Richard The Lionheart - and how did he get his name

MAGolding

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,939
Chalfont, Pennsylvania
View attachment 23127

Welcome to the world of fiction and intrigue. We all know in detail about the Norman/French / Plantagenets/Angevin king's life and exploits. But then ofcourse is always another twist, presenting the imagination, medieval romanticism and fairy tailish ambitions of
just another modern scribe.

Richard Coeur de Lion...Rhee-K-ard Coor deux Lee-on ..the French pronounciation

is the title of the book by Katherine H Terrell

In it the author goes to length to depict her own angle on things surrounding the French/Norman King life and exploits.
She mentions a mysterious King , who imprisons Richard the Lionheart, on his way back from the 3rd Crusade, although in reality
we have 2 Kings involved in the deed - Leopold V of Austria and Henry VI of the Holy Roman Empire.

....
The title of Leopold V was:
Ego Luipoldus dei gratia dux Austrie
"Duke of Austria"

Austria. I. Titles of European hereditary rulers

The title of Henry VI was:
Henricus Sextus diuina fauente clemencia Romanorum Imperator et semper augustus
Germany. Titles of European hereditary rulers

"Emperor of the Romans and alwasy Emperor (or always imperial)"
 
Jul 2017
239
Neverland
Unfortunately, leaders are often judged by the grandness of their actions rather than the goodness of their rule.
Exactly ! In ancient and medieval times, greatness was measured by the square mileage and military victories and prowess the rulers exhibited - not the low unemployment rate of today. Great Britain and its dominions were set on the path of preemince not by the german anglo-saxons, but the conquests of Normans and French.
Vestiges of Roman life persisted in Britain, along with form of governance, the arts and culture.Outdoor plumbing slowly abandoned, warm water by piping was again triumphat after the cultural desert Britain was before the Normans.
 

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,988
Sydney
In Ancient times a leader was judged on his personality , ancestry and ability to gather obedience
 

martin76

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
6,643
Spain
I guess probably the nickname was given by some chronicler, minstrel or jester decades after his death ... which is the only decent thing that man did.
 

notgivenaway

Ad Honorem
Jun 2015
5,743
UK
He won a number of battles versus the muslims, just that failed to conquer Jerusalem. Moreover, some of his allies(Leopold of Austria) abandoned him, due to Richard's ego
and misconceived honor.Not the best of diplomats.
He signed a truce with Saladin.

And he got captured in Austria and had to have the original "king's ransom".

He doesn't warrant his historical billing.
 

betgo

Ad Honorem
Jul 2011
6,339
Crusading is discredited now, and viewed negatively for various reasons. He probably wasn't a good king as far as doing what was best for his subjects or strengthening his empire. However, at the time and in the century or two afterwards he was had a reputation in England and France for the crusading. He was also killed sort of in battle defending his French territories. That is why he is known as Richard the Lionhearted.
 

JoanOfArc007

Ad Honorem
Dec 2015
3,800
USA
Crusading is discredited now, and viewed negatively for various reasons. He probably wasn't a good king as far as doing what was best for his subjects or strengthening his empire. However, at the time and in the century or two afterwards he was had a reputation in England and France for the crusading. He was also killed sort of in battle defending his French territories. That is why he is known as Richard the Lionhearted.
Richard I was one of Englands greatest Kings. Richard I statue survived the London Blitz by the Third Reich in WW2, giving Englishmen hope and courage in WW2.

For centuries, Richard I was said to be a friend of Robin Hood. Robin Hood fought against the misrule of the terrible King John whom was Richards own brother. But Robin Hood Remained loyal to Richard while Richard was away on Crusade. Its a story for the ages that is the real Robin Hood and was it possible that Robin Hood did exist and did support Richard the Lionheart? There is something about the Lionheart that stands out. To this very day Richard I is one of the figures of the middle ages rightfully glorified in art and literature.
 

betgo

Ad Honorem
Jul 2011
6,339
Richard I was one of Englands greatest Kings. Richard I statue survived the London Blitz by the Third Reich in WW2, giving Englishmen hope and courage in WW2.

For centuries, Richard I was said to be a friend of Robin Hood. Robin Hood fought against the misrule of the terrible King John whom was Richards own brother. But Robin Hood Remained loyal to Richard while Richard was away on Crusade. Its a story for the ages that is the real Robin Hood and was it possible that Robin Hood did exist and did support Richard the Lionheart? There is something about the Lionheart that stands out. To this very day Richard I is one of the figures of the middle ages rightfully glorified in art and literature.
Yeh, I remember in the Robin Hood tales King Richard was away on crusades and his brother John was oppressing the people.

He had a reputation for the crusades. He also died doing what generals today do, inspecting the situation at the front. It certainly showed courage.

From a modern perspective, some of his actions like ordering 3,000 POWs killed and sort of encouraging anti-Jewish riots and killings don't look so good. He spent almost all of his reign on crusade or fighting in France, and hardly any time in England. That was what made a great king at the time, but isn't looked on as well now. Crusades have been seen for the last 300 years as sort of insane.
 

MAGolding

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,939
Chalfont, Pennsylvania
Because he was a brave warrior, and had the heart of a lion.

Either way, he was an average king, and didn't even win his Crusades. John was a superior king to him, and yes, that's controversial. But then considering he didn't pay much attention to the kingdom, the nobility were rightly agititated by their king's bad acts.
King John was a very inferior king, if being evil makes a king inferior. King John didn't set a good example for nobles or common people. First his prisoner Arthur disappeared while a prisoner of John, at about the time of Arthur's 16th birthday. Then in 1212 the continuing aggression of John's officers against Gwynedd despite the peace drove the people of Gwynedd to revolt. According to the story when John heard of the revolt he rode in a fury to Nottingham Castle and hanged 28 hostages from Gwynedd, boys aged 12 to 14. According to the Brut y Tywysogion one of John's officers hanged a boy named Maelgwyn ap Maelgwyn, not yet seven, about the year 1212. It seems to me that if John had the slightest degree of benevolence or desire to do good he would not have had even one kid killed, let alone thirty.
 

Willempie

Ad Honorem
Jul 2015
5,391
Netherlands
The whole "Lionheart" stuff is pure propaganda. Richard had revolted multiple times against his father, was so popular in Aquitaine that almost every noble revolted at least once and was so popular with the other royals that they all wanted to capture him. He was such a good commander that he antagonized every other leader in the crusade, so that they left him alone and he died while laying waste to Limoges (during Lent apparently). In short one of the worst kings of England whose main success is that his brother got all the blame in the history and Robin Hood stories.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sparky