Differences Between Richard And Henry

Kings Richard, John and Henry were highly different men. Richard was popular and celebrated, and his reign did not bear many difficulties to him since his interest lay on crusading. John was deceitful and callous, but he was a fair judge. And Henry was spineless and powerless through most of his reign. Though visibly different, all of them were faulty kings in their own ways.
Richard became King of England after his father's death in 1189. Though remembered in history as a crusader who had done brave deeds beyond the seas, his military excellence does not negate his lack of eagerness for the crown of England. It is known that out of the ten years he reigned he only spent about six months in England between the Third Crusade and his war against Philip Augustus.
In spite of his fame as a crusader he was lacking as a king, he didn’t interfere with governing, being much too interested in demonstrating his military prowess. He was quick to leave England in the hands of two justiciars, Hugh de Puiset - …show more content…
Wilson as “the most violent clash of church and state”. Hubert Walter, archbishop of Canterbury and justiciar, died in 1205. John wanted to appoint someone who was faithful to him. In retaliation the monks chose their own candidate and presented him to the Pope alongside John’s candidate. Pope Innocent II selected his own candidate, Stephen Langton. This enraged John, who refused to accept Langton as archbishop of Canterbury. As punishment Innocent interdicted England, excommunicated John and closed all churches in the kingdom. In a fit of rage John took all lands owned by clergymen. During the following years the atmosphere was tense, Philip was preparing to invade England and the barons were on the brink of revolting. Therefore in 1213, John had to give in accept Langton, compensate the church for the losses he had inflicted upon them to get the Pope’s help in fighting