0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)
43 vues3 pages
Many people believe king John to be a bad king and possibly the worst. He was compared to his brother / previous king; Richard the Lion-heart. The reason why church people may be biast started when John and the Pope started arguing over who should be the next Archbishop of Canterbury.
Many people believe king John to be a bad king and possibly the worst. He was compared to his brother / previous king; Richard the Lion-heart. The reason why church people may be biast started when John and the Pope started arguing over who should be the next Archbishop of Canterbury.
Droits d'auteur :
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Formats disponibles
Téléchargez comme DOC, PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
Many people believe king John to be a bad king and possibly the worst. He was compared to his brother / previous king; Richard the Lion-heart. The reason why church people may be biast started when John and the Pope started arguing over who should be the next Archbishop of Canterbury.
Droits d'auteur :
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Formats disponibles
Téléchargez comme DOC, PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
England? Many people believe John to be a bad king and possibly the worst, I think not, and the following paragraphs will explain my opinion.
First off; Often, he was compared to his
brother/previous king; Richard the Lion-heart; who was a good fighter, went on the crusades and was overall the definition of a middle age king which John was not as he was termed a poor fighter. When you compare him to Richard it shows how good he was. Richard John Was only in England for Was there for most of 6 months out of his his reign whole reign. Got the country in debt Tried very hard to get it out of debt and also introduced a new finance system Hardly spoke any Spoke English English The list is endless. He didn’t always lose battles; he won some in Scotland, Wales and Ireland. Lastly all the sources at the time were written by Monks and Church people who might be biast. The reason why church people may be biast started when John and the Pope started arguing over who should be the next Archbishop of Canterbury (This was not the first time there was an argument between the church and the king, John’s father was Henry the second, who argued with Thomas Beckett.) John argued it should be his choice as he would have to work with the Archbishop and the Pope wouldn’t. John would not back down. So in 1205 the Pope ordered all churches to be closed down. John still would not back down. The churches being closed was bad news for the Villanes, who could not get married, christen their children or bury their dead. You may think that’s fine, they can wait, but back then people took their church very seriously. If their children could not be christened and then died, they believed they would be sent to hell. If they couldn’t bury their dead on church land which they also believed to be bad. This lasted for six years and John made a move during this time that added to his un-popularity.
He took church land so he could get the rent
from any people living on it. This made him very unpopular. Other things that made him unpopular were: He lost most of the land in Normandy and all his attempts to regain it failed, the church matter and Arthur. Arthur was John’s nephew and another candidate for the throne. He was found dead in a castle in France and it was later revealed that John was in the castle at the same time, people were quick to blame John for the death and accuse him of murder. His biggest blow was when he was forced to sign the Magna Carta. The Magna Carta consisted of 200 rules mostly helping the Barons.
When you balance this all out, I believe that John
was just unlucky. The Arthur incident for example, could just be a case of John being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Sure, he did some wrong things but they were only minute things, him taking church land was a use of the space, remember the church owned about a third of British land.