King John free essay sample

King John is one of the most well-known figures in history because he has forever been portrayed as a wicked, vile ruler of England, who taxed the country out of everything they had and despised his own people. In this essay, I aim to prove that King John wasn’t really a bad king because although he did have a bad personality, all the problems he faced were mostly caused by his father and brother also he also did some good deeds therefore he was actually a good, bad and unlucky king. John inherited many problems from his father King Henry II and brother King Richard I when he became king. The main problem was Philip II, King of France, this was caused because Richard I refused to marry Philip’s sister. This was a major problem because Philip was very powerful, cunning, and rich and kept trying attack England, but unfortunately for John, at the time he didn’t have enough money or soldiers to try and defeat Philip, therefore continued losing all his battles. We will write a custom essay sample on King John or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page A second problem was Pope Innocent III, caused by John’s father and brother as they kept arguing with the pope over who should have the most power over England. This meant that the pope thought that he should have the most power over England, but John also disagreed to this, so the pope declared that there would be no funerals or marriages until John gave in. Finally, John having no other option gave in, however this proved lucky for John as the pope supported John in his battles. The final problem was Roger Bigod, Earl of Norfolk caused by John’s father because he kept harassing Roger’s father as he kept rebelling against him. This made things harder for John because Roger wanted revenge and John was the one from their family alive. Since Roger was a baron, he could get all the other barons on their side and stop lending their soldiers to King John for all his battles, and instead use them to attack him. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that John was a bad king. For example he used to take lots of extra taxes to pay for his battles; furthermore he ends up losing which means all the money is wasted. Even if John did have a lot of problems that he did not create himself, his personality made them worse so he could not even resolve them. John was hot-tempered, stubborn, cruel, mocking and secretive. Most importantly, he did not have much control over England because first paupers and peasants rebelled him, then increasing to knights and powerful barons. However, John can also be seen as an unlucky ruler, such as in 1214 during a battle between John and Philip, King Philip was about to die when one of his own soldiers betrayed him and saved Philip. Unfortunately, John’s French and English barons broke their promise to be loyal and gave away John’s land to the French King. Finally, there is evidence that John was actually a good ruler. For example, he reinforced the British Navy, for instance and introduced a new; presumably better, monetary system to make government finances easier and he revamped the country’s law courts. John also took control of Scotland, Wales and Ireland, thus bringing relative peace to the realms of Britain. Furthermore in 1214, John actually won several battles against Philip and got some of his land back, this proves that he wasn’t really a soft sword after all. Interpretations of John have changed a great deal since the Middle Ages. In Tudor time, the people supported John because he was similar to their own ruler (Henry VIII) that he fought with the pope and Henry also had problems with the French. They also believed that the barons have nothing to do with the king’s reign and that they should not interfere. The Tudors were probably told this by their ancestors. In contrast, the Victorians thought that John was a Devil and a Villain because he divorced his wife, took land from the church which was a holy place and treated priests badly. They believed the Magna Carta is very important because it means that no king could do what they liked. They thought this because they read the books written by monks; which very biased because they only stated the bad things that John did because they were on the pope’s side. Modern Historians don’t agree about John because they thought he was unlucky but a good king because they thought he was organised and ran the government well, but he was unlucky and inherited many of his problems. Having examined all the evidence, I have concluded that John was not a bad king. This is because in most circumstances he was just very unlucky otherwise he could have easily overcome his problems. Finally, he did have some good qualities were enough to run a country peacefully. Therefore my final conclusion is that King John was not a bad king!