Dan Snow's History Hit - Richard the Lionheart

Episode Date: June 26, 2025

Crusading hero, battlefield legend...absentee ruler? Dan explores the myth and reality behind England’s Warrior King. From storming Sicily to conquering Cyprus and striking fear into the heart of Saladin on crusade, Richard’s legend has loomed large for centuries, fuelled by Victorian storytellers and patriotic lore. But how much of it is true?Medieval historian Richard Huscroft joins Dan to separate fact from fiction. Was Richard I a noble warrior, a king who abandoned his realm, or is it more complicated than that?Produced by Mariana Des Forges, Dan Snow and edited by Dougal PatmoreYou can now find Dan Snow's History Hit on YouTube! Watch episodes every Friday here.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe.We'd love to hear your feedback - you can take part in our podcast survey here: https://insights.historyhit.com/history-hit-podcast-always-on.You can also email the podcast directly at [e-mail].

He is England's warrior king. His statue in the heart of Westminster shows him astride a charger. His back arched, sword pointed straight and true to the heavens. As the Victorian sculptors intended, he embodies martial valour. You would follow him into the jaws of hell if you were his sworn man. You would drop your weapons and run if you were his sworn enemy. He is King Richard the Lionheart, the Angevin enforcer, Christendom's crusading hero.

He's the King of England who spent next to no time there. His true throne was the saddle. His court was the battlefield. He stormed fortresses in Sicily. He conquered Cyprus. The one man who stalked the nightmares of the king of France. The one man who gave pause to the mighty Muslim warlord Saladin. It was said that Saladin and his advisors regarded him as a terrifying warrior with no equal among the crowned kings of the known world. At least those are the stories we are raised with here in Britain. Those are the stories that the Victorians told each other in parlours and wrote down in hagiographic patriotic storybooks for kids. They were obsessed with his crusading

as they were with tales of Robin Hood and good King Richard returning to England to save his subjects from his brother, bad John. Each story bigger than the laugh. Over the centuries, the myth of the Lionheart has got bigger and more fantastical. So how much do we know, really, about Richard the Lionheart? The king whose crest is still on the shirts of the England national football teams? Well, we are here, of course, to help you unravel facts from fiction,

and we've got the medieval historian Richard Huscroft on the podcast to do so. Who was the real Lionheart? Was he a heroic king or one who neglected his kingdom the medieval historian Richard Huscroft, on the podcast to do so. Who was the real Lionheart? Was he a heroic king or one who neglected his kingdom in favour of building his reputation on expensive adventures abroad? You can decide at the end of the episode. Enjoy. T-minus 10.

Atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima. God save the king. No black-white unity till there is first and black unity. Never to go to war with one another again. And lift off, and the shuttle has cleared the tower. Richard was born into one of the most remarkable families in medieval Europe. But unfortunately also one of the most dysfunctional ones. That's up against some pretty stiff competition. He was born in 1157 in England. He was the fourth child born to King

Henry II of England and his very remarkable wife, Eleanor of Aquitaine, the second to survive into adulthood. The world he was born into was fragmented by near constant warfare, but violence, certainly. Shifting allegiances. Kings ruled in name, but unless they made their presence felt, real authority could slip towards nobles and warlords. Castles dotted the landscape, and their owners could rule as petty kings over their regions. They had their own mini armies, mounted knights sworn to obedience, who ruled the battlefield. Richard's father, Henry II, had married very wisely indeed, probably the smartest thing he ever did. Eleanor was heir to a vast collection of territories in France.

When they got married, their fused lands became what we call the Angevin Empire, stretching from England's northern borders all the way to the Pyrenees and even actually the Alps. Henry, well and his wife really, ruled over more of France than the King of France. That was a source of tension enough, but further afield there was great tension between the Christian kingdoms of the eastern Mediterranean, what we now call the Crusader kingdoms, and their Muslim neighbouring powers. That relationship would reach a crisis point during the life of Richard. There would be conquests, there would be crusade. One crusade in particular, the Third Crusade,

was the one in which Richard would really make his name and forge his legend. It was a violent world, but it was also a culturally dynamic one, a colourful one, a vivid one. At the time of Richard's birth, the ideals of chivalry, of courtly behaviour, of courtly love, they were emerging, especially in Southern France, especially in Aquitaine, where Richard's mother, Eleanor, was an important patron of the arts, important in shaping that culture. And it was here in Aquitaine that Richard spent his childhood learning how to behave and how to fight. Here's Richard Huscroft.

learning how to behave and how to fight. Here's Richard Huscroft. It's where he learns to become a knight. It's also where, it's important to stress, he learns some of the more cultural accomplishments that he acquires. Richard is an artistic man. He likes poetry, he likes music, he writes his own poetry, he writes his own songs. And Aquitaine is the centre of that developing,

literate, artistic culture in the 12th century. Certainly his mother'saine is a centre of that developing, literate, artistic culture in the 12th century. Certainly his Mother's Court is the centre of that. So he's exposed to all these influences as a young man. But first and foremost, yes, it's as a knight, as a warrior that he progresses most quickly. Are there plenty of opportunities in this period for, in the complicated politics of France and England, to go to war? Or is it a little bit more the joust, is it the tournaments in which he's gaining his experience? No, he's very much a hands-on soldier in the years before he becomes king. And he's set up there essentially as ruler of Aquitaine with his mother's help from the early 1170s in his late teens. And Aquitaine is a notoriously volatile part of

France. It's very big and it's very difficult to control from any kind of center. So the local nobility of Aquitaine are very independently minded and they do resist any attempts by their ruler, their duke or their duchess in Eleanor's case, to impose rules, to impose order, to tell them what to do. Richard tries very hard to bring them into line during his time there in the 1170s and 1180s. And he's more successful than most of his predecessors had been. So he earns his spurs certainly in Aquitaine, not in major battles, but in the odd skirmish here and there, but particularly in siege warfare. These local barons like to build their own castles and hold themselves up in those when the duke came knocking. So yeah, siege warfare was something Richard learnt in Aquitaine. It's

something he will take with him when he goes on crusade. I mentioned this was a pretty dysfunctional family, and you get very strong evidence of that in 1173, when Richard and two of his brothers rebelled against their father, Henry II, probably on the urging of their mother, Eleanor. Now, eventually, Henry managed to suppress this revolt. He reconciled with his sons, not though his wife went up in prison for several years to come. Peace was largely restored in the Angevin kingdom. Richard became a loyal son again. He ruled over Aquitaine on his father's behalf. But beneath the surface, tensions remained between father and son, between brothers, all about land and money and power and succession, of course. And then it all got shaken up again in 1183. Richard wasn't the oldest son of Henry II,

he had an older brother who's called Henry the Young King. He's a very glamorous, regal figure, chafing at his lack of power under his father's reign but he died of dysentery and that left Richard as the oldest surviving son of Henry II. However, given his recent problems with his son Henry, Henry II didn't formally declare that Richard would take young Henry's place. He would become his heir, even after this very obvious decisive shift in the succession. And this sort of indecision deeply unsettled Richard because he was a bit worried that his father might be grooming his very youngest brother, John, for the throne instead. It said, it's just impossible to know, but it said that Richard was Eleanor of Aquitaine's favourite

and John was Henry's, although we can't be certain. This may be an oversimplification, but Richard definitely came to believe that his father was not acting fairly and his place in this line of succession was under threat. And so in the mid-1180s, Richard did the unimaginable, what his older brother Henry had done. He started looking for support externally, and he found it in King Philip II of France, for whom any crisis across the border was an opportunity. Philip was desperate to extend the lands controlled directly by the King of France. He was desperate to chip away at the powerful Angevin Empire, and now he saw Richard as a useful ally. He supported Richard's claims against his father. In 1188-1189, in a deeply tragic from a personal point of view, but also

pretty treacherous and dishonourable, Richard, the son of Henry II, and Philip, Henry II's greatest rival, joined forces against Henry II. They pressed on him militarily. Richard wanted his father to name him as his heir. And Henry was ailing, he was aging, he wasn't able to resist. In July 1189, Henry was forced to acknowledge formally that Richard would be his successor. And he died just two days later, 6th of July 1189, broken by the conflict with his son. Richard's claim to the Angevin Empire was now secure, but his willingness to invite the King of France right into the heart of that kingdom made the whole imperial project far more fragile.

Perhaps that wasn't clear to him at that point, but it would become so. Richard got his heart's desire on the 3rd of September 1189 at Westminster Abbey in London. He was crowned King of England, but as now the head of the family, he would come to know his father's pain. The bitter blow of family betrayal, not to mention the challenges of running this sprawling empire with covetous neighbours. One of the criticisms of Richard was that he wasn't really very English. This is a 19th century view. How would he have seen his Englishness or not? Was England just another region of this big empire? Was he particularly attached to it or had strong feelings either way? I don't think there's any real sense that he's

strongly attached to it. Born there, yes, but he probably spoke very little English himself. French would have been his spoken language. He obviously comes to England once he is king. But then famously, of course, during his 10-year reign as king, he only spends six months here. And that's one of the great criticisms levelled against Richard from the 19th century onwards, that he's an absentee king, that he uses England as a source of wealth, essentially, and no more, with which to fund his foreign escapades. Now, that's probably unfair, I think. Richard may not have felt instinctively English, but I think he certainly valued his status as King of England. He valued what his kingdom could give him, of course, in terms of its resources. But he also saw by the ongoing stability of his kingdom, even in his absence,

to say he neglected it and just left it to go to seed wouldn't be fair. He does set up some ultimately successful arrangements for looking after the kingdom in his absence. He appoints competent and very able men to do the job for him. He's in regular contact with them whilst he's away. So yes, he's not an Englishman, but he is King of England, and I think he values that for all sorts of reasons. While King Richard was anointed with the consecrated oil, there was an existential crisis at the other end of Christendom.

Jerusalem had fallen to the Muslim leader Saladin, and the Pope was desperately trying to round up support for another crusade. Richard, while he'd been a prince, had vowed he would go and help reclaim the Holy Land. So the first thing he did upon becoming king was to raise an army to head east. He sold royal offices and lands to fund the campaign. His father actually begun raising a huge amount of money, a swinging tithe or tax of 10% on all revenue and on most movable property. It was called the Saladin tithe. Richard completed the job bringing it in. It was probably the largest tax bill the English people had ever faced up to that point. So in fact, he had the money and he had the inclination. What he needed

to do was convince his neighbours, particularly King Philip of France, not to attack while he was away. And to resolve that, well, they made a deal. King Philip would go with Richard. They would join a great host of European nobles on the way to the East to try and reclaim Jerusalem. Joining them, for example, would be the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa. He travels to the south of France and then embarks by ship from Marseille. This is a big change in crusading methodology. He and Philip, they're the first major princes to leave Western Europe on crusade by ship and to sail across the Mediterranean.

It allows them to take more stuff with them, essentially. Richard has 200 ships, we're told, by some sources, and up to 20,000 troops by the time he leaves one of his stopping off points on Sicily. So he's got masses of equipment, masses of supplies. He's very, very well prepared for all of this. But there's more to it than that. He has a kind of Mediterranean strategy of which the crusade is only part. He has business on Sicily. He stops on Cyprus and just decides to capture it while passing. And Cyprus becomes a very important offshore base for the crusader states from that point on. So he's got an eye for the bigger picture,

certainly. His conquest of Cyprus, I mean, it suggests that we've got a live one here. I mean, he's good at fighting. He's good at leading men in battle. Yes, very much so. And when he reaches the Holy Land, that becomes even more apparent. The situation at the start of the Crusade for the Christians in the Holy Land is dire. Saladin conquers Jerusalem, but he also takes back most of the territory which the Crusaders had occupied since the first crusade, which they'd built up since 1100. By the time Richard arrives, the Crusaders, the Franks, only control a very tiny amount of land on the Palestinian coast. And Richard jumps straight into the action at the siege of the

great port city of Acre. Acre is controlled by a Muslim garrison, and the Christians are trying very hard to get it back, essentially. It's strategically vital to them that they have a port the size of Acre. But by the time Richard arrives, the siege has been going on for two years. Some progress has been made, but not very much. You listen to Dan Snow's History. Don't go anywhere. There's more to come. I'm Matt Lewis.

And I'm Dr. Alan Orjanaga. And in Gone Medieval, we get into the greatest mysteries. The gobsmacking details and latest groundbreaking research. From the greatest millennium in human history. We're talking Vikings. Normans. Kings and popes. Who were rarely the best of friends.

Murder. Rebellions. And crusades. Find out who we really were. By subscribing to Gone Medieval from History Hit. Wherever you get your podcasts. It was at the gruelling siege of Acre that Richard the Lionheart really established his really Europe-wide reputation. It had been a brutal two-year siege.

It was marked by disease and desertion and the tide of war going either way. But things changed when Richard arrived. Acre is a port on the Mediterranean. It's in the north of what is now Israel. And it had been captured by Saladin as part of his great tear across the Crusader kingdoms. He had annihilated the Crusaders at the Battle of Hattin, and dozens of castles and towns and ports had fallen to him after that, culminating in Jerusalem itself. But the Crusaders were back, and they were determined to take Acre. And into this nightmare of trench warfare and hunger and tents filled with the

groans of men vomiting and defecating themselves to death, in the spring of 1191 arrives Richard. He's got the King of France, Philip alongside him, and they've got fresh armies and supplies. It seems that when Richard arrived, he was actually suffering from illness. Perhaps he had scurvy or malaria, but either way, he took command of the siege operations with characteristic aggression. At one stage, he was confined to bed.

He was so ill, but he had himself carried to the front line so he could still shoot his crossbow at the defenders while lying on his sickbed. Richard organised for siege engines to be placed, huge stone-throwing catapults, trebuchets, they had names like Bad Neighbour and God's Own Catapult, and he battered Acre's walls. He opened up breaches in those walls, holes in the walls,

which the crusaders tried to storm again and again. As they did so, Richard's crossbowmen put down a relentless barrage on the defenders on the battlements. And simultaneously, King Philip's forces, for example, they'd attack from other directions, other sections of the wall to divide the attention of the defenders. The siege had been going on for two years, but once the Lionheart arrived, well, it was all over in less than two months. The defenders inside Acre surrendered on the 12th of June 1191. The Muslim garrison negotiated their surrender terms. They expected the safe release of Muslim prisoners that had been taken in exchange for them marching out of the city, but that wouldn't be the case. And what came next was probably the darkest chapter in Richard's story.

You hear things about sort of Richard and Saladin having a kind of mutual respect for each other. Was he particularly harsh, particularly savage? What do you make of his treatment of things like the prisoners that he captures whilst in the Holy Land? Richard did establish a good relationship with Saladin's brother, who was an envoy, often. Richard certainly had the respect of Muslim chroniclers for his skills as a soldier, also for his character. They thought he was a great man. But of course, the one great blemish on his record is his treatment of the Muslim prisoners he takes at the end of the siege of Acre. When Acre is captured, of course, the garrison falls into

Richard's hands. And we're talking about something between 2,000 and 3,000 prisoners here. They are taken hostage and they are used as a bargaining chip. Essentially, Richard makes an agreement with Saladin that he will surrender the hostages. He'll hand them back if Saladin pays him a large amount of money. 200,000 gold dinars is the way it's usually expressed. Over the next few weeks, Saladin strings this out, essentially. He wants to delay Richard. He wants to keep Richard holed up in Acre so that he can recover a little bit and to frustrate Richard's plans. So Saladin drags his feet about the payment of the ransom. Richard, on the other hand, is again, as he sees won't, he's very, very determined to

move on quickly. But he has this problem of the prisoners. What will he do with them? He decides he can't leave them behind. He doesn't have the people to guard them apart from anything else. So he makes the drastic decision to execute them all. He takes them out of Iqa. He lines them up in plain sight, really, of the Muslim camp and executes them all by beheading. Estimates between two and a half and three thousand people are killed in one afternoon in this way. Now, of course, that today would be seen as a war crime. There's no question about it. Hostages were often taken at sieges. Hostages were often taken as guarantees of the good conduct of the party on the other side.

And there was an understanding that if that other party failed to fulfill their side of the good conduct of the party on the other side. And there was an understanding that if that other party failed to fulfill their side of the bargain, the hostages were fair game. The thing about this example is the scale of it. It's the amount of people who were killed in this way. Now, obviously, it causes a reaction on the Muslim side. Part of the deal was that Saladin will pay the ransom, but he will also surrender some of the Christian prisoners on his side. Many of those are killed, not in as great numbers as they are by Richard, but some of those Christian hostages are put to death. And there is outrage on the Muslim side about what Richard has done. On the Christian side, there's hardly any reaction at all.

There's no Western Christian outrage at this. This is a fact of war, essentially. And if anyone's to blame for it, it's Saladin, not Richard. It is a problematic episode, certainly for a modern audience, to get their head around. So much for chivalry. The right and decent way for a Christian knight to behave clearly had some porous boundaries. Richard was happy to stray beyond those throughout his career. There's another lesson that the reality of war could be very different to the songs sung by his mother's poets. The capture of Acre was a major morale boost for the Crusaders,

and it gave them a vital base and an apport for the rest of the campaign. But nothing creates conflict among a pack of status-obsessed, fragile male egos like success, folks. pack of status-obsessed, fragile male egos like success, folks. Victory actually intensified the cracks, the disagreements, among the constellation of kings and dukes and nobles and bishops and earls and knights that had all gathered, a big motley crew from across Europe. And we see that because King Philip of France, he left the Holy Land shortly after that victory. He abandoned the campaign. He left Richard in sole command. And that should have been a warning to Richard. But Richard was more interested in the enemy that lay to his immediate front. After Akersladin tried to crush this troublesome crusader army, but Richard won his greatest battlefield victory just down the coast from

a place called Arsuf, just north of present-day Tel Aviv and there's an account written about a generation later by chronicler it's an amazing description of the king in this battle whether it's true I don't know but it was written in the early 13th century let's give a chance there the king the fierce the extraordinary king cut down Turks in every direction and none could escape the force of his arm for wherever he turned brandishing his sword, he carved a wide path for himself. Then as he advanced and gave repeated strokes with his sword, cutting them down like a reaper with his sickle, the rest, worn by the sight of the dying which lay on the face of the earth, extended over half a mile. Even if there's a hint of truth in that,

it does imply that Richard was an astonishing presence on the battlefield. After that defeat, Saladin moved to capture the town of Jaffa on the coast, and Richard responded immediately. He gathered a small force, he sailed down the coast, he leapt into the sea, he just dared his men to follow him. They stormed ashore out of the surf, and Saladin's forces couldn't quite believe what they saw. They panicked and Richard retook the city. So it was going quite well for Richard and indeed at the very end of 1192 he took his army inland until they could see the walls of Jerusalem. But there were good old arguments in the high command, divisions uncertainly about to do next and there was shocking weather and so Richard reluctantly headed back to the coast. Bahal Din, who's a contemporary Muslim soldier, he wrote a biography of Saladin. He did also,

so this interest comes from the Muslim sources, he recorded a tribute to Richard's martial prowess. I have been assured that the King of England, lance in hand, rode along the whole length of our army from right to left, and not one of our soldiers left the ranks to attack him. So Richard was a great warrior. He was, I think, a serious threat to Saladin. The trouble is he now faced threats. He faced challenges on the battlefields of the Middle East, but back in Western Europe. Because he hears news that he faces another enemy, one in the very bosom of

his own family. His brother John had been consorting with his nemesis, the King of France, plotting against Richard. History was repeating. He made a truce with Saladin. There would be, I think, three years of peace. Christian pilgrims and traders would have access to visit Jerusalem. And Richard the Lionheart left the Holy Land, intending to return, but actually for the last time. He was now at peace with Saladin, but there was war on the horizon with a fellow crusader. He leaves the Holy Land and heads home. He's expecting to come back i suppose and go on another crusade why does he head home he heads home for several reasons really one because he's not very well he does fall ill with increasing frequency at 11 91 11 92 i think he's exhausted

by everything that's happened but more pressingly there are matters in Europe that require his attention. His younger brother, John, is plotting and conspiring with King Philip II of France. Philip II went on crusade, of course, with Richard, but then during the crusade, they fell out. Philip came home early and proceeded to try and undermine Richard in his absence by joining forces with John. So this is a problem which Richard clearly thinks he needs to address. So he goes home really to sort out that difficulty. He doesn't go back the way he came because he doesn't want to end up in France and fall into the attention of Philip II. He wants

to evade Philip's attention if he can. So the plan is to sail up the Adriatic and go back through Europe across the lands of some of his more friendly associates. So he's thinking of across those lands, then I'll have a safer passage. You listen to Dan Snow's history. There's more coming up. I'm Matt Lewis. And I'm Dr. Eleanor Janaga. And in Gone Medieval, we get into the greatest mysteries. The gobsmacking details and latest groundbreaking research.

From the greatest millennium in human history. We're talking Vikings. Normans. Kings and popes. Who were rarely the best of friends. Murder. Rebellions. And crusades.

Find out who we really were. By subscribing to Gone Medieval from History Hit, wherever you get your podcasts. But that is not what happened. Richard got caught up in a shipwreck on the coast of the Adriatic in modern-day northeast Italy. He struggled ashore with a small group. Now, then he disguised himself as a sort of merchant or pilgrim, and he hoped he would be able to slip unnoticed

through pretty hostile territory on his way to the English Channel. But Richard, well, he stood out. He was a tall, he was an imposing figure. I can imagine he's probably not the best a tall, he was an imposing figure. I can imagine he's probably not the best at hiding his light behind a bushel. And near Vienna, Richard was recognised and arrested by Leopold V, Duke of Austria. Now, Leopold was, by sheer bad luck, one of those lords who'd been very offended by Richard's treatment of him when they had campaigned together. In fact, the moment when they captured Acre. He had felt insulted when Richard hadn't given him sort of equal credit and status for the capture

of the city. And now Leopold had his chance for some revenge and for a massive profit. He handed Richard over. He sold him to Emperor Henry VI of the Holy Roman Empire, who held the king in chains in various royal prisons. Henry VI demanded a ransom of 150,000 marks. Now that is, we think, three times the annual English crown's revenue. And the English scrambled to pay. Taxes were raised, including a special levy called Aid for the King's Ransom. The church melted down sacred vessels and its plate. Now, his younger brother John was not being too helpful in this process. Together with Philip of France, they tried to delay and sabotage Richard's release. Philip even famously wrote to Henry VI,

hold him fast. We have the devil in our kingdom if he returns. Now, that story, that tragic story of Richard's imprisonment, really captured the imagination of Europe and its bards, and the myth-making began. And we have the story, which is not true, of Richard's loyal minstrel Blondel searching castle to castle across central Europe, singing a secret song until the king replied from a high tower window. More prosaically, in February 1194, the English paid a massive ransom. Richard was released, and he returned to England. His legend in arts, this is now a brave king that was betrayed and imprisoned and redeemed. But his capture really had humiliated England. It had weakened the Angevin Empire profoundly.

It highlighted the fragility of kingship, yes, but his kingdom in particular, which was just being overrun by the French. This was the ruthless realpolitik of medieval Europe. The Pope had promised, had absolutely guaranteed that no crusader's territory could be threatened by another Christian prince while he was off crusading, fighting for the cross. And yet as soon as Philip had got back from crusade, he'd turned his attention to Richard's lands. Outrageous. However, Philip of France was about to get his comeuppance.

When he found out that Richard had got his freedom, he famously wrote to John, Look to yourself, the devil is loose. So Richard arrives back in England. Is there a great moment of celebration like you see in all the different Robin Hood films? I don't think there's a huge celebration. He's down to business straight away. He has to go and besiege a few castles and knock a few heads together. But he's soon back in control. John really has no choice but to kind of fall on his knees and beg for mercy. And Richard magnanimously forgives him. I mean, he didn't rate John as a soldier or as a threat or a challenger.

But he does forgive John a lot. It's true. He does seem to love John as a brother, despite his faults. So Richard is then in England for a few months, but that's the only time really for the rest of his reign that he's in England. He then leaves England for France, where he has a much bigger threat or problem to deal with. And that's Philip II, because of course, while Richard has been away, Philip has used that time to his own advantage to encroach upon Richard's lands in France, particularly in Normandy in the north. And Richard is going to spend the next five years, essentially the last five years of his reign in France, trying to roll back those conquests that Philip made whilst Richard was in captivity.

But he's pretty effective, right? I mean, he builds Chateau Gaillard in the space of months or something, doesn't he? It's an astonishing castle on the Seine. And he does claw back some of those territories. However, in the process of doing so, he meets, well, a horrible end. Tell me about that. Yes. Well, Richard is largely successful. so, he meets a horrible end. Tell me about that. Yes. Well, Richard is largely successful. It's pretty grinding stuff though. In a way, it gets much less publicity, what he does in France in the second half of the 1190s, because it's not very glamorous kind of warfare. It's not crusading battles. But in a sense, it's just as impressive, really, what he does. But yes, we get to 1199 and Richard has nearly taken back

all of the most important places. But then he takes a little break from fighting Philip to go south to deal with a problem in Aquitaine, where a local lord has been causing problems as Aquitanian lords tend to do. And Richard goes down there to bring him into line and he ends up besieging one of this lord's castles, a place called Chaloux. It's a small castle. It's not a major operation. Richard's seen many like it. But one evening during the siege, he rides out to inspect what's going on. He has a helmet on, we're told, but no body armor, which is far too casual it proves because a crossbowman on the ramparts of the castle sees him and decides to take a pot shot and strikes

it lucky and hits him in the shoulder with a crossbow bolt that's not fatal it's what happens next that kills him the operation to remove the bolt is botched by an incompetent surgeon and the wound gets infected it turns gangrenous and that's what kills him and he dies pretty quickly really and unexpectedly it's all a pretty shabby end there's nothing unusual about that most of these kings have shabby ends and their glorious achievements count for little in their death throes yes and this is where we can ask if he deserves his well he had, I suppose, in the 19th century when they erected an enormous statue of him outside the House of Parliament, regarded as one of the great warrior kings of English history. So you tell me, what had he

achieved? Well, I mean, this is a contentious topic, really, amongst historians. On the one hand, Richard does provide a model of a certain kind of martial kingship. He is what contemporaries might have described as a rex bellicosus. And that's a good thing. That's a good thing. He's a warrior king, a powerful soldier king. And nobody does that better than Richard. Having said that, historians these days are inclined at least to scrutinize his achievements on the crusade. His failure to even attempt to take Jerusalem is explicable strategically, but if he went out of a sense of duty to Christianity, then arguably a failure.

He does see off Saladin a couple of times, but he doesn't defeat him. So is the Third Crusade the achievement it's sometimes portrayed as being? The Kingdom of Jerusalem is in a better state when Richard leaves it than it was when he arrived, that's certainly true. But it's not as if he achieves all the goals he sets out to achieve on the Crusade at all. Then when he gets back to France, he does go a long way to recovering all the lands that Philip has taken. And to be fair, had he lived longer, he might have recovered them all. He certainly left his little brother with a crushing financial problem from all his wars and ransoms, and dealing with the encroaching French king. And his little brother had none of

his martial abilities or skills. So that's a whole separate issue that poor King John's got to deal with. Richard leaves John with an exhausted treasury. The money spent on the crusade, the money spent on the ransom, the money spent on the campaigns in France, this has placed an enormous financial burden on England. And when John becomes king and secures his inheritance, contemporary chroniclers are delighted. They're delighted because they see this as an end to this period of warfare, an end to this intense, remorseless military and financial campaign that Richard has been waging for 10 years now. So there is a sense of relief when he's gone and when John takes over, and it looks as if John is going to be a more peaceable king. So I think there are questions about Richard's reputation. What legacy

does he leave behind? What inheritance does he leave to his brother? You've hinted at this already Daniel. Within a few years, all of the lands in France which John inherits are essentially gone. The Angevin Empire has collapsed. Now this is another podcast entirely, but many historians will blame John for that. They'll blame John's incompetence. They'll blame John's mistakes. But some historians would say, well, John had a very difficult job. Even had he lived longer, Richard would have struggled to hold on to the Andrian Empire,

not just because he was exhausting his own funds, but because French power was on the rise. Philip II was getting richer. Philip II was getting more confident and more able to challenge the Angevins on the ground. The words of one great historian, the Angevin Empire was arguably already a guttering candle by the time John became king, and Philip just needed to blow on it to put it out. Well, thank you very much, Richard Huscroft, for coming on and telling us all about your namesake,

the Lionheart Richard I of England. It's been a pleasure. Thanks so much for listening, folks. We really hope that this has helped you better understand what's going on, give me a bit of context. And if you think your friends, family, colleagues would enjoy that, then please, please do share with them.

Whatever your podcast player, whatever you're listening on, it will let you share this as a link or even a WhatsApp message. That sharing is the lifeline of this podcast and what keeps us going. So thank you for listening and thanks for sharing. Join us next time for another episode of Dan Snow's History Head. Thank you. you