No one disputes that King John, the last of the sons of Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine, was a bad king. John was dishonest, cowardly, sadistic, sexually aggressive, excommunicated from the church, and greedy. [a]
Practically the only thing that’s missing is the hunchback!
And yet, Elizabeth I was at least all of the latter half of those unattractive qualities …
All the classroom effort I put into discerning the qualities an effective leader needs, makes me rail at the epithet ‘bad’ king. It’s not just about Malcolm’s ‘king becoming graces‘:
As justice, verity, temperance, stableness,
Bounty, perseverance, mercy, lowliness,
Devotion, patience, courage, fortitude [c]
Sure, many of our intrinsically bad characters are great at achieving kingship, but dreadful as rulers. I’m pointing at YOU, Macbeth and Richard III. On the other hand you CAN be a bad man, or at least a far from nice one, and be a successful king: Edward I, and perhaps more controversially, Henry V, anyone? Of course, you can be a nice man and a shitty king: Henry VI must surely fit into this category.
But the key must be success as a monarch, surely, not benevolence?
As to John, well, at least his mother loves him (sort of) – which is more than can be said for Richard III …
Perhaps when I hit the end of the plays I’ll rank Shakespeare’s kings and queens, in a Top-Trumps sort of way.
[a] Henry Freeman, The Middle Ages: A History from Beginning to End (Hourly History, 2016) e-book
[b] ’10 Reasons Why Donald Trump Is Actually King John From Robin Hood’, Mashable.com, https://mashable.com/2016/12/01/trump-king-john/?europe=true
[c] William Shakespeare, Macbeth, sourced at http://www.opensourceshakespeare.org
The Boar's Head, Eastcheap 