Who do you think has been the worst British monarch ?

Question

There's a few to choose from, so pick carefully.

Answer 1

yu are right jthere a quite a few to choose from, I don't think I can pick one who was the worst, sitting here I can think of Richard theLionheart, who spent so little time in England, his brother John, whose poor rule caused the Magna Carta, Henry the VIII whose whole actions were bassed on his own virility, Charles the first who thought he had the god given right to rule as he pleased, Richard III usurped power but couldnt keep it.  James II wasn't any better. I can't choose the worst can you

Answer 2

James the first = witch hunters = thousands of dead women because of superstition, and an effect across the world of witch hunts

Answer 3

Edward Vlll

Self-centred, arrogant, selfish, weak-willed, incompetent, namby-pamby. Thank God he abdicated.

Answer 4

Bloody Mary

Answer 5

Henry VIII...an absolute tyrant. Not just because he was a wife killer (just to suit his own means) but all the other things he did to innocent folk...and the country.

Answer 6

queen Blaire and Brown

Answer 7

The most evil was undoubtedly Mary l but the worst may well have been the tyrant and coward James ll.

This King provoked the Monmouth rebellion and was kicked out by the people of England who invited William of Orange to take the thrown. When William landed, James fled and following his capture was ultimately sent to France from where he invaded Ireland and again ran away, branded by his own men 'Seamas a 'caca'.

Answer 8

You're right, there are a few to choose from! Heres my two cents as you yanks say:

Henry VIII, for splitting England from its mother church for his own selfish reasons. The ramifications which are still felt today. For someone who was such a hardline catholic at the beginning of his reign, he tore England apart and gave us a heretical church, and sowed the seeds of hatred and suspicion of Catholics which some still feel today.

People should be reminded there was only one church in England for thousands of years before Henry VIII and there were never any major issues between church and state until he came along. So to question the catholic church is mindless.We all know he needed to overrule the Pope to achieve divorce from his first wife, Catherine of Aragon.

We can see Henry broke away for no other reason than this in the fact he had previously written a defence of the Catholic faith, so he obviously just created the reformation for his own needs and then had to carry it on since the Pope would have excommunicated him either way, and there was no way an egotist like Henry would turn around and apologise to Rome and admit he was wrong. No way.

Surely such a staunch enemy of Luther and his ideas wouldnt have changed his ideals overnight, theres no other reason in my view for Henry splitting with Rome. He just had to make his reasons look just and legitimate later on. Many argue the reformation got truly underway under the reign of his weakling son, Edward VI, who was controlled by influential men.

Then there's Charles I who thought he could rule without Parliament when he felt like it and then call them back when he neded them. Fool. His ego and foolhardniness led to the near ruin of England at the hands of the civil war. US readers may find the fact we had our own civil war against our monarchy quite fascinating! (Especially since you often percieve us all as loving our kings or queens hehe)

James the I was just as bad for believing in this 'divine right of kings' also.

It is my dream that one day our Monarch (whoever it might be by then) will officially apologise to Rome, revert to its true faith, and actually live up the the title Defender of the Faith which still adorns our coins. The damage Henry did to this country's faith is unquestionable.

Answer 9

this is a hard one.. considering the history of england. my choice would be Henry VI. through his inexperienced leadership and weakness, the Wars of the Roses took place

Answer 10

Kind Edward dunno wat one but the one who killed William Wallace. what an a***hole

Answer 11

Definitely king John that evil person... =^_^=

Great question thrs loads 2 choose from! STAR 4 U!

Answer 12

Hi

I would have to say James I I , apart from being a complete idiot he brought the country into undeclared civil war over religion (yet again). He would be run close by James I and Charles I though.

Good question

Take care

Answer 13

there have been a few but mostly we were lucky enough to have good ones but the worst was probably charles the first as he had no aspect of leadership expected people to follow him because he was chosen by god and he completly screwed up the church and stole peoples land and of course started the bloodiest civil war in british history. Though if theres any consolation he was supposed to be a good family man.

Answer 14

It depends on what you mean by "worst".

Aethelraed Unaraed (Ethelred The Unready) was a good man, pious and learned but he was unsucessful in battle against the Danes and ended up losing his throne to King Forkbeard.

King Stephen was singularly unsuited to being the monarch. He was renouned as being "a good man and a bad King". He tried to achieve with kindness what needed to be done with force of arms and failed to punish those who did wrong.

Richard the First was in the medieval period considered an ideal King because he was very fierce and loved battle. The fact that he hated England never learned to speak English, and crippled the economy with various wars and the huge ransome that was needed to free him from prison would make him a tyrant by modern standards but in his day brought him great fame.

King John although renowned as a miser actually did a very good job as king. Most of his early problems were caused by debts inherited from his brother Richard, and most of his later problems were caused by his barons refusing to fight in his armies because they were annoyed by the high taxes he imposed early in his reign to pay off his debts. Although he was not known as a likeable man it was an argument with the Pope that ensured his name would be blackened in history books for all time.

Edward II was unsuccessful in battle and died a horrible death because he was disliked amongst certain factions of the nobility. His main failing was to apoint his lovers to positions of high authority and give them extravagant gifts. His personal life involved regular trips to stay with monks and a passion for the basic crafts and hobbies of peasants. In some ways an exceptional man and in others a very weak one Edward II was a man of contradictions.  After his death he was seen as a saintly figure for several centuries.

In my opinion the worst monarch may have been King William II (William Rufus) because he was disliked as a person, hated by the church, and despised by the people of England and Normandy. He achieved no glories in his reign and was not mourned when he died in a hunting "accident" that involved him being shot.

Answer 15

Charles the first

Answer 16

Not sure whether you mean Monarch of Britain which means after 1603 and precludes a few listed above or  a monarch who ruled any of the constituent parts prior to that date . Baddies ? Part 1 . ( Post 1603 ) George 1 and Part 2 ( Pre 1603 ) John Balliol .

Answer 17

The entire House of York.

Answer 18

Hi.

Apparently English Heritage want to know who was the worst British monarch ever. The problem of course in choosing the worst ever British royal is knowing where to start amid the incompetent, corpulent, tyrannical, pretentious, tight-fisted, greedy, war-mongering, despotic, pompous, cruel, militaristic, imbecilic, power-hungry, blood-thirsty, flatulent, imperialist, greedy, half-witted, obnoxious, warmongering, murderering, slave-trade sponsoring, n**i-supporting. I have submitted the following for your consideration.

Ethelred the Unready

Stephen of Blois

Edward I

Edward II

Henry VI

King John.

George III

Good luck my friend,

CATHORIO.

Answer 19

All through the Stewart's,  Both James-es,(I +II),  and both Charlies-es, (I + II), from 1603 - 1688...

Answer 20

Edward II.

He thought of his denizens as cattle, changed political strategy  on a whim, treated his wife appallingly (now there IS a woman who would have made a great Queen in a different time and different place) and had fickle 'favourites'. (Before I get slagged off about this answer: I'm bi myself but that is no way to run a Kingdom).