Upon the death of King Richard I in 1199 A.D., the only remaining heir to the throne was his younger brother John. Regarded as one of the worst kings of England, John’s reign was no doubt unpopular. As hated as John was, there was no denying that he was a hard worker, competent general and able king. It was not John’s failure as a strategist that made his reign crumble, but rather his underlying character flaws, such as his unyielding cruelty, pettiness and lack of sympathy for his people. John was raised in a family of liars and cheaters, laying the base for what would be his eventual downfall when it was his turn to rule. Early on, John’s older brother and ruler of England, Henry the Young King, attempted to figure out …show more content…
With Richard out of the picture, John began to slowly set up his legitimacy as the ruler of England. Richard left political power in the hands of Bishop Hugh de Puiset and William Mandeville, and made William Longchamp, the Bishop of Ely, his chancellor. Mandeville died shortly after this appointment, allowing Longchamp to become joint justiciar with Puiset. While this proved to be a terrible combination for the people of England, it was the perfect opportunity for John to exploit the hatred the nobility and clergy had for Longchamp for refusing to work with Puiset. John was soon seen as an alternate ruler to the people, complete with his own royal court. By 1191, Longchamp could not tolerate John’s ever-increasing presence and threat to his own power. In an attempt to suppress John, Longchamp resorted to armed conflict. John’s leadership abilities proved to be too great, as Longchamp was locked in the Tower of London and John assumed control of the city of London due to a promise he made with the people if they considered him Richard’s ostensible heir. Richard caught wind of his brother’s attempt to gain control, and sent Walter of Coutances, the Archbishop of Rouen, to restore order in England. John was quickly written off as ruler due to Countances’s popularity, and the news Richard had married while crusading, opening up the possibility of a true …show more content…
After John’s failed attempt at reclaiming Normandy, the baron’s had the final straw. John caught wind of a coup and did everything he could to stop it, from buying time to gain papal support, to declaring himself a crusader in hopes of gaining political protection. None of this worked, and the baron’s “Army of God,” marched on London, taking cities as they advanced. John was forced to negotiate peace talks, as more of his royalists left to join the barons. In June 1215, unbeknownst to John, he and the rebel leaders came up with the framework of England’s constitution, the Magna Carta. This proclamation attempted to settle the baron’s problems with John, as well as deal with matters regarding church law and the rights of men. Neither group intended to adhere to the terms of this potential peace, as Innocent III excommunicated the barons, ensuing war to break
Richard did not manage to recover from the usurpation of Edward and after allegedly murdering the two Princes in the tower his reputation had fallen greatly. He had lost a lot of respect from nobles and from the populus. Killing the Princes could be seen as one of the major factors of his downfall. It was common place in monarchical families to have brothers and sisters "put out of the picture", but even in these primitive times, the murder of innocent children was a taboo.
King John was born on the 24th of December in the year of 1167 to King Henry II and his wife, Eleanor of Aquitaine. John was the youngest of five sons to his father, and had been nicknamed “Lackland” by Henry as all of his elder brothers had received a certain share of dominion apart from John alone, however, John seemed to be his father’s favourite. In 1173, a marriage proposal was set up by Henry for his beloved youngest son to Humbert III’s daughter, meaning that John will have the right to a lot of lands but sadly, the wedding didn’t happen. His brothers did not seem very fond of that idea and they rebelled.
...od that Marshall transcends boundaries from knight into statesman. Under William’s rule, order is restored to England. This reestablished royal rule in England. Marshall watched over the noble household and cared for the young own king until his death on May 14, 1219.
John very quickly offered against the sanction to the pope, who took the king's side, but another common war resulted. John caught Rochester manor and crushed the northern provinces and the Scottish fringe grounds. While, Prince Louis of France (later Louis VIII), at the nobles' appeal, attacked England. John battled on until he passed on in October, 1216. His demise led to peace; the aggressors were restored, John's child Henry was guaranteed the progression, and Louis withdrew his
“I am determined to prove a villain / and hate the idle pleasures of these days. / Plots have I laid, inductions dangerous, / by drunken prophecies, libels and dreams.” Richard III, the evil Duke of Gloucester, is fighting a bloody road to the crown in Shakespeare's dramatic play. Stopped by nothing and with brilliant intelligence, Richard fights his way to the king’s position, clothing his villany with “old odd ends stolen out of holy writ.” With no one to fully trust, Richard breaks many hearts by killing all people in his way, and becomes the unstoppable villain. He hides behind a shield of kindness and care, but when he is alone, his real soul comes alive. Sending murderers, or killing people himself, he has no mercy. Manipulating Lady Anne to marry him and promising Buckingham rewards for his deeds, he knows what he is doing, and won’t stop until the crown lies at his feet.
Henry IV is a play that concerns itself with political power and kingship in English history. References to kingship are prevalent throughout the play, especially in the depiction of the characters. Although most of the characters in this play could teach us about kingship, I would like to focus my attention to Prince Henry. I think that this character helps us to best understand what kingship meant at this particular time in history.
25 English barons led by Robert Fitzwater decided to confront King John with demands effectively limiting his power has a king. He's had to come with something totally unprecedented to develop a new kind of banner for rebellion and a program of reform and a carter of liberties and, so we get Magna Carter. On June 15, 1215, at Runnymede near Windsor John met the barons to sign the Magna Carta that he had no intention of abiding by. What John did at Runnymede on 15nth of June 1215 was certainly to bring the negotiations to an end. King Johns attitude made civil war inevitable a brutal year-long campaign was launched throughout the country and in January 1216, King John slaughtered the inhabitants of Berwick as punishment for supporting rebel barons. In Rochester, King John directed the siege of this rebel stronghold. to torment the starving defenders, even more, he ordered bacon fat to be smeared and burnt on the wood castles tower. The tower and rebels soon collapsed. In 1216 while feasting in eastern England he contracted dysentery. While he was dying the barons could tell he was a deeply troubled
Richard’s credibility has come under fire from historians in the last hundred years as to whether his prolonged absence shows that he neglected England. Whilst it is true that Richard I may have little interest in England, he did manage to use his diplomatic skills to secure England’s borders. On the other hand, it can be argued that he was too military based which portrays him as a war-obsessed king who did not succeed in the Crusades; he also failed to form key alliances. Richard I did leave a well-respected man, Hubert Walter, in charge during his absence who kept Richard informed as to what was happening in England. Furthermore, Richard was one of the best military commanders and his tactical nous made him one of the most skilled military
Gifted with the darkest attributes intertwined in his imperfect characteristics, Shakespeare’s Richard III displays his anti-hero traits afflicted with thorns of villains: “Plots have I laid, inductions dangerous / By drunken prophecies, libels, and dreams” (I.i.32-33). Richard possesses the idealism and ambition of a heroic figure that is destined to great achievements and power; however, as one who believes that “the end justifies the means”, Richard rejects moral value and tradition as he is willing to do anything to accomplish his goal to the crown. The society, even his family and closest friends, repudiate him as a deformed outcast. Nevertheless, he cheers for himself as the champion and irredeemable villain by turning entirely to revenge of taking self-served power. By distinguishing virtue ethics to take revenge on the human society that alienates him and centering his life on self-advancement towards kingship, Richard is the literary archetype of an anti-hero.
The undeniable pursuit for power is Richard’s flaw as a Vice character. This aspect is demonstrated in Shakespeare’s play King Richard III through the actions Richard portrays in an attempt to take the throne, allowing the audience to perceive this as an abhorrent transgression against the divine order. The deformity of Richards arm and back also symbolically imply a sense of villainy through Shakespeare’s context. In one of Richard’s soliloquies, he states how ‘thus like the formal Vice Iniquity/ I moralize two meanings in one word’. Through the use of immoral jargons, Shakespeare emphasises Richard’s tenacity to attain a sense of power. However, Richard’s personal struggle with power causes him to become paranoid and demanding, as demonstrated through the use of modality ‘I wish’ in ‘I wish the bastards dead’. This act thus becomes heavily discordant to the accepted great chain of being and conveys Richard’s consumption by power.
In John's time there was no parliament. Because the Magna Carta established the council of 25 barons whom the king was supposed to consult on matters that were important to the country, some people also believe it sowed the seed for parliamentary democracy in England. Even though John was not required to take the barons' advice, this did mark the beginning of the power being shared by more people. The running of the state was now the concern of a group rather than an
Shakespeare constructs King Richard III to perform his contextual agenda, or to perpetrate political propaganda in the light of a historical power struggle, mirroring the political concerns of his era through his adaptation and selection of source material. Shakespeare’s influences include Thomas More’s The History of King Richard the Third, both constructing a certain historical perspective of the play. The negative perspective of Richard III’s character is a perpetuation of established Tudor history, where Vergil constructed a history intermixed with Tudor history, and More’s connection to John Morton affected the villainous image of the tyrannous king. This negative image is accentuated through the antithesis of Richards treachery in juxtaposition of Richmond’s devotion, exemplified in the parallelism of ‘God and Saint George! Richmond and victory.’ The need to legitimize Elizabeth’s reign influenced Shakespeare’s portra...
believe that Richard didn’t trust the Southern English so he sent young Edward V and his brother up north to be guarded by
...historical background set forth in the film, with the broad details of the attempted rebellion propelled by Queen Eleanor and led by Richard and Geoffrey are accurate, as is the attempt by Philip of France to undermine the Angevin Empire to regain the provinces acquired by Henry through his marriage to Eleanor. As depicted in the film, the indecision, faced by Henry II in attempting to determine which son to name as successor resulted from his desire to have the empire that he had created remain intact, rather than dividing the empire between his sons and this, in turn, led to the fracturing of both family and political cohesion, leaving the empire vulnerable to outside forces. Both Richard and John eventually ruled the empire, supported and influenced by their mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine, who was released from her Salisbury prison upon the death of King Henry II.
The Barons provided King John with money and soldiers to defend his land in France. King John also had to consult with the Barons when he wanted to raise taxes for more money and troops. When King John lost his hand in France, less money came to England through taxes. After this he immediately raised the taxes on the people without consulting the Barons, once he did this he violated their feudal law. Although, this was not the first time that he had raised or even created taxes, the Barons were still immensely upset with King John; especially after all they had done for him.