Title: What%20made%20William%20the%20Conqueror%20an%20effective%20king?
1What made William the Conqueror an effective king?
- Kept law and order
- Built castles to help control rebels etc.
- Collected tax effectively and fairly
- Good at fighting battles
- Religious / had good relations with the Church
2WHO WAS THE BETTER KING RICHARD I (1189-99) OR
JOHN (1199-1216)?
Henry II m. Eleanor of Aquitaine
Henry Richard I Geoffrey
John
3The Traditional ViewNicknamesRichard the
Lionheart and bad Prince John / lackland
/soft-sword
4Richard, the Crusader king
5Bad Prince John and Robin Hood
6The pictures of the brothers
King Richard I
King John
7Government
King John forced to sign The Magna Carta, 1215
by his Barons. This makes Him look weak! -Magna
Carta a list of things the king was
NOT allowed to do.
King Richard outside the Houses of Parliament
Today. Doesnt he look powerful?
8How true is the traditional view of Kings Richard
I and John?
Caption Was I REALLY a bad king?
9Supporting the traditional view John was NOT seen as a holy king because he fell out with the Pope and punished many of the monks. - He was seen as weak because the Barons made him sign the Magna Carter. - He lost a lot of land during Wars which made him seem a weak fighter.
10IS THE ROBIN HOOD LEGEND TO BLAME?King John is
the cruel King opposing Robin HoodKing Richard
is the brave King away fighting in the crusades
11King Richard The Traditional View
- Richard won lots of battles and conquered lots
of land in the Holy Land (Cyprus, Acre and NEARLY
Jerusalem). - He was a superb fighter
- He was seen to defend the Church against the
Saracens in the Crusades - He never had to give in to his Barons
12Which view is closest to the truth?Was Richard
that good a King?Was John as greedy and cruel
and so weak at fighting in reality?
13(No Transcript)
14(No Transcript)
15Lets Look at the opposing points of view