Froussart essays

Froussart essays The kingship was a position which bestowed great power and authority. During its peak, it was a status that commanded the utmost of respect, and entailed many characteristics that the average man did not have. Froissart wrote about many of the attributes of a king while he prepared for battle, fought in battle, and behaved afterwards. The communication of a king was also greatly outlined in respect to interaction with ambassadors, with their advisors and with civilians. While a kings actions during wartime and his communication with his empire were important, they were not the only traits which a king must possess to be considered successful. Froissart, having worked as a secretary for King John of France , knew a great deal about pinpointing exactly what these other qualities were. He also considered what it was that made a king inferior and inefficient. A king must have certain qualities if his subjects were to love and respect him. He must have a strong will to complete a task und ertaken, whatever the obstacles. He must be able to foresee the results of every step he took. The capacity to plan his work was one of the most essential qualities of a good leader. The king should also know how to deal with his enemies and how to earn the friendship of other kings. Some other attributes include the fact that a king must be charismatic and smart. Daring, bold and a good military strategist are just a few more of the important characteristics a king must possess. Froissart also believed that a king should be brave and decisive. Uncertainty and pettiness were some features he strongly disapproved of. All of these factors contributed to his opinion of each of the kings he wrote about, especially when he compared Edward the III to Philip the VI. Froissarts bias for certain kings is extremely evident in his writings. His differences of opinion between kings can most likely be attributed to the different governing characteristics...