for details for verification. "Source" means a location at which other users can find a copy of this work. Ideally this will be a scanned copy of the original that can be uploaded to and . If not, it is preferably a URL; if one is not available, please explain on the talk page.
Delivered on 9/19 August 1588 to the land forces assembled at Tilbury in Essex in preparation to repel a possible invasion by the Spanish Armada .
My loving people,
We have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourselves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear, I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good-will of my subjects; and therefore I am come amongst you, as you see, at this time, not for my recreation and disport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live and die amongst you all; to lay down for my God, and for my kingdom, and my people, my honour and my blood, even in the dust.
I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realm; to which rather than any dishonour shall grow by me, I myself will take up arms, I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field.
I know already, for your forwardness you have deserved rewards and crowns; and We do assure you in the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. In the mean time, my lieutenant general shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble or worthy subject; not doubting but by your obedience to my general, by your concord in the camp, and your valour in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over those enemies of my God, of my kingdom, and of my people.
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.
Public domain Public domain false false
Finally, Elizabeth appeals to her troops’ sense of reason, using logos to make a logical case for why they should fight. She points out the strength of the English navy, and how badly outnumbered the Spanish Armada is. She also talks about how much is at stake in this battle, and how important it is for England to defeat the Spanish.
The queen’s speech energized the troops and assured her faith in them as well as her leadership skills through repetition, contrast, persuasion, amplification, and language use. Elizabeth begins by referring to herself in the fight by using “we,” establishing a shared ground with the troops.
She also employs the technique of repetition later in the paragraph by saying “I know” three times to show the depth of her conviction in what she is saying. This is significant as it would have been easy for her to give up and let someone else lead in her stead, but her commitment to her people is evident in her words. Elizabeth also uses juxtaposition when she compares herself to her sister Mary, who was not a good role model for how a queen should behave.
To export a reference to this essay please select a referencing style below:
By queen elizabeth i.
These notes were contributed by members of the GradeSaver community. We are thankful for their contributions and encourage you to make your own.
Written by Jody Perry, Mridupaban Buragohain
Queen Elizabeth I gave this speech to her troops in August 1588, as they were gathered at Tilbury, Essex, one of the counties in the East Anglia region of England and one of the mainstays in the Tudor kingdom and very close to London. Her troops were assembled prior to defending the southern coast against the expected invasion from Spain. Although the Spanish Armada had not been successful in invading on first attempts, it was feared further invasion might occur from Dunkirk, so troops kept at the ready. On the day of making this speech the Queen moved among her troops to demonstrate her allegiance to them before asking for their allegiance in return. Accompanied by loyal Earls she displayed her own armor, presenting herself as a warrior and a very powerful leader who possessed determination and valor.
Historians believe that her appearance was actually even more important than her speech as her battle dress clearly showed her ready for a battle giving congruency to her words. Elizabeth did inspire her troops and a loyalty from her subjects that also enabled her to remain safe and protected from uprising.
The expected invasion never came and the troops were stood down two days later.
You can help us out by revising, improving and updating this section.
After you claim a section you’ll have 24 hours to send in a draft. An editor will review the submission and either publish your submission or provide feedback.
The Question and Answer section for Queen Elizabeth’s Speech at Tilbury is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel.
Selection 2 from the speech is an example of which of the following of rhetorical devices?
I don't have numbered selections. I only have the whole speech.
What are the primary rhetorical appeals the Queen uses in the numbered selections?
a. Logos and Ethos
In passage 1, how does Queen Elizabeth l’ use of parallelism reflect the purpose of her speech?
The first paragraph?
We have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety to take heed how we commit ourselves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery. But I assure you, I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving...
Queen Elizabeth's Speech at Tilbury study guide contains a biography of Queen Elizabeth I, literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.
Queen Elizabeth's Speech at Tilbury essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of Queen Elizabeth's Speech at Tilbury by Queen Elizabeth I.
Only 1 percent of the U.S. population serves in the armed forces. Some in the former president’s camp say it’s time more young adults put “some skin in the game.”
TEXARKANA, Tex. — Kyra Rousseau remembers feeling trapped in her high school media center last fall when a phalanx of military personnel and faculty members shut the doors behind her and about 100 classmates before gathering everyone’s phones.
Rousseau, 18, was a senior here at Liberty-Eylau High School. The service members were recruiters. She recalled asking to leave but being told to sit down — that her graduation hinged on completion of a military aptitude test.
“They tricked us,” Rousseau said. “They said ‘ASVAB,’ but they didn’t say what the ASVAB was.”
It stands for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, a standardized test developed by the Defense Department decades ago to help the military funnel recruits into occupations that match their skills and intellect. And if Donald Trump’s last defense secretary could have his way, all public high school students would be required to take it.
Christopher Miller, who led the Pentagon during the chaotic closure of Trump’s tenure in Washington, detailed his vision for the ASVAB and a range of other changes as part of Project 2025 , the conservative Heritage Foundation’s aspirational government-wide game plan should the presumptive Republican nominee return to the White House. Though Trump has not publicly endorsed its policy proposals, Miller is among a cluster of influential former administration officials and GOP lawmakers who have mused aloud about a national service mandate and other measures to remedy what they see as a “crisis” facing the all-volunteer military.
Trump has been complimentary of Miller’s performance during his administration and suggested that, if there is a second term, he might reprise his role as defense secretary, a powerful Cabinet post with sway over Pentagon policy. And though the former president has not weighed in on this Heritage strategy document, he did embrace many of the organization’s proposals at the outset of his first term.
In an interview, Miller said a national service requirement should be “strongly considered.” He described the concept as a common “rite of passage,” one that would create a sense of “shared sacrifice” among America’s youth.
“It reinforces the bonds of civility,” Miller said. “ … Why wouldn’t we give that a try?”
Under his plan, he said, the ASVAB would be used to identify potential military “weaknesses” and help plug knowledge gaps as U.S. defense leaders size up competitors like China, and devise plans for possible conflicts with a range of foreign adversaries.
“If we’re going to prepare for a great-power competition,” Miller said, “it’s helpful to have a baseline understanding of the pool of potential military service members and their specific aptitudes prior.”
His contribution to Project 2025 also advocates granting military recruiters greater access to secondary schools, and he’s proposed halting use of the Defense Department’s electronic medical records platform, which he says leads to “unnecessary delays” and “unwarranted rejections” for some people with disabilities or other conditions who otherwise want to serve.
On Tuesday, after publication of this report, Trump wrote on social media that the idea he would call for mandatory military service was “ridiculous” and attacked The Washington Post for what he said was a “failed attempt to damage me with the Voters.”
“In fact,” he said, “I never even thought of that idea.”
Trump’s own relationship with the military is complicated. As a teenager, he attended a military academy but later sought deferments to avoid service during the Vietnam War. As president, he embraced the role of commander in chief but routinely clashed with the Pentagon as its leaders balked at many of his impulses and recoiled when claims surfaced that he’d disparaged those killed in combat .
Trump’s campaign sought to tamp down speculation about his agenda. In a statement, top advisers cautioned that unless announced by the former president or “an authorized member” of his reelection team, no conjecture about future staffing or policy “should be deemed official.”
Spokespeople for the Heritage Foundation did not respond to requests for comment before publication of this article. After it appeared online, a spokesperson said that Project 2025 does not “speak for President Trump or his campaign, who alone set his agenda.”
Collectively, the military services fell short of the Pentagon’s recruiting goal by about 41,000 last year, officials told lawmakers in December. Only the Marines and the Space Force met their objectives.
In explaining its shortfall, the Army, the largest of the services, points to internal data indicating that most of America’s youths — 71 percent — do not qualify for military service for reasons that include obesity, drug use and aptitude.
Only 1 percent of the U.S. population serves in the armed forces, Army data shows.
The United States halted conscription in 1973, two years before the Vietnam War ended, and since then the idea of mandatory military service has remained politically unpopular. But some in the GOP appear willing to make a case for change.
Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), a potential Trump running mate , said in an interview that he sees a clear need for measures to boost participation. “I like the idea of national service. And I’m not talking about in wartime,” he said, calling for more Americans to put “some skin in the game.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the onetime Trump confidant who has recently clashed with the former president, suggested that military recruiters need more leeway to work in the country’s public schools and said, “I will take no option off the table” when it comes to addressing the shortfalls, including compulsory service.
Rob Hood, a former official in the Trump Defense Department and in the George W. Bush White House, said he thinks 18- to 20-year-olds would benefit from gaining “a better appreciation for how great this country is.”
“Who gave them their Social Security numbers? The United States government,” Hood said. “There can be the takers and there can be the givers, and once we’re all a bunch of takers and there are no givers, this country will collapse.”
The Pentagon declined to comment.
To address the military’s recruiting shortfall, officials said earlier this year that the Defense Department would lean into marketing that encourages young adults to seize a sense of purpose by joining up and emphasizes the tangible advantages of doing so, including health care and retirement benefits.
Mackenzie Eaglen, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, characterized the Pentagon’s posture as “treading water.” Military leaders, she said, are “throwing everything at the wall in the hope that good ideas will stick.” While it’s evident that more must be done, she said, “I still don’t see that as enough to make the case for Congress to direct mandatory service on to America’s youth.”
What could change lawmakers’ calculus? Pressure from the White House, Eaglen said.
Yet often in polarized Washington, consensus is hit or miss. Last year, for instance, Congress agreed to provide military recruiters with greater access to high school and college campuses. A “ Draft Our Daughters ” provision that would require all 18-year-old women to register with the Selective Service has been mired in debate for years.
The specter of a national service requirement, said Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), “strikes me as un-American.” He called such Republican proposals “strange,” before adding, “But there are an awful lot of things they’re doing that seem strange to me.”
Mandating the ASVAB at public high schools could represent a middle ground. Although neither state nor federal law requires that students take the exam, some schools already make students sit for the assessment.
The U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request about a decade ago, disclosed that more than 900 schools across the nation reported mandating the test. Defense Department officials declined a request for current figures.
Liberty-Eylau, in Texarkana, was among the schools identified in that list as not requiring the ASVAB. In a brief interview, the school’s assistant principal, LaTasha Harris, confirmed that all seniors at the school are asked to take the test. “All of them can take it on one day,” she said. Harris did not respond when contacted with additional questions, nor did other school administrators.
When Rousseau returned home from school after taking the ASVAB, she told her mother, Laura Rousseau, that the school had forced her to take a military test. “I don’t want to fight in a war,” she said.
Laura Rousseau said she wants her daughter to decide her future and does not want the military to interfere. “I feel like they’re trying to make it easier to just draft the kids,” she added.
More than 1,000 miles away, in southwest Pennsylvania, a 15-year-old student at Connellsville Area Senior High School wore an oversize military jacket, its sleeves drooping past his hands, and pants with legs so long they dragged on the floor.
All sophomores here are required to take the military aptitude test, said Joseph P. Walsh, a retired Army officer and the school’s Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) instructor. He said he uses the results to advise students to consider specific military jobs.
Walsh called the program an opportunity for those who may not be able to afford advanced education or qualify for well-paying employment after high school. He said JROTC awarded three Connellsville students more than $1 million in scholarships last year, which he has used as a selling point to attract others.
“I get a lot of kids that came from nothing,” Walsh said, “so job security is important.”
At least one teacher at Connellsville High criticized the military presence. David Hartz, who has taught at the school for nearly 30 years, said mandating military testing feels “Big Brother-y” and deceives students into believing they have less of a choice about their futures. Hartz said he is not anti-military, but believes students should be able to choose whether they take the test.
A Rand study published in 2017 found that low-income areas are disproportionately targeted by military recruiters. A separate Rand report , published in April, suggests that incidents of misconduct by recruiters have shaped the impressions of some parents and school administrators, who fear they “might endanger students or take advantage of those too young to understand the commitment of enlistment.”
A national service requirement, Miller contends, would afford young people from across the country the opportunity to learn about and rely on one another. He and other advocates on the political right say they believe the United States is losing its civil cohesion and view this as a solution.
“We don’t have a mechanism now in our society,” Miller said, “that leavens everyone, and provides a common focus and a common vision.”
Hannah Knowles contributed to this report.
Advertisement
Supported by
Their tensions, which have grown quietly for months, reached a new peak this week when the military’s chief spokesman, Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, made unusually blunt comments.
By Aaron Boxerman
reporting from Jerusalem
Growing divisions between Israel’s military commanders and the civilian government over the war in Gaza spilled into the open this week, raising questions about how Israel will conduct the next phase of the war.
The rift has grown quietly for months, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his allies have at times appeared to blame the Israeli security services for the failure to prevent the Hamas-led surprise attack on Oct. 7. More recently, the military has been frustrated by the Netanyahu government’s fight to maintain the exemption from service enjoyed by ultra-Orthodox Jews, at a time when Israeli forces are stretched thin.
But the sharpest and most public break came on Wednesday, with unusually blunt comments from the armed forces’ chief spokesman Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, reflecting fears among military leaders that the government’s failure to articulate a vision for a postwar Gaza could squander the gains made against Hamas. “If we do not bring something else to Gaza, at the end of the day, we will get Hamas,” he said in an interview with Israel’s Channel 13.
“Who is that someone else, what is that thing?” he asked. “The political leadership will decide. But in order to reach a situation in which we really weaken Hamas, that is the path.”
Admiral Hagari also appeared to criticize Mr. Netanyahu’s oft-repeated call for “absolute victory” over the Palestinian armed group. “The idea that it is possible to destroy Hamas, to make Hamas vanish — that is throwing sand in the eyes of the public,” he said.
That prompted a swift rejoinder from Mr. Netanyahu’s office, which said that the Israeli cabinet had set “the destruction of Hamas’s military and governing capabilities” as one of the war’s aims, and that the Israeli military was “of course committed to this.”
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in .
Want all of The Times? Subscribe .
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
As a result, the ageing Robert Dudley was put in charge of the land army at Tilbury, on the Thames, to the east of London in Essex. Dudley arranged for Queen Elizabeth to visit Tilbury to announce his appointment and rally the troops on 9 August 1588. The queen's reported words during that visit has gone down in history. Read it in full below.
The Speech to the Troops at Tilbury was delivered on 9 August Old Style (19 August New Style) 1588 by Queen Elizabeth I of England to the land forces earlier assembled at Tilbury in Essex in preparation for repelling the expected invasion by the Spanish Armada . Before the speech the Armada had been driven from the Strait of Dover in the Battle ...
Queen Elizabeth I's speech to the troops at Tilbury is among the most famous and iconic speeches in English history. On 9 August 1588, Elizabeth addressed the land forces which had been mobilised at the port of Tilbury in Essex, in preparation for the expected invasion of England by the Spanish Armada.
Queen Elizabeth I's Speech to the Troops at Tilbury, 1588. We have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourselves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear, I have always so behaved myself that ...
In the painting below, she is portrayed rallying her troops atop a white horse, every inch the leader of Englishmen and warriors. Queen Elizabeth I at Tilbury, 1588 c.1938. Alfred Kingsley Lawrence (1893-1975) Essex County Council. Elizabeth had done the impossible: defeating the 'invincible' Spanish Armada.
The Spanish Armada was defeated at sea by the English fleet and bad weather. The Spanish troops never made it to shore. The speech at Tilbury and the defeat of the armada helped secure Elizabeth's rule in a time of political turmoil. The speech is famous for its patriotic rhetoric, defiant attitude, and Elizabeth's defense of her right to rule.
The Tilbury Speech - The Elizabeth Files. The Tilbury Speech. The Tilbury Speech of 1588 was Elizabeth I's most famous speech and was given in August 1588 to the land forces at Tilbury, in Essex, who were preparing to defend England against the Spanish Armada. There are two main versions of the speech:-.
The Speech to the Troops at Tilbury was delivered on 9 August Old Style, 19 August New Style 1588 by Queen Elizabeth I of England to the land forces earlier assembled at… Read More Aug. 15, 1588 ...
1. Delivered by Elizabeth to the land forces assembled at Tilbury (Essex) to repel the anticipated invasion of the Spanish Armada, 1588. 2. Robert Dudley, earl of Leicester; he was the queen's favorite, once rumored to be her lover. The Norton Anthology of English Literature. 6 th ed. Vol 1. M.
Tilbury Speech. This speech was given by Queen Elizabeth to her troops, fighting the Spanish Armada, on 9 August 1588 at Tilbury in Essex. We have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit our selves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you I do not desire to live to distrust my ...
Elizabeth's Speech at Tilbury. THE SPEECH OF QUEEN ELIZABETH TO HER ARMY. ENCAMPED AT TILBURY, 1588. I remember in '88 waiting upon the Earl of Leicester at Tilbury camp, and in '89, going into Portugal with my noble master, the Earl of Essex, I learned somewhat fit to be imparted to your grace. The queen lying in the camp one night, guarded ...
Queen Elizabeth I's Speech to the Troops at Tilbury. On August 9, 1588, England was preparing to combat a Spanish invasion. Queen Elizabeth I met the English soldiers at Tilbury in Essex to ...
Summary: "Speech to the Troops at Tilbury". "Speech to the Troops at Tilbury" (1588) is a renowned speech given by England's Queen Elizabeth I to her troops in preparation for battle against the Spanish Armada. The Spanish hoped to invade England, overthrow Elizabeth, and return the country to Catholicism.
Aftermath of Speech to the Troops at Tilbury. The soldiers never had to fight the Spanish because the Spanish troops did not make it to land. The armada was defeated by a combination of forces. The English navy set fire to the Spanish ships. Bad weather wrecked a great many of the surviving Spanish vessels.
Speech to the Troops at Tilbury - Aug. 19, 1588. The 1500s saw a major rivalry between Britain and Spain over control of trade in the New World. King Philip II of Spain assembled a fleet of warships known as the Spanish Armada and in 1588 sailed into the English Channel with the goal of invading and conquering England.
The speech of Queen Elizabeth I to the troops at Tilbury before the battle with the troops of Spain is not just a short account of how the queen begs her army to fight for the country. While reading her speech, readers my encounter considerable of emotions and excitement. Belief in God, her army, and victory proves that miracles always come ...
On the 9th August 1588, Elizabeth I appeared before the troops that had gathered at Tilbury Fort in anticipation of a Spanish attack. In her article "The Myth of Elizabeth at Tilbury", Susan Frye, writes that there are no reliable eye-witness accounts regarding Elizabeth I's appearance on that day, but that tradition places the Queen in armour, giving a rousing speech - an iconic Gloriana.
Scotland on its way home, but troops were still held at ready in case the Spanish army of Alexander Farnese, the Duke of Parma, might yet attempt to invade from Dunkirk; two days later they were discharged. On the day of the speech, the Queen left her bodyguard before the fort at Tilbury and went among her subjects with an escort of six men.
393 Speech to the Troops at Tilbury 1588 Elizabeth I of England. My loving people, We have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourselves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear, I have always so ...
Speech To The Troops At Tilbury Rhetorical Analysis. Queen Elizabeth's speech to her troops is a masterclass in rhetoric. She employs numerous rhetorical devices to great effect, making her case for why they should fight against the Spanish Armada. Elizabeth begins by appealing to her troops' sense of duty and patriotism, invoking images of ...
Written by Jody Perry, Mridupaban Buragohain. Queen Elizabeth I gave this speech to her troops in August 1588, as they were gathered at Tilbury, Essex, one of the counties in the East Anglia region of England and one of the mainstays in the Tudor kingdom and very close to London. Her troops were assembled prior to defending the southern coast ...
Speech to the Troops at Tilbury | Quotes. Share. 1. To take heed how we commit our selves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery. The armed multitudes are Queen Elizabeth's own army. Because they are not an official standing army (a professional army that exists in peace as well as war) they are potentially unreliable. Elizabeth says that ...
Only 1 percent of the U.S. population serves in the military. Some in Donald Trump's camp say it's time more young adults put "some skin in the game."
"Speech to the Troops at Tilbury" Queen Elizabeth 1 Context: Queen Elizabeth 1 ruled England from 1558-1603. Here, she addresses her land forces at Tilbury in 1588 under imminent threat of invasion by the Spanish Armada. King Phillip II of Spain and his forces were defeated and never reached the shores of England. In a time when
Their tensions, which have grown quietly for months, reached a new peak this week when the military's chief spokesman, Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, made unusually blunt comments.