There was a massive loss of resources and income after the recline of land in France, leading to the powerful men of England to take arms in aid of their lords this lead to the battle of St Albans The weakness of royal power can be pin pointed to the king. Henry was never a fit king to rule a country such as England; he was not the man his father Henry V would ever be. And this caused a sense of unrest to the people of England. This can be reflected by his counterproductive peace policy with France, that lead to the loss of royal lands that his father had once gained. Henry was supported and manipulated by William de la Pole, Edmund Beaufort and his French wife, Margaret of Anjou.
Because of the uprising led by Brutus’ father, Cassius and Brutus conspire to do the same thing. However, back then was a lot different from the current day that Brutus lives in. When his father killed the man, the nation rejoiced but that was before they grew attached to the guy who was trying to be crowned king. In the present day it is different because a lot of
Claudius on the other hand has decided to take his position on the throne by marrying Gertrude in the short time span since the king’s death which is seen as a dishonourable act by Hamlet. We can see that Hamlet does not just want to kill Claudius for his own satisfaction but also for the sake of honour. He wants to redeem his father as he has been told that Claudius has killed him using a cowardly method, the poison in the ear, and during the time in that era it was seen as a cowardly tactic and therefore dishonourable. Laertes also seeks vengeance on Hamlet for his own father as well going as far as doing a dishonourable act of poisoning his sword in what is supposedly a friendly fencing match. Even today honour still matters a great deal, being honest, doing what you believe is right and
The king was always concerned the idea of madness and often said things like Oh, dear God, don’t let me go mad! In the end it seemed that his decisions beginning with the splitting of the kingdom showed a growing madness within. During that storm he finally cracked. I was extremely grateful although horrified when Lear split the kingdom. It was a great honour to be receiving this gift but I don’t believe it was in the kingdom’s best interest.
Nicholas II was the last tsar of the Romanov dynasty, and his own arrogance and incompetence was a key factor in what led him to that title. His decision to maintain an autocratic government, fight in the Russo-Japanese war, and, ultimately, drag Russia into World War I, proved he was not fit to rule, and his actions led to the destruction of his dynasty. In these ways, Nicholas II, while faced with many problems, may have survived had he not ruled the way he did. Nicholas II was an implacable autocrat, and his fear of change alienated the Russian people from their leader. When Nicholas was young, he witnessed his grandfather, Alexander II, being assassinated by terrorists.
James I was a very superstitious monarch, he hated the idea of witches and paranormal activity. Shakespeare took this into account to make the play more enjoyable for the king. The play also related to James I as it showed a man killing the king; earlier that year King James was a target of an attack on parliament, this is seen as defying god as a king was placed on the throne by god giving it the name “Divine right.” Attacking the king was equivalent to attacking god. Shakespeare shows a change in Macbeth and Lady Macbeth within their relationship throughout acts 1, 2 and 3. In the Elizabethan era, the would be the dominant figure in a traditional relationship, but in Lady Macbeth and Macbeths relationship, lady Macbeth is seen as the dominant figure and would bully, tease and mock Macbeth into committing things he didn’t wanted to do, but she thought was the best way to go.
Hamlet is probably thinking about how he would be king when the king already lives. He probably knows there is going to be a murder. 3. If I were directing the play, I would have made Macbeth act like he is saddened by the fact that he will be king after somebody got murdered and then be horrified realising he would be the killer and then happy because he would be king then morose again because it would be on his conscience. 4.
Therefore he would not listen to other wise diplomats, such as Talleyrand. His ego and ambition got in the way of common sense and this helped to lead to his downfall and he tried the impossible, like invading Russia. Napoleon's method of enforcing his rule and ideas on all the countries he defeated also helped turn countries against him. This is because they did not always like the French way of living and this caused the people to feel bitter towards Napoleon. There are also a couple of larger factors that led to Napoleon's downfall.
Macbeth had reason to be afraid of Macduff, so he sent men to kill Macduff’s wife and children. This showed how evil he had become. When Macbeth became king, he showed how desperate he was by planting spies in the nobles’ houses and putting out lies about Malcolm, who should have legally been on the throne. Even when he heard that his wife had died, Macbeth’s response
Because of this, he decides he must kill Banquo, so that there will be no heir. “Macbeth plots the murder of Banquo, out of jealousy and insecurity.” (Hompi 1) This is obviously an absurd idea, and prior to Macbeth’s murder of King Duncan he never would have considered it as a solution. Shakespeare uses this to show how power corrupts even the best of people. It is obvious that this is still a problem in society today, as people start off with good intentions but slowly get sidetracked. Before long, their objectives have changed completely.