A famous painting by historical artist Godwin Mandelson mocking John the Black for his "claim to the throne"; John of Black's armour did not actually have a crown and other royal symbols.

John Edward Antagen the Black was a famed knight of Stormwind, a Grand Champion of Redridge and a disowned child of royalty. Born into a time of relative peace, a young John found practicing his martial skills annoyingly difficult. Some say that it is this that has caused his unusual ferocity in battle, others say that it is merely his excellent ability and now people put it down to a mental disability.

He had seen fame in the Prince of Redridge Joust, and was renown throughout the land before the First War. Though now historians prey on him as a historical figure, and he has now been defamed as a rather idiotic brute. So much so, in fact, that the eponym "antagenist" was created for someone who is overly violent for no clear reason.

Claim to RoyaltyEdit

Though originally a rumour created by the former Prince Adamant when he remarked "I wish this man was relation," after seeing John defeat his last opponent in a joust, new historical evidence suggests that John may just have been of royal blood indeed. Many artists, such as Godwin Mandelson albeit mockingly, portrayed him as royal in some way.

From the account of the third princess of Alterac's diary, and the diary of her cousin Prince James, it is apparent that there was an incestuous relationship between the two. Though neither account mentions that this relationship produced a baby, many court nobles of Alterac recall the princess showing signs of pregnancy. Also, the chamberlain who was tasked with taking John to his new home wrote in his memoirs that the princess had cried when he came to take the baby away, even though he was told that they had found the baby on a hunting trip.

John does not show up in records again until the noble who the baby was delivered to, Reginald Antagen, sends him to be trained by a knight of Stormwind.


The knights that trained him appeared to have done well, because in the second Prince of Redridge Joust, a young warrior clad in black plate defeated the competition with brutal methods of attack. Though it was covered up at the time, three knights were known to have died from hemorrhages caused by John's lance, when the joust was supposed to be a non-lethal event.

Four titles later, and thirty lives taken in the grand mêlées and jousts later, John of Black was one of the greatest knights the King had at his dispense. Loved by the people for the carnage he brought, and loved by the nobles for being quiet (so that they could practice their own nefarious court deeds) he earned the fallacy of being a "gentleman".

The reality could not be further from the truth; John the Black, as his peers and servants recall, beat his wife on several occasions, harassed villagers and was involved with several corruption plots which included other court nobles. These scandalous plots include the falsely enforced tax on peasants, known as the "Cow Tax"(1) amongst other things.

(1) The Cow Tax meant that all peasants who had cows would have to pay fifty silver for milking the cow; the justification being that there was only so much milk cows could have, and therefore peasants shouldn't be greedy. This was uncovered eventually by a more intelligent peasant who petitioned the King.



Though servants of the land had little rights, the nobles knew that - should the truth come out - their name, and John's name, would be besmirched forever.

John the Black's death has been subject to both lie and wistful revision. The conventional story is that he was murdered by his squire who blamed one of his men-at-arms. Though many people believed this, the story is irrevocably false. Several facts and accounts have been compiled that suggest an alternate and more believable construction of events.

To begin with, John the Black had no squire. Indeed, he had alienated most squires he had through his violence in teaching them. Instead, the person who murdered John the Black was the maid who, according to the conventional version of history, uncovered the squire. Several of the servants', who worked in John's manor, accounts suggest that the knight had forced himself upon the maid.

The maid was taken back to John's bedroom, where she slit his throat with the knife upon his belt. In desperation, she fled to her husband, who happened to be one of John's men-at-arms. The husband agreed to take the blame for the crime, and pretended that he was drunk on the night of the crime in court. Due to the maid and her husband's lack of intelligence, however, the investigation showed that the maid had indeed slit John's throat.

However the maid would not go to prison; many of the nobles who wished to preserve John's good name blamed it upon a peasant boy who they pretended was John's squire. They did this because they knew, should the maid be prosecuted, the truth would come out via the other servants in the house - who would testify that the murder was in self-defence.

And so, a lie was spawned.