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
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...
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.
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.
But Buckingham knows what to do. He tells Richard to take two priests with him, since the people are very religious and will follow the priest's’ actions. After doing as if he was denying the request for being the king, the crowd tried to persuade him. Because of doing as if he didn’t want the crown, the crowd thought they could trust him more, and begged him to be the king. Eventually he said yes, and finally became king of England. He orders Buckingham to kill prince Edward, but Buckingham refuses to. He asks for his Earlship, but Richard gets mad and dismisses him. He knows he also has to get rid of Buckingham now, since he is not loyal to him anymore. He hires a murderer called Tyrrel to kill the princes and finally he got rid of
...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.
William was born around 1147 to John Marshall and Sybil of Salisbury during the reign of King Stephen. His father, John Marshall, served as a court officer and eventually earned the status of a minor baron. John Marshall was a shrewd soldier and a skilled negotiator. He was the premier example of lordship in William’s life. William’s relationship with his father would be brief and he would never experience him beyond his childhood. John Marshall died in 1165. John would leave a legacy behind that would influence William’s life and spark the future of his outstanding career both as a soldier and a courtier.
Richard being generous gave his younger brother rewards of several lands in England and he also made John the Count of Mortain in France. Whilst he was planning to go through a series of wars, Richard did not want his brother to enter England and he forced John to promise that he wouldn’t and John kept his word until he found out that Richard was intending to give the role of successor to the throne to their nephew. John felt that he should be king and he entered England, breaking his promise and tried to persuade the English people in order to gain the throne but the English woul...
Around the time when Richard named their nephew Arthur (child of their late sibling Geoffrey) as his beneficiary, John came back to England. When word of Richard's hostage by Emperor Henry VI was heard by him, John united with King Philip II of France and attempted to take control of England. Upon Richard's arrival in 1194, John was expelled and every one of his territories were taken from him. In May of that year, he made up with Richard and recuperated some of his properties. Although, it was not until Arthur fell into Philip's hands and Richard was compelled to announce John as his heir did John reacquire every one of his
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.
Edward V and his brother so that he could be next in line for the crown. But that is not true for Richard really didn’t do it.
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.
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
King John also angered the Church of England by acting against customs and the Pope's wishes. He appointed someone other than the Pope’s choice to be the archbishop of Canterbury. When King John did this, he angered the Pope and caused many problems. King John gave the Pope the Kingdom of England and paid him rent to continue to stay there in order to be back on the Pope’s good side. When King John did this, he angered the Barons even more than before.