King Henry II to blame:

Rebellion instigated by YH who was annoyed with his father - expected a degree of authority and autonomy, but didn't receive this (did Henry II not think his son was capable?) Also threatened his inheritance through granting land promised to YH to his youngest son John. Not assigned lands to YH or his queen
Restoration of royal authority restricted the barons' control, which infringed on their rule. Resented Henry's control : Hugh, Earl of Chester, was denied lands, Hugh Bigod’s lands were threatened by new royal castles, and the Earl of Leicester was made to pay scrutage. He further aggravated barons in Normandy by introducing a new form of doomsday book to eliminate existing corruption
However, Henry II adopted a lenient approach towards the punishment of the rebels involved, as he did not want an endless cycle of war and disturbances. Furthermore, Henry did not have the manpower available for the potential threat of war. These imply that Henry did not intentionally provoke, or even anticipate, the Great rebellion
His influence had become increasingly unpopular, especially after he allegedly arranged the murder of Thomas Beckett in 1170
reasons for Eleanor’s involvement in the rebellion were largely due to King Henry through his treatment of her; similarly to YH she was politically disenchanted - deeply resented her position as a non-entity in the reign and government of Henry II, having neither power nor influence. King Henry appeared to be exerting a pyramid of power in his Angevin Empire, placing England and Normandy before Eleanor’s beloved Acquitaine. She therefore joined the uprising to prevent Acquitaine being anonymously absorbed into Henry’s Empire

	Erstellt von Charlotte Peacock vor mehr als 10 Jahre

Reasons why King Henry II, Young Henry, Eleanor and Louis VII are to blame for the rebellion.