Final answer:
The phrase refers to a historical king who was viewed as neither markedly positive nor negative. King Louis XVIII of France is sometimes considered a 'neutral king' for his balanced approach to governance. Assessing a king's neutrality involves examining their policies and legacy.
Step-by-step explanation:
The phrase '___ wasnt good or bad; neutral king' is likely referring to a historical figure who was perceived as neither particularly positive nor negative during their reign. When describing a ruler in such a way, one might be referring to a monarch who maintained stability without being directly responsible for significant reforms or notable conquests, or who was not seen as significantly oppressive or benevolent. It's important to consider the historical context, as the notion of 'good' or 'bad' can vary greatly depending on cultural values and the outcomes of a ruler's decisions.
For example, King Louis XVIII of France is sometimes cited as a neutral king because, after the fall of Napoleon, he reigned without imposing drastic changes and attempted to balance the desires of various political factions. His aim was mostly to restore and maintain order during a turbulent period in France's history. Analyzing kingship through the lens of neutrality involves assessing their policies, the state of the kingdom during their reign, and their legacy.