I am reading Churchill belatedly. When I see your George III revisionist history, my first thought was this will appeal to the British; it may be a hard sell to Americans raised on an independence history in which George III figures as the villain. Could the story merely be that the British were simply protecting their empire? A history teacher tried to sell me on that. Nonetheless, what can you say about George III's foreign policy toward the colonists that will make us former colonists consider him a protector of empire, rather than an ill-advised opponent of the country that would in future, twice save the British Empire, if he only had the foresight to see.
Well, I'm now 30% of the way thru your vid, and I'm still waiting for "the world's greatest historian" to come on, because surely it isn't this totally lackluster guy you are interviewing now. [Where is the pride in your workmanship? Can't you find a way to get past this mere surface history crap?]
Adore Andrew and his work
I am reading Churchill belatedly. When I see your George III revisionist history, my first thought was this will appeal to the British; it may be a hard sell to Americans raised on an independence history in which George III figures as the villain. Could the story merely be that the British were simply protecting their empire? A history teacher tried to sell me on that. Nonetheless, what can you say about George III's foreign policy toward the colonists that will make us former colonists consider him a protector of empire, rather than an ill-advised opponent of the country that would in future, twice save the British Empire, if he only had the foresight to see.
Well, I'm now 30% of the way thru your vid, and I'm still waiting for "the world's greatest historian" to come on, because surely it isn't this totally lackluster guy you are interviewing now. [Where is the pride in your workmanship? Can't you find a way to get past this mere surface history crap?]