Richard Lionheart

Bad king, bad crusader

Bibliographic Data

ID11891790
AuthorsMichael Markowski (a Westminster College, Salt Lake City, UT 84105, U.S.A., corresponding author)
Year1997
Volume23
Issue4
Pages351-365
Publication date1997-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Medieval History (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0304-4181 • E-ISSN: 1873-1279
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1016/s0304-4181(97)00010-9
OpenAlexW2051119425
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited8

This paper analyzes the impact of King Richard Lionheart of England during his tenure as leader of the Third Crusade. It examines crusade policy and the significance of Richard's decisions to deviate from it. The lack of control which both the Church and normative crusading precedents had over him becomes apparent. Richard's failure to take Jerusalem leads to the conclusion that his self-centred, puerile interests in personal adventures destroyed the chance for success of the Third Crusade, and thus prolonged warfare. Most wars have some sort of peace as the ultimate goal. The Third Crusade is no exception, but Richard subverted the goal of peace by turning away from a siege of Jerusalem and toward various other adventures, for example, attacks on Egyptian holdings, border skirmishes, the conquest of Cyprus from the Byzantines. Still, the Lionheart's legend persists from his day to our own to extol chivalrous virtues and courageous action. This paper presents the other side of the coin in the hope of approaching a more balanced, accurate portrayal of Richard's crusade leadership and of the ends of crusade ideology which he undermined

Action (physics · Adventure · Ancient history · Art history · CONQUEST · Ideology · Legend · Normative · Political science · Politics · Siege · Byzantine Studies and History · Classics · History · Islamic Studies and History · Law · Medieval History and Crusades

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub