John II of France

John II
Saint Denis Basilica
Spouses	Bonne of Bohemia ​ ​ (m. 1332; died 1349)​ Joan I, Countess of Auvergne ​ ​ (m. 1350; died 1360)​
Issue	Charles V, King of France Louis I, Duke of Anjou John, Duke of Berry Philip II, Duke of Burgundy Joan, Queen of Navarre Marie, Duchess of Bar Isabella, Countess of Vertus
House	Valois
Father	Philip VI of France
Mother	Joan of Burgundy
Signature

John II (

John was nine years old when his father, Philip VI, was crowned king. Philip VI's ascent to the throne was unexpected: all three sons of Philip IV had died without sons and their daughters were passed over. Also passed over was King Edward III of England, Philip IV's grandson through his daughter, Isabella. Thus, as the new king of France, John's father Philip VI had to consolidate his power in order to protect his throne from rival claimants; therefore, he decided to marry off his son John quickly at the age of thirteen to form a strong matrimonial alliance.

Initially a marriage with

John reached the age of majority, 13 years and one day, on 27 April 1332, and received the Duchy of Normandy, as well as the counties of Anjou and Maine.^[1] The wedding was celebrated on 28 July at the church of Notre-Dame in Melun in the presence of six thousand guests. The festivities were prolonged by a further two months when the young groom was finally knighted at the cathedral of Notre-Dame in Paris. As the new duke of Normandy, John was solemnly granted the arms of a knight in front of a prestigious assembly bringing together the kings of Bohemia and Navarre, and the dukes of Burgundy, Lorraine and Brabant.

Upon his accession as Duke of Normandy in 1332, John had to deal with the reality that most of the Norman nobility was already allied with the English. Effectively, Normandy depended economically more on maritime trade across the English Channel than on river trade on the Seine. Although the duchy had not been in Angevin possession for 150 years, many landowners had holdings across the Channel. Consequently, to line up behind one or other sovereign risked confiscation. Therefore, Norman members of the nobility were governed as interdependent clans, which allowed them to obtain and maintain charters guaranteeing the duchy a measure of autonomy. It was split into two key camps, the counts of Tancarville and the counts of Harcourt, which had been in conflict for generations.^[2]

Tension arose again in 1341. King Philip, worried about the richest area of the kingdom breaking into bloodshed, ordered the

On 11 September 1349, John's wife, Bonne of Bohemia (Bonne de Luxembourg), died at the Maubuisson Abbey near Paris, of the Black Death, which was devastating Europe. To escape the pandemic, John, who was living in the Parisian royal residence, the Palais de la Cité, left Paris.

On 9 February 1350, five months after the death of his first wife, John married Joan I, Countess of Auvergne, in the royal Château de Sainte-Gemme (which no longer exists), at Feucherolles, near Saint-Germain-en-Laye.

In 1343, negotiations were initiated between John's father - king Philip VI, and dauphin

Philip VI, John's father, died on 22 August 1350, and John's coronation as John II, king of France, took place in Reims the following 26 September. Joanna, his second wife, was crowned queen of France at the same time.^[9]

In November 1350, King John had Raoul II of Brienne, Count of Eu seized and summarily executed,^[10] for reasons that remain unclear, although it was rumoured that he had pledged the English the County of Guînes for his release from captivity.^[11]

In 1354, John's son-in-law and cousin,

This act, which was largely driven by revenge for Charles of Navarre's and John of Harcourt's pre-meditated plot that killed John's favorite, Charles de La Cerda, would push much of what remaining support the King had from the lords in Normandy away to King Edward and the English camp, setting the stage for the English invasion and the resulting Battle of Poitiers in the months to come.^{[citation needed]}

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

In 1355, the

John was confident of victory—his army was probably twice the size of his opponent's—but he did not immediately attack. While he waited, the papal legate went back and forth, trying to negotiate a truce between the leaders. There is some debate over whether the Black Prince wanted to fight at all. He offered his wagon train, which was heavily loaded with loot. He also promised not to fight against France for seven years. Some sources claim that he even offered to return Calais to the French crown. John countered by demanding that 100 of the Prince's best knights surrender themselves to him as hostages, along with the Prince himself. No agreement could be reached. Negotiations broke down, and both sides prepared for combat.

On the day of the battle, John and 17 knights from his personal guard dressed identically. This was done to confuse the enemy, who would do everything possible to capture the sovereign on the field. In spite of this precaution, following the destruction and routing of the massive force of French knights at the hands of the ceaseless English longbow volleys, John was captured as the English force charged to finish their victory. Though he fought with valour, wielding a large battle-axe, his helmet was knocked off. Surrounded, he fought on until Denis de Morbecque, a French exile who fought for England, approached him.

"Sire," Morbecque said. "I am a knight of Artois. Yield yourself to me and I will lead you to the Prince of Wales."

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

King John surrendered by handing him his glove. That night King John dined in the red silk tent of his enemy. The Black Prince attended to him personally. He was then taken to Bordeaux, and from there to England. The Battle of Poitiers would be one of the major military disasters not just for France, but at any time during the Middle Ages.

While negotiating a peace accord, John was at first held in the Savoy Palace, then at a variety of locations, including Windsor, Hertford, Somerton Castle in Lincolnshire, Berkhamsted Castle in Hertfordshire, and briefly at King John's Lodge, formerly known as Shortridges, in East Sussex. Eventually, John was taken to the Tower of London.^[14]

The Treaty of Brétigny (drafted in May 1360) set his ransom at an astounding 3 million crowns, roughly two or three years worth of revenue for the French Crown, which was the largest national budget in Europe during that period. On 30 June 1360 John left the Tower of London and proceeded to Eltham Palace where Queen Philippa had prepared a great farewell entertainment. Passing the night at Dartford, he continued towards Dover, stopping at the Maison Dieu of St Mary at Ospringe, and paying homage at the shrine of St Thomas Becket at Canterbury on 4 July. He dined with the Black Prince—who had negotiated the Treaty of Brétigny^[15]—at Dover Castle, and reached English-held Calais on 8 July.^[16]

Leaving his son Louis of Anjou in Calais as a replacement hostage to guarantee payment, John was allowed to return to France to raise the funds. The Treaty of Brétigny was ratified in October 1360.

On 1 July 1363, King John was informed that Louis had broken his parole and escaped from Calais. Troubled by the dishonour of this action, and the arrears in his ransom, John gathered his royal council to announce that he would voluntarily return to captivity in England and negotiate with Edward in person.^[17][18] When faced with the opposition of his advisors, the king famously replied that "if good faith were banned from the Earth, she ought to find asylum in the hearts of kings".^[19] Immediately after he appointed his son Charles the Duke of Normandy to be regent and governor of France until his return.^[20]

John landed in England in January 1364 where he was met by Sir

John’s death in 1364 at age 44 was not unusually young for the period, especially given the Black Death’s impact and the stresses of captivity. The lack of specific health complaints in chronicles suggests that a health condition was not a prominent issue during his reign. The “unknown malady” causing John’s death could range from an acute illness (e.g., infection) to a chronic condition exacerbated by captivity. The Black Death, recurrent in the 1360s, or other infectious diseases are plausible causes, but no primary source confirms this.^[22] Speculation about arsenic poisoning, mentioned in relation to his son Charles V’s illness, is not supported for John himself.^[23]

John II was succeeded as King of France by his eldest son, Charles, who reigned as Charles V, known as The Wise.

The claim that King John II suffered from ill health often appears in discussions of his physical condition, lack of martial vigor (primarily referring to jousting rather than war), and the circumstances of his death. However, medieval sources rarely provide detailed medical diagnoses, and health descriptions are often vague or tied to political narratives. The claim appears to be a modern historiographical construct, as primary source evidence directly addressing his health is sparse and ambiguous.

The Grandes Chroniques de France provides little direct evidence of his health. It mentions his death in 1364 at the Savoy Palace but does not elaborate on the cause, referring only to an unspecified illness. It does not describe him as frail or chronically unwell.^[25]

English sources, such as those by Thomas Walsingham, describe John’s warm reception in England and his participation in festivities, suggesting he was not visibly incapacitated during his final months.^[26] The reference to an “unknown malady” aligns with Froissart’s account but lacks specificity.

John’s account books from his captivity in England, referenced in secondary sources, indicate that he maintained an active lifestyle, purchasing luxury items and maintaining a retinue. These records do not mention medical expenses or treatments that would suggest chronic illness.^[24]

Documents surrounding the

Secondary sources often cite John’s “fragile health” or lack of physical vigor, but these claims are typically based on inferences rather than direct primary evidence. Françoise Autrand and Jean Deviosse suggest John’s health was not robust, citing his limited participation in physical activities and his death from an unspecified illness. However, these works rely heavily on chronicles like Froissart’s that lack detailed medical information.^[23][24]

Contemporaries report that he was quick to get angry and resort to violence, leading to frequent political and diplomatic confrontations.^{[citation needed]} He enjoyed literature and was patron to painters and musicians.^{[citation needed]}

The image of a "warrior king" probably emerged from the courage he displayed at the Battle of Poitiers, where he dismounted to fight in the forefront of his surrounded men with a poleaxe in his hands,^[28] as well as the creation of the Order of the Star. This was guided by political need, as John was determined to prove the legitimacy of his crown, particularly as his reign, like that of his father, was marked by continuing disputes over the Valois claim from both Charles II of Navarre and Edward III of England.^{[citation needed]} From a young age, John was called to resist the decentralising forces affecting the cities and the nobility, each attracted either by English economic influence or the reforming party. He grew up among intrigue and treason, and in consequence he governed in secrecy only with a close circle of trusted advisers.^{[citation needed]}

He took as his wife

King John II faced extraordinary challenges: the

The trend of criticizing John II began with Jean Froissart’s influential but biased chronicle, which provided a narrative of bravery undercut by recklessness.^[22] Jules Michelet’s 19th-century reinterpretation transformed this into a nationalist critique, portraying John as a weak ruler who failed France.^[30] Subsequent historians—François Guizot, Charles Petit-Dutaillis, Edouard Perroy, Jean Deviosse, and Maurice Keen—built on Michelet’s framework, citing each other and Froissart to reinforce a narrative of incompetence.^{[31][32][27][24][33]} This historiographical chain reflects a tendency to judge John II by modern standards of statecraft, often ignoring the medieval emphasis on chivalric honor and the external pressures of war, plague, and noble factionalism. The reliance on citations created an echo chamber, where each historian reinforced the previous one’s conclusions without fully reevaluating primary sources like Jean de Venette or considering the broader context.^[34] Modern scholars like Françoise Autrand have begun to break this cycle by highlighting John II’s adherence to chivalric ideals and the impossible circumstances he faced, suggesting that the trend of criticism may be waning as historians adopt a more contextual approach.^[23]

The earliest significant criticism of John II likely stems from contemporary or near-contemporary chroniclers, particularly

Froissart’s account was influential because it was widely circulated in medieval Europe and became a foundational source for later historians. His depiction of John II’s capture and lavish lifestyle in English captivity—engaging in feasts, hunting, and pilgrimages—contributed to perceptions of a king more concerned with personal honor than governance.[22] While Froissart does not explicitly condemn John, his focus on the king’s extravagance and military failure provided raw material for subsequent criticism.

Another contemporary source, Jean de Venette (c. 1307–c. 1370), a Carmelite friar, offers a more sympathetic view, emphasizing the external pressures John faced, such as the Black Death and economic collapse. However, Venette’s chronicle was less widely read than Froissart’s, so it had less impact on shaping the critical narrative.^[34]

The critical trend solidified in the early modern period, particularly with Jules Michelet (1798–1874), a 19th-century French historian whose Histoire de France (1833–1867) is a landmark in French historiography. Michelet, a romantic nationalist, viewed the Valois monarchy, including John II’s reign, through the lens of France’s struggle for national unity. He criticized John II for his "weakness" and "extravagance," particularly highlighting the Poitiers defeat and the Treaty of Brétigny as catastrophic for French sovereignty.^[30] Michelet’s portrayal of John as a well-meaning but ineffectual ruler, overly reliant on favorites like Charles de la Cerda, set a precedent for later historians. His vivid prose and emphasis on national decline made his work highly influential, and he is a likely candidate for initiating the modern trend of criticizing John II.

Michelet’s interpretation influenced a chain of historians who cited his work, either directly or indirectly, as they built the critical narrative around John II. Key figures include:

1. François Guizot (1787–1874): A prominent historian and statesman, Guizot’s History of France (1829–1830) drew on Michelet’s framework and Froissart’s chronicles. Guizot emphasized John II’s military failures and the economic devastation caused by the ransom payments, portraying the king as a symbol of feudal incompetence.^[31]

2. Charles Petit-Dutaillis (1868–1947): In his The Feudal Monarchy in France and England (1933), Petit-Dutaillis cited Michelet and Guizot, focusing on John II’s inability to centralize royal authority amidst noble defections and English aggression. He described John’s reign as a low point in Valois legitimacy.^[32]

3. Edouard Perroy (1901–1974): Perroy’s The Hundred Years War (1945) built on Petit-Dutaillis and Michelet, explicitly citing their works. He criticized John II for his strategic blunders at Poitiers and his failure to manage noble factions, particularly Charles II of Navarre.^[27]

4. Jean Deviosse (1920–1992): In Jean le Bon (1985), Deviosse offered a more nuanced view, acknowledging John’s courage and chivalric ideals but still framing his reign as a failure due to the Poitiers debacle and financial mismanagement. Deviosse cited Froissart, Michelet, and Perroy.^[24]

5. Maurice Keen (1933–2012): In The Pelican History of Medieval Europe (1969), Keen cited Perroy and Michelet, describing John II as a king overwhelmed by circumstances, with his capture at Poitiers symbolizing the collapse of French royal authority.^[33]

Recent historians have begun to challenge the critical trend, arguing that John II’s reign must be understood within its medieval context. Françoise Autrand in Charles V: Le Sage (1994) contrasts John’s failures with his son Charles V’s successes but acknowledges John’s efforts to maintain Valois legitimacy amidst unprecedented crises. Autrand cites Deviosse and Froissart but emphasizes the structural challenges—such as the decentralized feudal system and the economic impact of the Black Death—over personal failings.^[23]

French monarchy
Capetian dynasty (House of Valois)
Philip VI
Children John II Philip, Duke of Orléans
John II
Children Charles V Louis I of Anjou John, Duke of Berry Philip the Bold
Charles V
Children Charles VI Louis, Duke of Orléans
Charles VI
Children Isabella of Valois Michelle of Valois Catherine of Valois Charles VII
Charles VII
Children Louis XI Charles, Duke of Berry
Louis XI
Children Charles VIII
Charles VIII
v t e

On 28 July 1332, at the age of 13, John was married to

1. Charles V of France (21 January 1338 – 16 September 1380)^[41]
2. Catherine (1338–1338) died young
3. Louis I, Duke of Anjou (23 July 1339 – 20 September 1384), married Marie of Blois^[41]
4. John, Duke of Berry (30 November 1340 – 15 June 1416), married Jeanne of Auvergne^[41]
5. Philip II, Duke of Burgundy (17 January 1342 – 27 April 1404), married Margaret of Flanders^[41]
6. Joan (24 June 1343 – 3 November 1373), married Charles II (the Bad) of Navarre^[41]
7. Robert I, Duke of Bar^[42]
8. Agnes (9 December 1345 – April 1350)
9. Margaret (20 September 1347 – 25 April 1352)
10. Gian Galeazzo I, Duke of Milan^[43]

• Treasure of rue Vieille-du-Temple

   Autrand, Françoise (1994). Charles V: Le Sage. Paris: Fayard. pp. 145–150. 
ISBN 978-2-213-59258-9
.
    Froissart, Jean (1978). Chronicles. Translated by Geoffrey Brereton. London: Penguin Books. pp. 136–140. 
ISBN 978-0-14-044200-7
.
    Michelet, Jules (1855–1867). Histoire de France. Vol. 4. Paris: Hachette. pp. 112–118.
    Guizot, François (1873). History of France from the Earliest Times to 1848. Vol. 2. Translated by Robert Black. London: Sampson Low, Marston, Low, and Searle. pp. 89–94. 
ISBN 978-0-19-822613-0. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help
)
    Petit-Dutaillis, Charles (1933). The Feudal Monarchy in France and England from the Tenth to the Thirteenth Century. Translated by E. D. Hunt. London: Routledge. pp. 256–260. 
ISBN 978-1-136-20247-6. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help
)
    Perroy, Edouard (1951). The Hundred Years War. Translated by W. B. Wells. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode. pp. 134–139. 
ISBN 978-0-413-28880-6. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help
)
    Deviosse, Jean (1985). Jean le Bon. Paris: Fayard. pp. 220–225. 
ISBN 978-2-213-01558-3
.
    Keen, Maurice (1969). The Pelican History of Medieval Europe. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. pp. 162–165. 
ISBN 978-0-14-021085-9
.
    Venette, Jean de (1953). Richard A. Newhall (ed.). The Chronicle of Jean de Venette. Translated by Jean Birdsall. New York: Columbia University Press. pp. 78–82. 
ISBN 978-0-231-90854-2. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help
)
    Roland Delachenal, ed. (1910). Grandes Chroniques de France. Vol. 6. Paris: Société de l’Histoire de France. pp. 245–247.
    Walsingham, Thomas (1987). G. M. A. Richmond (ed.). The St Albans Chronicle. Translated by John Taylor. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 312–315. 
ISBN 978-0-19-822167-8
.