Angevin kings of England

Northern France around the County of Anjou; red circles mark regional urban centres

The adjective Angevin is especially used in English history to refer to the kings who were also counts of Anjou—beginning with Henry II—descended from Geoffrey and Matilda; their characteristics, descendants and the period of history which they covered from the mid-twelfth to early-thirteenth centuries. In addition, it is also used pertaining to Anjou, or any sovereign, government derived from this. As a noun, it is used for any native of Anjou or Angevin ruler. As such, Angevin is also used for other counts and dukes of Anjou; including the three kings' ancestors, their cousins who held the crown of Jerusalem and unrelated later members of the French royal family who were granted the titles to form different dynasties amongst which were the Capetian House of Anjou and the Valois House of Anjou.[12]

The term "Angevin Empire" was coined in 1887 by Kate Norgate. As far as it is known, there was no contemporary name for this assemblage of territories, which were referred to—if at all—by clumsy circumlocutions such as our kingdom and everything subject to our rule whatever it may be or the whole of the kingdom which had belonged to his father. Whereas the Angevin part of this term has proved uncontentious, the empire portion has proved controversial. In 1986, a convention of historical specialists concluded that there had been no Angevin state and no empire but the term espace Plantagenet was acceptable.[13]

Henry II (1154–1189) is considered by some to be the first Plantagenet king of England.

Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York, adopted Plantagenet as his family name in the 15th century. Plantegenest (or Plante Genest) had been a 12th-century nickname for his ancestor Geoffrey, Count of Anjou and Duke of Normandy. One of many popular theories suggests the blossom of common broom, a bright yellow ("gold") flowering plant, genista in medieval Latin, as the source of the nickname.[14]

It is uncertain why Richard chose this specific name, although, during the Wars of the Roses, it emphasised Richard's status as Geoffrey's patrilineal descendant. The retrospective usage of the name for all of Geoffrey's male-line descendants was popular during the subsequent Tudor dynasty, perhaps encouraged by the further legitimacy it gave to Richard's great-grandson, Henry VIII.[15] In the late 17th century, this name passed into common usage among historians.[11]

Historians use the period of Prince Louis's invasion to mark the end of the Angevin period and the beginning of the Plantagenet dynasty. The outcome of the military situation was uncertain at John's death; William Marshall saved the dynasty, forcing Louis to renounce his claim with a military victory.[51] However, Philip had captured all the Angevin possessions in France except Gascony. This collapse had several causes, including long-term changes in economic power, growing cultural differences between England and Normandy and (in particular) the fragile, familial nature of Henry's empire.[53] Henry III continued his attempts to reclaim Normandy and Anjou until 1259, but John's continental losses and the consequent growth of Capetian power during the 13th century marked a "turning point in European history".[54]

Richard of York adopted "Plantagenet" as a family name for himself and his descendants during the 15th century. Plantegenest (or Plante Genest) was Geoffrey's nickname, and his emblem may have been the common broom (planta genista in medieval Latin).[14] It is uncertain why Richard chose the name, but it emphasised Richard's hierarchal status as Geoffrey's (and six English kings') patrilineal descendant during the Wars of the Roses. The retrospective use of the name for Geoffrey's male descendants was popular during the Tudor period, perhaps encouraged by the added legitimacy it gave Richard's great-grandson Henry VIII of England.[55]

Through John, descent from the Angevins (legitimate and illegitimate) is widespread, and includes all subsequent monarchs of England and the United Kingdom. He had five legitimate children with Isabella:

• Henry III – king of England for most of the 13th century
• Richard – a noted European leader and King of the Romans in the Holy Roman Empire[56]
• Joan – married Alexander II of Scotland, becoming his queen consort.[57]
• Isabella – married the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II.[58]
• Eleanor – married William Marshal's son (also called William) and, later, English rebel Simon de Montfort.[59]

John also had illegitimate children with a number of mistresses, including nine sons—Richard, Oliver, John, Geoffrey, Henry, Osbert Gifford, Eudes, Bartholomew and (probably) Philip—and three daughters—Joan, Maud and (probably) Isabel.[60] Of these, Joan was the best known, since she married Prince Llywelyn the Great of Wales.[61]

The chronicler Gerald of Wales borrowed elements of the Melusine legend to give the Angevins a demonic origin, and the kings were said to tell jokes about the stories.[62]

Tomb of Henry and Eleanor in Fontevraud Abbey near Chinon in Anjou, France

Henry was widely criticised by contemporaries, even in his own court.[63][64] Nevertheless, William of Newburgh, writing after his death, commented that "the experience of present evils has revived the memory of his good deeds, and the man who in his own time was hated by all men, is now declared to have been an excellent and beneficent prince".[65] Henry's son Richard's contemporary image was more nuanced, since he was the first king who was also a knight.[66] Known as a valiant, competent and generous military leader, he was criticised by chroniclers for taxing the clergy for the Crusade and his ransom; clergy were usually exempt from taxes.[67]

Chroniclers Richard of Devizes, William of Newburgh, Roger of Hoveden and Ralph de Diceto were generally unsympathetic to John's behaviour under Richard, but more tolerant of the earliest years of John's reign.[68] Accounts of the middle and later years of his reign are limited to Gervase of Canterbury and Ralph of Coggeshall, neither of whom were satisfied with John's performance as king.[69][70] His later negative reputation was established by two chroniclers writing after the king's death: Roger of Wendover and Matthew Paris. The latter claimed that John attempted to convert to Islam, but this is not believed by modern historians.[71]

Many of the changes Henry introduced during his rule had long-term consequences. His legal innovations form part of the basis for English law, with the Exchequer of Pleas a forerunner of the Common Bench at Westminster.[72] Henry's itinerant justices also influenced his contemporaries' legal reforms: Philip Augustus's creation of itinerant bailli, for example, drew on Henry's model.[73] Henry's intervention in Brittany, Wales and Scotland had a significant long-term impact on the development of their societies and governments.[74] John's reign, despite its flaws, and his signing of Magna Carta, were seen by Whig historians as positive steps in the constitutional development of England and part of a progressive and universalist course of political and economic development in medieval England.[75] Winston Churchill said, "[W]hen the long tally is added, it will be seen that the British nation and the English-speaking world owe far more to the vices of John than to the labours of virtuous sovereigns".[76] Magna Carta was reissued by the Marshal Protectorate and later as a foundation of future government.[52]

Tomb of Richard I of England and Isabella of Angoulême (at back)

There was no distinct Angevin or Plantagenet culture that would distinguish or set them apart from their neighbours in this period. Robert of Torigni recorded that Henry built or renovated castles throughout his domain in Normandy, England, Aquitaine, Anjou, Maine and Tourraine. However, this patronage had no distinctive style except in the use of circular or octagonal kitchens of the Fontevraud type. Similarly, amongst the multiple vernaculars—French, English and Occitan—there was not a unifying literature. French was the lingua franca of the secular elite and Latin or the church.[77]

The Angevins were closely associated with the Fontevraud Abbey in Anjou. Henry's aunt was Abbess, Eleanor retired there to be a nun and the abbey was originally the site of his grave and those of Eleanor, Richard, his daughter Joan, grandson Raymond VII of Toulouse and John's wife—Isabella of Angoulême.[78] Henry III visited the abbey in 1254 to reorder these tombs and requested that his heart be buried with them.[79]

John Foxe's Book of Martyrs (official title Acts and Monuments) viewed John's reign positively.

According to historian John Gillingham, Henry and his reign have attracted historians for many years and Richard (whose reputation has "fluctuated wildly")[80] is remembered largely because of his military exploits. Steven Runciman, in the third volume of the History of the Crusades, wrote: "He was a bad son, a bad husband, and a bad king, but a gallant and splendid soldier."[81] Eighteenth-century historian David Hume wrote that the Angevins were pivotal in creating a genuinely English monarchy and, ultimately, a unified Britain.[68] Interpretations of Magna Carta and the role of the rebel barons in 1215 have been revised; although the charter's symbolic, constitutional value for later generations is unquestionable, for most historians it is a failed peace agreement between factions.[82] John's opposition to the papacy and his promotion of royal rights and prerogatives won favour from 16th-century Tudors. John Foxe, William Tyndale and Robert Barnes viewed John as an early Protestant hero, and Foxe included the king in his Book of Martyrs.[83] John Speed's 1632 Historie of Great Britaine praised John's "great renown" as king, blaming biased medieval chroniclers for the king's poor reputation.[84] Similarly, later Protestant historians view Henry's role in Thomas Becket's death and his disputes with the French as worthy of praise.[85] Similarly, increased access to contemporary records during the late Victorian era led to a recognition of Henry's contributions to the evolution of English law and the exchequer.[86] William Stubbs called Henry a "legislator king" because of his responsibility for major, long-term reforms in England; in contrast, Richard was "a bad son, a bad husband, a selfish ruler, and a vicious man".[86][87]

The growth of the British Empire led historian Kate Norgate to begin detailed research into Henry's continental possessions and create the term "Angevin Empire" during the 1880s.[89][90] However, 20th-century historians challenged many of these conclusions. During the 1950s, Jacques Boussard, John Jolliffe and others focused on the nature of Henry's "empire"; French scholars, in particular, analysed the mechanics of royal power during this period.[91] Anglocentric aspects of many histories of Henry's reign were challenged beginning in the 1980s, with efforts to unite British and French historical analyses of the period.[23] Detailed study of Henry's written records has cast doubt on earlier interpretations; Robert Eyton's 1878 volume (tracing Henry's itinerary by deductions from pipe rolls), for example, has been criticised for not acknowledging uncertainty.[92] Although many of Henry's royal charters have been identified, their interpretation, the financial information in the pipe rolls and broad economic data from his reign has proven more challenging than once thought.[93][94] Significant gaps in the historical analysis of Henry remain, particularly about his rule in Anjou and the south of France.[95]

Interest in the morality of historical figures and scholars waxed during the Victorian period, leading to increased criticism of Henry's behaviour and Becket's death.[96] Historians relied on the judgement of chroniclers to focus on John's ethos. Norgate wrote that John's downfall was due not to his military failures but his "almost superhuman wickedness", and James Ramsay blamed John's family background and innate cruelty for his downfall.[97][98]

Richard's sexuality has been controversial since the 1940s, when John Harvey challenged what he saw as "the conspiracy of silence" surrounding the king's homosexuality with chronicles of Richard's behaviour, two public confessions, penances and childless marriage.[99] Opinion remains divided, with Gillingham arguing against Richard's homosexuality[99] and Jean Flori acknowledging its possibility.[99][100]

According to recent biographers Ralph Turner and Lewis Warren, although John was an unsuccessful monarch, his failings were exaggerated by 12th- and 13th-century chroniclers.[101] Jim Bradbury echoes the contemporary consensus that John was a "hard-working administrator, an able man, an able general" with, as Turner suggests, "distasteful, even dangerous personality traits".[102] John Gillingham (author of a biography of Richard I) agrees and judges John to be a less-effective general than Turner and Warren do. Bradbury takes a middle view, suggesting that modern historians have been overly lenient in evaluating John's flaws.[103] Popular historian Frank McLynn wrote that the king's modern reputation amongst historians is "bizarre" and, as a monarch, John "fails almost all those [tests] that can be legitimately set".[104]

Matthew Paris, a historian during John's early reign

Henry II appears as a fictionalised character in several modern plays and films. The king is a central character in James Goldman's play The Lion in Winter (1966), depicting an imaginary encounter between Henry's family and Philip Augustus over Christmas 1183 at Chinon. Philip's strong character contrasts with John, an "effete weakling".[105] In the 1968 film, Henry is a sacrilegious, fiery and determined king.[106][107] Henry also appears in Jean Anouilh's play Becket, which was filmed in 1964.[108] The Becket conflict is the basis for T. S. Eliot's play Murder in the Cathedral, an exploration of Becket's death and Eliot's religious interpretation of it.[109]

Shakespeare's The Life and Death of King John

During the Tudor period, popular representations of John emerged.[83] He appeared as a "proto-Protestant martyr" in the anonymous play The Troublesome Reign of King John and John Bale's morality play Kynge Johan, in which John attempts to save England from the "evil agents of the Roman Church".Curren-Aquino 1989, p. 19 Shakespeare's anti-Catholic King John draws on The Troublesome Reign, offering a "balanced, dual view of a complex monarch as both a proto-Protestant victim of Rome's machinations and as a weak, selfishly motivated ruler".Curren-Aquino 1989, p. 19[110] Anthony Munday's plays The Downfall and The Death of Robert Earl of Huntington demonstrate many of John's negative traits, but approve of the king's stand against the Roman Catholic Church.[111]

Richard is the subject of two operas: In 1719, George Frideric Handel used Richard's invasion of Cyprus as the plot for Riccardo Primo, and, in 1784, André Grétry wrote Richard Coeur-de-lion.

The earliest ballads of Robin Hood such as those compiled in A Gest of Robyn Hode associated the character with a king named "Edward" and the setting is usually attributed by scholars to either the 13th or the 14th century.[112] As the historian J.C. Holt notes at some time around the 16th century, tales of Robin Hood started to mention him as a contemporary and supporter of Richard, Robin being driven to outlawry during John's misrule, while in the narratives Richard was largely absent, away at the Third Crusade.[113] Plays such as Robert Davenport's King John and Matilda further developed the Elizabethan works in the mid-17th century, focussing on John's tyranny and transferring the role of Protestant champion to the barons.[114] Graham Tulloch noted that unfavourable 19th-century fictionalised depictions of John were influenced by Sir Walter Scott's historical romance Ivanhoe. They, in turn, influenced the children's author Howard Pyle's The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood (1883) which cast John as the principal villain of the Robin Hood narrative. During the 20th century, John also appeared in fictional books and films with Robin Hood. Sam De Grasse's John, in the 1922 film version, commits atrocities and acts of torture.[115] Claude Rains' John, in the 1938 version with Errol Flynn, began a cinematic trend in which John was an "effeminate ... arrogant and cowardly stay-at-home".[93][116] John's character highlights Richard's virtues and contrasts with Guy of Gisbourne, the "swashbuckling villain" opposing Robin. In the Disney cartoon version, John (voiced by Peter Ustinov) is a "cowardly, thumbsucking lion".[117]

During the 13th century, a folktale developed in which Richard's minstrel Blondel roamed (singing a song known only to him and Richard) to find Richard's prison.[118] This story was the foundation of André Ernest Modeste Grétry's opera Richard Coeur-de-Lion, and inspired the opening of Richard Thorpe's film version of Ivanhoe. Sixteenth-century tales of Robin Hood began describing him as a contemporary (and supporter) of Richard the Lionheart; Robin became an outlaw during the reign of Richard's evil brother, John, while Richard was fighting in the Third Crusade.[113]