In Homer's' The Iliad, King Agamemnon can give instances of how not to be a compelling pioneer. Agamemnon depicts negative initiative abilities and poor basic leadership all through the story. Towards the start of the lyric, it gets clear to the peruser that Agamemnon is anything but an exceptionally kind man. In the primary book, the dad of a lady being held hostage by Agamemnon moved toward Agamemnon with a truly sensible solicitation just as payoff. Agamemnon not just denied the man, he taunted and affronted him. The reaction was cold and unjustifiable. I see Agamemnon's choice to deny the man a poor initiative choice on two records. Initially, Agamemnon didn't have a lot to lose in the circumstance. By tolerating the payoff he would diminish both the dad and girl just as enhance himself with the endowments he was advertised. As I would like to think, I accept a sufficient pioneer consistently has space in his/her heart for more prominent's benefit of humankind. Agamemnon plainly depicted he is more intrigued by his status and personality than doing great for other people. What settled on his choice significantly increasingly less than ideal was that Agamemnon appeared to daze himself with narrow-mindedness. The man who mentioned for the sheltered return of his little girl happened to be a cleric to the god Apollo. Agamemnon knew this. He likewise may have realized that there would be ramifications for affronting a cleric of a divine being. Because of being denied and affronted the cleric (Chryses) argued Apollo to look for retribution upon Agamemnon. Before long, plague fell upon Agamemnon's military, and proceeded for nine days. The plague brought about numerous dead Achaian troopers. Far more detestable, Agamemnon didn't look for activity until his best warrior, Achilleus mentioned that he return the lady to her dad. By and by blinded by his very own wants, Agamemnon would possibly restore the lady on the off chance that we was repaid with another lady consequently. Achilleus volunteers his hostage lady to Agamemnon who acknowledges the arrangement. Agamemnon's inevitable destruction – (not in reference to the Iliad) can be connected to numerous poor choices and faulty character qualities. Absence of responsibility is an attribute that would be unsafe to any pioneer. I think taking responsibility for one's activities is an honorable go about just as an important represent a satisfactory pioneer to take. It tends to be seen that Agamemnon likes to censure others for his own disasters. When attempting to legitimize Achilleus relinquishing the Achaian armed force he expresses, "This is the word the Achaians have verbally expressed frequently against me and criticized me in it, yet I am not capable but rather Zeus is, and Destiny, and Erinys the fog strolling who in get together captured my heart in savage daydream on that day I myself took from the prize of Achilleus. However what might I be able to do? The god achieves all things." Book 19. Without Achilleus' arrival to the Achaian armed force, almost certainly, Agamemnon and the Achaian armed force would've been compelled to give up. In the same way as other pioneers ever, Agamemnon governed with an iron clench hand. In the wake of dissecting The Iliad, I would characterize Agamemnon as a ruler instead of a pioneer. Be that as it may, I would prefer not to ruin him altogether. Agamemnon had positive snapshots of administration. When driving his military into fight without the assistance of Achilleus he says, "Be men now, dear companions, and take up the core of mental fortitude, and have thought for one another in the solid experiences, since more come through alive when men think of each as other, and there is no magnificence when they give way, nor warcraft either." Book 5 All altogether, I see Agamemnon as an egotistical ruler with little respect for the prosperity of his subjects. He's more like a brutish dictator than a successful pioneer.>