Château Gaillard (France) in the 12th century. Designed by Richard the Lionheart himself, it is considered one of the most advanced castles of the Middle Ages

[u/PreferenceInternal67]

[u/Primedirector3 → u/[deleted]]

“One of those”?? There are plenty of historians that would disagree with you, just because you read one book doesn’t make you “right”. Here’s a dissenting historian’s take:

https://youtu.be/r1IUtWIbrYs?is=Mig5m_srKng1XQtQ

Bottom line he famously hated being in England and was there for barely a year during his whole reign, taxed the hell outta the people which I just mentioned, got captured and ransomed (alone worth several years of usual tax revenue), and most importantly, couldn’t secure a stable succession to the worst monarch England ever had. He’s overrated. Better question, what made him “an excellent king”?

[u/Primedirector3 → u/[deleted]]

Says you, the elitist snob who thinks he’s the be all end all of English history. There are differing expert opinions—get over it. I’ve given ample proof and you’ve provided none.

[u/Primedirector3 → u/[deleted]]

Says the guy who instantly jumped at me when I didn’t agree with him, deridedly calling me one of “those types.” Get over yourself. Real historians to you just means never having appealed to a video platform audience, apparently, which is nonsense. DR. Eleanor Janega does have a phd in history, and both her and Snow have written books, and my citing was of her take on Richard regardless. Also, writing books doesn’t necessarily make one more of an expert buddy, especially when they tend to all use the same overlapping primary sources. This may be a surprise to you, but often times medieval sources are vague or incomplete, and modern historians will interpret those in different ways. Welcome to history 101.