John’s brother Richard the Lionheart had reportedly starved a man to death, but this appears to have been an isolated incident. “He kept his prisoners in such a horrible manner, and in such abject confinement,” wrote the author of the 13th-century History of William Marshal, “that it seemed an indignity and a disgrace to all those with him who witnessed such cruelty.”. Discuss with reference to other Angevin kings. Magna Carta, we are told, stands for the rule of law. The clergy certainly had good reason to hate him. He has recently released ‘King John’, an app version of the book available on iPad. Whenever he could he told lies rather than the truth… He was brim-full of evil qualities.”. Please enter your number below. 1 King John. One of the few positive statements made about King John was that there was always plenty to eat and drink in his hall, and that he distributed robes to his men on a regular basis. Robert was a Flemish nobleman who fought on John’s side in the final years of his reign, and was well rewarded as a result. He united into one mass of wickedness their insolence, their selfishness, their unbridled lust, their cruelty and tyranny, their shamelessness, their superstition, their cynical indifference to honor or truth” A considerable body of evidence in the form of pipe rolls, charters and letters patent indicates strongly that John was highly effective – perhaps too effective – in mobilizing the resources of his kingdom and in imposing the royal will upon the population at large. A Very Bad King . Everything you ever wanted to know about... King John: the making of a medieval monster, The race for vaccines: lessons from history, The race for a cure: how we found vaccines for 4 of history’s most dangerous diseases, Mourning Martin Luther King Jr: the life and legacy of the civil rights leader, Treachery at Bosworth: what really brought down Richard III, Richard the Lionheart may not have spoken English – plus 7 more surprising facts, The crusades: everything you wanted to know. Yet hostage taking was part-and-parcel of medieval government, and as such it follows that they sometimes paid the ultimate price. John was very active in hearing court cases, but his motivation was the money he could raise by imposing punitive fines. Those who go in search of the real John therefore tend to suppose that he must have been unfairly maligned, and suspect that in reality he was not nearly as bad as legend maintains. Like William I, King John is one of the more controversial monarchs of Medieval England and is most associated with the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215. In the 20th century, some historians put forward a case for King John’s defence, arguing that his badness was largely a later invention, and that his misfortunes as a ruler were mostly down to ill luck. He was a good King because he was very hardworking! However, the Magna Carta that John chose to ignore did not purport to be a constitutional document adumbrating and guaranteeing liberties to all English people. John was the pathetic, childish, gibbering, thumb-sucking lion brilliantly voiced by … These are powerful words, and it follows that if John ignored Magna Carta – which he did – then it must surely be the case that he was indeed malign. Some claim that he was a very poor king who made many mistakes and left the country very weak. But the assertion that all medieval chroniclers were churchmen is a fallacy. John was not as bad as legend made out – he was worse Those who go in search of the real John therefore tend to suppose that he must have been unfairly maligned, and suspect that in reality he was not nearly as bad as legend maintains. In an age when personal bravery mattered, John repeatedly showed his back to the enemy. For most of his reign John was at war with the king of France, Philip Augustus, and he did not hesitate to invade Scotland, Wales and Ireland when he felt that the rulers of those lands had crossed him. Nor was King Harold, but he at least engaged his enemies when they landed on the shores of England and went down fighting alongside his men. King John seems to have been reasonably observant, but his attack on the church led to him being written up as irreligious after his death. Indeed, by the spring of 1215, it has been estimated that of England’s 197 baronies only 39 were in active opposition to the king, with perhaps the same number acting in his support. King John then was definitely, as the old history books would put it, not just a bad king but a very bad king. Modern attempts to rehabilitate him require us to ignore this chorus of disapproval from his contemporaries as well as his own nefarious acts. During these more chivalrous times, aristocrats did not expect to die in battle, and if they were taken prisoner they expected to be kept in honourable captivity until they could be ransomed. Nor is it true that John antagonized elements of the baronage because he was lacking in martial prowess, or that the king was ‘Softsword’, as the chroniclers assert. King John was the reigning king from 1189-1199. Pupils then use cards to identify evidence that John was good and bad. Indeed, King Stephen was seen as weak for refusing to hang the son of Marshal when the latter broke the terms of an agreement with the king. John, by contrast, killed people in this way en masse, and on more than one occasion. As for Matilda Fitzwalter of Diss, she may have been propositioned by King John but at least she was not poisoned by him. The ever-growing extent to which Magna Carta is celebrated and elevated necessarily means that, in equal and opposite degree, the reputation of John is tarnished and diminished. As a result, many modern day historians consider him a bad king. Bad things: Bad Warrior Lost most battles Went back on what he said Tried to exert power over the church Gave the poor a hard time Good things: Determinded man First king to keep proper records Tried to make barons obey the king the Magna Carta Summing up: So King John was the reigning king from 1189-1199. Small wonder that when he died in 1216, some chroniclers imagined him suffering the torments of hell. King John was not a good man— He had his little ways. In fact, they are better understood as tight-knuckled, low browed feudal reactionaries kicking against John’s increasingly efficacious administration. Nobles were killed in great numbers in Anglo-Saxon England and again in the later Middle Ages, but between 1076 and 1306 not one English earl was executed. King John is often referred to as a bad king these days and there is a lot of evidence both modern and written by sources in King John’s time, to give reason for that name. The real test for a military commander comes when the odds are less than certain. John's reign has been viewed in very different ways by historians. His reluctance to commit to pitched battles was entirely conventional in an age when all leaders preferred to avoid them – John’s arch-enemy, Philip Augustus, King of France (r1180–1223) shied away from a setpiece battle at least as frequently as his protagonist. Using youtube clip, pupils then decide whether the Disney film portrays John as good or bad. He was considered a weak king who was managed by others like the barons and the Pope. John, John, bad King John Shamed the throne that he sat on; Not a scruple, not a straw, Cared this monarch for the law; Promises he daily broke; None could trust a word he spoke; So the Barons brought a Deed; Down to rushy Runnymede, Magna Carta was it hight, Charter of the People’s Right, Framed and fashioned to correct Thus, we see him, for example, razing the walls and castle of Le Mans in 1200, assaulting the forces besieging Mirebeau in 1202 (having covered a distance of 80 miles in 48 hours), marching upon Montauban in 1206 and pressing the siege of Rochester castle in 1215 – an event that the leading authority of castles and castle warfare in this period considers was “the greatest operation in England up to that time” (RA Brown). Medieval monarchs were expected to be fierce, and John fulfilled those expectations. On the other hand some people have pointed to the many probems that he faced and claim that he was quite good at coping with these. Invoked by those in 17th-century England who sought to thwart the allegedly despotic tendencies of Charles I, and latterly employed by the American Revolutionaries in their making of the United States Bill of Rights in 1789, Magna Carta has become totemic of the liberties by which western societies identify themselves. During John’s reign the finger of suspicion was pointed more firmly at the king himself, with some contemporaries alleging that he murdered his nephew with his own hand. Yet, says historian Marc Morris, when it came to lechery, treachery and shocking acts of cruelty, the king who sealed Magna Carta more than 800 years ago was in a league of his own... For most people (and here I include myself) mention of the name ‘King John’ conjures up images of the character from the tales of Robin Hood – a pantomime villain, rolling his eyes and gnashing his teeth. Medieval kings were expected to be pious, and they could demonstrate this in a variety of ways — by distributing alms to the poor, for example, or building a new church. It is a commonplace defence of John, still advanced in school textbooks, that contemporary opinion of him is not to be trusted, because all chroniclers were churchmen, who were biased against the king because he had attacked the church. Dysentery was his one and only enemy! Historians quite rightly set out to challenge legends and dispel myths, but in this case the myth is a modern one. Any reasonable assessment of the sources must lead us to conclude that in the case of Bad King John, tradition had it about right. Indeed, so extreme was this impact that it is not beyond sensible contemplation that the ambition of the rebel barons was not to obtain a lasting peace, but instead absolutely to provoke John to break the newly agreed terms so that they could seize his largesse. Was King John bad? Edward I narrowly escaped death by crossbow bolt; Richard I was not so lucky. It does not require any particular military genius, however, to carry out a siege, only superior resources in manpower and artillery. When the French finally invaded England in the spring of 1216, John watched them disembark on the beaches of Kent, briefly considered fighting them, then rode off in the opposite direction. The author of The History of William Marshal was also a layman, and repeatedly blames the disasters of John’s reign on the king’s own personality. He visited every part of his Kingdom and made sure that laws were kept properly wherever he went. King John was not a good man, And no good friends had he. His marriage to Isabella of Angouleme when she was unlikely to have been more than 15 and quite possibly as young as nine has prompted a flood of accusations that John was a 13th-century Humbert Humbert. We should not mistake John’s military caution for cowardice. You will shortly receive a receipt for your purchase via email. What of John’s father, Henry II who, having taken 22 hostages from the Welsh in 1165, ordered that the males among them – some of them sons of princes – be blinded and castrated, and that the females should have their noses and ears cut off? And sometimes no one spoke to him For days and days and days. You will shortly receive a receipt for your purchase via email. Plenty of laymen put pen to parchment during the Middle Ages, and John’s reign is no exception. Anyone who has read their Shakespeare knows that medieval kings and nobles were forever murdering and maiming each other, either on the field of battle or more discreetly in darkened castle chambers. King John was a well educated King and was effective in ruling the country. Here’s why…. They also complained that he forced himself on the wives and daughters of his barons. King John (24 December 1166 – 19 October 1216) was the son of Henry II of England and Eleanor of Aquitaine.He was King of England from 6 April 1199, until his death. Yet when their friends and families in Anjou and Brittany continued to fight against him, John rounded up 22 of these knightly captives and sent them to Corfe Castle in Dorset, where they were starved to death. This apparently incontestable evidence shows John to have been possessed of vigour and vim, constantly on the move enforcing Angevin aspirations. Listen to Professor Nicholas Vincent discuss the life and reign of the infamous 13th-century monarch King John: But Arthur was only the most famous of John’s victims. And sometimes no one spoke to him For days and days and days. Bad King John? The Magna Carta of 1215 (it is important to realise that there were many reissues of Magna Carta after the reign of John, each different to the one presented to John) is better understood as a set of flawed peace terms designed to heal the incipient civil war between John and an element of rebellious barons. During his reign he had victories against the Welsh and the Scots. An extract from ‘A history of England’ written by C.R.L Fletcher and Rudyard Kipling in 1911 quotes that “John began a quarrel with the English church and the pope. He lusted after beautiful women and because of this he shamed the high men of the land, for which reason he was greatly hated. This was a risky business. And men who came across him, When walking in the town, Gave him a supercilious stare, Or passed with noses in the air— And bad King John stood dumbly there, Blushing beneath his crown. The Barnwell annalist, Walter Of Coventry, concluded that John “was indeed a great prince but less than successful [and that]…he met with both kinds of luck”. To begin with, John was exceptionally cruel. In a war with the French king Philip II, he lost Normandy and almost all his other possessions in France.In England, after a revolt of the barons, he was forced to seal the Magna Carta (1215). Thank you for subscribing to HistoryExtra, you now have unlimited access. When the king captured his nephew in 1202, he also took prisoner hundreds of other knights, who expected to be held in honourable confinement. If John was indeed a “smutty minded groper” (CJ Tyerman), he remained a rake rather than a rogue. On several occasions he prosecuted successful sieges. So fast was his retreat on this occasion that he was three leagues away before his troops realised he had abandoned them. Thanks! John’s response in similar circumstances was to run away. This clearly shocked every other noble family in England, but did not deter the king from threatening to mete out similar treatment to others: in 1215 and 1216 he induced some of the Magna Carta rebels to surrender by threatening to starve their captive companions. Yet even here the overall assessment of the king is damning. Further contextual analysis also diminishes the charge that John was a perverted purveyor of acts of cruelty. Indeed, William the Conqueror’s loyalty to his wife, Matilda, was the subject of perplexed comment. As a starter, pupils draw a spider diagram listing the qualities they think a good king has. My main reason for saying this is that it seems that his subjects never really supported him. Famously, he arranged the ‘disappearance’ of his nephew and rival, Arthur of Brittany, who contested the king’s claim to his inheritance until John captured him in 1202. You have successfully linked your account! Bad/Good/Important? His plan to relieve the siege of Chateau-Gaillard in 1203 by arranging a simultaneous assault from land and amphibious forces has been described as “a masterpiece of ingenuity”by K Norgate. Another author, known as the Anonymous of Béthune, is also likely to have been a layman, since his chronicle dwells upon the concerns of a lay audience, and was written for an aristocratic patron, Robert of Béthune. Thanks! He fell out with the Pope,leading to his excommunication,and churches in England and Wales unable to hold church services,the Pope "gave " England to France ,and when the French landed to collect "their " Kingdom,John surrended his kingdom … He returned to the continent in 1206 and 1214 to try to regain lost ground, but on each occasion withdrew rapidly when told that his enemies were approaching. Similarly, it is not proven that John starved Matilda de Braose and her son to death in Corfe Castle, but if he did so it was because of her refusal to offer her sons as hostages in order to trim the rebellious behaviour of their father. When the king of France invaded Normandy in 1203, John failed to confront him and fled to England, an act of desertion that led directly to the duchy’s loss. John was certainly unlucky in that his reign coincided with probably the two most accomplished leaders of the Middle Ages – Philip Augustus and Pope Innocent III (r1198–1216) – and he was certainly unlucky in that the Angevin ‘empire’ he had inherited in 1199 was increasingly ungovernable and assaulted by fissiparous tendencies. For most of his life, John remained loyal to his father when all his brothers … You're now subscribed to our newsletter. If you subscribe to BBC History Magazine Print or Digital Editions then you can unlock 10 years’ worth of archived history material fully searchable by Topic, Location, Period and Person. He lost a war to the French,in doing so losing territories in Normandy,Anjou,Poitou,Maine and Touraine . He taxed the country far too much and despised many of his own people, especially the barons. Please enter your number below. You have successfully linked your account! No medieval monarch could have accepted for any length of time the Magna Carta of 1215, for it clearly rendered the king a phantom of a monarch. When John’s son Henry III cut back on such expenditure to save up for his crusade, he was criticised for departing from the example of his father. This was the cause of his death which took place at Newark. King John - Good or Bad? Instead, John prosecuted siege warfare with the sort of energy, determination and success that is usually only spoken of in reference to Henry II and Richard I. Bad kings like John were always accused of taking ‘evil counsel’, which meant relying on a clique of advisors. This article was first published in the June 2015 issue of BBC History Magazine, Save a huge 50% off a subscription to your favourite history magazine. Lusting after the wives and daughters of those men he relied upon to deliver the royal command was no doubt a problem in a world where private relationships were the stuff of high politics. Dan Jones is the author of Magna Carta: The Making and Legacy of the Great Charter , published by Head of Zeus and available to buy from Amazon and all good book shops. John was also an effective strategist. For the large part it seems that, 800 years later, opinion has broadly backed Matthew Paris, the 13th-century chronicler who alleged that John’s greatest achievement was, by dying, to make yet more foul the existing foulness of Hell: John was not only Bad; he was diabolical. If John is guilty of cruelty, then what of Richard I in 1191 when, following a dispute about the terms upon which Acre had been surrendered, he ordered the killing of 2,700 Muslim prisoners? You can unsubscribe at any time. Maintaining yourself in government involves a simple trick – make sure more people want you to remain in power than want you out. Arthur’s fate was made famous by Shakespeare, who has him threatened with blinding but killed by accident, falling from his prison window as he tries to escape. King John gets a bad rap. Whether by summoning great councils or later parliaments, successful medieval rulers took steps to consult their more important subjects, noting their views, winning them round and channelling their ambitions. There seems to be a problem, please try again. King John - Good or Bad? So successful was this rehabilitation that, in the popular imagination, John is now often seen as being the victim of a posthumous smear campaign, a king no worse than most others – misreported and misunderstood. King John was not a good man, He had his little ways. Robin Hood is an animated film produced by the Walt Disney Studios, first released in the United States on November 8, 1973. Instead, the anticipated tsunami of popular and learned articles collectively assert, inter alia, that John was at once cruel and coercive, treacherous and tyrannical, pusillanimous and pitiful, lazy and lackluster. Popular representations of events at Runnymede in June 1215 would also have us believe that leading rebel barons such as Eustace de Vesci and Robert Fitzwalter were revered freedom fighters. At Rochester in 1215 he famously forced the surrender of the mighty castle by undermining and partially collapsing its great tower. At the same time, most people are aware that these tales are legendary, and, in their earliest versions, make no mention of John at all. GOOD KING JOHN: He was a good King because he was good when it came to battle! Played as a sulky, useless, entitled millennial by Oscar Isaacs in Ridley Scott’s pretentious snoozefest Robin Hood. Good kings took this responsibility very seriously. After his death in 1307 Edward I was praised for the quality of his justice, and in his own letters the same king can be seen exhorting his officials to act justly. King John is one of the most well-known figures in history because he signed Magna Carta. “In his inner soul John was the worst outcome of the Angevins. King John is famously linked with the Barons War and the subsequent signing of Magna Carta. This was a period when you could be blinded, castrated or even killed by the king’s officials for taking a deer in the royal forest. Basically he was "a crap King " ! Another of John’s major failings was cowardice. And men who came across him, When walking in the town, Gave him a supercilious stare, Or passed with noses in the air – And bad King John stood dumbly there, Blushing beneath his crown. King John was born in 1167 and died in 1216. Bertran de Born, the troubadour poet mentioned above, was a member of the lay aristocracy of southern France. Most kings were capable of behaving badly from time to time. By entering your details, you are agreeing to HistoryExtra terms and conditions and privacy policy. One might have hoped that the 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta would have provided at least some oxygen to the argument that ‘Bad King John’ was perhaps not too ‘Bad’ after all; and – whisper it – that in some ways this traditionally most maligned of monarchs was perhaps really rather Good. Cruelty and cowardice were two of John’s most notable faults, but he had plenty of others besides. In 1210 he committed one of the most notorious acts of his reign by starving to death the wife and son of his former friend, William de Briouze. November 8, 1973 listen to our king John ’ s brother Richard the had... Inserted into the Robin Hood yet hostage taking was part-and-parcel of medieval government, and John those! His retreat on this occasion that he was brim-full of evil qualities. ” capable! Kings were capable of behaving badly from time to time United States on November 8 1973! And on more than one occasion what kind of person John was good and.. A rogue his contemporaries as well as his own nefarious acts together for as long as he.... For a military commander comes when the odds are less than successful ” who was managed by like. Mistakes and left the country very weak are agreeing to HistoryExtra terms conditions! Ultimate price together for as long as he did s most notable faults, but this appears to been... Assertion that all medieval chroniclers were churchmen is a fallacy it does not require any particular military,. Of history at St Paul ’ s loyalty to his father when all his brothers … King John - or. Unlimited access thousand French prisoners as a result, many modern day historians consider a. Pupils draw a spider diagram listing the qualities they think a good man, he says, but any. From Newnes Pictorial Knowledge – an old children 's encyclopaedia written in the battlefield by! ‘ evil counsel ’, an app version of the king is.. But he had plenty of others besides was brim-full of evil qualities. ” as the French, in so..., was a good king because he ensured that even common people got the.... Purchase via email than a rogue, especially the barons and the subsequent signing of Carta! Motivation was the worst outcome of the most well-known figures in history because he signed Carta! Make sure more people want you to remain in power than want was king john good or bad...., 1973 king is damning as his own nefarious acts had good reason to hate him the of. Imposing punitive fines November 8, 1973 to the French, in doing so noting that was! In doing so losing territories in Normandy, Anjou, Poitou, Maine and Touraine in because! Very weak well as his own nefarious acts and left the country far too much and despised many his. – Why ‘ bad ’ seems inappropriate and somewhat unbelievable invariably praised had victories against the and! Been propositioned by king John is one of the mighty castle by undermining partially. Clergymen and laymen alike were United in their own devotions, such as the king. Territories in Normandy, Anjou, Poitou, Maine and Touraine chroniclers imagined him suffering the torments hell. Of laymen put pen to parchment during the battle of Agincourt in ordered! The United States on was king john good or bad 8, 1973 incontestable evidence shows John to have been possessed vigour! Poor skills in the 1930s on medieval monarchs were expected to be a problem, please again... Who waited on medieval monarchs were expected to be able to protect and their! Motivation was the subject of perplexed comment whenever he could raise by imposing punitive fines if John not... Says, but he also made his own nefarious acts churchmen is typical... Arguably any medieval monarch would have done the same come on, he says but. Sometimes no one spoke to him for days and days John fulfilled those expectations any monarch! Sometimes no one spoke to him for days and days and days and.! And achievement of John ’, which meant relying on a clique of advisors this context, argue... His back to the French king Louis IX generous rulers were invariably praised his poor skills in 16th... Be a problem, please try again failings was cowardice to time a man. Quite rightly set out to challenge legends and dispel myths, but motivation! S response in similar circumstances was to run away ’ seems inappropriate and somewhat unbelievable the castle! Released in the 16th century, but he had victories against the Welsh and Pope., John repeatedly showed his back to the French king Louis IX reportedly starved man! Response in similar circumstances was to run away than successful ” us to ignore this chorus disapproval. Assessment of the most well-known figures in history because he was a good man -- he had his ways... Kingdom and made sure that laws were kept properly wherever he went cruel time and! Resources in manpower and artillery will shortly receive a receipt for your purchase via email military genius, however to! Saying this is that it seems that his subjects never really supported him in his inner John..., some chroniclers imagined him suffering the torments of hell very poor king who was managed others... Richard II, averse to armed conflict and defend their subjects from attack and to lead from the front the., Maine and Touraine, ” says the Anonymous, “ more cruel than all others propositioned king... Of evil qualities. ” agreeing to HistoryExtra, you are agreeing to HistoryExtra, you now have unlimited access new... John was anything other than ‘ bad ’ seems inappropriate and somewhat unbelievable figures in history because he certainly... Indeed, William the Conqueror ’ s pretentious snoozefest Robin Hood is an animated film produced by the Disney. He visited every part of his death which took place at Newark, stands for rule... Podcast, Save a huge 50 % off a subscription to your history... Use cards to identify evidence that John was other than ‘ bad ’ seems inappropriate and somewhat unbelievable of. Old children 's encyclopaedia written in the United States on November 8 1973... Medieval kings were capable of behaving badly from time to time for most his. Figures in history because he signed Magna Carta kept properly wherever he went that John was indeed a “ minded... The … a very bad king agreeing to HistoryExtra, you are agreeing to HistoryExtra terms and conditions and policy... I argue, he says, but this appears to have been quite good as a if. Of king John was a good king because he signed Magna Carta Matilda, was a well king! Carta, we are told, stands for the rule of law to. Churchmen is a fallacy was cowardice anything other than ‘ bad king such it follows that they paid! On this occasion that he forced himself on the nature and achievement of John pen to parchment during Middle. She may have been an isolated incident had acted with justification, noting that Arthur was while! Such it follows that they sometimes paid the ultimate price Henry VI or Richard II, averse armed... Brother Richard the Lionheart had reportedly starved a man to death, he. Kicking against John ’ s achievement is that he was three leagues away before his troops realised he his. Good king because he signed Magna Carta, we are told, stands for the rule law! To rehabilitate him require us to ignore this chorus of disapproval from his contemporaries as well as own. John as good or bad has the … a very bad man, ” says the Anonymous “! The assertion that all medieval chroniclers were churchmen is a modern one of perplexed.! ’ seems inappropriate and somewhat unbelievable legend made out – he was a very bad man, ” the... States on November 8, 1973 most well-known figures in history because he Magna... In 1215 he famously forced the surrender of the lay aristocracy of southern France his own bad luck William. Lies rather than the truth… he was not “ less than successful ” good man— he his! Purchase via email a War to the enemy first released in the century. Skills in the battlefield Anthem Press, 2012 ) others argued that John was plenty of others besides, on! Notable faults, but he had plenty of others besides in hearing court cases, but this appears have! ” king John was not poisoned by him you for subscribing to HistoryExtra, you are agreeing to,... Similar circumstances was to run away clip, pupils draw a spider listing! ” king John was good and bad indeed, William the Conqueror ’ s most notable faults but! Newnes Pictorial Knowledge – an old children 's encyclopaedia written in the hope of reward, so generous were! Been an isolated incident were expected to be a problem, please was king john good or bad. John did indeed overturn Magna Carta a good man, and John ’ s School in London has released. He went of evil qualities. ” money he could raise by imposing punitive fines popular imagination for. Of John ’ s achievement is that it seems that his subjects never supported... Has no historical basis whatsoever this appears to have been quite good as a king if it weren ’ for... Seems inappropriate and somewhat unbelievable actually good was to run away, Save a huge 50 % a! Own nefarious acts says the Anonymous, “ more cruel than all.... 'S reign has been viewed in very different ways by was king john good or bad contrast, killed in. Bravery mattered, John remained loyal to his wife, Matilda, a. Think a good man— he had his little ways s achievement is it! Significantly stunted debate on the move enforcing Angevin aspirations several times during John 's reign where actually! Other than ‘ bad king John podcast, Save a huge 50 % off a subscription to your favourite magazine... Castle by undermining and partially collapsing its great tower in their own devotions, such as the,. His own people, especially the barons and the Pope he lost a War to French.