I adore the way he portrays Henry with those psychotic wide glaring eyes and with the way he lingers the voice, like a snake slithering around each and every corner.
This vintage British TV series is unquestionably a classic. I commend not only the acting but the script as well... I no longer hear the same quality of dialogues in our contemporary period dramas. No matter how many times I watch this series, I never cease to be fascinated by the elegance of its LANGUAGE, the poetic cadence of its sentences and phrases, the spontaneity and quickness of its wit. I dare say that it has elevated the English language to a sublime level: the PHONETICS here is simply unparalleled and I have never heard the Queen's English enunciated with such consummate skill. At the risk of sounding fulsome, I was so moved by the beauty of its language that I almost wept. Even the masterful use of intonation and voice modulation is nothing short of majestic. Eventually, I ended up asking why we don't have this same quality in our contemporary TV series in this digital age? Perhaps my taste is rather archaicc but part of the answer could lie in the fact that even the English language may have evolved alongside technological advances -- the two being inversely proportional to each other (for lack of a better term). Watching "Shadows of the Tower" is much like earning the privilege of seeing the Royal Shakespeare... for free. It is sheer joy. Kudos!
I find it ...interesting...that if one wants a dramatic historical production that is not one display of rampant promiscuity after another, we must go back in actual time. I'm far from prudish, but enough is enough, already. This series is beautifully done...the acting is particularly good; and while production is obviously done on a shoestring, it doesn't detract from its over-all excellence.
It makes me sad- almost all these wonderful actors& actresses, the like of which we shall not see again, have all passed, all gone away. No more to grace a stage in this realm. Rest peacefully all ye Players! Thank you for so many good days.
I see the same group in all of these wonderful miniseries like Edward 7, Lillie, Fall of Eagles, and the Edwardians ext. They actually looked like the real people in some cases and they were not all 20 they were age appropriate and chosen on ability back then. These dramas are so underated
I grew up with an Irish Wolfhound. She was a magnificent animal. I couldn't say enough about her, and the breed itself. There is a reason they were the dogs of kings.
It's not the nicest place to live right now, but then I suppose nowhere is these days. I live in the North East, and I've always loved history. When I was about 7 I visited Mary and Elizabeth's tombs in Westminster, although I can only dimly remember it now. Their tombs are side-by-side, which is nice after religion and politics played them against each other for so much of Mary's life. I've only recently refound my old interest in the Tudor dynasty, and I wouldn't mind going back.
@@TellEmB290 ....I also am addicted to these videos. I've been to The Tower.....but....I missed everything by being overawed with the venue, and by not having done the research. I would LOVE to go back now !!! A friend recently went to England, and posted pics from Hampton Court and from Never. I was Sooooooo jealous !! Another FB friend's daughter attended Cambridge in 2017. I could SEE the colour green !! Sigh enjoy !
great series this. i had it on dvd 2 years back. saw it a few times. i recommend it to anyone who seeks a screen portrayal of what, roughly, happened after Bosworth field. and despite being a Richard III fan. I warmed to this king Henry. At least he pardoned and tried to reconcile old differences without much killing. unlike his son.
Henry coukd have executed him right away he didn't. Richard would have. He ry Vii basically set up an entrapment sting for Warwick. In our modern courts they won't accept evidence that's "fruits of a poisonous tree", that's the western standard now. So u can't induce someone to commit a crime they'd not have done on their own. This is why with modern stings the person has to make all key moves themselves to get arrested
the 1500s and 1600s almost 90% of Europeans lived on farms or small rural communities. Crop failure and disease was a constant threat to life. Wheat bread was the favorite staple, but most peasants lived on Rye and Barley in the form of bread and beer. These grains were cheaper and higher yield, though less tasty.
And wasn't Father Simmons tortured by Mr Barrowclough out of Porridge and then executed in Elzabeth R for supporting Mary Queen of Scots ? Small world, isn't it ?
I am enjoying this series. In many of the things I've read and seen, Henry VII is kind of glossed over because of his son, Henry VIII, and all of his accomplishments and, of course, his marital affairs. So, seeing this makes me want to read and learn more. I was even surprised in the last episode to see tender interaction between him and his wife. I always pictured him as kind of cold and stern. Pleasantly surprised by this portrayal.
Henry VII was known to love his wife very much, so I didn't think it was much of a surprise to see a portrayal of that. I think people get the wrong perception of Henry because they don't want to believe someone so, could've (like some people say) usurped the throne. :)
^Yes you're right. Henry was very calculated, but his wife was probably the only person who could be close to him and keep his trust completely. The only man he probably trusted was his uncle Jasper. What's more Henry VIII his son loved his family. They all had good childhoods and all the members cared. The first Tudor royals were close, warm, and very supportive of one another. Henry VIII was- although by our standards this sounds ludicrous- a hopeless romantic. He always wanted the family his parents had with enough heirs and a beautiful, intelligent, loving wife. One of the reasons he kept remarrying is because he did want an heir, but he always had hopes for a loving family.
What I found funny is that despite teaching the Poor Lambert the history of the royal family so that he could play the role of the earl of Warwick, they never taught him to read or write. As we in episode 4, the earl of Lincoln need to help him write his ‘name’ on the royal decree
14:35 - When the frogs croak, my dear Foxe, do not imagine that they alone inhabit the pond. The pike, below the waterline, silent, unseen, is far more dangerous and harder to catch. Gotta love the language used in this series.
Similar quality BBC 70s period dramas here on UA-cam is 'The Devil's Crown' & the civil war (British!) 'By the Sword Divided', both highly recommended.
No one would have dared called the princes in the tower bastards in Henry's hearing.. One of the first things he did when he seized power was to ban the law that declared them bastards so he could marry Elizabeth of York.
They were only made illegitimate on the flimsiest of pretexts in the first place. It's funny how absolutely no one else knew of Edward IV's previous "marriage" to Eleanor Butler except for one man (Stillington).
+Rooster Cockburn Henry's mother was a Beaufort, which was originally a bastard line too. The first Beauforts were the children of John of Gaunt and his lifelong mistress, Katherine Swynford. When she became his third wife the children were legitimised by the then King Richard II and later by the Pope.
I am really liking this series with each episode. My interest in the Wars of the Roses was piqued when I watched "The White Queen" miniseries and further with David Starkey's documentary "Monarchy." BBC had such great series then! Henry VII was a clever man, one of my favorite English kings. Watching this makes me proud I am part English. Richard Neville was the worst out of all the Warwick Earls. Margaret of Burgundy is a sharp and outspoken woman indeed like so many of the formidable heroines whose actions decided the fate of England. Elizabeth Woodville especially was a strong brave woman 28:39. She rose the highest and fell the hardest more than Margaret Beaufort and Anne Neville did. "When you play the game of thrones you win- or you die. There is no middle ground" is very similar to Elizabeth's remark 30:46. We may never know what happened to the Princes in the Tower. It would not have been impossible for Elizabeth to have supplanted a servant boy for one of her sons. The mystery still lives on. Poor little earl of Warwick 47:24.
***** No it really would have been impossible for Elizabeth Woodville to place a servant boy as the Duke of York, it would have been noticed immediately servants and nobles don't act the same at all. The Princes either died, possible under Richard III's orders, or someone acting on Richard's behalf, by illness or Richard III sent them away to Ireland, where they either died young or saw what happened to Perkin Warbeck and realized nobody would support another pretender to the English Crown. While it's White Queen series is great it started your interests, it's not historically accurate at all, especially with it's version of Anne Neville and Elizabeth of York. Anne actually died triumph to extent, she was a crowned Queen, and even without an heir it was clear that her husband loved her and wasn't going to divorce (Given he took no actions to, nor did he make any movement to suggest he thought ill of Anne, and he brought her to her favorite castle after the boy's death and they didn't part until her death). So Anne was actually someone who honestly just kept rising, she married the Prince of Wales and when he was killed within months she was engaged to Richard III and spent several years with a faithful husband and a good life as Duchess of Gloucester, and then was crowned Queen of England and died a Queen with full honors given to her and husband deeply upset after her death.
+Wendy Hull Yea he's very much a Pro-Tudor camp, he can be better though then other Lancasrian/Tudor supporters on the Yorkist though. But he really does like the Tudors so that's his bias.
There is a certain element of dramatic license at play. There's no way Elizabeth Woodville would have been able to storm into a council meeting. However, in a dramatic context it's better than having to plead at an audience. Also how many prominent earls and bishops would have been able to access the king's chamber (apart from the Chamberlin of course) ? However, as showing Henry's vulnerability, it's effective. This series makes me warm to Henry a bit. It would have been hard for him, and he survived on his wits.
This Henry is very different from any of my imaginings, but I believe that he became more paranoid as he aged. The guarded chambers did not come until later
@@jessicabuckley4555 you probably are one of the few that spotted it lol. On old tvs, the image was probably too small. Thankfully, he was wearing something underneath
The actress who played Elizabeth Woodville ,Henrys mother in law,who entered the scene at 28.30 was excellent, chewing the scenery like a good un,she really earnt her 10 quid that day.
I like how Henry says that "they will crown apes.." he had only one small claim to the throne that was illegitimate on his his mother's side his father was a Welsh servant for a former French queen who was the consort in England. Would that not make him an ape?
Poor Henry. He was the only Tudor who wasn't completely psychotic. He probably didn't get good sleep a day in his life constantly thinking he was a hair away from ending up just like Richard III.
He was a Usurper and used a French military against Us the English people ; propaganda against Richard the third is literally that propaganda Shakespeare was commission by Elizabeth the first , Shakespeare had to write promising things about the Tudors & defamation about Richard iii
Life was harsh, with a limited diet and little comfort. Women were subordinate to men, in both the peasant and noble classes, and were expected to ensure the smooth running of the household. Children had a 50% survival rate beyond age one, and began to contribute to family life around age twelve.
Life was harsh, with a limited diet and little comfort. Women were subordinate to men, in both the peasant and noble classes, and were expected to ensure the smooth running of the household. Children had a 50% survival rate beyond age one, and began to contribute to family life around age twelve.
That’s why we need to end the monarchy, this high taxation. Henry Tudor was incredibly prudent fiscally and left his son Henry VIII a huge inheritance which the fat Henry VIII spent it through very quickly . Including the exploitation of Catherine of Aragon which he kept the dowry even after Arthur died & insisted on the rest even though it took 7 years before she married Henry viii. Catherine was born of two sovereigns of Spain
Very interesting...Lord Stanley's chain of office bears the Tudor Rose and, as pendant, the Beaufort Portcullis, along with other ornaments I don't recognise... there are some which might be stylised "S"s. It seems odd that he would display his son-in-law's symbol, and his wife's Family symbol... perhaps that was accepted practice then.
Oops, if you're refering to John, perhaps he did learn a lesson by that title Duke of Sulfolk being forfeited prior by his father & his father (William de la Pole, 1st Duke of Suffolk) having been executed. It appears John chose "life" over the assured penalty of death were he to challenge for the throne. He was "rewarded" of sorts with multiple Titles. I think I would have been content too. :-)
It would have been much better to be a rich lord than to be the head that wears the crown. I never understood why everyone was so desperate to be crowned.
Thanks for posting this series. I wonder if the Earl of Lincoln would have referred to Edward IV's two sons as 'bastards' as Titulus Regius had (in 1485) been repealed and such comments in a council meeting would have been a treasonous insult to Queen Elizabeth. Did the Dowager Queen interrupt the council?
Even if the real princess had survived they were also illegitimate as Edward 1V had married before woodville & therefore all seen a illegitimate, Henry got a Dispensation to legitimise them all after marrying Woodfield daughter Elizabeth Woodville
Interestingly, as the mother of Vanessa Redgrave, Rachel Kempson is thus the grandmother of Joely Richardson, who played Catherine Parr in The Tudors. She was also the grandmother of Liam Nesson's late wife Natasha. Talk about an impressive theatrical family!
Is it me, or did they swap actors for the boy imposter?? At the beginning he sounds like a 12 to 14 year old, but near the end he looks and sounds younger!
@Kyle S. point is there were actually two chikdren only one was an impostor. The real Earl.of Warwick was alive and in the Tower the whole time. Henry quashed the impostor's rebellion in part by getting the real Earl out of the Tower and showing him in public. This is why there is the scene with one chikd going "who is Lambert?", that child is the real Warwick.
I just have one question, was King Henry baiting the Earl of Lincoln when he was asking him if he resented the loss of his roles that he had earned from King Richard?
candles very expensive most common people burned candles made of beef tallow which did not burn well or brightly wealthier people burned candles made of bees wax which burned brighter
What I do respect is the historical research , the appalling series the Tudors was full of n historical inaccuracies & had constant sex to get a audience , here there are great actors & researchers who show history is captivating, there is no need to fill it with sex & historical inaccuracies. Eg Henry viii sister mary was queen of France , yet in the ridiculous Tudors they had marry a Portuguese king & didn’t show any other of the Tudor sisters .
I hope none will be offended if I suggest these Shadow of the Tower were all dress rehearsals for the bigger, better project: the BBC Shakespeare Series (of all 37 Plays)?
This episode is ridiculous. There was no person who impersonated Edward the Earl of Warwick. Edward never left the tower. There were two young men who impersonated prince Richard the son of Edward 4 and Elizabeth Woodville.
Stopped watching after 2 episodes. Had trouble breathing due to the lack outdoor scenes. The all indoor filming is quite depressing. Superb actors, nevertheless.
Prince George did not have any sons . He only had a daughter name Anne. She had a son. Look at English History please. Daughters lines did not inherit the throne of England at this time until King Henry the VIII changed the act of succession for Mary Tudor and Elizabeth The First.
+Lucie Wesson You're not making sense. The only Prince George I can think that's relevant to this T.V. series is as tnecklover said, George, Duke of Clarence. He had four children, two daughters and two boys. The youngest boy died at about a year old. The other was Edward Earl of Warwick. Also women could inherit or pass their claims to their sons. Example: Matilda the daughter of Henry I and mother of Henry II. She was the designated heir, fought a civil war and won the throne even taking King Stephen prisoner, only to loose the throne back to her cousin Stephen because she tried to rule too highhandedly and lost a second civil war. There were no really fixed rules governing succession to the throne that's why Edward III passed his Entail and the Succession to the Crown, Henry VIII passed and changed his Act of Succession, and Edward VI passed his Devise for the Succession after his father Henry VIII making Jane Grey Queen for nine days legally before Mary took the throne through superior force. Succession has been determined by bequest, battle, primogeniture, and parliament, with primogeniture being the default method. So unless I'm missing something, entirely possible, you got pretty much everything wrong but the names and the fact that George did have a daughter named Anne. Well, keep smiling anyways stranger.
+Fake Name George, Duke of Clarence, did have a daughter named Anne (of York), but she seems to have died young as did another son, Richard. Two children did grow to adulthood: Edward of Warwick who was executed by Henry VII and Margaret of Salisbury who was executed by Henry VIII.
+tnecklover Not sure your point friend. I acknowledged what you're telling me. I just didn't mention Richard and Margaret's names, or the fact Margaret was executed by Henry VIII, but neither was relevant to my point. My points were that Prince George Duke of Clarence was the only relevant Prince George and had he had four children not one, two sons and two daughters. Also while she did get right that George did have a daughter named Anne, who also yes died soon after being born, that women had inherited the throne before Elizabeth and Mary. Though in one case the woman lost the throne after a second civil war and in the other the woman only held the throne for nine days. My greater point being Lucie is lecturing people to learn about English history.... while getting pretty much everything wrong herself.
+Fake Name I don't know about the women inheriting the English throne before Mary and Elizabeth. Henry I's daughter Matilda was supposed to inherit it but her cousin Stephen took it from her. She was referred to as the first English Lady, not Queen. British history, an easy thing to get wrong if you're not careful!
It depends on what you consider to be good writing and acting. In fact these are plays which concentrate on the characters. I think this is a superb production with realistic characterisation of who these people really were. From what I have read of Henry VII - this production has really captured what we know of him historically.
This was basically a part of a trilogy . Why is it not more popular ? It is an excellent piece of work
Agreed!
I adore the way he portrays Henry with those psychotic wide glaring eyes and with the way he lingers the voice, like a snake slithering around each and every corner.
Tudor was a snivelling little wretch.
This vintage British TV series is unquestionably a classic. I commend not only the acting but the script as well... I no longer hear the same quality of dialogues in our contemporary period dramas. No matter how many times I watch this series, I never cease to be fascinated by the elegance of its LANGUAGE, the poetic cadence of its sentences and phrases, the spontaneity and quickness of its wit. I dare say that it has elevated the English language to a sublime level: the PHONETICS here is simply unparalleled and I have never heard the Queen's English enunciated with such consummate skill. At the risk of sounding fulsome, I was so moved by the beauty of its language that I almost wept. Even the masterful use of intonation and voice modulation is nothing short of majestic. Eventually, I ended up asking why we don't have this same quality in our contemporary TV series in this digital age? Perhaps my taste is rather archaicc but part of the answer could lie in the fact that even the English language may have evolved alongside technological advances -- the two being inversely proportional to each other (for lack of a better term). Watching "Shadows of the Tower" is much like earning the privilege of seeing the Royal Shakespeare... for free. It is sheer joy. Kudos!
Very well said sir. I agree. This is very excellent.
I find it ...interesting...that if one wants a dramatic historical production that is not one display of rampant promiscuity after another, we must go back in actual time. I'm far from prudish, but enough is enough, already. This series is beautifully done...the acting is particularly good; and while production is obviously done on a shoestring, it doesn't detract from its over-all excellence.
Same with I, Claudius. The set is like a sixth form play yet it is one of the finest productions of the 1970s, I would say.
"...So many Solomons, but without his wit." That was a good one, also: "Crowns are dear but heads are cheap."
It makes me sad- almost all these wonderful actors& actresses, the like of which we shall not see again, have all passed, all gone away. No more to grace a stage in this realm. Rest peacefully all ye Players! Thank you for so many good days.
@@tawanais I think she knows.🙄
well said
@@tawanais Thank you Captain Obvious!
@@kerrycavanaugh4268 lol 😂
I see the same group in all of these wonderful miniseries like Edward 7, Lillie, Fall of Eagles, and the Edwardians ext. They actually looked like the real people in some cases and they were not all 20 they were age appropriate and chosen on ability back then. These dramas are so underated
I grew up with an Irish Wolfhound. She was a magnificent animal. I couldn't say enough about her, and the breed itself. There is a reason they were the dogs of kings.
Loved the Six Wives of Henry VIII, absolutely LOVE Elizabeth R, and now just finding this show. I'd move to The UK just for the docudrama!
+GoSeeCal81 I love The Six Wives of Henry the VIII and Elizabeth R too.
It's not the nicest place to live right now, but then I suppose nowhere is these days. I live in the North East, and I've always loved history. When I was about 7 I visited Mary and Elizabeth's tombs in Westminster, although I can only dimly remember it now. Their tombs are side-by-side, which is nice after religion and politics played them against each other for so much of Mary's life. I've only recently refound my old interest in the Tudor dynasty, and I wouldn't mind going back.
@@TellEmB290 ....I also am addicted to these videos. I've been to The Tower.....but....I missed everything by being overawed with the venue, and by not having done the research. I would LOVE to go back now !!! A friend recently went to England, and posted pics from Hampton Court and from Never. I was Sooooooo jealous !! Another FB friend's daughter attended Cambridge in 2017. I could SEE the colour green !! Sigh enjoy !
The actor James Maxwell looks just like Henry VII.
great series this. i had it on dvd 2 years back. saw it a few times. i recommend it to anyone who seeks a screen portrayal of what, roughly, happened after Bosworth field. and despite being a Richard III fan. I warmed to this king Henry. At least he pardoned and tried to reconcile old differences without much killing. unlike his son.
I feel so terrible for Edward, Earl of Warwick. He's just a boy. His crime was his blood. :(
agreed...and I'll also add that Henry knew all along he was gonna kill him.
Henry coukd have executed him right away he didn't. Richard would have. He ry Vii basically set up an entrapment sting for Warwick. In our modern courts they won't accept evidence that's "fruits of a poisonous tree", that's the western standard now. So u can't induce someone to commit a crime they'd not have done on their own. This is why with modern stings the person has to make all key moves themselves to get arrested
the 1500s and 1600s almost 90% of Europeans lived on farms or small rural communities. Crop failure and disease was a constant threat to life. Wheat bread was the favorite staple, but most peasants lived on Rye and Barley in the form of bread and beer. These grains were cheaper and higher yield, though less tasty.
The actor playing the Earl of Lincoln, John de la Poole also played in Elizabeth R as the Duke of Anjou's companion.
Good actor
+Lennice Ayala His character's name was Simier, yes.
Also the actress playing margaret of burgundy was Elizabeth's lady in waiting..in same production.kat Ashley.
And wasn't Father Simmons tortured by Mr Barrowclough out of Porridge and then executed in Elzabeth R for supporting Mary Queen of Scots ? Small world, isn't it ?
@@pahoboye I had no clue she played both roles. I don't know how I didn't notice
I am enjoying this series. In many of the things I've read and seen, Henry VII is kind of glossed over because of his son, Henry VIII, and all of his accomplishments and, of course, his marital affairs. So, seeing this makes me want to read and learn more. I was even surprised in the last episode to see tender interaction between him and his wife. I always pictured him as kind of cold and stern. Pleasantly surprised by this portrayal.
Henry VII was known to love his wife very much, so I didn't think it was much of a surprise to see a portrayal of that. I think people get the wrong perception of Henry because they don't want to believe someone so, could've (like some people say) usurped the throne. :)
^Yes you're right. Henry was very calculated, but his wife was probably the only person who could be close to him and keep his trust completely. The only man he probably trusted was his uncle Jasper.
What's more Henry VIII his son loved his family. They all had good childhoods and all the members cared. The first Tudor royals were close, warm, and very supportive of one another. Henry VIII was- although by our standards this sounds ludicrous- a hopeless romantic. He always wanted the family his parents had with enough heirs and a beautiful, intelligent, loving wife. One of the reasons he kept remarrying is because he did want an heir, but he always had hopes for a loving family.
James Repstock Henry VIII was kind to his children to a point but he was horrible to Mary and Elizabeth after their mothers were put aside.
In depth. Know your'e history.
Oh yes he really loved his wife. He loved her as no man has ever loved.
So happy I found this. I found it more compelling than the later series although it was still very interesting.This had a natural realistic quality .
What I found funny is that despite teaching the Poor Lambert the history of the royal family so that he could play the role of the earl of Warwick, they never taught him to read or write. As we in episode 4, the earl of Lincoln need to help him write his ‘name’ on the royal decree
14:35 - When the frogs croak, my dear Foxe, do not imagine that they alone inhabit the pond. The pike, below the waterline, silent, unseen, is far more dangerous and harder to catch.
Gotta love the language used in this series.
Nice and smooth.😎
That monkey is so cute 🥰
“It must be hard for a man to lose his whole future, as well as his past... to live to see it all go.” There’s quite a thematic theme.
Similar quality BBC 70s period dramas here on UA-cam is 'The Devil's Crown' & the civil war (British!) 'By the Sword Divided', both highly recommended.
Poor, innocent Earl of Warwick
Wonderful show about the Tudors & Yorks
What a great forgotten series, thanks for posting
No one would have dared called the princes in the tower bastards in Henry's hearing.. One of the first things he did when he seized power was to ban the law that declared them bastards so he could marry Elizabeth of York.
They were only made illegitimate on the flimsiest of pretexts in the first place. It's funny how absolutely no one else knew of Edward IV's previous "marriage" to Eleanor Butler except for one man (Stillington).
+Rooster Cockburn Henry's mother was a Beaufort, which was originally a bastard line too. The first Beauforts were the children of John of Gaunt and his lifelong mistress, Katherine Swynford. When she became his third wife the children were legitimised by the then King Richard II and later by the Pope.
Exactly-Henry ordered all copies of the law destroyed and wouldn't have it mentioned again.
Well Hastings probably new of the "marriage" if it happened. Who knows if it did or not.
SAXTON FAIL true!
"The canker of treachery". My favourite line of the day :)
Tudor was all treachery, nasty little traitor
I am really liking this series with each episode. My interest in the Wars of the Roses was piqued when I watched "The White Queen" miniseries and further with David Starkey's documentary "Monarchy." BBC had such great series then! Henry VII was a clever man, one of my favorite English kings. Watching this makes me proud I am part English. Richard Neville was the worst out of all the Warwick Earls. Margaret of Burgundy is a sharp and outspoken woman indeed like so many of the formidable heroines whose actions decided the fate of England. Elizabeth Woodville especially was a strong brave woman 28:39. She rose the highest and fell the hardest more than Margaret Beaufort and Anne Neville did. "When you play the game of thrones you win- or you die. There is no middle ground" is very similar to Elizabeth's remark 30:46. We may never know what happened to the Princes in the Tower. It would not have been impossible for Elizabeth to have supplanted a servant boy for one of her sons. The mystery still lives on. Poor little earl of Warwick 47:24.
***** No it really would have been impossible for Elizabeth Woodville to place a servant boy as the Duke of York, it would have been noticed immediately servants and nobles don't act the same at all. The Princes either died, possible under Richard III's orders, or someone acting on Richard's behalf, by illness or Richard III sent them away to Ireland, where they either died young or saw what happened to Perkin Warbeck and realized nobody would support another pretender to the English Crown.
While it's White Queen series is great it started your interests, it's not historically accurate at all, especially with it's version of Anne Neville and Elizabeth of York. Anne actually died triumph to extent, she was a crowned Queen, and even without an heir it was clear that her husband loved her and wasn't going to divorce (Given he took no actions to, nor did he make any movement to suggest he thought ill of Anne, and he brought her to her favorite castle after the boy's death and they didn't part until her death). So Anne was actually someone who honestly just kept rising, she married the Prince of Wales and when he was killed within months she was engaged to Richard III and spent several years with a faithful husband and a good life as Duchess of Gloucester, and then was crowned Queen of England and died a Queen with full honors given to her and husband deeply upset after her death.
Though I think "Monarchy" with David Starkey was making the Yorkist out to be the bad guys and Lancaster to be the good ones.
+Wendy Hull Yea he's very much a Pro-Tudor camp, he can be better though then other Lancasrian/Tudor supporters on the Yorkist though. But he really does like the Tudors so that's his bias.
There is a certain element of dramatic license at play. There's no way Elizabeth Woodville would have been able to storm into a council meeting. However, in a dramatic context it's better than having to plead at an audience. Also how many prominent earls and bishops would have been able to access the king's chamber (apart from the Chamberlin of course) ? However, as showing Henry's vulnerability, it's effective. This series makes me warm to Henry a bit. It would have been hard for him, and he survived on his wits.
This Henry is very different from any of my imaginings, but I believe that he became more paranoid as he aged. The guarded chambers did not come until later
At 37:12 I swear Henry vii accidentally flashes us when he gets out of bed
He did. Old productions just kept rolling as long as it wasn't nudity
@@googleuser7454 I thought so I've watched this series loads of times and ever spotted it until now 😂
@@jessicabuckley4555 you probably are one of the few that spotted it lol. On old tvs, the image was probably too small. Thankfully, he was wearing something underneath
Most of us were half drunk as it was safer to drink beer than water
Lambert became a Scullion [ spit turner} in the royal house hold then eventually a Falconer
The actress who played Elizabeth Woodville ,Henrys mother in law,who entered the scene at 28.30 was excellent, chewing the scenery like a good un,she really earnt her 10 quid that day.
"I'M THE EARL OF WARWICK, LET ME OUT!!"
What a tragic life he had: death by accident of birth.
I like how Henry says that "they will crown apes.." he had only one small claim to the throne that was illegitimate on his his mother's side his father was a Welsh servant for a former French queen who was the consort in England. Would that not make him an ape?
Jeremy Potter refers to Henry as a mongrel of doubtful breeding.
An interesting historical character, Margaret of Burgundy. She was at her most valuable to the Duchy long after the Duke she married was dead.
I love this series; thank you so much for posting it!
I am ever and anon on the lookout for an opportunity to use _auspicate,_ a damn fine "inkhorn" word if ever there was one.
The British TV historical dramas are some of the best during the 1970s. Today's historical dramas are so boring.
at 33:44 same actor who was Babington in Elizabeth R
ah yes thats true, had forgotten that.. i find him irritating in this though.
When they caught Richard Simmons i thought id piss myself hahahaha. " Who are you "? Richard Simmons! Hahahahahah take him to the tower lol.
Poor Henry. He was the only Tudor who wasn't completely psychotic. He probably didn't get good sleep a day in his life constantly thinking he was a hair away from ending up just like Richard III.
I don't think that Elizabeth I was psychotic. Her temperament may have been above and beyond, but not psychotic.
He was a Usurper and used a French military against Us the English people ; propaganda against Richard the third is literally that propaganda Shakespeare was commission by Elizabeth the first , Shakespeare had to write promising things about the Tudors & defamation about Richard iii
Life was harsh, with a limited diet and little comfort. Women were subordinate to men, in both the peasant and noble classes, and were expected to ensure the smooth running of the household. Children had a 50% survival rate beyond age one, and began to contribute to family life around age twelve.
He was psychologically scared & murdered the Earl of Warwick & made Catherine of Aragon live in poverty for years
Oh poor Henry that exploited & manipulated his way to hold the crown , that produced Henry viii a tyrant , that used laws Henry has in acted
Gosh, can't wait for the next episode ☕
fantastic , Thanks!
Pure cheesiness at its finest and I absolutely love it! Thank you for posting this series 🥰
Life was harsh, with a limited diet and little comfort. Women were subordinate to men, in both the peasant and noble classes, and were expected to ensure the smooth running of the household. Children had a 50% survival rate beyond age one, and began to contribute to family life around age twelve.
I feel bad for that boy....
The fine art of high treachery
That’s why we need to end the monarchy, this high taxation. Henry Tudor was incredibly prudent fiscally and left his son Henry VIII a huge inheritance which the fat Henry VIII spent it through very quickly . Including the exploitation of Catherine of Aragon which he kept the dowry even after Arthur died & insisted on the rest even though it took 7 years before she married Henry viii. Catherine was born of two sovereigns of Spain
Watching this for the 2nd time on UA-cam. Lots of skullduggery..
Very interesting...Lord Stanley's chain of office bears the Tudor Rose and, as pendant, the Beaufort Portcullis, along with other ornaments I don't recognise... there are some which might be stylised "S"s. It seems odd that he would display his son-in-law's symbol, and his wife's Family symbol... perhaps that was accepted practice then.
Ha ha...no doubt leftover props from earlier tudor-docudramas
Didn’t know this existed but it’s good to see how the Tudor dynasty started, hardly knew anything about Henry VII
Oops, if you're refering to John, perhaps he did learn a lesson by that title Duke of Sulfolk being forfeited prior by his father & his father (William de la Pole, 1st Duke of Suffolk) having been executed. It appears John chose "life" over the assured penalty of death were he to challenge for the throne. He was "rewarded" of sorts with multiple Titles. I think I would have been content too. :-)
It would have been much better to be a rich lord than to be the head that wears the crown. I never understood why everyone was so desperate to be crowned.
Warwick’s murder always haunted Catherine of Aragon
Brilliant!!
Thanks for posting this series. I wonder if the Earl of Lincoln would have referred to Edward IV's two sons as 'bastards' as Titulus Regius had (in 1485) been repealed and such comments in a council meeting would have been a treasonous insult to Queen Elizabeth. Did the Dowager Queen interrupt the council?
Even if the real princess had survived they were also illegitimate as Edward 1V had married before woodville & therefore all seen a illegitimate, Henry got a Dispensation to legitimise them all after marrying Woodfield daughter Elizabeth Woodville
That was BS. Richard wanted the throne and the nobility didn't want another boy king after the last one so they conveniently came up with this "story"
is the Duchess of Burgundy played by the same actress who was Kat Ashley in Elizabeth R?
Yes indeed. Rachel Kempson. She was the mother of Vanessa, Lynn and Michael Redgrave.
Interestingly, as the mother of Vanessa Redgrave, Rachel Kempson is thus the grandmother of Joely Richardson, who played Catherine Parr in The Tudors. She was also the grandmother of Liam Nesson's late wife Natasha. Talk about an impressive theatrical family!
She was married to Michael Redgrave, their son is Corin Redgrave.
Are there no more episodes? I feel left on tenterhooks
Is it me, or did they swap actors for the boy imposter??
At the beginning he sounds like a 12 to 14 year old, but near the end he looks and sounds younger!
@Kyle S. point is there were actually two chikdren only one was an impostor. The real Earl.of Warwick was alive and in the Tower the whole time. Henry quashed the impostor's rebellion in part by getting the real Earl out of the Tower and showing him in public. This is why there is the scene with one chikd going "who is Lambert?", that child is the real Warwick.
Catherine Aragons Royal Spanish parents insisted on Warwick death ! It haunted Catherine
Rightly so, that's why the upstart Tudor dynasty died out, it was cursed.
The British made such fantastic historical dramas before, now 💩
I just have one question, was King Henry baiting the Earl of Lincoln when he was asking him if he resented the loss of his roles that he had earned from King Richard?
I believe wanted an honest answer. If John had said he was disappointed, Henry might have dealt with more equitably.
Wish the sets weren't so dark/cold.
Sadly, the castles were not well lit, even during the day.
candles very expensive most common people burned candles made of beef tallow which did not burn well or brightly wealthier people burned candles made of bees wax which burned brighter
What I do respect is the historical research , the appalling series the Tudors was full of n historical inaccuracies & had constant sex to get a audience , here there are great actors & researchers who show history is captivating, there is no need to fill it with sex & historical inaccuracies. Eg Henry viii sister mary was queen of France , yet in the ridiculous Tudors they had marry a Portuguese king & didn’t show any other of the Tudor sisters .
I hope none will be offended if I suggest these Shadow of the Tower were all dress rehearsals for the bigger, better project: the BBC Shakespeare Series (of all 37 Plays)?
Why is Elizabeth Woodville wearing a circa 1530s gable hood?! They didn't exist then
Because the costume designer knew that most people wouldn't know the difference at the time!
It could be a prop for the later series Six Wives of Henry VIII.
"Six Wives" came out first so this could be a holdover prop.!
Lol @ chewing the scenery
People should also realise how us the English had to live with no rights . 72,000 people were killed under Henry viii alone .
Henry Tudor 7th laid down on the political fortitude, that his surging son Henry viii exploited.
why no 4+5?
Look them up, they're there.
only 382, get real and woman up!
Henry is blond here. Wasn't he dark haired?
+linegenrou Contemporary sources said he had fair hair.
So what is the deal with Suffolk? Handing his son the paper than professing lyaltly to Tudor? Very confusing.
Surely it is Christopher Swan who hands him the paper?
@@thechatteringmagpie wow the years roll on
subtitles on this are disgraceful...
This episode is ridiculous. There was no person who impersonated Edward the Earl of Warwick. Edward never left the tower. There were two young men who impersonated prince Richard the son of Edward 4 and Elizabeth Woodville.
There was a person who impersonated Warwick.
Research and you’d see.
His name was Lambert Simmels.
like 3 people impersonated warwick
Yy
Stopped watching after 2 episodes. Had trouble breathing due to the lack outdoor scenes. The all indoor filming is quite depressing. Superb actors, nevertheless.
Prince George did not have any sons . He only had a daughter name Anne. She had a son. Look at English History please. Daughters lines did not inherit the throne of England at this time until King Henry the VIII changed the act of succession for Mary Tudor and Elizabeth The First.
+Lucie Wesson Sorry, I'm not sure which Prince George you have in mind? You don't mean, George, Duke of Clarence, father of the young Earl of Warwick?
+Lucie Wesson You're not making sense. The only Prince George I can think that's relevant to this T.V. series is as tnecklover said, George, Duke of Clarence. He had four children, two daughters and two boys. The youngest boy died at about a year old. The other was Edward Earl of Warwick. Also women could inherit or pass their claims to their sons. Example: Matilda the daughter of Henry I and mother of Henry II. She was the designated heir, fought a civil war and won the throne even taking King Stephen prisoner, only to loose the throne back to her cousin Stephen because she tried to rule too highhandedly and lost a second civil war. There were no really fixed rules governing succession to the throne that's why Edward III passed his Entail and the Succession to the Crown, Henry VIII passed and changed his Act of Succession, and Edward VI passed his Devise for the Succession after his father Henry VIII making Jane Grey Queen for nine days legally before Mary took the throne through superior force. Succession has been determined by bequest, battle, primogeniture, and parliament, with primogeniture being the default method. So unless I'm missing something, entirely possible, you got pretty much everything wrong but the names and the fact that George did have a daughter named Anne. Well, keep smiling anyways stranger.
+Fake Name George, Duke of Clarence, did have a daughter named Anne (of York), but she seems to have died young as did another son, Richard. Two children did grow to adulthood: Edward of Warwick who was executed by Henry VII and Margaret of Salisbury who was executed by Henry VIII.
+tnecklover Not sure your point friend. I acknowledged what you're telling me. I just didn't mention Richard and Margaret's names, or the fact Margaret was executed by Henry VIII, but neither was relevant to my point. My points were that Prince George Duke of Clarence was the only relevant Prince George and had he had four children not one, two sons and two daughters. Also while she did get right that George did have a daughter named Anne, who also yes died soon after being born, that women had inherited the throne before Elizabeth and Mary. Though in one case the woman lost the throne after a second civil war and in the other the woman only held the throne for nine days. My greater point being Lucie is lecturing people to learn about English history.... while getting pretty much everything wrong herself.
+Fake Name I don't know about the women inheriting the English throne before Mary and Elizabeth. Henry I's daughter Matilda was supposed to inherit it but her cousin Stephen took it from her. She was referred to as the first English Lady, not Queen.
British history, an easy thing to get wrong if you're not careful!
I’m proud to be English , adore history yet I’m not a royalist
If you're proud to be English that you're a royalist.
This entire production is horrible, from beginning to end; from the writing to the acting. Just awful.
It depends on what you consider to be good writing and acting. In fact these are plays which concentrate on the characters. I think this is a superb production with realistic characterisation of who these people really were. From what I have read of Henry VII - this production has really captured what we know of him historically.
Yet you are on episode 3 ?
you must be deaf and blind my dear fellow