Henry V

The English Monarchs

by Christopher Allmand

Thanks to Shakespeare, Henry V is one of England's best-known monarchs. Or is he? The image of the young king leading his army against the French and his stunning victory at Agincourt are part of English historical tradition. Yet to understand Henry V we need to look at far more than his military prowess.

While Henry was indeed a soldier of exceptional skills, his historical reputation as a king deserves to be set against a broader background of achievement, for he was a leader and a diplomat, an administrator, a keeper of the peace and protector of the Church, a man who worked with and for his people.

During the previous half century or so, England had been ruled by an old king in his dotage (Edward III), by a king with unusually autocratic views and tendencies (Richard II) and by Henry V's own father (Henry IV), a man never strong enough either morally, politically or physically to give a firm lead to his country. When Henry V came to the throne in 1413, England lived in hope of better days.

This new study, the first full scholarly biography of Henry V, based on the primary sources of both English and French archives and taking into account a great deal of recent scholarship, shows his reign in the broad European context of his day. It concludes that, through his personality and 'professional' approach, Henry not only united the country in war but also provided England with a sense of pride and the kind of domestic rule it was so in need of at the time. Together, those factors form the true basis of the high regard in which he is rightly held.

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, Medieval History, Medieval, Historical, British Literature

480 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1992

About the author

Christopher Thomas Allmand was an English medieval historian, with a special focus on the Late Middle Ages in England and France, and the Hundred Years' War. He was Professor of Medieval History at the University of Liverpool until his retirement in 1998, and then Honorary Senior Fellow at the university.

Reviews

[Jeffrey Keeten · Rating 4 out of 5]

”Although king, Henry V did not rule alone. It is easy to see him as a man closely involved in the affairs of ruling his kingdom, taking decisions, implementing them, in general stamping his personality upon events. Such an observation is generally well founded: Henry was very much a king who ruled.”


Henry V

Kenneth Branagh is the face of Henry V for me. As I was reading this book and picturing Henry striding through his life, I was seeing Branagh. The 1989 movie was the first Shakespearean play I saw on the Big Screen in a movie theater. Seeing the play so vividly depicted sparked an interest in Shakespeare’s plays that has never waned for me. When others think of Henry V, they might think of Sir Laurence Olivier, who played Henry in the 1944 version. Hollywood doesn’t make movies of Henry’s life; they make movies of William Shakespeare’s play.

In comparison to most kings, Henry was a rock star. He first showed his mettle fighting against the Welsh during the Owain Glyndŵr revolt, which gave him the confidence to stand up to his father, who had been suffering from ill health for some time. In 1413, his father died, and Henry was chomping at the bit to be in charge.

He had plans.

French plans.

He was inspiring to his men. He was a natural tactician. He was highly organized, which was a trait that served him well campaigning in France where he was outnumbered, outgunned, and fighting men who were defending and preserving their country. Henry quickly rolled up some victories that gave him confidence to continue.

Henry’s goal: add the throne of France to that of England.

He was not the first English king to claim the throne of France, but he was the first one who did not take the settlement of lands in exchange for renouncing his claim. He believed that he was going to be king of France, and maybe if he had lived longer, he could very well have pulled it off.


Kenneth Branagh giving the St. Crispin’s Day speech in the 1989 movie.

His big moment came at the Battle of Agincourt. I’m sure he gave a great rousing speech for his men, but it is doubtful that he had one as rousing or as memorable as the one Shakespeare writes for him in the play.

Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be rememberèd-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

Depending on which historian you believe, Henry was outnumbered either 4:3 or 6:1 or somewhere in between, but all historians agree that he was indeed outnumbered. His men were tired and had been dreaming for weeks of going home. They certainly were not in the best shape to fight a battle against fresh French troops.

The English had a few things on their side.

A young, healthy, inspiring King. In contrast, the French King Charles VI was not even at the battle due to a psychotic illness that frequently debilitated his mental proficiency.
80% of their army were the fabled English Longbow archers.
Their king situated them so that the French had to cross an open, freshly plowed field that had been rained on heavily the night before. The French sunk to their knees in the muck.

It was frankly a slaughter. Approximately 9 Frenchmen died for every Englishman killed. Thousands were captured, and this led to the one black mark that resides on the otherwise sterling record of Henry V.

He ordered the prisoners executed.

It was shockingly unchivalrous. He was preparing for a French counter attack, and his fear was that, if the tide of the battle turned against him, those French prisoners would join their compadres. Henry could only spare a handful of men to contain the prisoners, and they would be easily overwhelmed by the sheer number of prisoners. The other problem, of course, was how to go about executing thousands of prisoners in a short period of time. Fortunately, only a few prisoners were executed before Henry reversed his command. He must have felt confident that victory was his.

Still it showed a ruthlessness previously unrevealed. Henry’s ambition knew no limits. He had high ideals for himself as well, not only in war, but also in the management of his kingdom. He wanted to be a good steward in addition to being a conquering hero. Agincourt fulfilled the expectations that he had for himself and confirmed for his subjects that their king was worthy of shedding blood for, besides providing him with the funds he needed to continue his quest for the French throne.


Henry V effigy at Westminster.

Henry V died on page 182 with 261 pages remaining in the biography. Unless you are George R. R. Martin, this is a bit of a pickle to find yourself in, losing your main character before you are even half way through the book, but Christopher Allmand made the decision to separate out major topics, like the Army and Navy, Papal Relations, Family Circle, Parliament, and Finances, to name a few. Most biographers would have chosen to weave those elements into the plot surrounding the life of the main subject.

The reader could choose to abandon the book after 182 pages, but they would be foregoing a plethora of information about the structure of medieval England in the early 1400s. For me, it was a lot of bonus material that added to my understanding of a time period I’m woefully ignorant about.

I still struggle to separate the King Henry V in real life from the King Henry V who Shakespeare created. Certainly, Shakespeare captured the essence of the man. The grand promise of a king who, if he had lived longer than 36 years, quite possibly could have permanently changed the configurations of Europe. As it was, dying so young, he left his nation vulnerable, with only a baby in swaddling clothes to take his place. If he had lived, the Wars of the Roses, in which his son became such a pawn in the struggle for power, may never have happened. With his success on the battlefield in France, he did achieve a wife, Catherine of Valois, daughter of the French king, and a treaty naming him heir to King Charles VI of France. Henry inspired loyalty because he had very tangible goals and a natural ability to make everyone believe that it was impossible for him to lose.

If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit http://www.jeffreykeeten.com
I also have a Facebook blogger page at:https://www.facebook.com/JeffreyKeeten

[Jerome Otte · Rating 4 out of 5]

An informative and mostly well-written biography.

The first half of the book is a narrative of Henry’s reign, while the last half is an analysis of its major issues. The writing is sharp and Allmand usually succeeds in bringing Henry to life. Allmand argues that Henry’s major achievements occurred at home in England, rather than in France. Allmand’s coverage of Henry is fairly positive.

Some readers might be drawn to a biography of Henry because of his military campaigns in France. They might be disappointed, as Allmand’s rendition of the war is flat, feels incomplete, and doesn’t really capture Henry’s charisma. The narrative can get a little tedious and repetitive toward the end. Allmand has done some solid research in the era’s documentary record, and the facts from these documents are presented in a similarly boring way. Also, Allmand seems to stress that Henry’s case for war against France had some justice, but it still comes off as a weak rationalization. There could have been some more coverage of John of Gaunt. A few more maps would have helped.

A clear, readable and thorough work, though many readers will likely find it boring.

[Lisa · Rating 3 out of 5]

Christopher Allmand’s biography of Henry V of England is, from what I’ve read, considered the definitive biography of the man who has often been considered one of the greatest kings to ever rule England and whose memory has been immortalised by the enduring legend of the Battle of Agincourt and by Shakespeare.

Yet it was a biography that disappointed me. I believe a large part of my disappointment is down to Allmand’s work being, more or a less, a strict work of political biography, rather than a more rounded portrait of Henry V. This is obvious by the structure of the book. The first two parts detail Henry’s life and reign, while the third, final and largest part is dedicated to analysing and exploring different aspects of Henry’s own policies towards subjects such as parliament, finance and papal reform. This means Henry dies before the halfway point of his own biography.

There is no denying Allmand has created an excellent resource on Henry’s reign and policies, and it is similarly obvious that Allmand is an authority on Henry V. For the most part, I found the writing clear and accessible and I was rarely ‘bogged down’ by overly complex or jargonistic language. However, I will note that I was bewildered by the stylistic choice not capitalise titles (e.g. ‘bishop Beaufort’, ‘queen Katherine’, ‘king Henry’ etc.). Additionally, as someone who is not a medieval historian (or any historian at all beyond an armchair one), the fact that Allmand commonly provides quotes in Latin, French or Middle English without translation meant that I was frequently having to try and guess what each quote meant.

It is also worth noting that, first published in 1992 and revised once in 1997, Allmand’s biography does show its age. For instance, the ‘fact’ that in 1382 Henry’s mother, the twelve-year-old Mary de Bohun, gave birth to her and Henry Bolingbroke’s short-lived first son is retold, while more recent research has shown that the “evidence” of this son actually refers to Mary’s sister, Eleanor, giving birth to her own son, Humphrey of Gloucester, who died in 1399.

What disappointed me most, though, is how brisk Allmand is in his recount of Henry V’s life and reign. For instance, as the then-Prince of Wales, Henry was badly injured at the Battle of Shrewsbury in 1403, taking an arrow to the face. Allmand deals with this incident in one sentence and a footnote, whereas other biographers have put greater stress on its impact on Henry’s life (for example, Malcolm Vale, in Henry V: The Conscience of a King, suggests it may have left Henry with neurological damage, while Christopher Given-Wilson spends a couple of pages on it in his biography of Henry IV, also part of the Yale Monarch series of political biographies). There are also numerous times where Allmand mentioned an event in passing and I wanted to know more but there was no “more”.

In the end, I’m not really sure how to rate this. As an exploration of Henry V’s policies, it is a fantastic resource. But those wanting to understand more of Henry’s personality would be best supplementing their reading.

[Mercedes Rochelle · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s amazing how much has been written about a king with such a short reign! And yet I still find Henry V to be a bit inscrutable. All historians agree that he was a brilliant administrator and an effective leader. But underneath, his methods could be questionable and his motives controversial at times. Of course, what ruler did not have questionable methods? Author Christopher Allmand has given us a helpful overview of Henry and his reign. The first part of the book is a straight biography and the second half an overview of the period: Lollardy, Parliament, Papal relations, the army and navy and such. And like all volumes of this size, we don’t get too much detail. For instance, when he was short of funds in 1419, he trumped up a charge of witchcraft against Queen Joanna so he could get his hands on her wealth; she was (lightly) imprisoned for four years and never charged. (I qualify this as a questionable method!) Anyway, this event only rated a footnote. I understand that when covering so much, you can only go so far into depth and the historian has to pick and choose what is most important. Hence, a book like this is a starting point for more serious research on an academic level if needed. On the other hand, I found Allmand’s observations very helpful concerning many of the more puzzling episodes. For instance, in 1412 when Henry IV made an alliance with the French Armagnacs only a few months after Prince Henry sent a small army to fight for the Duke of Burgundy (Armagnac’s enemy), “The fact was that Henry, having dismissed his son for pursuing his own policy with Burgundy, could not go down the same path and demonstrate his independence at one and the same time.” Voila! That was the best explanation I’ve ever run across. The book is full of these well thought-out observations which made it very valuable to me, despite the fact that I had to read some of his passages a couple of times to get the full meaning. On a second reading I absorbed much more than the first reading. Overall, this is definitely a “go-to” resource.

[Sifa Poulton · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5 stars

This book is a hard one to talk about as I read it in two different ways. At first I was reading it for research purposes and taking copious notes, and then I realised I didn't need to do so, and switched to just reading it without the constant stopping and starting of notetaking. This is not a book for pleasure, and had gone into with the goal of learning rather than entertainment - which makes the star rating system feel a bit... out of place.

What this book does do is give a comprehensive look at the life of Henry V, going well beyond the wars with France for which he's most famous for. In fact, that only occupies about a third of the book. The first sixth covers his pre-ascension life, and the final half gives a broad view at his kingship.

I really appreciated the scope, as too often everything is obsessed over the war with France. This is a time when England was involved in the religious politics gripping Europe and the economic life of the country was recovering - as well as England moving forwards in the definition of itself (herself?) as a 'nation' on the European stage (and this book does go into the difference between the subtle, complicated, and important distinction of 'nation' and 'kingdom' in medieval Europe).

The major problem this book faces is in the history - which is an obstacle the author can do little about. Alas, while Henry V's reign has an obvious narrative thread of the wars in France to occupy a sizeable chunk of the book, it's not a compelling one (for me, at least). It's just a series of battles and marches - a war story, without a narrative heart. Unlike the previous biography I read (Henry IV), Henry V's life doesn't involve a deep personal struggle between figures, which made the war very uncompelling. He's not even fighting with Thomas, which at least gave the end of his years as Prince a bit of a narrative kick.

I do realise that this is a bit unfair of me to be bored by the lack of a "narrative heart", when it's something Christopher Allamand has no control over. This is the history he has to write about. However, I am primarily a reader of fiction, so am used to an emotional core at the heart of a story. even though this is non-fiction, my love and avid consumption of fiction is going to have an enormous impact on my reading.

I actually found that the latter half of the biography was more interesting, when it was looking holistically at aspects of Henry's reign, such as his relationship to parliament, as it wasn't following the war. Reading those sections without taking notes made them far more interesting than I had found the similar sections found in the HENRY IV biography, as I could get a good general impression of the policies. It's actually making me interested in re-reading HENRY IV, now that all the notes have been taken, to see what impression I get without having to stop and start (hahaha, it's a massive book and my TBR is ridiculous, so this probably shouldn't be happening any time soon!)

The prose, though, is pretty bog-standard - rather dry and academic at times, which didn't help make it an engrossing read. In all, it's a book to read if you are interested in Henry V's life, but don't go into it expecting to be entertained and enthralled - that's not its purpose.

[Nick Artrip · Rating 3 out of 5]

Following my reading of Ian Mortimer’s The Fears of Henry IV I was excited to dive into Christopher Allmand’s Henry V from the English Monarchs series. I always look forward to reading the introduction to any of these historical biographies so I can understand how the author views the subject and how they’ll be positioning their role in history. Allmand focuses primarily on war against France and Henry V’s administrative talents/interests, which isn’t necessarily surprising, but he did make a statement that I found interesting. When discussing the previous forty years of history he reduces Edward III to his dotage and characterizes Richard II as an autocrat which is pretty standard, but his very decided condemnation of Henry IV as “a man never strong enough morally, politically, or physically to give a firm lead to his countrymen” struck me. While most of this assessment rings true, I think this sweeping judgment ignores some of the nuance of Henry IV’s position that makes him a bit more difficult to lump in with his predecessors (but perhaps sets up for a discontented Prince Hal.)

Allmand does an admirable job of offering a balanced account of Henry V’s life. He’s rather straightforward with the facts and doesn’t offer some of the fun little embellishments or ye olde gossip that can sometimes liven these works up, but I was still held captive by his work (sometimes in a fun way, sometimes not.) The text does a wonderful job of providing context for his ascension to the throne. At one point Allmand comments on Henry V’s transition from a “seemingly irresponsible youth into a serious and highly responsible ruler” which is the standard cultural depiction of the monarch, but isn’t something you get a sense of from the preceding hundred pages of text. I wish Allmand had committed a bit more space to exploring some of the women in the life of Henry V (mother, wife) but this is where it’s nice to sort of compile a list of other sources to investigate. On a high note, the book does a great job discussing the Southampton Plot in an interesting way.

I knew war would play a great role in this biography, but I wish there were some way that Allmand had been able to enliven this part of his text. In my previous Mortimer reading, I remember the Battles of Shrewsbury being written about in a way that was both entertaining and informative. There is plenty of room for a bit of flavor with a figure like Henry V, so I was surprised to find this rather dry, even for this particular series. This was an enjoyable read, even if a bit flat at times, and I look forward to moving on to Lauren Johnson’s biography of Henry VI, but I think I might have to take a quick perusal (if not full read) of my copy of Vale’s Henry V: The Conscience of a King which I originally discarded as my Henry V read in favor of this volume.

[Matthew Welker · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good biography on Henry V. Not long, easy to read, and I like the structure. The book covers Henry’s life across 2 parts and then goes into the finer details of his reign in part 3 so essentially his government, piety, and so on. I personally really digged this structure as it kept the book very organized.

All in all solid book and holds up.

[Terry · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book made a very interesting subject boring and hard to finish.

[Becky · Rating 3 out of 5]

Rating this book is a little hard, because I'm not sure if I just liked the subject or if it was well written book (or both). I didn't have a problem reading it, though it was a fairly dense book. It took me a while to read it. That said, I was looking to read a biography of Henry V and this didn't disappoint. I was very much into it when I realized that Henry V was probably one of the better kings that England has had and it was unfortunate (not just for him, but for England) that he died before he could complete his goals. His reign, preceded by not only his father's lackluster performance, but Richard II's debacle as king, he had much to prove and to fix. He succeeded where his father had failed in inspiring trust among his nobles and his subjects, gaining lands lost in France and restoring England to prominence. It's kind of sad that Henry V died so young, because most of the progress he made in his short 9 1/2 years were lost in his son's reign.

[Leslie · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very old-fashioned top-down work of history, focussed on politics, economics, and military matters. the first (less-than) half provides a basic chronology of Henry V's life; the second (more-than) half is a series of thematic chapters giving overviews of such matters as Henry's relationship with Parliament, the army and navy in his lifetime, church history and policies to deal with heresy, and matters of finance and debt. Nowhere does Allmand give us any sense of what it was to be alive during this period, of material history, of lived experience. Women are absent except as king-producing wombs. I admit that my eyes started to glaze over a bit at discussions of such matters as the organisation of the financial apparatus of the royal household and Henry's skill in debt management, but this is a very good, competent history of its type.

[Guera25 · Rating 2 out of 5]

Reading this book was like chewing sand. Dull and often excruciating, the convoluted grammar gave me a tension headache; not every sentence needs to be forty-seven clauses long and choked with parenthetical expressions, not even in an academic treatise. Clarity of idea is better than pretentious syntactic flourish any day.

This book is not a biography, but rather a study of Henry's economic, religious, and political policies through which a portrait of Henry as ruler emerges. If you are interested in Henry the fully-realized figure, look elsewhere.

[Nicole · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first half of this book (the actual biography of Henry V) was good and very thoroughly researched. The second half (analysis of various aspects of Henry's reign) was not so good and too heavy on minutiae. Entire chapters dedicated to analysis of taxation, finance, religious schism, etc was just unnecessary and suffered from too much detail. Overall I would recommend it as a good biography for anyone interested in knowing the real man behind the Shakespearean play.

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent. Well researched. Looks at details of his skills as a king. Very interesting.

[Mary · Rating 5 out of 5]

I listened to an audio version from my library via Overdrive: Naxos Audio Books, Cambridge University Press, full cast.

[Mary · Rating 5 out of 5]

Love the Histories. I listed to an audio version from my library via Overdrive: Naxos Audio Books, Cambridge University Press, full cast.

[Ginger Heskett]

I registered a book at BookCrossing.com!
http://www.BookCrossing.com/journal/14341701

[Tanzanite]

http://shelfandstuff.blogspot.com/201...