no, simple as, all he did was lose it.
2000
There's no consensus on whether King John was a good king. Many consider him to have been a bad ruler, but others think he was effective. Regardless of the presence of dissenting opinions, he tends to be portrayed negatively in the media.
Not really because all he really wanted was money and he was acting selfish.
my friend it is king henry because king john is a good king in them days
king john had 2 sons for heres and kept clean
Because Richard didn't leave enough money for John to pay for good weapons in the battles so John almost always lost the battles
gave them money
There's no consensus on whether King John was a good king. Many consider him to have been a bad ruler, but others think he was effective. Regardless of the presence of dissenting opinions, he tends to be portrayed negatively in the media.
King Henry of England
yes he did
He was a good king, he had won many wars and had lots of money and loot to show for his battle victories.
People in the Victorian times disliked King John and saw him as a failure and a villain. They thought he created his own problems and was cruel and a wicked king; the Devil in disguise.