V had fought so hard and campaigned to gain possession of France, and then it had been lost by Henry VI, made people compare the two and think of Henry V as a better king.

Therefore, Henry V is very overrated for reasons such as Shakespeare's play, which made people who didn't know much about him believe that he was a very good king. The fact that his son was not very successful in his reign (even though many of his failures were due to his father, Henry V) made a contrast between him and Henry V, who was very popular mainly because of his victory at Agincourt. The Battle of Agincourt was a key point for Henry's popularity and success, and his recognition for this was well-deserved. But another problem with Henry V was that many people disliked him because he spent so much time in France campaigning and fighting battles, that they felt he had forgotten about them and he didn't care.

Answer 3

No he was greedy and he only cared for himself. He had several wives and betrayed the all! It was a really unfair time!

Answer 4

he wasnt