English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

4 answers

It is tough to argue against John's reputation as perhaps England's worst-ever King.

His reign ended in disaster. At his death, a civil war was raging, and there was a French invasion army in England, trying to grab the throne for Prince Louis of France.

Before that, John had contrived to: -
[1] lose his ancestral home, the Duchy of Normandy, to the French;
[2] accept the Pope as his overlord, thus making England (at least on paper) a satellite of Rome;
[3] knuckle under to his rebellious barons, and have Magna Carta imposed on him.

He may not, however, have fully deserved the bad press he has been stuck with ever since. He did have some good points: -
[1] Unlike most other English Kings of his era, he did spend most of his time actually in England, actually trying to run the country, instead of wandering off on crusades or fighting in dynastic disputes over in France.
[2] It seems that John was one of England's better educated and fairer medieval rulers in terms of applying the laws.
[3] As a result of selecting some good officials to work in his administration, John can take credit for providing the government with its first set of sensible, cohesive records, known as the Pipe Rolls.
[4] He attempted to reform and modernize the tax system to some extent, requiring monetary payments from his barons instead of feudal military service. This was one of the main things that made him so unpopular with the barons. But he was probably right to try to do it.

-------------------------------------------

Still, it's not much to set against his disastrous record. There is indeed a reason why the British royals have ever since shied away from naming their sons "John".

2007-03-21 11:49:22 · answer #1 · answered by Gromm's Ghost 6 · 0 0

yes medieval question.

John was the youngest child of Henry II and Eleanor of Acquitaine, and so hardly expected to be king. His nickname 'Lackland' suggested that he simply had not resources. His 1st marriage was for money.

Was widely unpopular in his lifetime. Repeated attempts to usurp the throne while his father and brother ruled.

Quarreled violently with the Church, refusing to accept Stephan Langton as Archbishop of Catherbury. Pope excommunicated John and closed all church's in England. (this is before the church of England, so everyone under the pope.) No marriages or baptism!

Spend time, money and more taxes on wasted battles in Wales, Scots and Ireland.

Forced to sign the Magna Carta giving up Kingly rights to the barons. Gave the church its Independence, prevented arbitrary taxes and made it impossible to be punished except by law and the king followed the same rule.

He not trust his followers so kept his money with him. He lost wagon-load after wagon-load valuables in the Norfolk marshes.

He died so afterward, most likely poisoned.

2007-03-21 19:16:51 · answer #2 · answered by issa 2 · 0 0

His hubris and malfeance, caused the Barons to rebel. Giving us the Magna Carta.

2007-03-21 10:57:33 · answer #3 · answered by Sophist 7 · 0 1

The story of Salt's importance !!!

2007-03-21 10:57:07 · answer #4 · answered by cabridog 4 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers