The Betrayal And Revenge Of King Edward | Wars Of The Roses | Real Royalty
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 чер 2020
- Edward of York becomes King Edward IV in 1461, after wresting power from Henry VI, but must subsequently deal with his ally, Warwick the Kingmaker. In 1465, Edward marries the beautiful but lowborn Elizabeth Woodville.
From Elizabeth II to Cleopatra, Real Royalty peels back the curtain to give a glimpse into the lives of some of the most influential families in the world, with new full length documentaries posted every week covering the monarchies of today and all throughout history.
Subscribe to Real Royalty: bit.ly/3tofGQL
Content licensed from DRG to Little Dot Studios.
Any queries, please contact us at: owned-enquiries@littledotstudios.com
"Elizabeth Woodville was basically a chav" is a line that perfectly sums up why I love Dan Jones 😂
I'm American, so I had to Google that word 😂 Glad I did
@JustJesstheMess just look up lee nelson
LoL I looked it up too! Wow that's crazy
So "Chav" is the old English way of calling a Thot a Thot. Time changes, nothing changes lol.
Today Warwick would give an interview on Oprah trash talking Edward IV.
I would pay to see that
@@horminmangfi5653 😂 me too
Nah, Jerry Springer. Then Edward come out and everyone would start cheering "JERRY! JERRY!" and they'd start fighting.
BOY! Ain't THAT the bloody truth!
Apparently the quickest way to SHRED a member of the Royal Family is to whine and moan in an interview with OPRAH!!
The accuracy of this comment 😂
The actor who plays Henry VI is brilliant at being gormless.
I saw a little gorm
To GORM...or NOT to gorm?
That is the question!
@@huberticusrex when?
I've been an avid reader of history but it's cool to see historians like Dan Jones making history approachable for all. I think some get turned off by the stuffiness of how history has been presented in the past. I never understood how anyone could consider history as boring. Boring? It has everything. History is everywhere because everything has one.
And teachers droning on about dates etc. When most history teachers I had did the same except for one who made it interesting
History has always been my top subject over anything else. That's one of my gripes about David Starkey, the subjects he talks about, I'm interested in but his Cambridge jargon, mannerisms and speech patterns switch me off. Jones, Snow & Lipscomb; even Tony Robinson has done some docs that are interesting as well. they offer a gateway into history that makes it fun and as you say accessible.
I've found the Starz series' on the Queens to be both intelligently presented and damned entertaining!
Let me remind you real history is completely different as these narrators are explaining to us
So we're going to persecute Elizabeth for not sleeping with the king before they were married but then we're going to turn around and persecute her for sleeping with him before she's married. Women were damned if they did and damned if they didn't back then.
This is the best explanation of Warwick’s role in history that I’ve ever heard. I never really understood how he factored into everything fully until now. Well done.
Warwick was the richest man in england, he owned more castles had more knights, owned all the beef. His problem was, it was all in Domesday. The king owed him, money as well as everyone else. There is a story of Warwick and his 600 knights in full colors, riding to my grandfathers castle, who was a cousin of Warwick. It describes the event of Entrance. It also describes them discussing politics of the day, about a mad king and a boy king, and even Warwick's own line to the thrown.. He had a bigger army than the king, And the first the law that was created after they lopped of his head, was no one can have a larger army than the king!
@@Rockhoundingcolorado Who's your grandfather
@@HeedfulHistory Some lord. Have you never read that story? Could have been Beaumont, Beaufort, SOMERSET MAYBE, Beauchamp, I think john Beauchamp of 1605, had shares in the virginia company. Both are sir names. See A lot of my lines go to warwick, And those people came to america after Warwick and Richard were killed. Minor cousins related to each other, and both richard and Warwick. And I think that is why the king had spys in jamestown. They think they found one, who was secretly a priest. But I think he was secretly a york.If you check the lineages of the high ranking leaders. I bet they have lines To warwick. Because he was a catholic. And catholic reliquarys are been found in high ranking burials at jamestown. I would love to see a dna study on it.
I will try and find that document, It's just one of many many people like that. My family was here in 1640. And all my lines are very early. Abraham Bledsoe, and his line settled 5 states? Most famous, Issac and Anthony Bledsoe.
@@HeedfulHistory If you have read that story, it tells his name in that rendition of the events. Baron someone. Very interesting story though. I have read the document, but not sure were now, I will try to google some phrases?
@@HeedfulHistory Yeah I just peeked at it, See I am related to Anne, his wife. Beauchamp.
Can you imagine how nervous 😬 Edward was when he told Warwick he was married to Elizabeth? No wonder he said it in front of the whole court cuz he knew Warwick would not disrespect him.
Disrespect? He's lucky Warwick didn't kill him!
@@susanfalconedaquino3623 Very true ! Warwick was a badass for real.
I want to know why tf he didn't tell Warwick long beforehand. He hung Warwick out to dry with pointless "negotiations." How do they not talk to each other about something like that?
@@lisakaz35 well I’m thinking that he was going with “ if I wait until the deed is done he can’t stop me” thinking of nearly every one ever under the age of 25 or so .
@@roolenoir3183 That's really immature of a king, but is possible. Ya gotta wonder about "he can't stop me." Warwick couldn't but maybe you don't undercut the guy who got you your crown in favor of those who "backed the wrong guy." Feels like an unforced error and a costly one at that. It wasn't mentioned here but I believe his brother Richard also married a daughter of Warwick, too. Methinks Edward undercut his family and allies in the name of appeasement. Lots of misery followed.
King Edward IV was a powerful ruler and a noble knight. Standing at 6 feet 4 inches tall King Edward IV is among the tallest British Monarch to date. When fully clad in armor King Edward IV stood at 6 feet 7 inches tall, an exceptional height for any man, especially of that time.
Not a king but son of a king. Lionel of Antwerp was 7 feet tall. He was a direct ancestor of Edward. So you see where he gets his height from. John of Ghent was also 6'4
king Henry the eighth also was very tall..well over 6 foot
the Plantagenets were crazy tall...
and strong athletic build
Lionel of Antwerp as mentioned earlier,
no one suspected that he would die quite young with his crazy vigorous physique and height
( i always suspected he was poisoned at his wedding feasts in Italy )
Edward I Longshanks, over 6 ft also
Edward II at least six feet
Edward III was almost "short " at under 6 ft
it's not surprising that Elizabeth I,
daughter to Henry VIII,
was strong and healthy surviving prison
6 foot 4 ? Blimey ... back in 1470 he would surely have been Champion of Champions in WWE
@@chocho8036
... and don't forget too that William The Conqueror was over 6 feet tall, when most of the combatants at the Battle of Hastings weren't much taller than 5 foot !
"Elizabeths 20 year old brother John, is married to the 65 year old Countess of Oxford. Its all very unsavory"! LOL.
I thought she was 85 years old.
That part got me too😅
Poor lad. 😂
@@charlinethom1624 I wouldn't say so. Just how many years of "married bliss" would he have with her? 😉
@@dorothypozi543 Given how young he was I'm sure it was one to many either way. lol
Had Richard and George remained loyal to their brother, the Yorks could have built a powerful and long lasting dynasty
From Kenya....true theres a new book on the three York brothers.."a royal tragedy...the brothers york.".....if they had stuck together,they could have ruled the known world.however,there were so many rivalries,treachery,lust for power during the war of the roses....It almost makes" game of thrones" seem like a sunday picnic!
Yes BUT pretty girls get bored of monotony (i.e. men who are bestowed with delusions of grandeur but are in actuality beta-males that are insecure about their real power) are on full display for us on this well narrated and intriguing BBC Documentary!
- JOHNNY OF G-TOWN
Richard was loyal, George wasn’t
Johnny Walter huh
Alex But not matter how loyal Richard was during Edward’s life he betrayed him after Edward died 1 by taking the throne, and 2 failing to protect his son. The princes disappeared on Richard’s watch, and think they were murdered at Richard’s command. I went through a phase of thinking Richard didn’t kill them, but after reading more I think their deaths were Richard’s responsibility.
I was raised in a village 7 miles away from the remains of Sandal Castle (Battle of Wakefield, 1460) and 6 miles away from the remains of Pontefract Castle.
But 17 miles south is a castle that is still awe inspiring to see - Conisbrough Castle.
The best castle I ever saw is Alnwick Castle, 150 miles north in Northumbria. And it's reopening on 31st March after renovations.
That's amazing. Whati wouldn't do to see a castle in real life.
i absolutely LOVE how when he finishes his sentences, he just glares at the camera, as though he wants to take a bite out of you
Watch him on Roman roads, you get to see his tattoos on that series
Warwick is one of the best examples of why oaths of fealty/loyalty were useless, even dangerous. These royals spend a great deal of time pledging alliances, but it seems that these oaths were just preludes for betrayal. One Tudor ruler learned this lesson well in childhood: Elizabeth I, the greatest monarch in British history. She kept everyone guessing as to whom she did or did not support, and by doing so, maintained control of her court by confusion- then when faced with the Armada, everyone was united, not divided into sparring factions. There were, of course, attempts to remove Elizabeth, but she changed her "favorites" so often that it was hard to tell who to align with or not.The Plantagenets are fascinating, but their reigns seem chockfull of rebellions, civil wars, schemes to overthrow-all by people who had sworn on their eternal souls to be loyal. If someone promised to support a monarch, that monarch better start sharpening the swords. Poor Henry VI seems the only sympathetic character because he was too disabled to practice the art of deceit and was not driven by relentless ambition.
True, he wasn’t cut out to be a king, he was more of a church or scholar type guy, and he was never thought the stuff of kingship
The one person i just feel so bad for is henry. man didnt ask to be king
lol she was not the greatest monarch in British history.
I'm so glad I discovered Dan Jones! Wish I'd known about him sooner. LOVE his work!
He used to do a history program with his father. Those were equally as good. Especially his ‘moving’ display boards. 😅
The sooner you start penance, the sooner you find Dan. Now walk with Dan, hand in hand. Amen.
@@graceamerican3558 which program was that?
@@amanda0683 I’ll have to find out the name. I’ll get back to you.
I feel so bad for Henry he really was brought into the battle for no other reason then someone else’s cause. He really never wanted to be king and was ok with letting Edward lead he was a unfortunate pawn once again
Dan presents our historical moments so well and easy to watch
Love his docu series it’s very entertaining
Why is this Advertisement Documentary constantly being interrupted about all this history stuff?
ahem.... adblockplus.... it WORKS.
dbr@dley3 I actually paused this video to install an Adblock 😂
Lol
🤣‼️Brilliant ‼️
You need to get ProgrammeBlock and that will fix all that.
Elizabeth played the "oldest trick in the book" by "playing hard. to get"? The implication is somehow that Elizabeth was somehow being devious or crafty by insisting on marriage before sex. Good grief, the only value of royal women at the time is their virginity and their ability to give birth to males, which, as we now know, is not even within her power in term of chromosomes. Should we we judge her as deceitful because she employs her only worth to have some control over her life? That's not "the oldest trick." It's the ONLY trick.
It is ironic that women then lost their reputations if they were two easy, and then criticised if they held out.
Since she had two sons King Edward probably thought that she was a boy maker there for a male heir was next to come. As they would say way back in the days she was a proven breeder
Agreed. That was complete BS. Let's face it. She was a destitute widow. If Edward had wanted her for a mistress, she would have had zero choices. In fact, she probably would have been grateful for the opportunity, for it would have been better than starving to death. For that matter, nothing would have stopped him from just taking whatever he wanted. The fact that he married her shows that he had a clear plan in mind.
,she was a widow and just really her land back for herself and her 2 sons and guess the only way she could get it was that way. 🤗 . Margaret Beaufort did a lot of tjings to get her illegitimate son, Henry Tudor ...aka Henry 7th.... on the throne. A woman had to do what a woman had to do
😉😉
@@lindatimmons3675 Henry VII was not illegitimate. One of Margaret Beaufort’s ancestors were born illegitimate, but were later legitimatised. BTW when her ancestors were first legitimatised (by both Parliament and the Pope) - there was NO bar placed against them inheriting the throne.
Warwick is a mixture of roose Bolton and tywin lannister
Edward is the mixture of robert baratheon and rob stark
Jon Arryn could also have elements of Warwick as well
That is pretty much who G.R.R.M your half right. Rob stark and was Edward in his prime and the fat drunk king Robert was based off Edward in is later years. He was a womanizer and a drunk and a glutton that gained alot of weight. And the mad king is based off King Henry 6th. And Danny the dragon queen is Henry (7th) Tuder his flag for Wales had a dragon on it.. hence why she was the dragon queen only her character was based off a man. And so on and so on. You can search the real life game of thrones and it will tell you who in the show was based off in real life.
Mmmm I see it another way. GOT is just a pastiche of Tolkein mixed with Medieval English history.
The crucial thing really was that Warwick managed to get the European banks on side, securing financial backing by assuring them that a Yorkist regime would be much more open for business ... the Lancastrian regime was very unpopular with the merchants in London and the Low Countries. Also the Yorkists held the Calais outpost and essentially Dublin/Ireland which provided them with safe heavens in case of retreats (Ludford Bridge for example) and simultaneously a springboard from which to launch invasions anywhere into England and/or Wales. Warwick was the true genius. Though rather hit and miss when it came to military strategy he was an absolute master of propaganda and stirring descent. After 1461 he held the north of England for Edward and drove the Scots back with a huge raid which in-turn forced them to abandon support of Henry VI and Queen Margaret. It’s only because Edward IV was the martial genius of his day that he managed to square up to a man like Warwick and win. The House of York then imploded under the weight of its own ambition. George was too jealous and greedy and lost his life as a result. Richard, for what ever reason , decided to take the crown from his nephews thus alienating many of those loyal to the House of York. Half of his army just stood by and watched as the Battle of Bosworth unfolded. The Percy’s would only back Richard if the Stanley’s did so. The memory of Edward IV’s later reign certainly lasted though.. Henry VII basically picked up from where he had left off in 1483, employing many
of the same men that had worked for Edward. The early Tudor regime basically copied nearly every aspect of Edwards kingship.. though with some subtle but crucial differences.
Joe Steers--wow! Thanks for that!
I love Warwick. He would be unstoppable in the PR world now. A true master of image and spin.
Awesome!!!
Warwick was the richest man in england, he owned more castles had more knights, owned all the beef. His problem was, it was all in Domesday. The king owed him, money as well as everyone else. There is a story of Warwick and his 600 knights in full colors, riding to my grandfathers castle, who was a cousin of Warwick. It describes the event of Entrance. It also describes them discussing politics of the day, about a mad king and a boy king, and even Warwick's own line to the thrown.. He had a bigger army than the king, And the first the law that was created after they lopped of his head, was no one can have a larger army than the king!
A
This series is amazing. I've heard so many references to this era and know how it played into important events later on, but never really knew the detail. This is a very engaging, thorough and accessible explanation.
I've been literally watching this whole "Britains Bloody Crown" Series for 5 hours! I obviously have no life.🙄
Wizard Gato 93 But it’s sooo good. I’m doing the same thing now!!!
Is that a BBC series only in UK,? I’m in America . I’m fascinated with British history .
And that was just the adverts.
That’s what a pandemic will do for us
Same
I kinda feel sorry for Henry, who seems to have suffered from some form of psychiatric condition. He did not make a good king, no, but that wasn't because he was a bad person, if anything he was probably too nice, too peaceful. He did not like violence and was described as being shy and pious. Warwick took advantage of him, tried to make him king again when he knew full well that it would only end in disaster for Henry yet again. Warwick did not care for Henry or whether he wanted the throne back or not, all he cared about was getting back at Edward.
It’s now believed that he suffered from porphyria through his mother Katherine of Valois later affecting English and Scottish monarchs
People who don’t like violence caused most violence
I love this history you have shown us on Edward of York. Excellent!!!!!
To much blood shared,it gets me scared.
I will show this to my son. Though very dark, he loves learning about English history & the monarchy! ❤️That huge field where so many were slaughtered during the war, must be very haunted. Great video & the host/narrator has such a beautiful accent. ❤️👏🏻👏🏻
If I wanted this many ads I would watch television.
You can fast forward and back several times and the yellow dots will disappear.
Get either Adblock or UA-cam Premium. Problem solved.
@@angelsinger4574 If one can afford Premium, it is truly worth it.
@@debmoadd see i hesitated for a few months as well since it’s like £15🙄but then i weighed it against those who have netflix, spotify and similar which surely comes to about the same and I watch so much of it
You can pay a small amount to remove adverts.
These stories are nothing less than fabulous.. Can you imagine just how that battle field looked!
War of the cousins/Rose's is a favorite of mine..
I love how the narrator also seems deeply offended and disgusted by edwards marriage
A turbulent period in English history, full of complex political intrigue. And this was well researched and presented by Dan Jones, Christopher Price and team
This marvelous country, with all this colourful history.
These get better every time. These families are crazy .
This truly brings history to life for me.
I greatly appreciate these videos, thank you. And Dan, you are the best at providing narration.
"The new King has learned the old lessons" true but chilling... Sometimes the world is just not ready for peace and forgiveness. Didn't work for Caesar and Edward almost went out the same.
Elizabeth's mother was connected to royal family of Luxembourg. Her father however which was what counted at the time was a former squire
Exactly. Elizabeth was seen as common because of her father. Her mother was top tier nobility and lady in waiting to Queen Margot
Warwick was the richest man in england, he owned more castles had more knights, owned all the beef. His problem was, it was all in Domesday. The king owed him, money as well as everyone else. There is a story of Warwick and his 600 knights in full colors, riding to my grandfathers castle, who was a cousin of Warwick. It describes the event of Entrance. It also describes them discussing politics of the day, about a mad king and a boy king, and even Warwick's own line to the thrown.. He had a bigger army than the king, And the first the law that was created after they lopped of his head, was no one can have a larger army than the king!
Seven kings? I'm sure the peasants were pretty confused as to who to bow to back then.
Actually 5 kings since Henry VI and Edward IV each had 2 separate reigns... He counted the separate reigns as separate kings... 1455- 1485 we have Henry VI, Edward IV, Henry VI, Edward IV, Edward V, Richard III, & Henry VII....
“Everyone” works
@@jamellfoster6029 All of these Henry's and Edward's, how do people keep up
@@skylarblue6725 LOL...
Poor King Henry.....he was innocent and didn't deserve to be murdered. He could have been sent into exile and kept safe and alive. He didn't choose to be king or for any of this to happen.
While I feel sorry for him, Warwick and Margaret had clearly shown Edward that as long as Henry was alive, wherever he may be, he was a rallying point for those discontent with Edward and the Yorkists. So he had to be taken out of the equation once and for all.
Juanita Richards But he had the deadly kiss of King Curse.
Sent into exile he might return (his grandpa did and he had a Valkyrie of a wife in Margaret of Anjou)... Had they let Henry VI, Edward's throne wouldn't have been safe... It's unfortunate...
War is brutal and ugly. With Henry VI alive, there would be more rebellions and many men would persih as a result from both sides. So it was a case of sacrificing Henry VI for countless bloodshed.
I agree 100%. More than likely Henry would've been content to live out his days at/in a religious place/order doing good works and studying. It could've been possible if not for the ambitious busy bodies around him. It's sad what happened to him. 💔
I love Warwick's shocked Pikachu face when he gets no response from Henry after proclaiming him king again 😅
Worwick had no clue that during his brokering a marriage deal with France , he was courting and marrying Elizabeth W. , widow of Lord Grey of Golby with 2 sons - a former Lancaster supporter .
Elizabeth's mother was of European royal connections .
Brilliant documentary, excellent narrative.👑
I love the look of the actor who plays Warrick aka Neville. Warrick was so smart. Too bad he couldn’t have just been king himself. It’s wrong to say he didn’t know how to manage in peacetime. That’s ridiculous. He just didn’t know how to deal with not being the king’s right hand man.
Warwick could've had everything. He could've been King.
If only he didn't dither after having crossed the Rubicon.
He was better known as the Kingmaker.
Soo good!! You can't make this up, ive said this before, this is better than any reality show today!! It has it all Love, hate, jealousy, betrayal, war, redemption!!! Too good!!!
Medieval Kings were like fires. Sit too far away and you freeze. Sit too close and you burn.........
Was Margaret really a "schemer," or just a tough woman who had to stand in for her "useless" husband? Never been able to figure that one out.
I think she just put all her hopes into her son. She nearly died birthing him and she knew she couldn't have more kids....so she just wanted him to have all that was due him.
I really don't believe she had any great ambition for him(when Henry VI wasn't king) she just wanted him to be able to live in England safely.
Because of Richard's outsized treachery, she pivoted from trying to curry favor with the current king to rhe prospect of him being King himself.
Warwick doesn't seem to have acted badly. He tried to negotiate a good marriage with the French instead of with one of his daughters. Edward seems a weak coward not to tell everyone when he first married. I feel he was treated poorly. Warwick seems to believe Edward was weak and being controlled by his wife's family rather than making his own choices. It's hard to judge if Edward had a strategy or not.
One thing not mentioned here is the reason the old king Henry was killed at this time and not earlier. It was because his son had died in battle so it was now to their advantage to have him killed.
Warwick could've called into question Edwards legitamacy?? Oooh awks considering Edwards mother was his aunt
"he basically married a chave" lol, love this guy
"More like a pitch invasion by the Woodvilles." 😂
I've always liked history,but I love these videos.
You failed to mention that Warwick also married his younger daughter, Anne, to Henry and Margaret of Anjou's son, and he also died in the battle at Barnet. Anne was also the lifelong love of Edward's youngest brother Richard. It was her sister that was married to Clarence, so two brothers married 2 sisters. Richard was fostered by Warwick and grew up with his family. All of these warring Nobles were related in someway down through Edward III. He had so many children that Most of the families were all related.
White Queen watcher I'm guessing? Anne wasn't the lifelong love of Richard, it was a good political move as Anne was a very rich woman.
@@NessaBear90 No, a reader of history. Yes, she was rich. But so was Richard. Besides the fact that Richard gave up a lot of lands because he wanted to marry Anne because he loved her. His brother Clarence married her sister, Isabel and George wanted many lands that had belonged to the Earl of Warwick. Before that, Anne had been married to the Prince of Wales and not happily and not for long. That was a deal struck by Warwick and Marguerite D'Anjou. The Prince of Wales died on the Battlefield of Barnet as did Warwick. So, when Anne and Richard got married, they were barely in their 20's. He grew up with Anne at Middleham because he was fostered by Warwick.
Edward, Prince of Wales, surely died at Tewkesbury a couple of weeks after Barnet?
@@ip2862 Not a few weeks, he died at the Battle.
@@susanfalconedaquino3623 No; I think that you misunderstand. When I wrote that he died at Tewkesbury I meant that he died at the Battle of Tewkesbury on 4th May 1471 - ie twenty days after the Battle of Barnet. He had only arrived from France on the south coast of England, with his mother Margaret and bride Anne Neville, on 14th April - the day of the Battle of Barnet; so he clearly wasn't present at that event.
This was one FANTASTIC Documentary
The Burgundians weren't 'the Woodville's favourites' they were family. Elizabeth Woodville's mother was the daughter of the Duke of Burgundy. They were the queen's cousins. Jaquetta of Burgundy/Luxembourg was high-born enough to marry the brother of Henry V, the most powerful man in England and France. She was also kin to Queen Margaret of Anjou. Elizabeth wasn't some country bumpkin. Why do they always ignore this?
Elizabeth Woodville's family, if you do some history, was of noble blood.
True. And she was a good wife to Edward and loving Mom to their kids. She was present in the birthing room with her daughters when they gave birth to calm them and support them...
Jaquetta’s father was the Count of St Pol, but you are right she was very high born. It is alway annoying that this is ignored.
However I think the problem was the marriage did not bring any political alliances
Funny thing about Elizabeth Woodville. Apparently she's descended from King John. (Richard the Lionheart's brother through his daughter Eleanor who married Simon de Montfort) The narrator said it on one of these documentaries.
@@dorothypozi543 also she's descended from Eleanor De Montford's niece, Beatrice. Duchess of Brittany... All of this through Elizabeth's Mom, Jacquetta of Luxembourg... While her detractors want to insult her lineage as being common...
If the Woodvilles were so hated by everyone, and both Princes in the tower were descended from them, it's no wonder their uncle Richard III took the throne. The country was at war, the court was surrounded by enemies to the Woodvilles, both boys were in constant danger from Henry's factions. The court probably came together and insisted that Richard take the throne, because they were afraid the Woodville's influence would be thrust upon the child Edward V. In my opinion, the only one who had a lot to gain from the princes death was Henry VII. With them out of the way he was free to take the throne, and blame Richard for their deaths.
I agree. Edward's sons were very close to their mother's family and probably would have taken whatever advice from them. It wouldn't have been good for the country or Richard.
@@speedy806 youre wrong Henry VII took the throne and was crowned before even marrying E of York. His goal was to end the war and thus uniting the two lines. The Yorks needed him even more than he needed them. He won the crown by conquest and the Yorks didnt have any male heir left so they had no choice but to follow Henry. Thats the reason he was sent to France as a child even to Edward IV, Henry was a threat to his rule, he knew that Henry could overthrow the Yorks as the last Lancastrian heir. He wasnt accepted bc of his alliance to the Yorks at all.
@@Saliha366 "His goal was to end the war" isn't a counter argument to their argument. He very well could've had the boys killed to ensure there were no more uprisings and the remaining Yorkists had no one to rally around.
Plus, the Yorkists that supported Tudor did so on the basis that he would marry Elizabeth of York. If it weren't for this, he wouldn't have had a sniff in at the throne. And the others that rallied to him, aside from Jasper Tudor and de Vere, did so because they'd rather anyone be on the throne than Richard. So I think it's a pretty safe bet that he most certainly needed them and they only needed him because he wasn't Richard III.
And he wasn't "sent" to France. He fled with Jasper Tudor after Tewkesbury. And while yes Edward IV wanted him back, he didn't seriously consider Tudor as a rival to the throne. Nobody did until late 1483 (except maybe Margaret Beaufort).
@@bobjenko he was crowned as a conqueror and the yorskists didnt want a female ruler so they didnt have any others options he was the last option.
Also Queen Elizabeth Woodvilles was the one who engaged her daughter with the last lancastrian heir did you believe she would have done so if he killed her children?
He wasnt even present when they were murdered.
They accepted him bc they had no other choices otherwise they wouldnt have accepted a Lancastrian while the Yorkists are the one you overthrew the Lancastrian dynasty
@@Saliha366 You're making the assumption that the Princes were definitely dead by the time Henry VII became King and that Elizabeth Woodville knew of this. She was a main stay in the court of Richard III and allowed her children not in captivity to spend time with Richard, even going so far as to request for her eldest son, Thomas Grey, to return from exile with the promise that Richard would treat him well. Why on Earth would she let her daughters and remaining son be so close to Richard if she thought he had murdered her boys? I think the logical explanation here is that Elizabeth Woodville had become a desperate woman so was playing both sides in order to put her children in the best and safest possible position.
Plus, thanks for proving my point on him being the last possible option, though an argument can be made about Edward of Warwick.
This is why I say the conflict of 1483-85 was no longer York v Lancaster, simply Richard v Tudor.
“A direct snub” - I shall be saying that more of late
Hahaha, very good! Those indirect snubs are seldom noticed! (Is the Duke snubbing me, or just reaching for another juicy capon?)
I like the banged up saying...lol
These videos are so interesting I haven't been able to stop watching
Loved watching this!!!
You’ve got to fix the UA-cam advertisement issue.
The irony of this series being posted in 2020... history wants to repeat itself again ?!
Aly Through whom?
Glad I checked these comments... I also thought there are a ridiculous number of ads that are ruining the subject matter. I am beginning to loathe some of the more repetitive advertisers.
Woo wee, Dan Jones can tell me anything he wants! Being serious now, I have a couple of his books. Great stuff
Edward's brother, who becomes King Richard III, has the same feelings towards the Woodvilles as Warrick. Perhaps they had something to do with Edward's death.
Maybe Warwick wasn't wrong, though. Edward did throw him over and I wonder if the Woodvilles should skate uncriticized.
Rather, Richard had to do with some Woodville deaths, and some half-Woodville boys.
Absolutely love Edward IV!!!! He is my absolute favorite!!!!
Me too!
Also Elizabeth Woodville is my fav queen!
I am fascinated by this period. My understanding was that Edward understood that Warwick was too ambitious and wanted to put him in his place. He could easily have his marriage to Elizabeth annulled and marry somebody of Warwick’s choosing but he did not want to elevate Warwick any more than he has
Dan Jones enthusiastic delivery style makes me want more. Too many Historians speak in monotones with dull facial expressions, which makes the viewer at risk of falling asleep!
York -the White Rose
The White Queen 👸🏼 on STARZ
The White Princess 👸🏼 also on STARZ starring Jodie Comer (Killing Eve Villanelle)
The Tudors = the Red Rose
The Spanish Princess
Starring Charlotte Hope on STARZ
⁹no
The White Queen is my most favorite fictional historic show 🤗
All utter rubbish!!!
AngAngie Yep I love watching them. Now The Spanish Princess season two is on starts!!!
Charlotte Hope did a fabulous job as Katherine of Aragon .
Excellent writer, a genius of story teller with interesting anecdotal of that period or epoch.
That was excellent and narrated by an excellent presenter! ❤ Both Dan's
Thank you, I love it
Edward IV should’ve just told Warwick about his marriage! He might not have agreed with the king, but perhaps he would’ve respected him for being forthcoming.
Kings named edward have always marriage problems
Edward did the right thing, marrying a woman proven to be fertile.
She was NOT common.
She came from a loving family too. Anthony was a poet, a man of learning who brought a printing machine to England.
This documentary is misleading in a number of ways.
You can understand Waricks complete dissapointment and feelings of complete betrayal.....
Fascinating Series
Richard Neville of Warrick fought with Richard Plantegenet against Henry VI, then abandoned him when he was defeated and sided with the Lancastrians. After that, he switched side to York again and fought with Edward IV, against Henry VI. And then finally went against the York king. In, politics, it's termed, "whoring". Going from mem to men. So confusing with too many Richards, Henrys, and Edwards. Not to mention too many Elizabeths.
👍 Yes, Warrick was indeed the opportunist non plus ultra. As for the names... 😂😹
Yes. That’s why they called him the Kingmaker. He was very powerful in his own right. But as far as the names being confusing for you, can’t help you there. Back then they didn’t name kids after cars or anything that came into their head. Personally, it would be a Lot MORE confusing if everyone had a different name. Keep watching, and you’ll get it. That’s why they have numbers after the names. And titles after the names. It can be confusing at first. But Richard of York isn’t the same as Richard of Warrick. Look at it this way. Richard of Los Angeles, that’s his space. Richard of San Diego, that’s his territory. Obviously I’m from California, but insert any city where you live.
I so agree with you on the names of Henry Richard and Elizabeth and not to forget Mary... there are so many Mary Margaret's and Anne's as well
nevil edidnt abandon richard duke of york sowhere did you get your fax from darlin you better go n read that again
@@guvdagroove I did, I read articles and watched documents and have finally got the timelines of Houses all the way to the Tudors. I wrote Richard Plantegenet, not York btw. The Richard who's Henry VI's cousin that challenged him first.
the Burgundian were Elizabeth Woodville's mother Jaquetta of Luxemborgs family who was the 2nd women at Henry the 5ths court. They weren't minor and the Burgundians weren't their 'favorite' it was their family
Her mother was of nobility her father was just a knight who gained rank by marriage and being chamberlain of the prince the duke of Bedford he didn’t become a lord until king Edward married his daughter so he is an upjump who snuck and married the widow of a prince they wanted to kill him but Henry the 4th didn’t want to make a mess with the Luxembourg’s after he just stole the crown
Excuse me I meant the 5th didn’t want to lose support abroad while he was making war
King Edward IV's younger brother Prince Edmund, Earl of Rutland had the last laugh even though he predeceased his brothers and failed to become king after his nephews King Edward V and Prince Richard died since he was killed at age 17 in the Battle of Wakefield in 1460 during the War of Roses, he has over 100,000 living direct descendants. 💐🌷🌹🌺🌸🌼💮
It should be noted that by blood right, Edward IV was the rightful king of England.
King Edward III had many sons who survived into adulthood and acquired great wealth and power, this created a problem.
The house of Lancaster came from John of Gaunt (Duke of Lancaster), the fourth son of Edward III (the line of his first son Edward "the black prince" dried out and his second son William of Hatfield died shortly after birth).
Edward IV was the true heir of Lionel of Antwerp (Duke of Clarence), who was Edward III third son. Lionel had only one surviving daughter, Phillipa Plantagenet, great great grandmother of Edward IV. He (Edward IV) was also a descendant of John of Gaunt and of his younger brother, Edmund of Langley (Duke of York) which dukedom he inherited.
Henry VII Tudor had no right to claim the throne of England, as he was a descendant of John of Gaunt through his "legitimized" children with his mistress Katherine Swynford. The children of John and Katherine Swynford were born while he (John) was married with princess Constance of Castile. However, the Tudor Dinasty becomes the legitimate holder of the throne of England because Henry Tudor married Edward IV s daughter Elizabeth of York, who should have been the true Queen of England, not just the queen consort.
This needs a chart
That's what right of Conquest is for. Edward IV was descended from the 2nd born son to live to adulthood of Edward III, Lionel Antwerp, BUT as you stated it was through the female line, him being of House of York is through him being descended from the 4th born son to live to Adulthood of Edward III, Edmund Duke of York. Because back in that time the male line had greater authority and made your claim stronger and the female line didnt mean much and was used as a last resort, so him being descended through the female line of Lionel Antwerp didnt make his claim stronger than the Lancaster branch of the Plantagent Dynasty, who were direct male descendents of the 3rd born son to live to adulthood of Edward III, John of Gaunt. That is why Edward of York/ Edward IV had to win his throne not once but twice in battle. And the same can be said for Henry Tudor/Henry VII, as stated he had a very weak claim to the throne through being a descendent through his mother, of John of Gaunt, but through a bastard line that was barred from inheriting the Throne but eventually got legitimized. So even though it was a weak claim, it was a claim to the throne nonetheless and enough people supported it that it gave him the force he needed to take the throne from Richard III. Long story short all is fair in love and war, and Both the Yorks and Tudors won the throne from their predecessors.
Camilo2002oz Its not that clear cut. At the time Henry IV claimed the throne the Yorkist were only descended from the 4th son. It was only after Henry IV was king did they combine their claim with Philippa. So at the time Henry IV became king his was the senior claim.
With Henry VII, the Beauforts were legitimatised by the Pope and Parliament without qualification. Henry IV, tried to qualify that legitimation later, but it is doubtful his letters patent could undo what had already been done, so the Beauforts were legitimatised fully, and could claim the throne.
I have done a chart. It is pretty complicated. Basically the male lines died out. Henry the seventh was discended through the maternal line. Through the paternal line it is considered a conquest. Family tree between all of Edward The third‘s sons are very complicated and interwoven. There was also a series of four illegitimate children from John Of Gaunt Who were declared legitimate when he married the mother. They are also part of the story.
@@brontewcat you make a good point that at the time of Henry IV s reign, the kinship through Philippa was not yet established as her progeny Anne Mortimer had not yet married into the Yorkist line
but it's not clear cut to me that Henry IV is senior in claim if you regard Philippa s grandchild, Edmund Mortimer 5th Earl of March,
who was alive and was made a ward of one of Henry IV s top men,
being young still
and because Henry IV had claimed the crown ahead of young Edmund
Philippa, had two sons
and her oldest son, Roger, had two sons
as you probably know about
Henry IV controlled Edmund Mortimer , 5 th Earl
knowing his claim fully well
and it is well documented how
the Mortimers,
Philippa s progeny were deliberately kept down,
denied honors given to others
like being included in the Order of the Knights of the Garter
Edmund Mortimer was not permitted to meet with "large groups of men"
for fear of him rising up
His wealth and lands were kept firmly controlled in Henry IV s time
and it was not until the next king Henry V, son of Henry IV
that the Mortimers
in the form of Richard Duke of York,
son of Anne Mortimer, we're allowed to rise into their power.
it was due to this that Richard almost made himself king
and made the way for
his son
Edward IV
of this documentary to be king
I am watching this because I am into genealogy-- and what do I hear my OWN family name "Lord Scales" We always knew there were old royal connections and that our ancestors ended up on the "wrong side of the King" and lost their title and lands. So interesting.
I too have been doing family genealogy, my mother is a 23 generation of King Edward 3rd, im 24g , my son,is 25g and mu grand daughters are 26. My great grand father was a nephew of Queen Victoria and lived with her while he attended school in Scotland. He immigrated to the United States after he finished school. We havevalways said ..." so he could get aeay from the crown" and be a normal person with a normal life. We have known most of this our whole lives. But since ive got generation charts .....about 50 ..... a lot of thesr names are charted on my charts.
@@lindatimmons3675 24 generations? Do the women in your family start having kids when they're 7 years old? My own ancestor from 1470 is just a 15-greats grandfather, and he was only 24 in 1470.
Same reason as me. Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville were my 16 x great grandparents. Its amazing watching a documentary about them
@@RJStockton King Edward III was born in 1312 so it is possible she can trace her ancestry as 23 generations over the course of the last 710 years. Remember...life expectancies were very short back then. Especially if her ancestor wasn't nobility or aristocracy.
Great inspiration for George R Martin.
R.R*
@Abradolf Linkler why the hell 'R' u so aggressive?
The War of the Roses is so bloody interesting, I’m waiting for them to make a hollywood movie about it
Those wars of the roses lasted many years . Many movies have been made about the prominent people that lead Britain during those years. I can picture the story being told as a mini-series .
I want to read the book, i like reading the books before the miniseries comes out.😉
Seriously! I cannot believe they have not yet! People would love it!
Hollywood does not have the sophistication, talent, nor the technical or intellectual capacity to make a film of this quality. They would ruin it by hiring shallow talentless twits in rhe lead roles. Give the job to the Brits or the Russians.
If you would like to watch a series about the wars of the Roses, watch a series called The White Queen that's a good series and spans from Kind Edward IV to Richard III to the invasion and crowning on Henry VII
‘Led by his loins’. Love that saying!
Who is the actor that plays Edward IV? He is SO PRETTY!!!!
Why couldn't anyone notice that the queens imported from France were a bad omen to the throne of Britain.
Yeah
They brought far more war with France than peace with France.....
Margaret of anjou's actress is such a beauty omg.
Vhern Victoria what about the actress of Elizabeth Woodville? OMG
@@xiaofangfei8920 i know right? Such a beauty. I want to see the faces of the persons their portraying as well. How i wish the camera was invented during 1500s
"Basically married a chav" - A perfect way to explain history to the current generation.
I love Dan Jones videos. He’s brilliant!
Edward the Fourth was my favorite king during the War of the Roses and his wife my favorite Queen. In 30 years during the War of the Roses, Edward held the crown from 1461 until 1483 minus 6 months.. after being betrayed and backstabs by Bruce of his brothers and Richard Neville, it's amazing he was King that long .
It's really heartbreaking that his brothers George and Richard were so jealous of Elizabeth woodville's family, & the Rivers family were so loyal to King Edward in every way. George was the most jealous initially as with Lord Warrick and. They stabbed him in the back and Edward forgave George three times. Edward and Elizabeth were nice people and if I were a monarch and my own sibling did that to me I wouldn't give them another chance to attempt to kill or remove me from the throne. Family can be backstabbing and I've learned that the hard way especially with even children. The little shits!! 😂😂
At least George had the courage to betray Edward during his lifetime because Richard didn't have the guts to do it until after he died. Richard had to lie and say that Edward was married to another woman secretly to bed her just like Elizabeth. The priest that came forward even without any Witnesses or a woman's name, took Elizabeth's Dowager name away from her as well as made her children illegitimate. Richard only did that because he wanted to be king and he didn't have the guts to stand up to Edward during his lifetime and he was a loyal servant of Edward until Edward died. I don't believe that Richard of York really betrayed Edward so much except he lied and said that he would be Edward V protectorate and guardian until he was old enough to rule on his own. that was the lie whether he intended to do it at the time or not but I'm certain in the back of his mind Richard always was ambitious enough and wanted to be king.
I don't know how in the hell Elizabeth of York could stand him after he had Edwards kids claimed as illegitimate so he could have himself crowned King of England. It was rumored that Elizabeth of York had a crush on him even though he was her uncle and he was married to Ann Neville before her death.
Henry the 7th made sure that when he became king. Elizabeth Woodville and her surviving daughters got their Royal titles back. Elizabeth was dowager Queen and their daughters were still princesses. the deal had already been arranged between Margaret Beaufort and Elizabeth Woodville for Elizabeth oldest daughter to marry Henry the 7th if and when he took the throne from Richard the Third. even though Henry came from France and he was undermanned, he had a stepfather that took his side even though Lord Stanley always wanted to back a winner. Lord Stanley had a lot to gain having his step son on the throne and he sent his private little Army in to help Henry defeat Richard the Third. I still think Henry would have defeated Richard anyway but it would have been harder and taken longer...
I don't care much for the brothers of Edward the Fourth but I think that Edward the Fourth was one of the best Kings of England and managed to hold on to the throne for about 12 years during the 30 years and the crown switching hands seven times. the people in England loved Edward and Elizabeth along with all of their little children and Elizabeth's older children from her first marriage.
Vorrei tanto sapere bene la tua lingua ..qualcosa ho capito però. .che adori come me Edoardo 4 e sua moglie ..La regina Elisabetta woodville. .Grande donna ..Da loro ..Insieme a margaret beaufort è nata la grande dinastia dei tudor ...Nel bene e nel male ha segnato la storia inglese ..Grande Elisabetta prima ..Regina delle regine
Sono appassionata come te di storia ..Soprattutto inglese. .
Eh, I actually feel bad for George. Yeah he was pompous and arrogant but he may have been mislead. Edward may have been a good monarch but he should’ve married the princess Warwick wanted him too. I think that would’ve caused less problems along the way. I also feel bad for Richard. Who knows if he really wanted to be king or not. Maybe he did, maybe he thought it was his duty. We don’t truly know. I have my own opinions on all of these people but that’s for another time.
From Kenya...Iinitially Edward 1V was actually a 'good king " but he overtrusted his brothers and advisors especially Neville the kingmaker.As for his wife Elizabeth Wydville(Woodville),my premise is that since she came from a much lower status family,the nobles and Edwards brothers did not have that much respect for her family,As we all know,the ruling class can be rather snobbish and status conscious,to put it mildly.I have just read the book on Richard 111 by Hilary Mantel and it gives many insights as to the relationship and sibling rivalry between the three brothers.
michael ochido Actually half of Elizabeth’s of the family were very high ranking. Her mother was very well born, daughter of the Count of St Pol, and had married Henry V’s brother.
PSA:
In order to reduce the number of ads or get rid of them completely go to the end of the video and hit replay. (A simple ad block will work as well)
Thank you!!
You magnificent SOB.✌😎
Thank you so much!
Thank you it works
Didn't work for me. Now it won't play. :(
I really appreciate the description and explanations here. The largely 12th-13th Century armor (which seems of lower quality) is quite distracting though.
Henry the VI was pretty happy not being a King. Henry The VI thought "Oh s***."
I like how everyone is fighting with swords. Not a pike in sight.
i like this period in history . timeline is brilliant. this civil war ravages the british isles and rise of a new dynasty the tudor dynasty. dan snow one of my fav historians . thank you for posting this videos.
thank you
Brilliant is Edward?What sadness of Warwick?Such succes for Edward at the end.
Why are all of Real Royalty’s videos actually BBC Timeline videos with very different titles?!
Garbeaux Æ so they get views? Just my guess. And they have as many commercials. People love royal history.🤷♀️
alot of real royalty is out sourced from other places.
@@giselematthews7949 A lot, not alot.
@@giselematthews7949 I think that ALL of their videos are "out sourced". This channel is sharing, not producing.
This is channel 5. Timeline licenses the rights to upload them.
I’m loving this narrator
Very interesting Documentary and Dramatisation.
I recently just discovered I’m a descendant of many of the players of the Wars of the Roses, including Edward III, & the 1st Duke of Buckingham, as well as other Plantagenet’s, Lancastrians, & York’s. Heck, I’m a Neville, Stafford & Beaufort & Grey.
Wow!White Rose for ever.I am miffed the emojis don't have one!
Que lastima que no esté doblado al español 😟 sería muy agradable poder disfrutarlos porque los temas son muy interesantes!
PORQUE no es possible ? YO UNA GRINGA . MI ESPANOL ESTA POBRE .
Very interesting fakts. Thx
Fantastic documentary. I could have sworn that I read somewhere that Warwick was not at Towton tho.
It saddens me cause Edward 1V and Richard111 are my blood relatives. I feel Edward of York had intelligence highly skilled in all things that were importantino peace herand very w to his country . Hi
That one
It's hard to see how they were blood relatives when their lines both became extinct.