John’s
actions and character had contributed to the failure of the Bouvines campaign
of 1214 as his treatment of barons had resulted in long term hatred, proving to
be harmful in the long run when they refused to support him when required.
However, it would be false to state that the failure of the Bouvines campaign
of 1214 was a consequence of John’s actions and character as there were factors
which were beyond his control, and rather the faults of other allies which had
thus resulted in the failure of the Bouvines campaign of 1214.
John’s
actions and character had to some degree contributed to the failure of the
Bouvines campaign as the lack of baronial support demonstrates John’s
incompetence to secure and maintain vital allies. Surely, if John had managed
to maintain the support of William des Roches, he would’ve have been more
successful in marching against Philip. Although, over the years John had
improved relations with barons as seen by the Lusignans as he previously had an
ordeal with them but by making an alliance he was able to successfully secure
the vital port of Nantes and captured Robert of Dreux which demonstrates that
John’s actions were wiser and gives more of a reason that the failure of the
Bouvines campaign wasn’t solely due to John’s actions and character. It would also
be false to state that it was entirely due to John’s incompetence as the
Poitevin barons, notoriously known to be disloyal and tyrants, deserted him and
refused to fight. This thereby crippled John’s efforts to regain further lands,
but also meant that Philip did not have to fight a front and thus enabled him
to prepare further defences. However, arguably at this event, it could be
suggested that it was to some extent a consequence of John’s actions and
character as John had requested help from the English barons but due to the long-term
hatred and bad relations with them very little could be done and forced John to
withdraw as his army wasn’t large enough to advance onto the castle of
Roche-au-Moine. A key group of English barons known as ‘northerners’ had
refused to pay scutage in lieu or contribute military forces which emphasises the
lack of baronial support and John’s bad relations with barons. This therefore
implies that the failure of the Bouvines campaign of 1214 was a consequence of
John’s action and characters, as if John had maintained good relations with
important barons such as William des Roches, he would’ve been in a stronger
position as would not be required to rely upon Poitevin barons.
On
the other hand, rather than the failure of the Bouvines campaign being a fault
of John’s actions and character, John’s allies had contributed much more to the
defeat of the 3-hour battle. Whilst John’s initial plan was to invade Paris
from both the north east, this was prevented by John’s allies, German emperor,
Otto IV, Count Ferrand of Flanders and Count Renaud of Boulogne, who were heavily
delayed in assembling which allowed Philip II to continue to build up his
defences and to prepare for the upcoming battle. Although John made a good
strategic plan to simultaneously attack Philip from the north and south, the
failure of the Bouvines campaign of 1214 was less to do with the consequences
of John’s actions and character but rather the ineptness of the allies as it
wasn’t until the third week of July that Otto IV and the coalition forces were
prepared to march on Paris. This therefore reveals that rather than the
consequence of John’s action and character it was the fault of John’s allies
which impacted the outcome of the Bouvines campaign and ultimately led to a
truce with Philip II, as if the Poitevin barons did not bail out from the previous
battle and if Otto IV, Ferrand of Flanders and Renaud of Boulogne had been less
tardy, the campaign may have succeeded.
Thus,
to conclude the failure of the Bouvines campaign of 1214 was mainly due to the
ineptness of John’s allies as they had delayed in assembling, making John’s
plan go to waste and such crucial time had enabled Philip to easily build up
forces and defences. Although John’s actions and character may have contributed
slightly as surely if he had better relations with the barons this would mean
that John would not have to rely on Poitevin barons, nor would he have bailed
on the march on the castle of Roche-au-Moine due to the lack of baronial
support. Therefore, ultimately Otto IV and the coalition forces had contributed
to the failure of the Bouvines campaign more significantly.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Feel free to correct any mistakes, add your opinion, or just a comment in general!