Ultimately, the capitulation of Edward the Confessor to the Normans led to England's conquest by William. Thank you for a very well-researched presentation.
Fabulous video. It goes right through the 'soap opera' of the Aethelred II reign, his sons fighting the Vikings, Canute, The Confessor, right through to the Bastard. The most pivotal time in Early Medieval English history. All done in a nice, lyrical, even pace. Really good work.
Great video! I’m almost done. I’ve watched several William the Conqueror videos and never knew he had such support from the Pope, Holy Roman Emperor, etc. It always seemed like he used Godwinson’s years old oath as a somewhat flimsy reason to get his people together and invade. Knowing he had such powerful allies/supports adds a new dimension. Awesome work!
The production value on your channel is sick. As well as having top shelf historical information the way you approach the narrative and the cadence of it are perfect. I remember the dark ages of the history channel. Kids today will never know. The music is wonderful and fits the mood wonderfully.
I don't know how I got here, but I'm glad I did. You have a great knack for making what to me is quite obscure historical content and making it extremely watchable. Very interesting indeed.
Ollie, bro, Your channel is just up there with the best when it comes to history content makers. I used to support quite a few channels Patreons. But now years later, they to the point to where they got millions of subscribers and their videos are getting tins of millions of views so I lowered it to Support the smaller channels I like. And I literally only support one channels Patreon. And it’s yours. I did have to lower my support over the last year and a half because I had a housefire and my fiancé was murdered and that left me with a lot of her debt that was tied up my finances and have to pay a lot of extra money monthly for my son‘s braces and tutoring. I’m just a single father, raising my son by myself, retired Army. But once I get through this little situation, I’m gonna go up to the max level Patreon because you deserve it, bro. I think with the majority of your Anglo-Saxon and Viking videos, your voice and narration and especially that music that you play on those videos is the perfect combination, and that’s why I’ve been watching and supporting your & channel from day one! Keep up the great content!
Thank you so much it really means a lot! That’s so sad, I’m so sorry my condolences. Your kind words really do mean a lot to me though! Thank you so much for supporting the channel!
I’m just a stranger on the internet but read your comment when I don’t look at them much. I wanted to send my condolences, thank you for your service, and wish you luck. You’re obviously a good dude, I hope things look better for you soon! (and I agree - love his channel!)
Can’t thank you enough for the work you do on your channel. I love the vibe in your videos - something about the combination of the background music and the quality of your narration just hits different than a lot of the other history channels I watch. Great job as always, looking forward to watching this later today!
Wow! I just got the notification after 1 hour you uploaded. Wonderful video with magnificent scenes and music. Just love it! Thank you History Profiles
This is a fascinating video. I have learned so much and realised how little I knew/know about Æthelred. I was also delighted that the 'Norman-ness' of Edward the Confessor's court was highlighted, as this often seems to slip under the radar, with the impression given that the Norman invasion was an entirely new and unfamiliar regime. Thank you so much for this - I'm off to order books from the library about Æthelred, now that the gap in my knowledge has been exposed!
Thank you so much for watching! I hope you enjoyed it! Yes not many people do highlight that, Edward the confessor was basically a Norman, he spent the first half of his life in the Norman court, so he definitely related to the Norman lords more than the Anglo-Saxon ones
I am a descendant of both of these men. They were brutal men, but we can't judge them by our 21st century morals and sensibilies, they were brutal because it was a harsh, cruel world back then, and weak men didn't become Kings , or stay Kings for very long.
IF Ethelred had really been that bad why do you think he was invited to return and take the throne after stepping away. The St Brides day massacre was not just him acting, the people also were far from happy living with who they saw as invaders still. This same division in society was inherited and remained until the Harrying of the North. Brutal times, and brutal solutions.
Fair point, but at the time the Danes and northern had set up communities in the Dane law from the year 845 and the St Brice’s day massacre was 150 years after, do you know how many generations of people that is that would have settled there? At the time England was a nation for all tribes, as many living in the danelaw was Anglo-Scandinavian obviously being mixed so many would consider it evil, it wasn’t the settlers fault the Vikings came back to England and raided. The armies were then paid off and aethelred took out his wrath on innocents
My cousin used to work in the army corps of engineers and does work in genetics; after heavy research he found out my mom’s lineage goes to William Longsword! Alongside some French nobles, and obviously Rollo. William was brutal, but undeniably changed history forever. Hate him or love him, he was an extremely strong ruler who had nothing but a hard upbringing after his father died. He became hard as hell! He had to be.
@@historyprofiles i think its fair to say this was th strt of the nrth south divide....evn to this day the upper classes speak with a vocabulary thts derived frm french
My English family traces our ancestors back to a knight who fought for William I at the Battle of Hastings. Confirmed it with church records in Normandie. 😁
I'm supposedly related to Waltheof, Earl of Northumbria. He was supposedly the only English nobleman ever deliberately put aside and executed by William I for his actions in the rebellions.
Following the Battle of Hastings he submitted to William and was allowed to keep his pre-Conquest title and possessions. But he was a Saxon to the bone and supported Edgar settling in his quest for the English throne. When Sweyn II of Denmark invaded Northern England in 1069, Waltheof and Edgar Aetheling joined the Danes and took part in the attack on York. He would again make a fresh submission to William after the departure of the invaders in 1070. In 1075 Waltheof was said to have joined the Revolt of the Earls against William. He spent almost a year in confinement before being beheaded on 31 May 1076 at St. Giles's Hill, near Winchester. Thank you so much for watching I hope you enjoyed the video!!
Men came from across the sea and killed his countrymen and beggared his realm so he took out vengeance against those men's families and Kin. I call that a great leader
Fair point, but at the time the Danes and northern had set up communities in the Dane law from the year 845 and the St Brice’s day massacre was 150 years after, do you know how many generations of people that is that would have settled there? At the time England was a nation for all tribes, as many living in the danelaw was Anglo-Scandinavian obviously being mixed so many would consider it evil, it wasn’t the settlers fault the Vikings came back to England and raided. The armies were then paid off and aethelred took out his wrath on innocents
@@historyprofiles Frankly I respect Sweyn Forkbeard more than Æthelred II aptly named Unræd ("poor counsel," as in doesn't listen to sense, chooses bad advisers.) Not a good trait in a king. It snowballs into poor decisions, immature & poorly thought out strategies, emotional choices of tactics, but his point was if they'd attack his villages, he'd attack their settlers. Æthelred "the Unready" comes from deliberate alteration of Unræd, shifting blame from the advisers to himself & rightly so bc a king needs to be able to hear wiser minds. Sweyn was wise, an excellent strategist, perceptive & a seasoned warrior capable of drawing on his own experience & knowing whose input was sage. He read & led men well, carried out goals. It is his goal & effective strategy that was a problem for the Anglo-Saxons. It had been peaceful, yes, but in the 980s the Danes began raiding again, from within the Danelaw into surrounding areas, & were welcoming Ostmen landing & using the Danelaw as a base, including parts of Yorkshire & Northumberland. As more raiders a'viking came it escalated into the 990s & from 991 & his loss at the battle of Maldon Æthelred was paying Danegeld to the Danish king, in other words, his lands were in effect occupied, his reign being held for ransom. Pay or be annihilated bc the Danes had far more troops the could bring including the wilder Norsemen /Norwegians. Norse raided in swoop & leave style. Danes had the objective of settlement & conquest, establishing a base then trade center & settlement then expansion of area of control. The Swedes were less actively doing this at the time. There was the threat of far more men including the fiercest Norse allies, which were most feared. He hadn't exactly paid the army off. It was akin to a protection racket & he was under their thumbs. While the settler community was trading & not raiding they were sheltering the raiders & it escalated into enough fighters there to make the raids increasingly incessant & then the battles, which he finally lost to the Danes at Maldon. It never was that all Danes were Vikings, but they were of the culture, it was their normal, just everyone had their own jobs, bc a community has multiple needs. They had always intended to take the island or a vast majority of it, they just did so in stages & Sweyn did end up king. The Danelaw was in effect Danish occupation & every member of it aware & for it, their leadership king of both the Danelaw & what's now Denmark - no difference to them, all one territory on different lands. Denmark still holds lands not in Denmark & held others til modern times. He had to fight back, they were making sudden attacks on the villages surrounding the Danelaw, & going farther & farther both in distance & violence. The two groups were fighting each other, over his land, as the Danes were occupying with the precise purpose of gradually clearing lands for expansion as people feared the raids & those surviving packed up their stuff & migrated farther inland. Æthelred's people were losing their land, his kingdom was losing its land, & he was paying the Danish kingdom for the privilege & he knew the Danelaw was the base of operations, we'd call it today, for that ongoing objective. His people were getting whooped & uprooted, at best, & angry with him for not having already wiped out the Danes & Danelaw. The root of the poorly advised reputation was that he had sought to coexist with the occupiers who had claimed that land through extreme violence. Danes & Norse were feared for a reason. Intermarriage with them began before it was just descendants, but during the initial violent seizing of lands, & the Anglo-Saxons for the most part saw that as treasonous or seeking to profit by joining the fierce invaders. To this day the percentage of Viking DNA is very high in parts of Yorkshire, Northumberland & Durham, & the Scottish islands especially Orkney. It's terrible when any leader aims for annihilation rather than cooperation. & It's the times, too, though, Viking age. Meanwhile in other lands, same armies or hit & run raiding leading to battles. Sweyn saw Æthelred as weak bc of his attempts at peace, his tolerance of their presence, & the way in which he went about it, unsure of himself, not an Alpha, too hesitant, supremely unprepared to immediately repel invasion. Æthelred knew Danes were landing, Vikings,& tried to ignore it, to his downfall & eventual assault on the settlerments. So this was WEAK. Attempted avoidance of meeting the stronger of those peoples! He did it while many fighting men were away, calling it strategic. It looked like fear, & was. Sweyn goaded Æthelred & they all did - the fighting men within the community & those landing from mainland Dane lands, & the settlement. Æ. was mocked. It's his ego that responded in this way out of reaction not tactics. He wasn't seen as fierce but I'll advised not just by others but his own thinking. He's belittled, just as Putin is called a megalomaniac mass murderer but not a sharp wise mind, impaired & of course characteristics that are different from Æthelred too. But no respect for life, no sense, no mature diplomatic cunning & sense. I digress. There was a symbolic gesture finally in around 987 of several men burning the boats. It's where "you'll never take the island if you don't burn the boats" comes from. The Danes were always going to conquer the majority of the island & leave the edges for Scottish, Welsh & Cornish, the Celts they respected more. The Anglo-Saxons though, they were there to rule over. And they did. He was trying to stop them, poorly. And stupid men seek to annihilate not align& ally with. Sweyn would not have been able to ally with such an irresponsible & childish man though bc the action you rightly call out was a desperate tantrum by a weak leader. My only issue is that he was indeed a weak mind & I think it's important we recognize genocide as a weak minded action bc it still is going on in multiple places & half the people in "civilized" areas will support it. All Æthelred could have done was to allow the Danes to rule for the survival of his people who would not then have been raided & killed bc Danish Vikings would coexist when settling. Æthelred's 1st error was in overestimating his ability & acting in panic against a far stronger force. His peasants could not possibly have consistently held the land & loss was inevitable & knowing that a wise man saves lives & lets time lead to opportunity later. Dead men have none. He aimed it at them instead of seeing it through the eyes & losses of his people. His obvious lack of strength of mind led to those increasing raids in the first place. He hesitated then took action that resulted in a mass landing & the Danish king kicking his ____ & taking the kingdom. The man was just a fool & yes, they're dangerous. But I can't see him as a fierce warrior. Stupid careless man with troops. & I'm really just adding insult & belittlement to your take on this to double the allegations of the guy thoroughly sucking! 😂 He was even worse! He didn't think Scandinavia would arm the Danelaw, & send hordes of boats full of men?! He had spies in their lands! He was arrogant as insecure men always are! But he did have reason to attack, he should have faced the fighters immediately though & accepted the outcome bc he led to far more hardship & agony & loss of life by postponing.
@WildWoodsGirl65 actually it is perfectly evolved but rejects the divinity within every human being. You cannot justify not killing without believing in God or at the very least believing in the potential divine action of men. The origin of that idea is with judaism.❤
What ever Ethelred was he did the right thing destroying the vikings! saying he “murdered” and “massacred” a race that came to England and did the exact same thing is a bit rich!
Fair point, but at the time the Danes and northern had set up communities in the Dane law from the year 845 and the St Brice’s day massacre was 150 years after, do you know how many generations of people that is that would have settled there? At the time England was a nation for all tribes, as many living in the danelaw was Anglo-Scandinavian obviously being mixed so many would consider it evil, it wasn’t the settlers fault the Vikings came back to England and raided. The armies were then paid off and aethelred took out his wrath on innocents
His attack was five generations later. Should the US attack Japan this year because of Pearl Harbor? The Danelaw was well-established and peaceable. There was no justification for his attack.
I've said similar, if the Vikings didn't raid in the 1st place, he wouldn't have set in motion the St Brices Day Massacre ... the narrator states: "there was a Peace, but the Unready killed them" ... but he doesn't outline that there was a 'Peace' in England but the Vikings raided CONSTANTLY
Ethelred was given his nickname over a century after he had died, by writers working for the Norman conquerors who wanted to discredit all Anglo-Saxon nobility. Propoganda existed even then. Plenty of kings made rash decisions costing thousands of lives and leaned on royal favorites. Ethelred was mearly a product of his bloody times. It's always a mistake to judge historical figures using modern morality. Consider Henry VIII's break with the Catholic Church, which was brutal and bloody & caused centuries of unrest, revolts, ans open warfare all so he could get a new wife. He's a far superior choice for your chosen topic than Ethelred. At least Ethelred thought he was defending his people.
@@H1ST0RYWriter I sort of agree with you, although even the Anglo Saxon chronicle speaks of aethelred with distain, he was a politically weak king, and his own noblemen and earls didn’t trust him, he failed to unite his armies so many times. While his son Edmund easily rallied them to his cause. Aethelred wasn’t only weak but rash and emotion which leads me to believe his rages of passion especially the st brices day massacre was evil. The north men and Dane’s had been living there for over 150 years as guthrum and Alfred had a treaty where all tribes were allowed to settle in England. Evil is a very subjective term so all I can do is present my own argument. Thank you so much for watching though! I hope you enjoyed the video!
Tostig was Harold's brother. The Godwin family were collaborators with the Danish King Cnute. Edgar Aetheling's sister Margaret married Malcolm King of Scotland, and their daughter Matilda married William's youngest son King Henry I. Through the Plantagenets and the Stuarts the current dynasty decends from The House of Wessex.
I love these facts, Harold needs his own video to point out the treachery of his brother Tostitg! Harold Godwin son is one of my favourite English kings, just a shame he lasted so little time on the throne
Let's GOOOOO. Business as usual! Still waiting on the story of the first Portuguese King, D.Afondo Henriques or his most brave Templar knight, Gualdin Pais or even the story Nuno Álvares Pereira, please! I have his first and last name!Thank You
@historyprofiles Whatever You prefer Sir. Trust Your great judgment and knowledge about medieval history! My youngest son wants to study high and low medieval history, cause of Your phenomenal content, so we really apreciate Your work! We take it all, as it comes! Thank You once more! Best chanel on UA-cam, no doubts about it.
@@NomadX7 that’s amazing!!! It’s crazy to think I have an impact like that! That really made me smile! Thank you so much for watching and showing the content to your kids it really means a lot!!
I'm sure it will be very interesting. I lived Portugal for 14 years. I will look forward to it. As learnt much about Portuguese History. More than a brief overview, but not as detailed as this channel delivers.
Æthelred "the Unready", King of the English is my 29th great grandfather. You → Cheley Len Hokanson (your mother) → Oliver Hokanson (her father) → Ellen Louise Hokanson (his mother) → Ellen “Nellie” Yada (her mother) → Horace Greeley Hurd (her father) → J. Alanson Hurd (his father) → Susannah Hurd (his mother) → Heli Foote (her father) → Dr. Ichabod Foote (his father) → Capt. Joseph Foote (his father) → Lt. Robert Foote (his father) → Nathaniel Foote "the Settler" (his father) → Robert Foote of Shalford (his father) → Helen Hall (his mother) → Richard Warren (alias Waller), of Bassingbourne (her father) → Sir Laurence Warren, Lord of Poynton (his father) → Sir John Warren, Lord of Stopford (his father) → Sir Laurence de Warren, Knt., of Pointon (his father) → Isabel Dalton (his mother) → Elizabeth Stanley (her mother) → Sir Nicholas Harrington, of Hornby (her father) → Katherine Harrington (his mother) → Margaret de Holland (her mother) → Elinor de Holland (her mother) → Maude Kellet (her mother) → Sibil d'Ewyas (her mother) → Robert II de Ewyas, Baron of Ewyas Harold (her father) → Robert FitzHarold de Ewyas, I (his father) → Harold de Ewyas I, Lord of Ewyas (his father) → Ralph I "the Timid" de Mantes, earl of Hereford (his father) → Godgifu (his mother) → Æthelred "the Unready", King of the English (her father)
Sweyn I "Forkbeard", king of Denmark, Norway & England first cousin 31 times removed. You → Cheley Len Hokanson (your mother) → Oliver Hokanson (her father) → Ellen Louise Hokanson (his mother) → Ellen “Nellie” Yada (her mother) → Horace Greeley Hurd (her father) → J. Alanson Hurd (his father) → Susannah Hurd (his mother) → Heli Foote (her father) → Dr. Ichabod Foote (his father) → Capt. Joseph Foote (his father) → Lt. Robert Foote (his father) → Nathaniel Foote "the Settler" (his father) → Joane Foote (his mother) → John Brooke (her father) → Robert Brooke (his father) → Edward Brooke (his father) → Reginald Brooke, MP (his father) → Joan Brooke, 5th Baroness of Cobham (his mother) → Joan de la Pole, Baroness Cobham (her mother) → Sir John de la Pole (her father) → Margaret de la Pole (his mother) → Elizabeth Peverell (her mother) → Lady Margaret de Lisle (her mother) → Sir Walter de Beauchamp, of Elmley & Alcester, Sheriff of Worcestershire (her father) → Isabel de Beauchamp (his mother) → Alice de Beaumont, Lady of Hanslope (her mother) → Waleran de Beaumont, 4th Earl of Warwick (her father) → Gundred de Warenne, Countess of Warwick (his mother) → Elisabeth de Vermandois, dame de Crépy (her mother) → Hugues I 'Magnus', Comte de Vermandois (her father) → Anna of Kiev, Queen Consort of the Franks (his mother) → St. Anna of Novgorod (her mother) → Olof III "the Treasurer", king of Sweden (her father) → Eric the Victorious, king of Sweden (his father) → Olaf "the Mighty", king of the Svear (his brother) → Gyrid Olafsdotter, Danish queen consort (his daughter) → Sweyn I "Forkbeard", king of Denmark, Norway & England (her son)
Actually this should be a lessob n to not rebel too much or protest too much about lifes Even the best of rulers have their tyrant side Do notp povoke them to unleash their worsts just because we complaint too much
My cousin did a lot of genetic tracing in my mom’s side of our family and we too, are! Back to Rollo the walker! William had a very tough upbringing after his father died. That was where he became metal as hell.
@@historyprofiles He should have refused to engage the Normans in battle immediately and raised a larger army. It was a bad idea to face them immediately following the battle of Stamford Bridge. Easy to say with 1000 years of hindsight however.
Incorrectly labelled as bad Kings.... you could not be seen as weak or merciful and had to be psychologically monstrous to succeed. Do not judge with a modern sense of morality. William was extremely talented.
You can be talented and evil at the same time. William could have won the war in Northumbria without the harrying of the north. That’s why his own chroniclers said that god would not forgive him. In his wrath he ordered that common folk be cut down; their homes burned and fields reduced to ash. I don’t think you understand the scope of what happened there. Nearly every field in the north on England was reduced to ash, and 75% of the population was killed. William was an amazing warrior and administrator, but his frustration with Edgar arthling who the northerners saw as their true king and their unwillingness to submit is what caused Williams fury. Yes the northerners resisted his rule, but morality isn’t subjective to time. There has always been good and bad. And in his fury William chose the latter
@@historyprofilesno he couldn’t. He HAD to kill everyone. It was the only way to be sure his rule would be solidified and his dynasty secured. Sometimes you have to do a great evil for a greater good. That is what it means to be king, the ability to compromise your morals for the benefit of the realm and your family. Dude was just a product of his time. Sometimes you just have to commit to the role.
@@mosellakepoint9088 that makes no sense though. He spared Edgar ethling and exiled him, so the line of Wessex lived on. Therefore the threat was always there for his line to be overthrown. It’s a difficult argument to be honest I get your point though. The harrying broke the spirits of those left and the rest died.
William was simply evil and wasn't talented he didn't do things because that's what a king is supposed to do he did them out of spite and cruelty and when your own chroniclers don't like that means you're horrible
I am of a long Cumbrian ancestry, from the border of England and Scotland. What William did in the north shall ner be forgotten, but also, neither shall the brutal wars betwixt Alba and England
Aethelred the Unready showed symptoms of Borderline Personality Disorder, betraying his friends and appeasing his enemies. As a young child, he witnessed the murder of his half brother and his mother beat him with a candle, after which he could never bear the presence of candles, clearly a sign of ptsd
6:12. Okay please correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Rochester Castle constructed after the Norman conquest in 1087? Or was there a Anglo Saxon fortified structure there at the time?
You are correct, the Anglo Saxon chronicle mentions the Siege of Rochester castle so it must have been a fortification of some sort before the Norman castle we know today was built
The Battle of Hastings was unusual in that it was an all day affair. Despite Harold's previous battle in the North against Hardrada,they were able to take a strong defensive position that held out almost all day! If they had been at full strength perhaps William would have to withdraw. But it was not to be! And William the Bastard became a King that day!
Indeed! The Anglo Saxon shield wall was pushing the Norman’s back at one point! However under the conquerer the Norman’s were a war machine. His cavalry tactics in the end manages to win the day by outflanking the old shield wall tactic. This that day William was immortalised
I see these medieval portraits and wonder when and why people forgot how to paint humans. Earlier I saw a documentary about Pompei; their art was realistic. When did the brain drain happen?
I’m an artist, favoring realistic styles. Idk what you mean, like I do, but people still paint and draw etc. humans and in realistic styles, for one google just isn’t great at finding anything anymore, and the internet altogether isn’t as open or as easily navigable as it used to be, that we might see the small time art people create. And lastly the big money powers of our time don’t care for realism, or artistic license, just trying to maximaize the amount of money made from as little money spent as possible. So low effort, cheap minimalist art proliferates. And I will assure you, those artists making those corporate styles indeed take as much pride in the work as the styles suggests, which is to say they hate making that garbage but it’s what gets them paid. Check out deviant art, I haven’t been there in a while but it’s always been a great place for people doing their own thing, realistic styles included, you should find countless artists making photorealistic art that’d make an AI weep at the precision.
You are an awesome channel. I’m a huge history buff so your channel makes me giddy with excitement. Can you do videos on Napoleon, King Richard the Lionheart, Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, and Miyamoto Misashi? They are some of my favorite people in history. I already know much about them but I’m sure you’ll come up with new info. Please do those videos in the future! Keep up the good work! 🙏
He is 41 million people’s grandfathers in the 🇬🇧 today. I sequence DNA for a living. If only you knew that living in an average city of 1m plus people? After 7 generations, you will be inbred on a 0.3 scale. You will have buried your seed in one of two distant cousins in your lifetime, without knowing. I’m related to King David 🇮🇱, Lothbrok, Saint Magnus, 7 popes, William Of Orange & the guy who cooked at the last supper.
I don't like the idea of the current king of England being of Norman decent. I would rather see England get rid of the monarchy, or bring back the old Saxon royal houses. That's right. England should be ruled once again by Anglo Saxons.
@@historyprofiles It does seem to be a curiously modern take that William the Conqueror, who committed ethnic genocide but presided over an otherwise peaceful reign, is viewed as evil, whereas Edward III and Henry V, who started wars that killed thousands and thousands of people for base territorial gain and glory, are viewed as morally reasonable people and men of their time. I would regard all these kings as being immoral, especially Henry V who invaded France despite the French having been willing to grant him major diplomatic concessions without him needing to lift a sword. He chose war and death in huge numbers on both sides, and I fail to see how he should escape judgement simply because he won a lucky victory at Agincourt and did not do his killing along ethnic lines. The kings that are traditionally considered "bad" kings - Richard II, John, Edward II, seem like lesser evils frankly, despite them not having provided anything like good rule. In terms of good English kings, in all honesty Alfred the Great stands out to me, even as a non-Englishman.
That makes sense where I get my evil streak from, the unready my paternal 29th GGF , WILLIAM 26TH PATERNAL GGF & MATERNAL 28TH GGF ! so I have the conqueror in both my parents lines.
He wasn't Unready because he was unprepared for the Danes! He was 'redeless' which is better translated as 'badly advised' because he was very young when he became king, and his mother had effectively murdered his half-brother King Edward (known as the martyr) to get him on the throne. His courtiers and lords decided he himself was too young to blame, the victim of his mother's ill advice. It's not exactly an obscure story. Edward was ambushed whilst offered a drink, stabbed, and dragged by a horse.
My husband descends from Aethelwulf, King of Wessex, father of Aethelred and Alfred The Great and Osburga of Wight. King Alfred and Queen Ealhswith of The Gaini Tribe had Edward "The Elder", King of Wessex, who married Eadgifu *Saint Eadburh's Mother* of Kent, Queen Consort of the Anglo-Saxons who had King Edmund "The Magnificent" of Wessex who married Saint Ælfgifu of Shaftesbury, Queen Consort of England who had King Edgar "The Peaceful" of Wessex who married Ælfthryth of Devon, Queen Consort of The English who gave birth to Æthelred "the Unready" House Wessex, King of The English who married Ælfgifu Thoredsdottir House York (Saxon era), Queen Consort of The English who gave birth to Edmund II "Ironside" House Wessex, King of England who married Ealdgyth Queen-Consort of England who gave birth to Edward "The Exile" House Wessex, Prince of England who married Agatha Von Saxony, Saint Henri's daughter who gave birth to Saint Margaret House Wessex, Queen of Scotland Princess of Wessex who married Malcolm III "Canmore" Dunkeld, King of Scotland whose daughter Matilda of Scotland "Good Queen Maud" Dunkeld, Queen of England, Princess of Scotland married King Henry I of England whose father was William The Conqueror, King of England. -House Normandy is related to House Wessex -House Wessex is related to House Dunkeld -House Dunkeld is related to Alpin -Alpin Founded Scotland with Kenneth Alpin -My husband descends from them all ^_^
With good reason. At least Edward I, II, and III. Edward IV had more than enough problems in England to keep him out of Scotland. But, the England- Scotland conflicts were no more vicious or brutal than any other wars during the Mediaeval Period. Me, I'm a Fraser. Of Lovat. My immigrant ancestor to America was "transported" after the 1715 Rebellion. A younger brother of Simon The Fox. I'm directly descended from the "Edwards" as well as MOST Kings of the Scots/ of Scotland, from Kenneth MacAlpin to James V. Most of the Dunkelds, all the Bruces, and all the Stewarts. I'm as closely related to William Wallace as anyone else now living, as I'm directly descended from 2 or 3 of his siblings. Funny thing: the eldest son of my immigrant ancestor, a Daniel Fraser, was with his father as a 12-yr- old boy in "The Fifteen." But, his father got him released and sent home to Inverness. Since most of the Lovat Frasers had stayed out of that fight, young Daniel wasn't treated well. After his period of SLAVERY, his father brought him to North Carolina. The rest followed soon after. ANYWAY. Daniel was in his 50s when the French & Indian War/ 7 Years War broke out, but still healthy and fit. His cousin, Young Simon Fraser, came over with his regiment of Highlanders, mostly Frasers. He got Daniel commissioned as a Major in the British Army - not militia, like George Washington. They fought together and remained dear friends until Daniel's death. I am now the "caretaker" of his sword and a few other things. He also received HUGE Land Grants for his service. This young Simon returned as General Fraser in the American Revolution, but the friendship was over. Daniel's son, my direct ancestor, was a rifleman in the Continental Army. In one battle, he could've easily killed General Fraser, but instead shot off his hat, then yelled greetings to him saying that shot was because of his father. Next time it'd be through his head. They never crossed paths again.
hard to feel sorry for the danes/vikings massacred after what theyd done for so long,slavery isnt mentioned but that was the greatest source of their wealth,let alone massacre, rape arson and pillage.reap what u sow comes to mind,what legacy did the vikings leave,they didnt have a written language.all they brought was suffering and pain to a lot of europe
Very true, ivar the boneless turned Dublin into one of the slave trade capitals of the world at the time. They did bring a lot of pain and death to Europe and beyond. Their legacy is one of conquest, murder, the establishment of dynasties and their differing religion (before their conversion to Christianity)
At all times rulers only interests in their subjects has been exploitation as submissive workers, servants and taxation objects. All for personal ambitions of wealth and power- then and now.
The Danes in England then were not settlers, they were murderous invaders. Do you suppose the land they had was unoccupied before they got there? The counter to ethnocide is ethnocide. Cry about it.
Actually they had settled in England for over 150 years at that point, many of them settled in the danelaw after Alfred’s treaty with guthrum and generations of Anglo-Scandinavians had been living in England by the time aethelred come to the throne some 100 years later.
What about the st Bruce’s day massacre and him saying in a charter it was a just extermination? Sounds wicked to me, he was called the unready because every time the Vikings came to England he paid them instead of assembling a force to fight a pitched battle
@@SandileNgwenya-gv7nx are you kidding me they invaded these islands, murdered whole monastery's destroyed whole villages. Saxons and Vikings fought three wars. Edward The Unready is not considered a bad king, but what do I know I just grew up by one of their biggest battle sites
@@bruceplenderleith838 You're completely right about that! From what I've read about Æthelred, he did order the killing, but it was only after he got that suggestion from his council. He didn't just wake up one day and decide to order it. Plus, the archeological evidence we have suggests that the massacre wasn't as bad as it is described as. And the vikings that were killed were either mercenaries or just newly settled ones around Oxford. Now I can say that no, the massacre wasn't good and it could've been avoided. But we also have to note that it was in 1002, when killings like that were a normal Tuesday. Plus the killing was only a last resort after many, MANY viking raids. So yeah, we can't call Æthelred evil. Just very, VERY weak! (The source I got this information from was Levi Roache's "Æthelred the Unready" book) (Also I apologise for my bad spelling and grammar, English is not my first language)
Unfortunately there’s hardly any artwork in chronicles for 10th and 11th century England. I added the images of every chronicle and manuscript I could at the time, such as the image of Sweyn conquering England. I like to add other images though for the imaginative feel, not keeping every image the same and making the video more visually appealing
@@historyprofiles Yes, that's understandable, but I think there is a danger that some viewers will get misconceptions as to what was going on in differing periods, it's amazing what people take in, even unconsciously.
@@historyprofiles I think that if you do this in future videos, it would be a good idea to add captions explaining that this is artwork from chronicles from later centuries. People living in the 14th century apparently either didn't seem to appreciate that people had different clothing/armour/weapons in previous centuries, or, if they did, chose not to portray that in chronicles. Personally I find it hard to believe they can have been completely ignorant of historical change, and perhaps they decided to portray historical knights as modern day knights for other reasons. There must have been physical examples of, say, 13th century armour in the 14th century, on statues, tomb effigies and so on, so people must have been aware, not to mention stories from older generations, and we know that armour evolved rapidly over this period, so they must have had knowledge of this change, but chose not to portray it in artwork for some reason. In the same way Biblical scenes are often curiously depicted with people dressed in a classic medieval fashion, and yet (albeit later, Renaissance) artwork shows they knew that biblical figures did not look or dress like your average contemporary European. It's a fascinating topic.
You know, in 2024, if you want to talk about genocides, then we can discuss it. It shouldn’t happen now, if your country has any ethical standards. If you want to talk about the middle ages… judge them by their peers of that era. The concept of genocide wasn’t a relevant term for that period. It was common practice to slaughter entire regions. It was common to rape every person in a city as a “reward” for winning a siege. And in most places, if you conquered a region you either enslaved them, or killed them. Christian Europeans made this slightly better by making peasants be tied to the land. So slaves that got passed from lord to lord. Assuming they survived the initial conquest. And yes, if you weren’t the right kind of Christian, they’d more often than not put your entire community to the sword. If they bothered even recording it. That was just business as usual. Welcome to the dark and middle ages. And if you left England and went anywhere else, they were doing the same barbaric stuff, or worse. Everyone was subject to the good graces of their manor lord. Complete nepotism. And most were just seen as property, to be worked to death. Even the king was only as in control of his own lords as he had leverage and influence to get them to comply. So yeah. Kings would wipe out a lord just to send a message to others. If the peasants revolted, same thing. Because that was the only way to maintain control. Make people fear you. So if a bunch of foreigners moved in, you make a policy to kill them all. Because then you can get both lords and peasants to all work towards a common goal. You just needed a unifying scapegoat. And yeah, religion back then was much more barbaric. Kinda like how Islam is today.
Both men are not the greatest people. As I can call both my family, I am not proud of this. You find the viewpoint is always important to how things are viewed. William was viewed differently because he was the new ruler. Speaking out against him would mean death.
8:13 ...you say 'Genocide' but if War Bands didn't set in motion all the raids in England in the 1st place, there wouldn't have been Genocide would there ... 🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️
Most evil English Kings? Hardly. Aethelred and William did what they needed to do as Monarchs and warriors to secure their kingdom. There have been way worse that did what they did simply for greed and personal gain. Henry VIII, case in point. And I hope one day you English would stop referring to William as the bastard. He more than earned his legitimacy well before 1066, not simply because his parents were considered married by the church. Get over your obvious hatred of the French/Norman's. .almost 1000 years after the fact. I would venture that most English are not purely Britons or Anglo Saxon's, but many are possessed of Norman or Danish ancestry.
There’s a Obviously a Difference between English Kings and Kings of England, the Kings of England between 1066-1399, weren’t “English”…because they didn’t even Speak English, because they considered it, the Language of their Serf (actual) English Subjects…
Down to luck. The Scots successful campaign in Yorkshire included a night attack on the English camp at Stamford Park. The young Edward III hid under a collapsed tent. 😂
Almighty God, grant me the courage to face adversity with unwavering faith, knowing that You are my refuge and strength. Help me to trust in Your divine plan even when it's difficult to understand.
So, before I bother to watch…can someone tell me if this a Harold fanboy video. In other words, Harold=good, William=bad. Honestly, I loathe Harold and the entire Godwin clan. I have always preferred William. Moreover, William’s children had actual royal blood thanks to Matilda. The Godwins didn’t. And undeniably, the Normans brought some good things to England. Too bad King William’s Anglo-Dane subjects were foolish and rebelled against him. The rebels were the ultimate cause of the problems, but it seems some people refuse to hold them accountable.
The video dosnt really cover Harold that much or go into his character, mainly the stories of aethelred the unready and William the conqueror! When the rebels of Northumbria rebelled against William causing the harrying of the north is what the video is mainly about! I’m covering Harold godwinson this week though! Going into a bit of earl godwins story and the complete story of Harold godwinson and his rise to power
Oh and Cnut is pronounced cenuth...hence Kenneth being so popular then, Know all academics screwing up a language the don't to this day understand. We can never know how any of these languages where spoken or pronounced. We would probably understand them today. It's not how you spell it, It's how the people SAY IT....BOODEECA INDEED, BO DISEA Was good enough for hundreds of years, Don't mess with things you don't understand. Oh and if your born in Britain your British, No matter what creed or colour, Don't let foreigners tell us what to do,
I don't blame ethelred the unready he was ill advised as his name and it was the danes fault because they also killed english people so i would still think about him but william the conqueror is a real murderer after all the anglo saxons him and his normans killed
Ultimately, the capitulation of Edward the Confessor to the Normans led to England's conquest by William. Thank you for a very well-researched presentation.
Warming st is still a road in service today and is known as a Roman road byborigin
Fabulous video. It goes right through the 'soap opera' of the Aethelred II reign, his sons fighting the Vikings, Canute, The Confessor, right through to the Bastard. The most pivotal time in Early Medieval English history. All done in a nice, lyrical, even pace. Really good work.
Thank you so much! A lot of work went into the video so your comment really means a lot! ❤️
Great video! I’m almost done. I’ve watched several William the Conqueror videos and never knew he had such support from the Pope, Holy Roman Emperor, etc. It always seemed like he used Godwinson’s years old oath as a somewhat flimsy reason to get his people together and invade. Knowing he had such powerful allies/supports adds a new dimension. Awesome work!
Glad you enjoyed it!
The production value on your channel is sick.
As well as having top shelf historical information the way you approach the narrative and the cadence of it are perfect.
I remember the dark ages of the history channel. Kids today will never know.
The music is wonderful and fits the mood wonderfully.
Thank you so much! Your comment really means a lot! I’m glad your enjoying the content! More on the way!
I don't know how I got here, but I'm glad I did.
You have a great knack for making what to me is quite obscure historical content and making it extremely watchable.
Very interesting indeed.
Welcome aboard! Thank you so much for watching!
Ollie, bro, Your channel is just up there with the best when it comes to history content makers. I used to support quite a few channels Patreons. But now years later, they to the point to where they got millions of subscribers and their videos are getting tins of millions of views so I lowered it to Support the smaller channels I like. And I literally only support one channels
Patreon. And it’s yours. I did have to lower my support over the last year and a half because I had a housefire and my fiancé was murdered and that left me with a lot of her debt that was tied up my finances and have to pay a lot of extra money monthly for my son‘s braces and tutoring. I’m just a single father, raising my son by myself, retired Army. But once I get through this little situation, I’m gonna go up to the max level Patreon because you deserve it, bro. I think with the majority of your Anglo-Saxon and Viking videos, your voice and narration and especially that music that you play on those videos is the perfect combination, and that’s why I’ve been watching and supporting your & channel from day one! Keep up the great content!
Thank you so much it really means a lot! That’s so sad, I’m so sorry my condolences. Your kind words really do mean a lot to me though! Thank you so much for supporting the channel!
Thank you again, viking England is one of my favourites! Hope you enjoyed man! Keep going! Your doing amazing!
I’m just a stranger on the internet but read your comment when I don’t look at them much. I wanted to send my condolences, thank you for your service, and wish you luck. You’re obviously a good dude, I hope things look better for you soon! (and I agree - love his channel!)
I'm sorry you went through all of that. It's wonderful that you can find escape and enjoyment in watching these videos.
Can’t thank you enough for the work you do on your channel. I love the vibe in your videos - something about the combination of the background music and the quality of your narration just hits different than a lot of the other history channels I watch. Great job as always, looking forward to watching this later today!
Thank you so much! It really means a lot!
Wow! I just got the notification after 1 hour you uploaded. Wonderful video with magnificent scenes and music. Just love it! Thank you History Profiles
Thank you so much for watching Elke!!
@@historyprofiles
My pleasure! Working and listening, also the ads! 👍🏻 Great video as always. Thank you Ollie
This is a fascinating video. I have learned so much and realised how little I knew/know about Æthelred. I was also delighted that the 'Norman-ness' of Edward the Confessor's court was highlighted, as this often seems to slip under the radar, with the impression given that the Norman invasion was an entirely new and unfamiliar regime. Thank you so much for this - I'm off to order books from the library about Æthelred, now that the gap in my knowledge has been exposed!
Thank you so much for watching! I hope you enjoyed it! Yes not many people do highlight that, Edward the confessor was basically a Norman, he spent the first half of his life in the Norman court, so he definitely related to the Norman lords more than the Anglo-Saxon ones
I am a descendant of both of these men. They were brutal men, but we can't judge them by our 21st century morals and sensibilies, they were brutal because it was a harsh, cruel world back then, and weak men didn't become Kings , or stay Kings for very long.
it's still ongoing in gaza palestine 2023 and 2024 the fenocide has even been condemned by un and icj declaring isreali leadership of genocide
All kings are weak men, you are very gravely mistaken.
@@Hrossey this is an incredibly stupid comment
IF Ethelred had really been that bad why do you think he was invited to return and take the throne after stepping away. The St Brides day massacre was not just him acting, the people also were far from happy living with who they saw as invaders still. This same division in society was inherited and remained until the Harrying of the North. Brutal times, and brutal solutions.
Fair point, but at the time the Danes and northern had set up communities in the Dane law from the year 845 and the St Brice’s day massacre was 150 years after, do you know how many generations of people that is that would have settled there? At the time England was a nation for all tribes, as many living in the danelaw was Anglo-Scandinavian obviously being mixed so many would consider it evil, it wasn’t the settlers fault the Vikings came back to England and raided. The armies were then paid off and aethelred took out his wrath on innocents
Because he was a weak king
Ethelred did nothing wrong.
@@historyprofiles doesn't change much. The Danes were still foreigners who let's not forget descended from people who massacred English people.
And now England is once again under foreign rule
Awesome vid, very comprehensive, helped me understand how alot of these rulers tie together versus individual profiles on them
My cousin used to work in the army corps of engineers and does work in genetics; after heavy research he found out my mom’s lineage goes to William Longsword! Alongside some French nobles, and obviously Rollo. William was brutal, but undeniably changed history forever. Hate him or love him, he was an extremely strong ruler who had nothing but a hard upbringing after his father died. He became hard as hell! He had to be.
Agreed under william the Normans force was a war machine, brutal but great man
@@historyprofiles i think its fair to say this was th strt of the nrth south divide....evn to this day the upper classes speak with a vocabulary thts derived frm french
My English family traces our ancestors back to a knight who fought for William I at the Battle of Hastings. Confirmed it with church records in Normandie. 😁
He was a hard man .
The English language comes from the midlands black country @@1112-g1x
Amazing presentation
Thank you so much! I hope you enjoyed!
I'm supposedly related to Waltheof, Earl of Northumbria.
He was supposedly the only English nobleman ever deliberately put aside and executed by William I for his actions in the rebellions.
Following the Battle of Hastings he submitted to William and was allowed to keep his pre-Conquest title and possessions. But he was a Saxon to the bone and supported Edgar settling in his quest for the English throne. When Sweyn II of Denmark invaded Northern England in 1069, Waltheof and Edgar Aetheling joined the Danes and took part in the attack on York. He would again make a fresh submission to William after the departure of the invaders in 1070. In 1075 Waltheof was said to have joined the Revolt of the Earls against William. He spent almost a year in confinement before being beheaded on 31 May 1076 at St. Giles's Hill, near Winchester. Thank you so much for watching I hope you enjoyed the video!!
Excellent video thank you for breaking this all down. 👍👍 RIP to all those who where mercilessly murdered 🙏🙏🕊️🕊️🕯️🕯️
The conqueror wasn't an English king, he was the king of England.
Men came from across the sea and killed his countrymen and beggared his realm so he took out vengeance against those men's families and Kin. I call that a great leader
Fair point, but at the time the Danes and northern had set up communities in the Dane law from the year 845 and the St Brice’s day massacre was 150 years after, do you know how many generations of people that is that would have settled there? At the time England was a nation for all tribes, as many living in the danelaw was Anglo-Scandinavian obviously being mixed so many would consider it evil, it wasn’t the settlers fault the Vikings came back to England and raided. The armies were then paid off and aethelred took out his wrath on innocents
Sounds more spiteful than great
@@historyprofiles Frankly I respect Sweyn Forkbeard more than Æthelred II aptly named Unræd ("poor counsel," as in doesn't listen to sense, chooses bad advisers.) Not a good trait in a king. It snowballs into poor decisions, immature & poorly thought out strategies, emotional choices of tactics, but his point was if they'd attack his villages, he'd attack their settlers. Æthelred "the Unready" comes from deliberate alteration of Unræd, shifting blame from the advisers to himself & rightly so bc a king needs to be able to hear wiser minds. Sweyn was wise, an excellent strategist, perceptive & a seasoned warrior capable of drawing on his own experience & knowing whose input was sage. He read & led men well, carried out goals. It is his goal & effective strategy that was a problem for the Anglo-Saxons.
It had been peaceful, yes, but in the 980s the Danes began raiding again, from within the Danelaw into surrounding areas, & were welcoming Ostmen landing & using the Danelaw as a base, including parts of Yorkshire & Northumberland. As more raiders a'viking came it escalated into the 990s & from 991 & his loss at the battle of Maldon Æthelred was paying Danegeld to the Danish king, in other words, his lands were in effect occupied, his reign being held for ransom. Pay or be annihilated bc the Danes had far more troops the could bring including the wilder Norsemen /Norwegians. Norse raided in swoop & leave style. Danes had the objective of settlement & conquest, establishing a base then trade center & settlement then expansion of area of control. The Swedes were less actively doing this at the time. There was the threat of far more men including the fiercest Norse allies, which were most feared. He hadn't exactly paid the army off. It was akin to a protection racket & he was under their thumbs. While the settler community was trading & not raiding they were sheltering the raiders & it escalated into enough fighters there to make the raids increasingly incessant & then the battles, which he finally lost to the Danes at Maldon. It never was that all Danes were Vikings, but they were of the culture, it was their normal, just everyone had their own jobs, bc a community has multiple needs. They had always intended to take the island or a vast majority of it, they just did so in stages & Sweyn did end up king. The Danelaw was in effect Danish occupation & every member of it aware & for it, their leadership king of both the Danelaw & what's now Denmark - no difference to them, all one territory on different lands. Denmark still holds lands not in Denmark & held others til modern times. He had to fight back, they were making sudden attacks on the villages surrounding the Danelaw, & going farther & farther both in distance & violence. The two groups were fighting each other, over his land, as the Danes were occupying with the precise purpose of gradually clearing lands for expansion as people feared the raids & those surviving packed up their stuff & migrated farther inland. Æthelred's people were losing their land, his kingdom was losing its land, & he was paying the Danish kingdom for the privilege & he knew the Danelaw was the base of operations, we'd call it today, for that ongoing objective. His people were getting whooped & uprooted, at best, & angry with him for not having already wiped out the Danes & Danelaw. The root of the poorly advised reputation was that he had sought to coexist with the occupiers who had claimed that land through extreme violence. Danes & Norse were feared for a reason. Intermarriage with them began before it was just descendants, but during the initial violent seizing of lands, & the Anglo-Saxons for the most part saw that as treasonous or seeking to profit by joining the fierce invaders. To this day the percentage of Viking DNA is very high in parts of Yorkshire, Northumberland & Durham, & the Scottish islands especially Orkney. It's terrible when any leader aims for annihilation rather than cooperation. & It's the times, too, though, Viking age. Meanwhile in other lands, same armies or hit & run raiding leading to battles. Sweyn saw Æthelred as weak bc of his attempts at peace, his tolerance of their presence, & the way in which he went about it, unsure of himself, not an Alpha, too hesitant, supremely unprepared to immediately repel invasion. Æthelred knew Danes were landing, Vikings,& tried to ignore it, to his downfall & eventual assault on the settlerments. So this was WEAK. Attempted avoidance of meeting the stronger of those peoples! He did it while many fighting men were away, calling it strategic. It looked like fear, & was. Sweyn goaded Æthelred & they all did - the fighting men within the community & those landing from mainland Dane lands, & the settlement. Æ. was mocked. It's his ego that responded in this way out of reaction not tactics. He wasn't seen as fierce but I'll advised not just by others but his own thinking. He's belittled, just as Putin is called a megalomaniac mass murderer but not a sharp wise mind, impaired & of course characteristics that are different from Æthelred too. But no respect for life, no sense, no mature diplomatic cunning & sense. I digress. There was a symbolic gesture finally in around 987 of several men burning the boats. It's where "you'll never take the island if you don't burn the boats" comes from. The Danes were always going to conquer the majority of the island & leave the edges for Scottish, Welsh & Cornish, the Celts they respected more. The Anglo-Saxons though, they were there to rule over. And they did. He was trying to stop them, poorly. And stupid men seek to annihilate not align& ally with. Sweyn would not have been able to ally with such an irresponsible & childish man though bc the action you rightly call out was a desperate tantrum by a weak leader. My only issue is that he was indeed a weak mind & I think it's important we recognize genocide as a weak minded action bc it still is going on in multiple places & half the people in "civilized" areas will support it. All Æthelred could have done was to allow the Danes to rule for the survival of his people who would not then have been raided & killed bc Danish Vikings would coexist when settling. Æthelred's 1st error was in overestimating his ability & acting in panic against a far stronger force. His peasants could not possibly have consistently held the land & loss was inevitable & knowing that a wise man saves lives & lets time lead to opportunity later. Dead men have none. He aimed it at them instead of seeing it through the eyes & losses of his people. His obvious lack of strength of mind led to those increasing raids in the first place. He hesitated then took action that resulted in a mass landing & the Danish king kicking his ____ & taking the kingdom. The man was just a fool & yes, they're dangerous. But I can't see him as a fierce warrior. Stupid careless man with troops. & I'm really just adding insult & belittlement to your take on this to double the allegations of the guy thoroughly sucking! 😂 He was even worse! He didn't think Scandinavia would arm the Danelaw, & send hordes of boats full of men?! He had spies in their lands! He was arrogant as insecure men always are! But he did have reason to attack, he should have faced the fighters immediately though & accepted the outcome bc he led to far more hardship & agony & loss of life by postponing.
@WildWoodsGirl65 actually it is perfectly evolved but rejects the divinity within every human being. You cannot justify not killing without believing in God or at the very least believing in the potential divine action of men. The origin of that idea is with judaism.❤
@RougeSanta sounds very revisionist take to me. History interpreted through a DIE lens.
Hi Ollie. I’m late to your narration. Enjoying it under a sunny sky. Cheers
Hope you enjoyed it!
What ever Ethelred was he did the right thing destroying the vikings! saying he “murdered” and “massacred” a race that came to England and did the exact same thing is a bit rich!
Fair point, but at the time the Danes and northern had set up communities in the Dane law from the year 845 and the St Brice’s day massacre was 150 years after, do you know how many generations of people that is that would have settled there? At the time England was a nation for all tribes, as many living in the danelaw was Anglo-Scandinavian obviously being mixed so many would consider it evil, it wasn’t the settlers fault the Vikings came back to England and raided. The armies were then paid off and aethelred took out his wrath on innocents
His attack was five generations later. Should the US attack Japan this year because of Pearl Harbor?
The Danelaw was well-established and peaceable. There was no justification for his attack.
@@jturtle5318don’t care
I've said similar, if the Vikings didn't raid in the 1st place, he wouldn't have set in motion the St Brices Day Massacre ... the narrator states: "there was a Peace, but the Unready killed them" ... but he doesn't outline that there was a 'Peace' in England but the Vikings raided CONSTANTLY
@@brianhodgson9547 did you know that the Saxons aren't indigenous to England?
you should have millions of subs. Great history videos!
Ethelred was given his nickname over a century after he had died, by writers working for the Norman conquerors who wanted to discredit all Anglo-Saxon nobility. Propoganda existed even then. Plenty of kings made rash decisions costing thousands of lives and leaned on royal favorites. Ethelred was mearly a product of his bloody times. It's always a mistake to judge historical figures using modern morality. Consider Henry VIII's break with the Catholic Church, which was brutal and bloody & caused centuries of unrest, revolts, ans open warfare all so he could get a new wife. He's a far superior choice for your chosen topic than Ethelred. At least Ethelred thought he was defending his people.
@@H1ST0RYWriter I sort of agree with you, although even the Anglo Saxon chronicle speaks of aethelred with distain, he was a politically weak king, and his own noblemen and earls didn’t trust him, he failed to unite his armies so many times. While his son Edmund easily rallied them to his cause. Aethelred wasn’t only weak but rash and emotion which leads me to believe his rages of passion especially the st brices day massacre was evil. The north men and Dane’s had been living there for over 150 years as guthrum and Alfred had a treaty where all tribes were allowed to settle in England. Evil is a very subjective term so all I can do is present my own argument. Thank you so much for watching though! I hope you enjoyed the video!
@@historyprofilesAethelred was probably on of them 🏳️🌈
They / thems 😉✅
Tostig was Harold's brother. The Godwin family were collaborators with the Danish King Cnute. Edgar Aetheling's sister Margaret married Malcolm King of Scotland, and their daughter Matilda married William's youngest son King Henry I. Through the Plantagenets and the Stuarts the current dynasty decends from The House of Wessex.
I love these facts, Harold needs his own video to point out the treachery of his brother Tostitg! Harold Godwin son is one of my favourite English kings, just a shame he lasted so little time on the throne
His brothers Sveyn and Tostig both allied to attack Harold.
He was ill advised not unready, it was a mistranslation of the Anglo Saxon word for ill advised
Yes, "The Redeless".
This is fantastic thanks!
Thank you for watching!!
GREAT content and GREAT music choices ❤️
Thank you so much for watching! Hope you enjoyed the video!
I enjoy ALL of your videos mate 🙏🏾
Let's GOOOOO. Business as usual! Still waiting on the story of the first Portuguese King, D.Afondo Henriques or his most brave Templar knight, Gualdin Pais or even the story Nuno Álvares Pereira, please! I have his first and last name!Thank You
Scripts are being written research is getting done! I’m a one man band so give me time!!! Which one would you rather prefer though?
@historyprofiles
Whatever You prefer Sir. Trust Your great judgment and knowledge about medieval history! My youngest son wants to study high and low medieval history, cause of Your phenomenal content, so we really apreciate Your work! We take it all, as it comes! Thank You once more! Best chanel on UA-cam, no doubts about it.
@@NomadX7 that’s amazing!!! It’s crazy to think I have an impact like that! That really made me smile! Thank you so much for watching and showing the content to your kids it really means a lot!!
Morning.
More impact that You might imagine!
We love the editing also so keep up the great great work! Thank You.
I'm sure it will be very interesting. I lived Portugal for 14 years.
I will look forward to it.
As learnt much about Portuguese History. More than a brief overview, but not as detailed as this channel delivers.
Good presentation. Thank you! Volume needs to be increased though.
I want to thank you for a really good video full of information ⚔️
Thank you so much for watching!! I hope you enjoyed!
@@historyprofiles I did
Makes Game of Thrones look like a Sunday school outing...
I don't read many novels anymore because history beats it for drama. It's one thing to fantasize but this really happened.
Well done!!!
Thank you so much for watching!
Æthelred "the Unready", King of the English is my 29th great grandfather.
You → Cheley Len Hokanson (your mother) → Oliver Hokanson (her father) → Ellen Louise Hokanson (his mother) → Ellen “Nellie” Yada (her mother) → Horace Greeley Hurd (her father) → J. Alanson Hurd (his father) → Susannah Hurd (his mother) → Heli Foote (her father) → Dr. Ichabod Foote (his father) → Capt. Joseph Foote (his father) → Lt. Robert Foote (his father) → Nathaniel Foote "the Settler" (his father) → Robert Foote of Shalford (his father) → Helen Hall (his mother) → Richard Warren (alias Waller), of Bassingbourne (her father) → Sir Laurence Warren, Lord of Poynton (his father) → Sir John Warren, Lord of Stopford (his father) → Sir Laurence de Warren, Knt., of Pointon (his father) → Isabel Dalton (his mother) → Elizabeth Stanley (her mother) → Sir Nicholas Harrington, of Hornby (her father) → Katherine Harrington (his mother) → Margaret de Holland (her mother) → Elinor de Holland (her mother) → Maude Kellet (her mother) → Sibil d'Ewyas (her mother) → Robert II de Ewyas, Baron of Ewyas Harold (her father) → Robert FitzHarold de Ewyas, I (his father) → Harold de Ewyas I, Lord of Ewyas (his father) → Ralph I "the Timid" de Mantes, earl of Hereford (his father) → Godgifu (his mother) → Æthelred "the Unready", King of the English (her father)
34:17 - I thought you said something else there for a split second!
Sweyn I "Forkbeard", king of Denmark, Norway & England first cousin 31 times removed.
You → Cheley Len Hokanson (your mother) → Oliver Hokanson (her father) → Ellen Louise Hokanson (his mother) → Ellen “Nellie” Yada (her mother) → Horace Greeley Hurd (her father) → J. Alanson Hurd (his father) → Susannah Hurd (his mother) → Heli Foote (her father) → Dr. Ichabod Foote (his father) → Capt. Joseph Foote (his father) → Lt. Robert Foote (his father) → Nathaniel Foote "the Settler" (his father) → Joane Foote (his mother) → John Brooke (her father) → Robert Brooke (his father) → Edward Brooke (his father) → Reginald Brooke, MP (his father) → Joan Brooke, 5th Baroness of Cobham (his mother) → Joan de la Pole, Baroness Cobham (her mother) → Sir John de la Pole (her father) → Margaret de la Pole (his mother) → Elizabeth Peverell (her mother) → Lady Margaret de Lisle (her mother) → Sir Walter de Beauchamp, of Elmley & Alcester, Sheriff of Worcestershire (her father) → Isabel de Beauchamp (his mother) → Alice de Beaumont, Lady of Hanslope (her mother) → Waleran de Beaumont, 4th Earl of Warwick (her father) → Gundred de Warenne, Countess of Warwick (his mother) → Elisabeth de Vermandois, dame de Crépy (her mother) → Hugues I 'Magnus', Comte de Vermandois (her father) → Anna of Kiev, Queen Consort of the Franks (his mother) → St. Anna of Novgorod (her mother) → Olof III "the Treasurer", king of Sweden (her father) → Eric the Victorious, king of Sweden (his father) → Olaf "the Mighty", king of the Svear (his brother) → Gyrid Olafsdotter, Danish queen consort (his daughter) → Sweyn I "Forkbeard", king of Denmark, Norway & England (her son)
Supposedly, I am a descendant of William the Conqueror but I'm not sure I want to admit to that after seeing this video. 😹
You and every other white American.
Actually this should be a lessob n to not rebel too much or protest too much about lifes
Even the best of rulers have their tyrant side
Do notp povoke them to unleash their worsts just because we complaint too much
haha I hope you enjoyed it! That's so cool though!
My cousin did a lot of genetic tracing in my mom’s side of our family and we too, are! Back to Rollo the walker! William had a very tough upbringing after his father died. That was where he became metal as hell.
Hello Cousins 👋
If only Harold Godwinson could have held out until those reinforcements arrived!
Yes! He only lost marginally at Hastings was a very close encounter! Could have gone either way!
You might not be alive today if you have a distant relative to any of those involved in the Battle
@@historyprofiles He should have refused to engage the Normans in battle immediately and raised a larger army. It was a bad idea to face them immediately following the battle of Stamford Bridge. Easy to say with 1000 years of hindsight however.
wuld it be fair to say tht if he had england wuld be a fairer more equal society 2day? more like other germanic / Scandinavian states?
@@Etäinshewölf007like many old battles in Europe, I have ancestors from both sides. Sometimes literally on both sides of the same battle.
Does Cumberland have anything to do with Cucumbers? I always think of Cucumbers when I hear Cumberland. I figured they might have grown them there.
It’s related to the Welsh term Cymru, which means Wales; originally deriving from the old-Brittonic word for compatriots
Geez I couldn’t live back then , the violence so bad
Continuous wars, trading 12 or 13 year old girls like cattle to make alliances, it's fascinating but appallingly cruel.
Incorrectly labelled as bad Kings.... you could not be seen as weak or merciful and had to be psychologically monstrous to succeed. Do not judge with a modern sense of morality. William was extremely talented.
You can be talented and evil at the same time. William could have won the war in Northumbria without the harrying of the north. That’s why his own chroniclers said that god would not forgive him. In his wrath he ordered that common folk be cut down; their homes burned and fields reduced to ash. I don’t think you understand the scope of what happened there. Nearly every field in the north on England was reduced to ash, and 75% of the population was killed. William was an amazing warrior and administrator, but his frustration with Edgar arthling who the northerners saw as their true king and their unwillingness to submit is what caused Williams fury. Yes the northerners resisted his rule, but morality isn’t subjective to time. There has always been good and bad. And in his fury William chose the latter
@@historyprofilesno he couldn’t. He HAD to kill everyone. It was the only way to be sure his rule would be solidified and his dynasty secured. Sometimes you have to do a great evil for a greater good. That is what it means to be king, the ability to compromise your morals for the benefit of the realm and your family. Dude was just a product of his time. Sometimes you just have to commit to the role.
@@mosellakepoint9088 that makes no sense though. He spared Edgar ethling and exiled him, so the line of Wessex lived on. Therefore the threat was always there for his line to be overthrown. It’s a difficult argument to be honest I get your point though. The harrying broke the spirits of those left and the rest died.
@@mosellakepoint9088No that's not what it is to be king William the conqueror was just evil and a real king was his son Henry I
William was simply evil and wasn't talented he didn't do things because that's what a king is supposed to do he did them out of spite and cruelty and when your own chroniclers don't like that means you're horrible
Fascinating film!
I am of a long Cumbrian ancestry, from the border of England and Scotland. What William did in the north shall ner be forgotten, but also, neither shall the brutal wars betwixt Alba and England
ALBA CABRATH!
It was a thousand years ago. Let it go.
@@williamphelps8550 I utterly agree. I am of a very long Lancastrian lineage - let it go.
Our Pictish and Dalriadan forebears started some things themselves.
Was a millennia ago, time to move on I think.
Aethelred the Unready showed symptoms of Borderline Personality Disorder, betraying his friends and appeasing his enemies. As a young child, he witnessed the murder of his half brother and his mother beat him with a candle, after which he could never bear the presence of candles, clearly a sign of ptsd
6:12. Okay please correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Rochester Castle constructed after the Norman conquest in 1087? Or was there a Anglo Saxon fortified structure there at the time?
You are correct, the Anglo Saxon chronicle mentions the Siege of Rochester castle so it must have been a fortification of some sort before the Norman castle we know today was built
The Battle of Hastings was unusual in that it was an all day affair. Despite Harold's previous battle in the North against Hardrada,they were able to take a strong defensive position that held out almost all day! If they had been at full strength perhaps William would have to withdraw. But it was not to be! And William the Bastard became a King that day!
Indeed! The Anglo Saxon shield wall was pushing the Norman’s back at one point! However under the conquerer the Norman’s were a war machine. His cavalry tactics in the end manages to win the day by outflanking the old shield wall tactic. This that day William was immortalised
@@historyprofiles 🛡⚔️
William came in backstabbing after the viking battle. Bastard move.
I see these medieval portraits and wonder when and why people forgot how to paint humans. Earlier I saw a documentary about Pompei; their art was realistic. When did the brain drain happen?
I’m an artist, favoring realistic styles. Idk what you mean, like I do, but people still paint and draw etc. humans and in realistic styles, for one google just isn’t great at finding anything anymore, and the internet altogether isn’t as open or as easily navigable as it used to be, that we might see the small time art people create. And lastly the big money powers of our time don’t care for realism, or artistic license, just trying to maximaize the amount of money made from as little money spent as possible. So low effort, cheap minimalist art proliferates. And I will assure you, those artists making those corporate styles indeed take as much pride in the work as the styles suggests, which is to say they hate making that garbage but it’s what gets them paid. Check out deviant art, I haven’t been there in a while but it’s always been a great place for people doing their own thing, realistic styles included, you should find countless artists making photorealistic art that’d make an AI weep at the precision.
i guess it was just a popular art style at the time? haha
Wait , so Vinland saga is somewhat real?😭😭👀
A lot of aspects of it are real yes
that William the Conqueror, hear he was a bastard
😂
Backstabbing bastard, hahaha
fr
Athelered wife emma was half dane herself
indeed she was
Harold Godwinsson was 3/4 Dane.
Tbf, Scandinavian women are pretty hot....
Tonight? We're gonna Party like it's the year 999. 🎉😮
You are an awesome channel. I’m a huge history buff so your channel makes me giddy with excitement. Can you do videos on Napoleon, King Richard the Lionheart, Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, and Miyamoto Misashi? They are some of my favorite people in history. I already know much about them but I’m sure you’ll come up with new info. Please do those videos in the future! Keep up the good work! 🙏
Supposedly William the Conquer is my great grandfather.
He is 41 million people’s grandfathers in the 🇬🇧 today. I sequence DNA for a living. If only you knew that living in an average city of 1m plus people? After 7 generations, you will be inbred on a 0.3 scale. You will have buried your seed in one of two distant cousins in your lifetime, without knowing.
I’m related to King David 🇮🇱, Lothbrok, Saint Magnus, 7 popes, William Of Orange & the guy who cooked at the last supper.
I don't like the idea of the current king of England being of Norman decent. I would rather see England get rid of the monarchy, or bring back the old Saxon royal houses. That's right. England should be ruled once again by Anglo Saxons.
Both angles and Saxons were invader's as well just so ya know
Really? Sorry but I totally disagree.
Who would you rank as the most evil?
Care to elaborate?
A remark likethat requires elaboration
John or Henry viii in terms of mortality. Incompetence Henry vi
@@historyprofiles It does seem to be a curiously modern take that William the Conqueror, who committed ethnic genocide but presided over an otherwise peaceful reign, is viewed as evil, whereas Edward III and Henry V, who started wars that killed thousands and thousands of people for base territorial gain and glory, are viewed as morally reasonable people and men of their time. I would regard all these kings as being immoral, especially Henry V who invaded France despite the French having been willing to grant him major diplomatic concessions without him needing to lift a sword. He chose war and death in huge numbers on both sides, and I fail to see how he should escape judgement simply because he won a lucky victory at Agincourt and did not do his killing along ethnic lines. The kings that are traditionally considered "bad" kings - Richard II, John, Edward II, seem like lesser evils frankly, despite them not having provided anything like good rule.
In terms of good English kings, in all honesty Alfred the Great stands out to me, even as a non-Englishman.
We have a saying in our reenactment group better ded than aethelred
😂😂😂😂 that’s actually funny, left Edmund with a divided country and a Viking invasion!
@@historyprofilesyep edmund had a up hill struggle left to him. Regia anglorum the viking age is our core period.
@@WarDogMadness I love that! Love re-enactments too! Thank you for keeping history alive!
That makes sense where I get my evil streak from, the unready my paternal 29th GGF , WILLIAM 26TH PATERNAL GGF & MATERNAL 28TH GGF ! so I have the conqueror in both my parents lines.
So do over 25% of people of European ancestry. The number of people who share this as though it’s some kind of flex is mind blowing.
@@williamphelps8550 I UTTERLY agree. It's extremely tedious.
you’re aware W1 carried the gene for small testicles?
Well, if you take price in your ancestors then good on you, and your small package.
He wasn't Unready because he was unprepared for the Danes! He was 'redeless' which is better translated as 'badly advised' because he was very young when he became king, and his mother had effectively murdered his half-brother King Edward (known as the martyr) to get him on the throne. His courtiers and lords decided he himself was too young to blame, the victim of his mother's ill advice. It's not exactly an obscure story. Edward was ambushed whilst offered a drink, stabbed, and dragged by a horse.
If I died after five weeks on the Throne, I'd have laid off the Prunes and Green Apple Tarts. 🕺
The name Geoffrey isc usually pronounced Jeffrey not joffrey
I prefer the work of Real Crusades History but good effort HP. 👍
Aethelred the unready, charles the simple, william the bastard. Was hard to get a cool name being a medieval king lol.
Harm-Fart The Smelly Viking has entered the chat. Sveidi Halfdansson, King of Vestfold.
And I think we all know how Ivar "The Boneless" got his nickname, Norse nicknames were savage.
Isn’t the City of London under banker rule? Doesn’t the king have to ask permission to enter?
My husband descends from Aethelwulf, King of Wessex, father of Aethelred and Alfred The Great and Osburga of Wight. King Alfred and Queen Ealhswith of The Gaini Tribe had Edward "The Elder", King of Wessex, who married Eadgifu *Saint Eadburh's Mother* of Kent, Queen Consort of the Anglo-Saxons who had King Edmund "The Magnificent" of Wessex who married Saint Ælfgifu of Shaftesbury, Queen Consort of England who had King Edgar "The Peaceful" of Wessex who married Ælfthryth of Devon, Queen Consort of The English who gave birth to Æthelred "the Unready" House Wessex, King of The English who married Ælfgifu Thoredsdottir House York (Saxon era), Queen Consort of The English who gave birth to Edmund II "Ironside" House Wessex, King of England who married Ealdgyth Queen-Consort of England who gave birth to Edward "The Exile" House Wessex, Prince of England who married Agatha Von Saxony, Saint Henri's daughter who gave birth to Saint Margaret House Wessex, Queen of Scotland Princess of Wessex who married Malcolm III "Canmore" Dunkeld, King of Scotland whose daughter Matilda of Scotland "Good Queen Maud" Dunkeld, Queen of England, Princess of Scotland married King Henry I of England whose father was William The Conqueror, King of England.
-House Normandy is related to House Wessex
-House Wessex is related to House Dunkeld
-House Dunkeld is related to Alpin
-Alpin Founded Scotland with Kenneth Alpin
-My husband descends from them all ^_^
We're cousins.
Personal opinion only but makes me want to read about both these English kings
The Romans leaving Britain left the place Transient and Chaotic.
William the Conqueror wasn't an English King - He was a King of England
Wdym both of these two are my favorite English kings. Even though I personally still consider William a Norman
Any of the ones named Edward aren't exactly remembered fondly in Scotland.
With good reason. At least Edward I, II, and III. Edward IV had more than enough problems in England to keep him out of Scotland.
But, the England- Scotland conflicts were no more vicious or brutal than any other wars during the Mediaeval Period.
Me, I'm a Fraser. Of Lovat. My immigrant ancestor to America was "transported" after the 1715 Rebellion. A younger brother of Simon The Fox. I'm directly descended from the "Edwards" as well as MOST Kings of the Scots/ of Scotland, from Kenneth MacAlpin to James V. Most of the Dunkelds, all the Bruces, and all the Stewarts. I'm as closely related to William Wallace as anyone else now living, as I'm directly descended from 2 or 3 of his siblings.
Funny thing: the eldest son of my immigrant ancestor, a Daniel Fraser, was with his father as a 12-yr- old boy in "The Fifteen." But, his father got him released and sent home to Inverness. Since most of the Lovat Frasers had stayed out of that fight, young Daniel wasn't treated well. After his period of SLAVERY, his father brought him to North Carolina. The rest followed soon after.
ANYWAY. Daniel was in his 50s when the French & Indian War/ 7 Years War broke out, but still healthy and fit. His cousin, Young Simon Fraser, came over with his regiment of Highlanders, mostly Frasers. He got Daniel commissioned as a Major in the British Army - not militia, like George Washington. They fought together and remained dear friends until Daniel's death. I am now the "caretaker" of his sword and a few other things. He also received HUGE Land Grants for his service. This young Simon returned as General Fraser in the American Revolution, but the friendship was over. Daniel's son, my direct ancestor, was a rifleman in the Continental Army. In one battle, he could've easily killed General Fraser, but instead shot off his hat, then yelled greetings to him saying that shot was because of his father. Next time it'd be through his head. They never crossed paths again.
hard to feel sorry for the danes/vikings massacred after what theyd done for so long,slavery isnt mentioned but that was the greatest source of their wealth,let alone massacre, rape arson and pillage.reap what u sow comes to mind,what legacy did the vikings leave,they didnt have a written language.all they brought was suffering and pain to a lot of europe
Very true, ivar the boneless turned Dublin into one of the slave trade capitals of the world at the time. They did bring a lot of pain and death to Europe and beyond. Their legacy is one of conquest, murder, the establishment of dynasties and their differing religion (before their conversion to Christianity)
And way too many commercial interruptions
At all times rulers only interests in their subjects has been exploitation as submissive workers, servants and taxation objects. All for personal ambitions of wealth and power- then and now.
Communists have very small manhoods. And you are a Marxist.
Put it away, junior.
The Danes in England then were not settlers, they were murderous invaders. Do you suppose the land they had was unoccupied before they got there? The counter to ethnocide is ethnocide. Cry about it.
Actually they had settled in England for over 150 years at that point, many of them settled in the danelaw after Alfred’s treaty with guthrum and generations of Anglo-Scandinavians had been living in England by the time aethelred come to the throne some 100 years later.
Why are my comments being deleted 😂
UA-cam can delete comments on its own if there deemed inappropriate! No idea though Hope you enjoyed the video!
@@historyprofiles yeah the vid amazing bro.
great channelm, what an amazing histories european nations have
Doesnt sound like the Danes and Anglo-Saxons were living very peacefully.
Rules of medieval politics, Nice guys don't finish( large knife in back).
Very true!!! Thank you for watching!
The Bisho-what of whatchester?
The Unready. Quite a nick name. I supposed it's better than "The Mincer."
Æthelred the Unready was so called because he was badly advised. His council was wicked, his behaviour was typical.
What about the st Bruce’s day massacre and him saying in a charter it was a just extermination? Sounds wicked to me, he was called the unready because every time the Vikings came to England he paid them instead of assembling a force to fight a pitched battle
@@historyprofiles because he was badly advised, I just think he's more weak than evil. People don't curse his name like John.
@@bruceplenderleith838he was badly advised and evil imagine having 10k killed and you say that person wasn't evil
@@SandileNgwenya-gv7nx are you kidding me they invaded these islands, murdered whole monastery's destroyed whole villages. Saxons and Vikings fought three wars. Edward The Unready is not considered a bad king, but what do I know I just grew up by one of their biggest battle sites
@@bruceplenderleith838
You're completely right about that! From what I've read about Æthelred, he did order the killing, but it was only after he got that suggestion from his council. He didn't just wake up one day and decide to order it. Plus, the archeological evidence we have suggests that the massacre wasn't as bad as it is described as. And the vikings that were killed were either mercenaries or just newly settled ones around Oxford. Now I can say that no, the massacre wasn't good and it could've been avoided. But we also have to note that it was in 1002, when killings like that were a normal Tuesday. Plus the killing was only a last resort after many, MANY viking raids. So yeah, we can't call Æthelred evil. Just very, VERY weak!
(The source I got this information from was Levi Roache's "Æthelred the Unready" book)
(Also I apologise for my bad spelling and grammar, English is not my first language)
The video clips of nature and landscapes doesnt work.
Your accompanying artwork is woefully ill-matched to content, sometimes being of eras up to 4 centuries post events you mention.
Unfortunately there’s hardly any artwork in chronicles for 10th and 11th century England. I added the images of every chronicle and manuscript I could at the time, such as the image of Sweyn conquering England. I like to add other images though for the imaginative feel, not keeping every image the same and making the video more visually appealing
@@historyprofiles Yes, that's understandable, but I think there is a danger that some viewers will get misconceptions as to what was going on in differing periods, it's amazing what people take in, even unconsciously.
@@rjlchristie i completely understand your point. Will be more mindful in future videos
@@historyprofiles I think that if you do this in future videos, it would be a good idea to add captions explaining that this is artwork from chronicles from later centuries. People living in the 14th century apparently either didn't seem to appreciate that people had different clothing/armour/weapons in previous centuries, or, if they did, chose not to portray that in chronicles. Personally I find it hard to believe they can have been completely ignorant of historical change, and perhaps they decided to portray historical knights as modern day knights for other reasons. There must have been physical examples of, say, 13th century armour in the 14th century, on statues, tomb effigies and so on, so people must have been aware, not to mention stories from older generations, and we know that armour evolved rapidly over this period, so they must have had knowledge of this change, but chose not to portray it in artwork for some reason. In the same way Biblical scenes are often curiously depicted with people dressed in a classic medieval fashion, and yet (albeit later, Renaissance) artwork shows they knew that biblical figures did not look or dress like your average contemporary European. It's a fascinating topic.
You know, in 2024, if you want to talk about genocides, then we can discuss it. It shouldn’t happen now, if your country has any ethical standards.
If you want to talk about the middle ages… judge them by their peers of that era.
The concept of genocide wasn’t a relevant term for that period. It was common practice to slaughter entire regions. It was common to rape every person in a city as a “reward” for winning a siege.
And in most places, if you conquered a region you either enslaved them, or killed them.
Christian Europeans made this slightly better by making peasants be tied to the land. So slaves that got passed from lord to lord. Assuming they survived the initial conquest.
And yes, if you weren’t the right kind of Christian, they’d more often than not put your entire community to the sword. If they bothered even recording it. That was just business as usual.
Welcome to the dark and middle ages. And if you left England and went anywhere else, they were doing the same barbaric stuff, or worse.
Everyone was subject to the good graces of their manor lord. Complete nepotism. And most were just seen as property, to be worked to death.
Even the king was only as in control of his own lords as he had leverage and influence to get them to comply.
So yeah. Kings would wipe out a lord just to send a message to others. If the peasants revolted, same thing.
Because that was the only way to maintain control. Make people fear you. So if a bunch of foreigners moved in, you make a policy to kill them all. Because then you can get both lords and peasants to all work towards a common goal. You just needed a unifying scapegoat.
And yeah, religion back then was much more barbaric. Kinda like how Islam is today.
Aethelred wasn't evil. He was just a complete idiot totally out of his depth as king. The St Brice's Day massacre was an act of pure desperation.
Both men are not the greatest people. As I can call both my family, I am not proud of this.
You find the viewpoint is always important to how things are viewed.
William was viewed differently because he was the new ruler. Speaking out against him would mean death.
8:13 ...you say 'Genocide' but if War Bands didn't set in motion all the raids in England in the 1st place, there wouldn't have been Genocide would there ... 🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️
Hmm indeed
Evil is a matter of perspective and opinion
Most evil English Kings? Hardly. Aethelred and William did what they needed to do as Monarchs and warriors to secure their kingdom. There have been way worse that did what they did simply for greed and personal gain. Henry VIII, case in point. And I hope one day you English would stop referring to William as the bastard. He more than earned his legitimacy well before 1066, not simply because his parents were considered married by the church. Get over your obvious hatred of the French/Norman's.
.almost 1000 years after the fact. I would venture that most English are not purely Britons or Anglo Saxon's, but many are possessed of Norman or Danish ancestry.
There’s a Obviously a Difference between English Kings and Kings of England, the Kings of England between 1066-1399, weren’t “English”…because they didn’t even Speak English, because they considered it, the Language of their Serf (actual) English Subjects…
Supposedly I'm a descendant of Edward the 3 lmao
Down to luck. The Scots successful campaign in Yorkshire included a night attack on the English camp at Stamford Park. The young Edward III hid under a collapsed tent. 😂
Almighty God, grant me the courage to face adversity with unwavering faith, knowing that You are my refuge and strength. Help me to trust in Your divine plan even when it's difficult to understand.
Ethelred's son Edmund Ironside could have been a great English king.
So, before I bother to watch…can someone tell me if this a Harold fanboy video. In other words, Harold=good, William=bad. Honestly, I loathe Harold and the entire Godwin clan. I have always preferred William. Moreover, William’s children had actual royal blood thanks to Matilda. The Godwins didn’t. And undeniably, the Normans brought some good things to England. Too bad King William’s Anglo-Dane subjects were foolish and rebelled against him. The rebels were the ultimate cause of the problems, but it seems some people refuse to hold them accountable.
The video dosnt really cover Harold that much or go into his character, mainly the stories of aethelred the unready and William the conqueror! When the rebels of Northumbria rebelled against William causing the harrying of the north is what the video is mainly about! I’m covering Harold godwinson this week though! Going into a bit of earl godwins story and the complete story of Harold godwinson and his rise to power
Danes got what was coming to them
Apparently everyone is related to this guys in the comments .
4:42 danes and viking killed off many english speaking
Oh and Cnut is pronounced cenuth...hence Kenneth being so popular then, Know all academics screwing up a language the don't to this day understand. We can never know how any of these languages where spoken or pronounced. We would probably understand them today. It's not how you spell it, It's how the people SAY IT....BOODEECA INDEED, BO DISEA Was good enough for hundreds of years, Don't mess with things you don't understand. Oh and if your born in Britain your British, No matter what creed or colour, Don't let foreigners tell us what to do,
Ethelred was english ....William not...
*sigh* Fiiiiiiine. I'll play CK3 again
I don't blame ethelred the unready he was ill advised as his name and it was the danes fault because they also killed english people so i would still think about him but william the conqueror is a real murderer after all the anglo saxons him and his normans killed
Colored the eyes red🤣🤣🇺🇸