Thesis statement: Richard Ist did not completely follow the model of “roi-chevalier” established by his legend, he lacked few knightly characteristics and cannot be considered as an excellent king, especially from a political, financial and ideological stand point. Evidence 1: “King Richard had the valour of Hector, th heroism of Achilles; he was not inferior to Alexander, nor less valiant than Roland. No, he easily surpassed in many respects the most praise-worthy figures of our times […] his skill and experience in action equalled his desire for it; his desire did not betray a lack of skill or experience”1 “He was tall, of elegant built; the colour of his hair was between red and gold; his limbs were supple and straight. He had quite long arms, which were particularly convenient for drawing a sword and wielding it most effectively. His long legs matched the arrangement of his whole body. With the not insignificant addition of his suitable character and habits, his was a figue worthy to govern […] He gained the greatest praise not so much for his noble birth as for the virtues which adorned him […] He far excelled others both in his good character and in physical strengh. He was memorable for his military power; his magnificent deeds overshadowed all …show more content…
For him, as for his father Louis VII, French suzerainty was not simply a theory, both aimed to apply it as a powerful weapon for subverting their English rival's authority and used it as pretext for intervening in the Angevin provinces. Richard, like his father before him, refused to recognize the danger in their fealty to the French monarch and thus slowly weakened their authority in their remote territories. The greatest failure in Richard's reign seems to be an ideological one, despite his formidable legend and the kingship's model supposedly built after his