Poor Edward VI didn't have the best relationship with either of his prominent uncles. One rebelled and shot Edward's dog, while the other kidnapped him.
Edward Seymour kept his nephew the King on a tight budget -- which Edward VI bitterly resented. Had the Lord Protector given the King more money, Nephew Edward might have defended his uncle.
@@cathryncampbell8555 Whilst he might have defended him a bit, I think King Edward regardless would have seen the writing on the wall that Lord Protector Edward wasn't liked at all by the other prominent nobles and therefore would struggle to continue ruling the country.
Since my married name is so similar to Paget, I’m always interested in hearing about him. My husband’s family immigrated from England but even though I’m sure there’s no relation it’s still fun to imagine.
I think Thomas‘ end played a part in this. You made a video a couple years ago, if I remember correctly, talking about, if he was even capable to sign the warrant (he was, but only after Edward VI told them to get their shit together). Edward being sick and forced to ride for hours through the October night certainly didn’t help his case neither. Edward delaying to sign Somerset‘s death warrant until the last possible day was very interesting.
In that era, if I were offered the Somerset title, I would run away, screaming. During the Wars of the Roses, two Dukes of Somerset, John and Edmund Beaufort, were close, trusted advisors to Henry VI, and both died because of it. Both were blamed for a lot of the problems with Henry's reign. Fast forward to Edward VI's time, and Edward Seymour, a very powerful, capable, ambitious and shrewd man, becomes Duke of Somerset. He also became a scapegoat for many problems, and lost his head. Seems like an unlucky duchy to inherit!
The brutality of the Tudors and other Renaissance monarchs is beyond belief. I had to watch this twice just to keep up with the story. Edward VI was like Henry VIII concentrate. How many people did he execute in proportion to the rest of his siblings?
I have always thought that Elizabeth I's comment about his brother could also apply to him. "This day died a man of much wit and very little judgment." You could assert the brothers were very much alike except that Thomas had charm and Edward had none.
Hi Claire great video like always I live and breathe tudor history Could I please ask what are the books behind you please as I love reading about anyone tudor 😊
The ones facing forward are my books. I've written lots, including The Fall of Anne Boleyn: A Countdown, The Anne Boleyn Collection (1,2 and 3), The Boleyns of Hever Castle (with Dr Owen Emmerson), George Boleyn: Tudor Poet, Courtier and Diplomat (with Clare Cherry), and On This Day in Tudor History (1 and 2).
@@anneboleynfiles thank you Claire I definitely know what my hubby will be buying me for my birthday (your books) I find goerge boleyn really interesting but there isn't much about him as a person only in books about mary and anne so you're book about goerge will be my first read
@anneboleynfiles Thanks Claire. I don't know if you ever did a video about what revenues were given away in the will, or generally in the period from the dissolution to the time of Elizabeth. Also, were there any revenues that Elizabeth didn't get just because she was a woman? I'm trying to understand why Henry seemed so rich and Elizabeth so relatively poor.
John Dudley was similarly ambitious, like when he got his son married to the revised heir to the throne, Jane Grey. Dudley would likewise be brought down by unfaithful, scheming councilors, who blamed him for the conspiracy to enthrone Jane Grey even though every one of the men had gone along with the treason. Edward Seymour wasn't unique in his ambition and the opposition he faced was not solely due to his actions and failures. More realistically, most men are ambitious and most men are perfidious according to calculations of risk versus reward. At least Edward Seymour had a personal, familial stake in the governance of the realm, being blood kin to the king.
I think most people at the Tudor court were ambitious, but I think Somerset's downfall was in acting by himself, when he was supposed to be working with the council, and really alienating others. That was risky when people were always looking to get ahead.
If I remember correctly Henry VIII did in fact delay dealing with at least one of the rebellions against him, in order to buy time to crush it. As for Somerset's fall? Well in my opinion his trial was obviously a kangaroo court and I just can't take any of it seriously. Northumberland obviously just wanted to get rid of a rival. Seems like karma that Northumberland, with vastly better cause ended up on the chopping block later.
He was condemned by his weakness of character, greed, and ambition. I also wonder as to his characterization of being "sympathetic" towards the peasants during the revolts. If he had been, he could have worked with the Council towards arbitrating an arrangement with the 'peasant's'. They had legitimate grievances wherein laws were being violated to their detriment. The peasants wanted the laws to be upheld. He could have worked within the existing legal framework to hold those accountable who were in violation of the laws that were the basis for the grievances. He did not. Instead, he made empty promises, which only fueled the flames and created false hope. Then, he turned on the very people he allegedly was "sympathetic" towards by declaring them traitors and condemning them to death.
What if, Mary the first actually married her betrothed French King? I often wonder what if anything would of been different, most of all I wonder if she was young enough when it happened if she would have had a chance at a happy life. What if?
Mary I was first formally betrothed to Francis the dauphin who died in late 1536. She was later betrothed to Francis I (who was 24 years older than her) or his second son Henry (after the death of his older brother became dauphin, he married Catherine de Medici in 1533). The best king that Mary should have married was James of Scotland as Henry VIII should have been more content to secure the throne for his daughter and nephew.
Poor Edward VI didn't have the best relationship with either of his prominent uncles. One rebelled and shot Edward's dog, while the other kidnapped him.
Yes!
Edward Seymour kept his nephew the King on a tight budget -- which Edward VI bitterly resented. Had the Lord Protector given the King more money, Nephew Edward might have defended his uncle.
@@cathryncampbell8555 Whilst he might have defended him a bit, I think King Edward regardless would have seen the writing on the wall that Lord Protector Edward wasn't liked at all by the other prominent nobles and therefore would struggle to continue ruling the country.
Wise words from Paget. A pity Seymour didn't take note.
Yes, Paget really tried to make him see sense!
Since my married name is so similar to Paget, I’m always interested in hearing about him. My husband’s family immigrated from England but even though I’m sure there’s no relation it’s still fun to imagine.
I think Thomas‘ end played a part in this. You made a video a couple years ago, if I remember correctly, talking about, if he was even capable to sign the warrant (he was, but only after Edward VI told them to get their shit together).
Edward being sick and forced to ride for hours through the October night certainly didn’t help his case neither.
Edward delaying to sign Somerset‘s death warrant until the last possible day was very interesting.
In that era, if I were offered the Somerset title, I would run away, screaming. During the Wars of the Roses, two Dukes of Somerset, John and Edmund Beaufort, were close, trusted advisors to Henry VI, and both died because of it. Both were blamed for a lot of the problems with Henry's reign. Fast forward to Edward VI's time, and Edward Seymour, a very powerful, capable, ambitious and shrewd man, becomes Duke of Somerset. He also became a scapegoat for many problems, and lost his head.
Seems like an unlucky duchy to inherit!
The brutality of the Tudors and other Renaissance monarchs is beyond belief. I had to watch this twice just to keep up with the story. Edward VI was like Henry VIII concentrate. How many people did he execute in proportion to the rest of his siblings?
I think had Edward VI survived to reign in his own name, there would have been heresy burnings. I think he had the makings of quite a zealot.
@@anneboleynfiles Frankly I suspect England avoided a bullet when he died. But the English did get Mary I, just a different bullet.
I have always thought that Elizabeth I's comment about his brother could also apply to him. "This day died a man of much wit and very little judgment." You could assert the brothers were very much alike except that Thomas had charm and Edward had none.
😮😮😮 gosh
Hi Claire great video like always
I live and breathe tudor history
Could I please ask what are the books behind you please as I love reading about anyone tudor 😊
The ones facing forward are my books. I've written lots, including The Fall of Anne Boleyn: A Countdown, The Anne Boleyn Collection (1,2 and 3), The Boleyns of Hever Castle (with Dr Owen Emmerson), George Boleyn: Tudor Poet, Courtier and Diplomat (with Clare Cherry), and On This Day in Tudor History (1 and 2).
Oh, and I'm glad you enjoyed the video - thank you!
@@anneboleynfiles thank you Claire
I definitely know what my hubby will be buying me for my birthday (your books) I find goerge boleyn really interesting but there isn't much about him as a person only in books about mary and anne so you're book about goerge will be my first read
@emmajulian8716 I loved working on that book. He was such a gifted man. Thank you!
Thanks Claire. I'm suspicious of Henry the 8th's will. It seems like it fulfilled the wishes of the recipients of all those titles.
I think the failure of the will was to choose someone as leader of the council, someone that was capable of listening to others.
@anneboleynfiles Thanks Claire. I don't know if you ever did a video about what revenues were given away in the will, or generally in the period from the dissolution to the time of Elizabeth. Also, were there any revenues that Elizabeth didn't get just because she was a woman? I'm trying to understand why Henry seemed so rich and Elizabeth so relatively poor.
John Dudley was similarly ambitious, like when he got his son married to the revised heir to the throne, Jane Grey. Dudley would likewise be brought down by unfaithful, scheming councilors, who blamed him for the conspiracy to enthrone Jane Grey even though every one of the men had gone along with the treason. Edward Seymour wasn't unique in his ambition and the opposition he faced was not solely due to his actions and failures. More realistically, most men are ambitious and most men are perfidious according to calculations of risk versus reward. At least Edward Seymour had a personal, familial stake in the governance of the realm, being blood kin to the king.
I think most people at the Tudor court were ambitious, but I think Somerset's downfall was in acting by himself, when he was supposed to be working with the council, and really alienating others. That was risky when people were always looking to get ahead.
If I remember correctly Henry VIII did in fact delay dealing with at least one of the rebellions against him, in order to buy time to crush it.
As for Somerset's fall? Well in my opinion his trial was obviously a kangaroo court and I just can't take any of it seriously. Northumberland obviously just wanted to get rid of a rival. Seems like karma that Northumberland, with vastly better cause ended up on the chopping block later.
He was condemned by his weakness of character, greed, and ambition. I also wonder as to his characterization of being "sympathetic" towards the peasants during the revolts. If he had been, he could have worked with the Council towards arbitrating an arrangement with the 'peasant's'. They had legitimate grievances wherein laws were being violated to their detriment. The peasants wanted the laws to be upheld.
He could have worked within the existing legal framework to hold those accountable who were in violation of the laws that were the basis for the grievances. He did not. Instead, he made empty promises, which only fueled the flames and created false hope. Then, he turned on the very people he allegedly was "sympathetic" towards by declaring them traitors and condemning them to death.
What if, Mary the first actually married her betrothed French King? I often wonder what if anything would of been different, most of all I wonder if she was young enough when it happened if she would have had a chance at a happy life. What if?
She had so many betrothals arranged, didn't she, and wasn't able to marry until she was in her late 30s - so much wasted time.
What if his elder brother Arthur or shortlived Edmund lived?
What if his elder brother Arthur or shortlived Edmund lived?
Mary I was first formally betrothed to Francis the dauphin who died in late 1536.
She was later betrothed to Francis I (who was 24 years older than her) or his second son Henry (after the death of his older brother became dauphin, he married Catherine de Medici in 1533).
The best king that Mary should have married was James of Scotland as Henry VIII should have been more content to secure the throne for his daughter and nephew.
Would his brother’s behaviour have contributed as well?
It didn't help.