While his martial prowess and his effectiveness as a military leader are unquestionable, having won some major victories in both the Holy Land and France during his reign, Richard’s actual rulership has been questioned and often criticised by historians. The fact that he only spent six months of his ten year long reign in England, and that he used much of the kingdom’s coffers in order to fund his overseas military endeavours (which in the case of the Third Crusade, ultimately failed) while failing to implement any significant social or economic reforms place him a little lower in the rankings than one might expect. However, the ineffectiveness of his reign is also eclipsed by that of his younger brother’s, John, who is generally considered by the consensus to have been England’s worst all-time king.
He is not considered to have been a “good” king. (5/8)
Submitted to "Lionheart: 8 Facts About Britain’s Bravest King"