The author also puts a lot of emphasis on Napoleon’s mistakes or “blunders.” He had many victories because he never stopped attacking his enemies by using the ignorance of his enemy’s commanders. Napoleon Bonaparte was a hard-working man who never allowed himself or his subordinates to sleep on a campaign. He was very demanding of his officers and a
As well as all this, William had a store of the finest weapons in France. Leadership William was one of the bravest people of his time. When his army was having difficulties during the battle, he bravely led his army back up the hill to make another attack upon the English. Due to William's intelligence, he arranged his army in long rows, archers at the front to try and soften up the English's shield wall, foot-soldiers in the middle, and the cavalry at the back for a big attack.The retreating trick explained in the above paragraph also shows great leadership. Luck Luckily for William, the wind changed direction in his favour on his journey north to England.
Another reason why the First Crusade was successful was because of its efficient leadership. Leaders such as Robert of Flanders, who organised the foraging and gathering of materials at Jerusalem; and Robert of Normandy, who was one of the great failures of the crusade but yet scoured a victorious charge at Ascalon, greatly contributed to the success of the First Crusade. Perhaps the greatest contributor to the success of the First Crusade in terms of leadership was Bohemund. Bohemund was considered the greatest leader of the First Crusade. He was an able general, whose greatest strength was his aggressiveness.
Fourth, their use of the feudal system, as well as the administration which accompanied it enabled them to keep their kingdoms and subjects in check. Whilst all these factors played a role, without the force of their armies behind them, the ruler’s control of the kingdom crumbled, marking out force as the most important factor enabling effective royal government. The use of force by rulers was crucial in establishing and maintaining effective royal government in the middle ages. By the victories of armies the rulers of kingdoms could be changed in a very short space of time, as the Norman conquest of England in 1066 aptly demonstrates. This ‘Right of Conquest’ gave rulers a legitimate claim to a throne because of their military might.
During wars, armies use the opposing sides’ disadvantages to work in their favor. The War for Independence was no different. England held the advantage of having the most dominant Navy in the world. Their naval power was incredibly overwhelming, especially to the colonists whose navy was nonexistent. Not only were the English more capable of winning a sea battle due to their superior Navy, they had the upper hand on land also.
When Henry VIII became king in 1509 he had a number of aims that he wished to achieve during this period of time. He wanted to be seen as a very different king to his father Henry VII. He wanted to get England noticed as a major power in Europe and also enrich his reputation, honour and prestige. But Henry’s first and biggest goal was to get a male heir. Some may say that Henry was largely successful in achieving his aims with his biggest success being the battle of the spurs in 1513.
Wellington’s Leadership Actions Arthur Wellesley, known as the Duke of Wellington, was one of Great Britain’s greatest military leaders. He was a careful and conservative general who inspired discipline and loyalty in his troops and frequently won battles in difficult circumstances. These characteristics led to him being victorious in many battles however, the battle against the Maratha forces at Assaye was his first major victory. Although the Duke of Wellington was known for his defensive strategies, he employed an offensive strategy in the battle against the Maratha forces. In 1803, Arthur Wellesley assumed command of an Army consisting of 15,000 British soldiers and another 9,000 from Hyderabad (Harvey, 2008).
The aims set to be achieved by Henry was to; Capture France, become a ‘Warrior king’ and to be known as one of the leading country’s in the world. I believe it was a failure to some extent because even though the major aim of capturing France was not met, Henry still made a name not only for himself
Alexander The Great, fought in wars for his power rights and his empire, Macedonia. He fought for many ages showing how powerful and brave he was when he never gave up and fought on the wars that he did. Arrian, another historian who also knew Alexander says, “Whilst In war with Alexander, I saw how he made endless pushes to the enemy to win and to not give up. When he later died, I then took place of being captain from the great Alexander.” This is showing Arrians view on the wars that he and alexander The Great fought in. Alexander was very determined and brave enough to fight in those wars that he had won as
This was firstly by very strict military discipline. Strictness and harsh punishments provided a deterrent to deserters and those who gave up and it created a sense of unity of fighting for one cause among the troops. This view is supported by Trotsky’s orders to the Red Army (Source D) in which he says that “Every scoundrel who incites anyone to retreat, to desert, or not to fulfil a military order, will be shot”. These harsh disciplinary techniques were used, in Trotsky’s knowledge, to boost soldiers’ morale and their will of fighting as he knew that if he lost this war, the Revolution would break up and communism would end in Russia for good. Also Trotsky selected the army carefully.