Why Would John Want to Usurp the Throne?
Richard had no children--it is even said that he was homosexual--, so would not John have been his inevitable successor?
God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)
Richard had no children--it is even said that he was homosexual--, so would not John have been his inevitable successor?
God is subtle, but He is not malicious. (Albert Einstein)
Yes but when? Richard and John weren't so many years apart, and considering the many hazards of medieval life, there was at least as much chance of John dying before Richard as of John suceeding him. Not ot mention, Richard didn't have any children YET, but was very capable of still producing a male heir before he died. Finally, there was a vacancy in power because Richard was away and held prisoner. John saw an opportunity.
"Occasionally I'm callous and strange."
Because to John it seemed like a good idea at the time. Sorry, but I just couldn't resist writing that. I have terminal smart ass syndrome.
share[deleted]
He did succeed Richard, and signed the Magna Carta.
Hitler! C'mon, I'll buy you a glass of lemonade.
He had a lust for power. It corrupts and twists the minds of mankind to otherwise foolish or unthinkable deeds.
shareEveryone did shit like that in those days, it was a violent and ruthless age. It was what you did if you were a rich and powerful aristocrat, because it was how to keep all the other rich and powerful aristocracts from grabbing everything! You grabbed it all first!
Eventually it ruined the Plantagenet dynasty. By the end of the War of the Roses, they had basically killed each other off.