2A - Relations with France and the conflict between Richard and Philip II
Richard and Philip cooperated against Henry II and then on crusade, but their competing interests made lasting agreement difficult. Follow the rivalry after the Third Crusade, Richard's recovery from 1194 and the truce of 1199 to judge how far he restored his continental position.
Rivals with overlapping claims
Richard's continental power was a threat to Philip even though Richard owed him homage for lands held in France.
The Angevin rulers held extensive lands within the French kingdom. Richard was king in England, but duke and count in continental territories where Philip was his feudal superior. Homage acknowledged the relationship of a tenant to a lord. It did not turn Richard into an ordinary obedient subject or give Philip immediate control of his castles and armies. Legal claims and actual military resources could point in different directions.
The Norman frontier was especially important. The Vexin lay between the Norman and French royal heartlands, while the Seine connected Rouen to the coast and inland approaches. Possession of frontier castles influenced access, supplies and the security of surrounding territory. A dispute about one fortress could therefore have wider consequences than its size suggested.
Richard and Philip had cooperated in the defeat of Henry II in 1189 because both benefited from weakening him. Once Richard inherited the lands, he occupied the position Philip wanted to constrain. Their shared enemy had gone; the structural rivalry remained. A personal friendship or common crusading commitment could temporarily restrain competition without removing it.
Marriage arrangements added another dispute. Richard's long-expected marriage to Philip's sister Alys had not occurred. His marriage to Berengaria of Navarre in 1191 ended that expectation and required a settlement of related claims. Such quarrels involved political honour and territory as well as family relationships. They gave Philip arguments with which to challenge Richard's conduct.
Richard's English kingship and his French lordships were different legal positions. Philip could use that overlap to press claims, but had to combine it with diplomacy and force to gain effective control.
Crusading rivalry and captivity
The Third Crusade intensified disagreements that Richard's absence then made more dangerous.
At Acre the kings disputed leadership and the political future of the kingdom of Jerusalem. Richard supported Guy of Lusignan, while Philip favoured Conrad of Montferrat. These choices connected the rulers to rival groups within the crusading army. Disagreement therefore affected cooperation, patronage and the allocation of gains; it was more than wounded personal pride.
Philip returned from the East after Acre's surrender in 1191. Although obligations associated with crusading constrained attacks on an absent crusader's lands, they did not end Philip's ambitions. Richard's continuing absence gave the French king opportunities to pressure frontier positions and find allies. Philip also used accusations surrounding Conrad's assassination in 1192 against Richard. The allegation illustrates political hostility; it should not be presented as proof that Richard ordered the murder.
Richard's captivity from late 1192 changed the balance further. Philip could campaign without facing him in person, and John could bargain with Philip in the hope of securing his own position. John was prepared to concede continental interests for political support. Philip captured important places, including Gisors, while uncertainty over the king's return affected the loyalty and decisions of local lords.
Diplomacy over the captivity was part of the struggle. Philip and John wanted Richard to remain unavailable; Eleanor and loyal officials worked to secure his release. The king's return in 1194 therefore changed both military capacity and expectations. He could now direct campaigns, reward supporters and punish or recover the positions of those who had opposed him.
William of Newburgh's account connects the assassination allegations, Philip's actions and John's ambitions. Its favourable treatment of Richard and hostile treatment of Philip are themselves evidence of how the conflict was represented in England. Historians must corroborate claims about hidden plots rather than treat hostile descriptions as established motives. The relevant account is in Book IV.
War and recovery from 1194
Richard recovered much of his position through sustained campaigning supported by money, alliances and fortifications.
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account