Please subscribe for more and please hit the bell icon so you don’t miss our new documentaries. www.youtube.com/@PeopleProfiles?sub_confirmation=1 Watch our videos ads free & listen to podcast episodes on our website. www.peopleprofiles.com/join/ Watch our marathon videos on People Profiles Extra www.youtube.com/@PeopleProfilesExtra Or follow us on Twitter! twitter.com/tpprofiles
I think Henry VII was an underrated monarch who deserves far more credit than history has given him. I see hints of him in the reign of his granddaughter, Elizabeth I. Thanks for this video!
Haha my nightly ritual also! Get out of work, make a coffee and go sit on the outside porch and chill. I'm slowly going through every King and Queen in England's history. Some of them were so intriguing I watched multiple videos from different people.
Thank you producers of this video! I am a more than 5 decade long student of the Tudor Dynasty. This video is one of the better productîons that I have encountered. I have read books of history and seen documenteries on tv, as well as dramas. This video on Henry VII is insightful and thoughtful.
Henry VII is sort of forgotten, I suppose in part that was because of his miserly reputation, but also he lacked the notoriety that the other Tudors had. He was really an accountant above all things, but even that legacy was gone when Henry VIII spent it all. Given the previous wars, in my opinion the peaceful transfer of the throne when he died isn’t to be overlooked.
Amazing video! He is underrated & underappreciated in light of his larger-than-life predecessor and successor. PLEASE do a video on his wife, Elizabeth of York, who was the linchpin in Henry's victory. They should have been England's first joint monarchs!
Can we accept that it was his marriage to Elizabeth of York, his mother's royal descent and his battle victory that bought his legitimacy. Without these three factors he would never have been accepted.
But what an incredible life story he had from even before his birth! Such a story couldn't be made up by a writer out of the blue! I feel the strangulation of rule veered him from some of the noble ideals he held at first, and the loss of Arthur and then Elizabeth that caused him much emotional distress and grief.
Agreed. The marriage between Henry & Elizabeth of York cemented Henry's claim. Honestly, I vehemently disagree with historians who assert the Tudor line was weak. Not only did Henry Tudor ascend the throne by the most difficult way imaginable through "feat of battle" Henry VII was a direct descendant to John of Gaunt, as well as, King Henry IV. Henry Tudor had as much royal blood as any of the Plantagenet houses.
@@scott6828 Indeed but the issue with his heritage right was because in those days your father's line was the most important. The Tudors were minor welsh nobility and The Beaufort line was deliberately barred from the Line of Succession due to the children being born out of wedlock despite being later legitimised by the parents marriage.
@harrietharlow9929 king James V was my 12th grandfather! This is so awesome! I have traced my genealogy down to King Otto during the Ottoman Empire in Jerusalem approx 500AD!
@@DarthDread-oh2ne Besides Humphrey, none of Henry's father or brothers reached his 50's so he could lived 10-15 more years at most. Since Henry 5 married the mad king's daughter, it was very likely that Henry's son will also be mad whatsoever so it's more his greed rather than his early death which provoked the war of the roses.
@@robert-surcouf marrying the mad king's daughter was a huge mistake. And I think, even if Henry v had live his son(Henry sixth) wouldn't have been a good king.
@@DarthDread-oh2ne To be fair with Henry 5, none of Charles 6's children were mad (but 7 of the 12 died before being in their 20's) neither his brothers and sisters (but all of them died before being in their 10's besides Louis of Orleans) but his madness likely came from his own mother (Jeanne of Bourbon), nevertheless it doesn't seem to be a big gamble back then to married Catherine of Valois. In hindsight, it's still the worst decision made by the lancaster dynasty (if we see Henry 6 as unstable to be responsible of his own doings) but i also blame Henry for not being married until his early 30's (or maybe he alrady considered an invasion when his father was still king and want to wait until he could married one of Charles 6's daughters) and his 3 brothers for being unable to make a single legitimate child (curiously, they were all able to have illegitimate child). With more patience, Henry could easily wait few years for france's civil war to worsened and played both sides (in 1412 with the treaty of Bourges, the armagnacs were ready to give him all the old Aquitaine if he allied with them), he will not be king of france but will win many lands without fighting. For Henry 6, he was basically doomed before his birth so it's hard to blame him for his own DNA.
I’m a huge history buff & the period of the war of the roses & the reigns of the York & Tudor monarchs have caught most of my attention. Did Richard the 3rd have his nephews the princes in the tower murdered? Was Perkin Warbeck actually one of princes Richard of York? The Earl of Warwick tragic life of being jailed in the tower? Till his later execution? Was he executed to satisfy the concerns of Isabella of Spain 🇪🇸? A very interesting story.
Something to consider. If Perkin was indeed a Flemish commoner why was he buried in a cemetery reserved for England's high nobility? It makes no sense. Also, if he was a Flemish commoner how could he be a traitor to England's King when he wasn't an Englishman.
I don’t get to watch these videos as often as I would like, but I really enjoy this channel so much! I wonder what Henry VII would have thought of the tragedy that is Henry VIII. The depth of the story is pretty foreboding, Margaret is literally a child herself when she had Henry. It’s also deeply upsetting that Queen Elizabeth II denied DNA testing that could have potentially solved the mystery of The Princes in the Tower. Their disappearance truly is one of the most intriguing and devastating mysteries in history, I feel that not only does England deserve an answer, but so does the world.
Yes, so many ‘what if’s’ in history. It always makes me smile ( in a way), the tomb of Henry and Elizabeth holding hands is lovely. Then there’s Margaret Beaufort lying so very close by. I always think poor Elizabeth couldn’t even get away from her mother in law in death. May be rude but it’s how it strikes me. 🙏🙏👵🇦🇺
@@gonefishing167 My favourite "what if" is _what if William of Normandy hadn't had to wait for favourable winds to cross the channel and thus had faced Harold Godwinson's army before they were exhausted from first fighting Harald Hardrada and rushing back to confront William?_
Ive had 5 kids & my first was due 28th October so I can confidently say she did not give birth at 7 months. If she was ovulating and then conceived on her wedding night which was on the 18th of January (making her LMP the 4th January), then she would’ve been due on the 10th October so if she gave birth on the 20th of September then she was only 3 weeks early but still full term as she would have been 37 weeks & 1 day which is considered full term as the baby is fully developed and can breathe on its own (pregnancy is dated to be 40 weeks but you are considered full term 37+ weeks)
The bizarre arrogance that comes with motherhood is staggering. “I’ve had 5 kids and so I can confidently say what happened 550 years ago”. Do you hear yourself? What a tiring old broad you must be to like with.
The documentary strictly states Henry waited until she was 2 months pregnant before marrying her. So she gave birth at full term. More obviously the child was healthy and lived.
@ Exactly, so he is saying that they had sex before they were married, which isnt the case if she gave birth on the 20th of September, which Ive explained why. If she gave birth at 7 months (28 weeks) pregnant the baby would not have survived as they didnt have humidicribs, incubators or ventilators back then. Premature babies at 28 weeks have only been able to have a 80%-90% survival rate at 28 weeks in the last 20-30 years, before the 70’s it was only 9% and before the early 1900’s it would’ve been 0%.
I think Henry's goal was stability .. for his family, his country and his people .. and in the end, despite unscrupulous methods, he produced that stability. Henry VIII inherited the throne with a full treasury and no challengers... and he went on to leave an empty treasury and a mess to his heirs.
The Background for King Harry the VII at 1:00 1470 at 13:46 The Death of Edward the VI at 22:23 The Revolted again Richard III at 26:54 The Death of King Richard III at 34:13 1486 at 40:23 1502 the death of king Harry VII frist son at 57:22 The death of King Harry VII at 1:07:13
I would really love to see some documentaries on the various French kings and queens. I've found a bunch regarding the French revolution, and a few on Catherine de Medici, but what about all those who came before?
I think he was extremely lucky in gaining the throne and keeping it. He also did what good fathers do: leave a strong legacy for your kids to live off of. Cant fault him for that. Even though H VIII squandered all of his efforts for the country and him.
It was not luck at all. He planned and succeeded his York predecessor were the ones who were lucky Edward IV could have lost any one of those battles and been executed for treason just like his father and grandfather.
Can we all agree that it was his marriage to Elizabeth of York, his mother’s royal lineage, and his significant battle victory that solidified his legitimacy? Without these three key elements, he likely wouldn’t have gained acceptance. What do you all think?
Are you going to be doing ALL kings of England? (I assume you'll do the 3 remaining George's, but I mean the ones between aethelstan and William the conqueror?)
I've seen one documentary, that I can't find now, where it was mentioned that Henry was originally given a different, Welsh sounding name, but that Margaret decided to change it to the more royal _Henry_ when she developed her ambitions to put him on the throne. I haven't seen that mentioned in any other documentary. Anyone know if that was the case or if that's all hogwash?
really enjoyed this documentary on King Henry VII! it’s fascinating how he laid the foundation for the Tudor dynasty. however, i can’t help but think that he often gets a bit too much credit for his success when a lot of it was due to the political climate of the time. what do you all think?
Richard didn´t "quickly had himself named Lord Protector", he was named so by Edward IV himself three days before his own demise. Elizabeth Woodville did not like Richard, so she IGNORED Richard and planned to crown little Edward V immediately - against the will of his own late FATHER, Edward IV, who wanted the kid to be a king after his FOURTEENTH birthday, which would make Richard III a Lord Protector only for TWO YEARS. Interestingly, Richard´s own rule only laster 2 years, 2 months and 2 days. But I think he feared that if he had become a Protector, after those two years, he would have been imprisoned and beheaded in the Tower of London anyway, because that was what was done to the opponents of the regime AND aristocrats. And if the Woodville clan got into tzhe power, tehy would act like mafia. In fact, they acted exactly like that even during Edward IV´s rule, and Richard openly opposed the Woodvilles. Whether or not he killed the two Woodville kids, well, I don´t know, but that was absolutely possible, albeit horrid. But Richard III would have died ANYWAY. I think he wanted to secure his life and acted rashly and started executing people because he did not know how else to solve the situation fast. I am not supporting this behavior, but it´s the only possible explanation, since up until Edward´s death, Richard OPENLY DISLIKED Edward´s court and only came WHEN SUMMONED - but Edward IV himself often had to travel to York to see Richard, as he e.g. did when he wanted Richard to start the war against Scotland. That does not sound to me, using cold logic, like a man who WANTED to become the new king, when he openly cricitized the Machiavellianism of the court and the people in it (mostly the Stanleys - they were long-time rivals, Richard and Lord Stanley, much longer than it is claimed. Read about the Siege of Hornby Castle and Anne Harrington. Stanley wanted to attack the Harringtons with Warwiock the Kingmaker´s CANON called Mile Ende (lent to him by Warwick from Bristol), so that he would illegally get the Harrington´s Hornby Castle and marry Anne Harrington, who was obscenely rich, to his fifth son, Earl of Monteagle (who later possibly poisoned one of his enemies in the Tudor period). Richard rode on horseback to Hornby to SAVE the Harringtons with Edward IV´s edict, saying that "whoever wanted to obtain the castle by force, he would meet with the king´s wrath". It is very likely that Richard knocked up Anne Harrington BEFORE she was officially given over with the castle to Lord Stanley BY THE KING (because Stanley complained after Richard stopped the siege and fought his men on Chester Road, yelling that Stanley was a traitor). If it was so, it must have been a HUGE INSULT to Lord Stanley, to marry a girl that had a child outside of marriage to his son, and she had been knocked up by his own chief enemy! It looks like Richard´s illegitimate son was born on December in the following year, and he appeared in Richard´s own castle as his illegitimate son and ward immediately after. Just put two things together. And as Lord Stanley was the husband of Margaret Beaufort, who was in turn the mother of HENRY VII TUDOR, and who married Elizabeth Woodville´s daughter Lizzie, it all makes sense, doesn´t it? Especially with Edward IV´s suden death. After three or four hundreds of years, when tehy opened up his tomb, his skeleton was partially covered with mummified meat. What only poison does that? ARSENIC. Who could have given it to Edward? Well, not Richard and not Elizabeth Woodville. Put things together. Lord Stanley was Edward´s high officer, and Richard kept him in his own office to keep an eye on him, even though they absolutely HATED each other.
La Vergine Maria ci dice oggi attraverso la preghiera del Santo Rosario che è la nostra intercessore in questi tempi difficile, confidammo in Dio è appoggiamoci a nostra madre Maria . Amen.
So Margaret used Elizabeth Woodville to help get her son on the throne and then convinced her son that Elizabeth was a threat, thereby forcing her into retirement. Wow
Henry Tudor should have put his mother Margaret in a seperate castle than with his new wife Elizabeth of York . I hear she was the mother in law from hell
Yes a married women's property was legally her husband's unless otherwise stated. The laws regarding this did not change until the 19th century. In medieval England if a married woman held a title in her own right then quite often her husband would use it as his own this practice eventually died out and today the husband of a titled female receives no title
King Henry VII was also secretly gay. No wonder he had any mistresses or remarried after his wife, Queen Elizabeth of York died. Arthur, Prince of Wales, Margaret Tudor, King Henry VIII, and Mary Tudor were only born because of a mad scramble for an heir. 🎭🩰🎨
Please subscribe for more and please hit the bell icon so you don’t miss our new documentaries. www.youtube.com/@PeopleProfiles?sub_confirmation=1
Watch our videos ads free & listen to podcast episodes on our website. www.peopleprofiles.com/join/
Watch our marathon videos on People Profiles Extra
www.youtube.com/@PeopleProfilesExtra
Or follow us on Twitter!
twitter.com/tpprofiles
Suggestion: Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York
I think Henry VII was an underrated monarch who deserves far more credit than history has given him. I see hints of him in the reign of his granddaughter, Elizabeth I. Thanks for this video!
He's right behind Elizabeth I in best Tudor monarchs.
I get so excited when I get a notification for a new video! Thank you!! My nightly ritual.
Haha my nightly ritual also! Get out of work, make a coffee and go sit on the outside porch and chill. I'm slowly going through every King and Queen in England's history. Some of them were so intriguing I watched multiple videos from different people.
Me to
Thank you producers of this video! I am a more than 5 decade long student of the Tudor Dynasty. This video is one of the better productîons that I have encountered.
I have read books of history and seen documenteries on tv, as well as dramas. This video on Henry VII is insightful and thoughtful.
Henry VII is sort of forgotten, I suppose in part that was because of his miserly reputation, but also he lacked the notoriety that the other Tudors had. He was really an accountant above all things, but even that legacy was gone when Henry VIII spent it all. Given the previous wars, in my opinion the peaceful transfer of the throne when he died isn’t to be overlooked.
Amazing video! He is underrated & underappreciated in light of his larger-than-life predecessor and successor. PLEASE do a video on his wife, Elizabeth of York, who was the linchpin in Henry's victory. They should have been England's first joint monarchs!
Can we accept that it was his marriage to Elizabeth of York, his mother's royal descent and his battle victory that bought his legitimacy. Without these three factors he would never have been accepted.
But what an incredible life story he had from even before his birth! Such a story couldn't be made up by a writer out of the blue! I feel the strangulation of rule veered him from some of the noble ideals he held at first, and the loss of Arthur and then Elizabeth that caused him much emotional distress and grief.
Claim by conquest was by far more respected by subjects in those times and it is obvious his marriage was a mandatory step in his claim.
Agreed. The marriage between Henry & Elizabeth of York cemented Henry's claim. Honestly, I vehemently disagree with historians who assert the Tudor line was weak.
Not only did Henry Tudor ascend the throne by the most difficult way imaginable through "feat of battle" Henry VII was a direct descendant to John of Gaunt, as well as, King Henry IV. Henry Tudor had as much royal blood as any of the Plantagenet houses.
@@scott6828 Indeed but the issue with his heritage right was because in those days your father's line was the most important. The Tudors were minor welsh nobility and The Beaufort line was deliberately barred from the Line of Succession due to the children being born out of wedlock despite being later legitimised by the parents marriage.
How was he descended from Henry the 4th?
King Henry VII was my 14th great grandfather. I so enjoy learning about the Tudor dynasty
Trump is my 7th cousin once removed, but I am also a descendant of Charlemagne LOL
If only it was the right lineage, you would be king of England now
I'm related via James V and I agree about learning about the Tudors. They're fascinating.
@harrietharlow9929 king James V was my 12th grandfather! This is so awesome! I have traced my genealogy down to King Otto during the Ottoman Empire in Jerusalem approx 500AD!
King Henry VII was my 16th great grandfather
The winner of the wars of the roses. He really brought stability to England after such devastating civil war
It wouldn’t be a wars of the roses if Henry V didn’t die so early.
I love this channel 😍.
@@DarthDread-oh2ne Besides Humphrey, none of Henry's father or brothers reached his 50's so he could lived 10-15 more years at most.
Since Henry 5 married the mad king's daughter, it was very likely that Henry's son will also be mad whatsoever so it's more his greed rather than his early death which provoked the war of the roses.
@@robert-surcouf marrying the mad king's daughter was a huge mistake. And I think, even if Henry v had live his son(Henry sixth) wouldn't have been a good king.
@@DarthDread-oh2ne To be fair with Henry 5, none of Charles 6's children were mad (but 7 of the 12 died before being in their 20's) neither his brothers and sisters (but all of them died before being in their 10's besides Louis of Orleans) but his madness likely came from his own mother (Jeanne of Bourbon), nevertheless it doesn't seem to be a big gamble back then to married Catherine of Valois.
In hindsight, it's still the worst decision made by the lancaster dynasty (if we see Henry 6 as unstable to be responsible of his own doings) but i also blame Henry for not being married until his early 30's (or maybe he alrady considered an invasion when his father was still king and want to wait until he could married one of Charles 6's daughters) and his 3 brothers for being unable to make a single legitimate child (curiously, they were all able to have illegitimate child).
With more patience, Henry could easily wait few years for france's civil war to worsened and played both sides (in 1412 with the treaty of Bourges, the armagnacs were ready to give him all the old Aquitaine if he allied with them), he will not be king of france but will win many lands without fighting.
For Henry 6, he was basically doomed before his birth so it's hard to blame him for his own DNA.
While everyone else is playing checkers. Margaret was playing chess!
The kindest and sweetest husband who I love. 3.Valium ,2 Codiene !! 1.Nurofen.
$ dimensional chess at that!
one of my favorite kings! thank you
The first of the Tudors! Thanks For this! ❤❤❤❤
One of the best channels on UA-cam and the first and last Inspiration that inspired me to start creating Videos. Keep it up❤❤
A grand and factual representation!
He was my grandpa 16 generations ago.
I’m a huge history buff & the period of the war of the roses & the reigns of the York & Tudor monarchs have caught most of my attention. Did Richard the 3rd have his nephews the princes in the tower murdered? Was Perkin Warbeck actually one of princes Richard of York? The Earl of Warwick tragic life of being jailed in the tower? Till his later execution? Was he executed to satisfy the concerns of Isabella of Spain 🇪🇸? A very interesting story.
Something to consider. If Perkin was indeed a Flemish commoner why was he buried in a cemetery reserved for England's high nobility? It makes no sense. Also, if he was a Flemish commoner how could he be a traitor to England's King when he wasn't an Englishman.
I don’t get to watch these videos as often as I would like, but I really enjoy this channel so much!
I wonder what Henry VII would have thought of the tragedy that is Henry VIII. The depth of the story is pretty foreboding, Margaret is literally a child herself when she had Henry.
It’s also deeply upsetting that Queen Elizabeth II denied DNA testing that could have potentially solved the mystery of The Princes in the Tower. Their disappearance truly is one of the most intriguing and devastating mysteries in history, I feel that not only does England deserve an answer, but so does the world.
Thank you, Henry V11 always makes a good subject to visit. 🙏🙏👵🇦🇺
I wonder how different England would be if Arthur had survived and been crowned
Yes, so many ‘what if’s’ in history. It always makes me smile ( in a way), the tomb of Henry and Elizabeth holding hands is lovely. Then there’s Margaret Beaufort lying so very close by. I always think poor Elizabeth couldn’t even get away from her mother in law in death. May be rude but it’s how it strikes me. 🙏🙏👵🇦🇺
@@gonefishing167 My favourite "what if" is _what if William of Normandy hadn't had to wait for favourable winds to cross the channel and thus had faced Harold Godwinson's army before they were exhausted from first fighting Harald Hardrada and rushing back to confront William?_
Can you please continue the series on US presidents with William Henry Harrison than John Tyler etc
Curse you all 😂 I was about to go to bed .
THIS IS WHY I LOVE YOU GUYS 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 STRAIGHT BANGERS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Father of infamous Henry VIII
I know this is a little off topic but could you guys consider doing the Hanoverian Kings George 1 and William 1V. Thanks.
Henry VII And His Mother Lady Margaret Beaufort Countess Of Richmond And Derby won the real Game Of Thrones.
- Fighting for family value, keeping the family together and togetherness
- established a strong monarchy
- Wat an moederschap, wat een koning.
Henry 7th’s story is more surreal than a Hollywood movie! Truly remarkable how he survived, let alone prospered.
How intense was the Rivalries of Henry and Richard ❤❤ I would love to know about this 😊😊
Excellent documentary. Many thanks.
Dude was built different. What an insane life of action.
Ive had 5 kids & my first was due 28th October so I can confidently say she did not give birth at 7 months. If she was ovulating and then conceived on her wedding night which was on the 18th of January (making her LMP the 4th January), then she would’ve been due on the 10th October so if she gave birth on the 20th of September then she was only 3 weeks early but still full term as she would have been 37 weeks & 1 day which is considered full term as the baby is fully developed and can breathe on its own (pregnancy is dated to be 40 weeks but you are considered full term 37+ weeks)
The bizarre arrogance that comes with motherhood is staggering. “I’ve had 5 kids and so I can confidently say what happened 550 years ago”.
Do you hear yourself? What a tiring old broad you must be to like with.
The documentary strictly states Henry waited until she was 2 months pregnant before marrying her. So she gave birth at full term. More obviously the child was healthy and lived.
@ Exactly, so he is saying that they had sex before they were married, which isnt the case if she gave birth on the 20th of September, which Ive explained why.
If she gave birth at 7 months (28 weeks) pregnant the baby would not have survived as they didnt have humidicribs, incubators or ventilators back then. Premature babies at 28 weeks have only been able to have a 80%-90% survival rate at 28 weeks in the last 20-30 years, before the 70’s it was only 9% and before the early 1900’s it would’ve been 0%.
I think Henry's goal was stability .. for his family, his country and his people ..
and in the end, despite unscrupulous methods, he produced that stability.
Henry VIII inherited the throne with a full treasury and no challengers...
and he went on to leave an empty treasury and a mess to his heirs.
I've always thought Henry VII was a much better king than his son.
Henry VIII Was never ment to be king and his personality didnt suit for ruling
The Background for King Harry the VII at 1:00
1470 at 13:46
The Death of Edward the VI at 22:23
The Revolted again Richard III at 26:54
The Death of King Richard III at 34:13
1486 at 40:23
1502 the death of king Harry VII frist son at 57:22
The death of King Harry VII at 1:07:13
Could you do more World War 2 figures ❤ it
Fantastic. Thank you💪
I would really love to see some documentaries on the various French kings and queens. I've found a bunch regarding the French revolution, and a few on Catherine de Medici, but what about all those who came before?
I need visuals I can't keep up 😅 5:17
I wish they would do one a keep the family tree up and highlight whoever they are talking about. The name and relationship is so confusing
My favorite Tudor!
I think he was extremely lucky in gaining the throne and keeping it. He also did what good fathers do: leave a strong legacy for your kids to live off of. Cant fault him for that. Even though H VIII squandered all of his efforts for the country and him.
It was not luck at all. He planned and succeeded his York predecessor were the ones who were lucky Edward IV could have lost any one of those battles and been executed for treason just like his father and grandfather.
Very interesting
Thank you!! My nightly ritual.
If I may suggest someone, what about King Solomon?
The huizong emperor, i beg
Finally!!! :)
So interesting.History is amazing ♥️👩🦰♥️
So many people with similar names, I find it all impossible to understand
They need to just have a family wreath up and highlight the name of the person they are talking about the entire video.
Please do some biblical figures in the future.
Very good idea.
Fiction mostly
@@steventaylor3884 Such an original comment. Try harder next time.
@@HauteGemsDallas Yes your perfectly right,I didn't think before I typed.
Margaret Beaufort one of the most kick arse women in history x
I think Elizabeth I more than likely inherited her kickass nature from Margaret.
Can we all agree that it was his marriage to Elizabeth of York, his mother’s royal lineage, and his significant battle victory that solidified his legitimacy? Without these three key elements, he likely wouldn’t have gained acceptance. What do you all think?
Are you going to be doing ALL kings of England? (I assume you'll do the 3 remaining George's, but I mean the ones between aethelstan and William the conqueror?)
Please make a video on Lorenzo the magnificent
THE REIGNS OF THE TUDOR'S DINASTY 1500 AND 1600 IS THAT MORE A LIKE.GREAT KINGS UP ENGLAND.
?????? I take it English is not your native language???
Happy Birthday Henry VII
I've seen one documentary, that I can't find now, where it was mentioned that Henry was originally given a different, Welsh sounding name, but that Margaret decided to change it to the more royal _Henry_ when she developed her ambitions to put him on the throne. I haven't seen that mentioned in any other documentary. Anyone know if that was the case or if that's all hogwash?
really enjoyed this documentary on King Henry VII! it’s fascinating how he laid the foundation for the Tudor dynasty. however, i can’t help but think that he often gets a bit too much credit for his success when a lot of it was due to the political climate of the time. what do you all think?
Let us not forget the short reign of Richard IV
I have always lived this story of Americans coming back to Tennessee. We just want a fair shake, Patroits stand.
The original Tu Tu Tu-Tudor!
Would you consider doing smth on the Borgias? I just started watching the tv show and I'd like to learn abt the real deal
Get a thirteen year old pregnant and you don't get a whole lot of sympathy, mate.
That was his father. Margaret must've been terrified.
@@TheTwinklinglilstar Indeed. Horrible.
Related to this guy through 6th Sheriff of Argyll and Bute
18th, 18 August 2024
Richard didn´t "quickly had himself named Lord Protector", he was named so by Edward IV himself three days before his own demise. Elizabeth Woodville did not like Richard, so she IGNORED Richard and planned to crown little Edward V immediately - against the will of his own late FATHER, Edward IV, who wanted the kid to be a king after his FOURTEENTH birthday, which would make Richard III a Lord Protector only for TWO YEARS. Interestingly, Richard´s own rule only laster 2 years, 2 months and 2 days. But I think he feared that if he had become a Protector, after those two years, he would have been imprisoned and beheaded in the Tower of London anyway, because that was what was done to the opponents of the regime AND aristocrats. And if the Woodville clan got into tzhe power, tehy would act like mafia. In fact, they acted exactly like that even during Edward IV´s rule, and Richard openly opposed the Woodvilles. Whether or not he killed the two Woodville kids, well, I don´t know, but that was absolutely possible, albeit horrid. But Richard III would have died ANYWAY. I think he wanted to secure his life and acted rashly and started executing people because he did not know how else to solve the situation fast. I am not supporting this behavior, but it´s the only possible explanation, since up until Edward´s death, Richard OPENLY DISLIKED Edward´s court and only came WHEN SUMMONED - but Edward IV himself often had to travel to York to see Richard, as he e.g. did when he wanted Richard to start the war against Scotland. That does not sound to me, using cold logic, like a man who WANTED to become the new king, when he openly cricitized the Machiavellianism of the court and the people in it (mostly the Stanleys - they were long-time rivals, Richard and Lord Stanley, much longer than it is claimed. Read about the Siege of Hornby Castle and Anne Harrington. Stanley wanted to attack the Harringtons with Warwiock the Kingmaker´s CANON called Mile Ende (lent to him by Warwick from Bristol), so that he would illegally get the Harrington´s Hornby Castle and marry Anne Harrington, who was obscenely rich, to his fifth son, Earl of Monteagle (who later possibly poisoned one of his enemies in the Tudor period). Richard rode on horseback to Hornby to SAVE the Harringtons with Edward IV´s edict, saying that "whoever wanted to obtain the castle by force, he would meet with the king´s wrath". It is very likely that Richard knocked up Anne Harrington BEFORE she was officially given over with the castle to Lord Stanley BY THE KING (because Stanley complained after Richard stopped the siege and fought his men on Chester Road, yelling that Stanley was a traitor). If it was so, it must have been a HUGE INSULT to Lord Stanley, to marry a girl that had a child outside of marriage to his son, and she had been knocked up by his own chief enemy! It looks like Richard´s illegitimate son was born on December in the following year, and he appeared in Richard´s own castle as his illegitimate son and ward immediately after. Just put two things together. And as Lord Stanley was the husband of Margaret Beaufort, who was in turn the mother of HENRY VII TUDOR, and who married Elizabeth Woodville´s daughter Lizzie, it all makes sense, doesn´t it? Especially with Edward IV´s suden death. After three or four hundreds of years, when tehy opened up his tomb, his skeleton was partially covered with mummified meat. What only poison does that? ARSENIC. Who could have given it to Edward? Well, not Richard and not Elizabeth Woodville. Put things together. Lord Stanley was Edward´s high officer, and Richard kept him in his own office to keep an eye on him, even though they absolutely HATED each other.
How often was Parliament summoned ?
33:52
His youth is one big clusterfuck. I lost the plot a couple minutes in. When he got the crown in became great stuff.
La Vergine Maria ci dice oggi attraverso la preghiera del Santo Rosario che è la nostra intercessore in questi tempi difficile, confidammo in Dio è appoggiamoci a nostra madre Maria . Amen.
So Margaret used Elizabeth Woodville to help get her son on the throne and then convinced her son that Elizabeth was a threat, thereby forcing her into retirement. Wow
1
So it runs in the family to marry often, huh? 😅
Henry VII looks like Joaquin Phoenix
He was smart thooo 😂😂😂
Do you mean descendants, not ancestors? That's a stupid mistake.
A big family quarrel .
Henry Tudor should have put his mother Margaret in a seperate castle than with his new wife Elizabeth of York . I hear she was the mother in law from hell
Thanks to King charles and its momma brits os now islam.
@@pedanticradiator fuck the monarch same as the stupid government
First
Did women's property not held in trusts pass to their husbands ?
Yes a married women's property was legally her husband's unless otherwise stated. The laws regarding this did not change until the 19th century. In medieval England if a married woman held a title in her own right then quite often her husband would use it as his own this practice eventually died out and today the husband of a titled female receives no title
Although I find the content interesting, I must turn this off because of the dreadful, annoying music
Can't handle the accent for more then 5 minutes. Pity.
What did you want? An American accent?
@@harrietharlow9929 yes.
@@magicunclefergaloreilly6699 Well, guess what? Grow up. Not everyone speaks English with an American accent.
@@harrietharlow9929 Darth Vader and Scar from the Lion King. Colonial oppressor accent. Ask an Irish person or an African.
Too much and frequency.
King Henry VII was also secretly gay. No wonder he had any mistresses or remarried after his wife, Queen Elizabeth of York died. Arthur, Prince of Wales, Margaret Tudor, King Henry VIII, and Mary Tudor were only born because of a mad scramble for an heir. 🎭🩰🎨
If it’s a secret how do you know?
@@kickedinthecalfbyacow7549 Because King Henry VII slept with men