How Far Do King John's Errors of Judgement Explain His Loss of Normandy?

How far do King John's errors of judgement explain his loss of Normandy?

The loss of Normandy was a fatal moment in John's loss of control over the AngevinEmpire, Barratt describes it as the "heart" of the Empire. John's errors of judgement were a ultimately decisive, despite relative success in the early part of his reign. However, other factors also played their part in this loss.

John enjoyed a successful beginning to his reign, fending of the threat of Arthur, who by primogentive law should have been king. The treaty of Goulet in 1200 appeared to be a good idea, as Philip acknowledged John's power over the Angevin lands and Arthur was expected to do homage. It later appeared to be a mistake, as the terms of the Treaty meant John gave up the alliances Richard made with Toulouse, Flanders and the Holy Roman Empire. This loss of alliances meant John had no support when Normandy came under attack as there was no base in proximity, meaning the fortresses built by Richard had to be relied upon. This leads to the next error, which was the loss of support from French vassals. After the Battle of Mirabeau, described by some as a greater victory than any achieved by Richard or Henry II, John's treatment of captives infuriated the nobility. He had them imprisoned, and even went on to murder Arthur, and this greatly undermined the laws of chivalry. The traditional view of John's merciless personality was evident. These errors of judgement resulted in the huge loss of support in France, making it much more difficult to defect Normandy when it came under attack.

Political misjudgement also cost John, as he married Isabella, despite her already being married to Hugh of Lusignan. John then refused to compensate though, leading to Philip attacking his lands. John's inability to handle the situation made it a much greater issue than it needed to be. John was also extremely suspicious, and this meant he relied on mercenaries in France. This however, resulted in the appalling treatment of French by people such as Louvrecaire who Marshall says "maltreated and pillaged" the French as "though in an enemy country". This again resulted in a mass loss of support, with many rebelling against John. Finally, John was inert and passive at times of crisis, earning him the nicknames of "lackland and softsword". During the attacks of Chateau Gaillard, the strongest threshold John had in Normandy, he returned to England in 1203 and failed to act by the time he had it was too late. This was one of the key errors of judgement, as Barratt states that as long as Gaillard stood there was hope.

However, John's errors of judgement were not the only reason for the loss of Gaillard, Philip Augustus leadership also brought about its downfall and ultimately the loss of Normandy. Philip attacked John's lands throughout 1203, winning over Maine, Anjou and large amounts of Aquitaine, as well as key castles and strategically placed lands such as Caen. Described as "astute and opportunistic" (Barratt), Philip took full advantage of John's inability to defend Normandy, and eventually won over Chateau Gaillard in 1204. Normandy's possession depended on it and he had stormed one of the greatest fortresses build by Richard, then he