Thank you for taking me places that I can never go.
@ashleymckenna280810 ай бұрын
Same
@KCIIIII7 ай бұрын
Well said
@mariospanna83895 ай бұрын
You can go anywhere you like, just set yourself free.
@brianmerz60705 ай бұрын
@@mariospanna8389 I love you positivity!
@anabelpecoraro30833 ай бұрын
100% how I feel ❤️
@carmenlottner29710 ай бұрын
As has been alluded to in other comments,his mother's story is even more extraordinary imo.
@a.azazagoth54137 ай бұрын
He states that in the intro. The entire point of this show is to inform us of Henry’s life in a more intimate way.
@christophercasey738810 ай бұрын
You've discounted the role of Henry's mother in bringing him to the throne and arranging the marriage with Elizabeth.
@susanbrand75039 ай бұрын
You forgot the Queen Elizabeth Woodville had a part of Elizabeth of York marring Henry VII ...they plotted together for that to happen...the house of York had a stronger claim to the throne than the house of Tudor
@mamakat1149 ай бұрын
That is why I love "The White Queen" & "The White Princess"
@BSU559 ай бұрын
Margaret Beaufort
@susanbrand75039 ай бұрын
Edward VI had the stronger claim to the throne Because he was parternaly and maternaly related to King Edward III 's third and fifth Sons ...Henry VII 's claim weak because he was from illegitimate line of Edward III ' S fourth son John of Gaunt as known as the Duke of Lancaster.....through his Mother Margaret Beaufort..So the only way Henry VII 'S claim was made stronger when he Married Elizabeth of York Daughter of King Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville..because Margaret Beaufort and Queen Elizabeth Woodville made some kind pact that if Henry became king he would Marry Elizabeth of York
@mamakat1149 ай бұрын
@susanbrand7503 yes exactly
@gregsarnecki75819 ай бұрын
Somewhat ironic that Henry's dreams of a dynasty in Prince Arthur were destroyed by the sweating sickness that some have attributed to the mercenary army that he used to seize the throne from Richard. Once that victorious army entered London, after Bosworth, it wasn't long before the first major recorded outbreak of 'The Sweat' hit England, killing thousands. It would come back to hit poor and rich alike for the next 66 years, including the twin sons of Henry's son-in-law, Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk (he who was also the son of Henry's standard bearer at Bosworth!).
@nickh428011 ай бұрын
Always loving these videos, well done lads, looking forward to dive into this one ❤
@anooshadar11 ай бұрын
It’s a shame that Henry VII is overshadowed by his son and grandchildren, if he hadn’t won Bosworth there would have been no tudors
@katharper65511 ай бұрын
I believe this program is geared to make History geeks such myself more familiar with the obscure Tudor. MUCH appreciated. Also..if you enjoy excellent dramatization of historical characters, Look up the series "The Shadow Of The Tower. Not only Henry VII is shown, but his mother, The Lady Margaret Beaufort; Elizabeth Of York, who became his Queen; his Uncle, Jasper Tudor; Sir William Stanley, who helped him triumph at Bosworth; and others who are named in this documentary.
@thomaszaccone396011 ай бұрын
The Tudors were the bloodiest bunch of vile monsters to ever sit on the throne. From bloody Harry VIII to Bloody Mary. Elizabeth I was pretty good but her virgin status gave Britain the equally useless Stewarts.
@terraflow__bryanburdo454711 ай бұрын
@@katharper655Shadow of the Tower I indeed a great docudrama.
@katharper65511 ай бұрын
@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 OH YES! I watch the entire available episodes at least once a year. The script-writing and CASTING are superlative! And everybody keeps their clothing on, too! lol😏
@terraflow__bryanburdo454711 ай бұрын
@@katharper655 I might watch it again. Another fun one is "The Devils Crown" 1978 it's on daily motion
@MLennholm10 ай бұрын
17:53 That painting is of young Henry VIII, not prince Arthur. The painting shown at 48:02 is Arthur. You've got them mixed up.
@mikespearwood39143 ай бұрын
womp womp!
@multipipi12345 күн бұрын
Bungalows.
@AdmRose11 ай бұрын
I’m not sure that Thomas More would agree that Henry VIII was an improvement over Henry VII.
@sarahsnowe10 ай бұрын
Not eventually, no.
@davehoward229 ай бұрын
Don't think just about everyone henry vlll knew would
@fgoindarkg9 ай бұрын
Henry VIII was a terrible King, yet he likely had the greatest influence on English history since William.
@JGJGAGSG2 ай бұрын
Yes. Cardinal Wolsey would also like a word
@justme-tj3jt2 ай бұрын
LMAO for sure.
@NicFydd8 ай бұрын
Henry VII was a descendant of Welsh Royalty and Edward I via Eleanor of England on his father’s side. Describing him as a mere servant suggests he was nothing more than a stable hand.
@robertandthecavalry20623 ай бұрын
who cares
@judepower442524 күн бұрын
He was a descendant of an adulterous union between a king's younger son and his children's governess.
@mhollman865020 күн бұрын
So a king bangs a servant and his offspring wants to rule……. Did I miss something?
@TheHomelessDreamer11 ай бұрын
The Tudors were quickly followed by the Fordors and then the Hatchbacks.
@ancilodon10 ай бұрын
There it is!
@anonUK10 ай бұрын
"Henry Tudor- but how did he chew her?"
@markblix68809 ай бұрын
Let's not for get the Convertibles ruled before the Hatchbacks, which may I add, had a strong connection to Japan, creating havoc in not yet discovered America!
@arfshesaid43259 ай бұрын
@@markblix6880 said Ann
@WORKERS.DREADNOUGHT9 ай бұрын
Evidently you are a Bored of the Rings fan. And who isn't?
@MsSteelphoenix10 ай бұрын
I'm not a fan of the Tudors, but you can't deny that they as a dynasty shaped England (and the UK) for centuries to come.
@Trebor749 ай бұрын
Actually,they shaped the world. It was only a tyrant like Henry VIII that had the power to go against the catholic church and at that time the catholic church was God. Of course that set in motion the English civil war and the downfall of absolute monarchy,if you can go against,and remove gods representation in the pope,then a king is no bigger matter.
@thaloblue8 ай бұрын
They absolutely suck in an iconic way. Villains of the highest tier.
@RESIST_DIGITAL_ID_UK7 ай бұрын
Every dynasty shaped England in some way
@majorgear10214 ай бұрын
I deny it
@tomben6180Ай бұрын
@@majorgear1021How and why?
@ianmaddams957710 ай бұрын
I’m not a huge fan of the royal family. But I do like learning the history about them . We can’t change history but can learn from it
@therightarmofthefreeworld470310 ай бұрын
The Windsors aren’t related to the Tudors.
@therightarmofthefreeworld470310 ай бұрын
@@Liam_PeacockNo, they're not.
@pedanticradiator149110 ай бұрын
The Windsors are direct descendants of Henry VII's daughter Margaret and also the last 2 monarchs have also been descended from his other daughter Mary and possibly have an illegitimate descent from Henry VIII
His wife played an important role too, since her claim to the throne was stronger, their marriage strengthened his.
@janegardener166210 ай бұрын
She was the older sister of the Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, the "Princes in the Tower".
@nickjgunning10 ай бұрын
Which is why he refused to crown her until after his own coronation, to make it clear it was his own right both by his descent from John of Gaunt, and by conquest. His mother-in- law, Elizabeth Woodville, was packed off to a convent when she tried to interfere and backed Perkin Warbeck. She was only allowed to visit for Christmas in the grounds, "I have a mother and only need one mother-in-law..." which must be the earliest recorded mother in law joke.
@fruitiusmaximus92510 ай бұрын
Her lineage was his ONLY valid claim to the crown.
@janegardener166210 ай бұрын
@@fruitiusmaximus925 Right of conquest was still a thing in England at the time, so there's that.
@fruitiusmaximus92510 ай бұрын
@@janegardener1662 fair point, though it would still earn you the name Usurper if you were not seen as having a valid claim of lineage to even challenge a king in battle.
@t.l.161010 ай бұрын
What’s with the comments painting Henry & his mother as paragon’s of evil while Richard was this poor martyred saint? Richard had good qualities AND did shady things to take the crown. Margaret & Henry too. They were all ambitious, products of their times.
@di348610 ай бұрын
They all watch the starz series and think that’s historically accurate😂
@t.l.161010 ай бұрын
@@di3486 Oh yeah. But then there’s the Ricardians. Some are reasonable, but I’ve been called a “Tudor propagandist” & brainwashed … by Shakespeare the last few weeks. 😂Shakespeare’s legacy. Brainwashing.
@di348610 ай бұрын
@@t.l.1610 Imagine being brainwashed by Shakespeare. Wow, that’s the type of brainwashing that is worth having, not social media and starz brainwashing🤣
@Diamondkiwi149 ай бұрын
I mean he probably killed his nephews and was trying to marry his neice... a great guy! 😂
@wenthulk84397 ай бұрын
It wouldn’t have been unusual for him to kill his nephews. Though whether he actually did is a matter of debate
@davehooper51159 ай бұрын
I love history, to know why things are like they are now, how the people before shaped what legacy we all live In today
@atillathefun590010 ай бұрын
My interest of William I to Charles III.. I have come to the conclusion that Henry VII is arguably the biggest reason that England became the powerhouse that dominated the world. 130 years of wars and he cleaned it all up (relatively). He sorted out the monarch/army’s dependence on the parliament. He made the crown wealthy in its own right. He gave relative peace and raised crown funds from mostly the wealthy. He wasn’t spending silly amount either but he did jump on paying for things such as reaching the Americas 2nd after Spain. Forward thinking yet conservative. Also importantly and what distinguishes him from say Henry 2nd or Edward 3rd or Henry 8th.. Henry 7th nailed succession and gave decent chance of first properly English dynasty without creating a situation of immediate infighting or ridiculous wars In my mind Henry Tudor is the king who made England into the power it became more than any other single monarch. Henry VII Edward I William III Elizabeth I is my current Mount Rushmore of monarchs that made England and Britain successful in relative terms to other monarchies.
@Chief_Brody10 ай бұрын
Bore off mate
@tomben6180Ай бұрын
@@Chief_Brodyif you’re not interested, why even watch?
@Chief_BrodyАй бұрын
@tomben6180 I'm interested in the topic, not the long winded opinion of a bore.
@tomben6180Ай бұрын
@@Chief_Brody He’s written four paragraphs, a couple of which are one sentence long. If that’s long-winded then many you’re a bit short of patience, reading ability or both
@Mandy-dy7nj8 күн бұрын
@atillathefun5900 Really good points. Thanks for taking the time to share. I really appreciate on topic, insightful comments.
@emilien.11 ай бұрын
Wonderfully presented. The lessons of this dynasty resonate both forward and backward in time; a chill ran up and down my spine as I was watching this.
@straingedays10 ай бұрын
It's actually from a 2013 BBC series called : (The Tudor Court S01 E03 Henry VII Winter King). The series had four episode in total.
@emilien.10 ай бұрын
@@straingedays Thank you for the tip!! Happy New Year to you🥳
@iahelcathartesaura388710 ай бұрын
Very well said. And yes thanks for the tip! to you the other commenter!
@firesideshats10 ай бұрын
What a over exaggeration a chill ran up and down my spine 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@emilien.10 ай бұрын
@@firesideshats ☺✌That's AN over exaggeration.
@tullochgorum632310 ай бұрын
I feel that this is a rather miserly account of Henry's achievements. Given the turbulence of the times, his paranoid autocracy was probably unavoidable. The alternative would have been continuing bloody and disruptive civil wars. His son and his grandchildren were equally brutal in securing the throne, so I for one don't judge him too harshly. But he should also be given credit for modernising the fiscal system, developing commerce and trade, reducing the disruptive power of the nobility and patronising scholarship and the arts. He also largely avoided ruinous entanglements in France. So he ushered in a period of relative peace and prosperity, creating the foundations of the modern centralised state.
@cuebj3 ай бұрын
Huge effect on national finances after ruinous civil wars. Left Henry VIII lots of money to waste and then dissolve and loot the monasteries. But also origin of a deeply ghastly murderous police state for next 100 years
@dreamsofturtles18289 ай бұрын
They all wanted this power and fought to get and keep it but it seems every one of them ended up miserable in their life.
@michaelmontagu39796 ай бұрын
As he was dying, Henry VII was obsessed with a guilt about something so terrible that even on his deathbed he couldn't confess it. He kept asking the Archbishop of Canterbury if he would enter Heaven if he died without confessing everything that he had done.
@michaelmontagu39792 ай бұрын
@Kriyavas1 Absence agree with you. It would be interesting to be able to go back in time and see how things really were but only for a short time.
@kimberlypatton2058 ай бұрын
I’m quite a fan of Henry VII, and many of the Tudors. For the first time in history,he seemed to actually bring a sense of stability, dedication and a great organization to Britain.
@alexadelroy55222 ай бұрын
A police state is indeed very stable, if you like that sort of thing.
@invisibleray69872 ай бұрын
Edward IV had already made England safe, Richard probably killed the Princes to make England safer
@SherlockHolmesb-kp4ruАй бұрын
@@alexadelroy5522Well it's about the only stable state that you could have in those times
@geoffreylee51999 ай бұрын
The Tudors were Welsh. The present Welsh flag is the Tudor family banner with a red dragon on it.
@shazanali6927 ай бұрын
The Tudor name is Welsh. This is where the dynasty originated. The Welsh are a Celtic people. However, all of the Tudor monarchs spoke English as their first language and had a great deal of Anglo-Saxon and French ancestry in their genealogies.
@bronsonperich94306 ай бұрын
Llewellyn the Great's revenge on the Plantagenets!
@chardz20072 ай бұрын
Amen 🙏 🏴🏴🏴
@judithglasser30724 ай бұрын
What a super presentation. Totally brings forth the reign and history of Henry VII, fascinating!
@eurtunwagens235910 ай бұрын
Excellent narrative. It goes to the heart of this king. I like it, when the historian reveals the core of a historical personality.
@marvwatkins70299 ай бұрын
According to the narrator, Thomas More's words about a "happy life" were in fact fulfilled though briefly
@deborahbrottmiller294810 ай бұрын
Sinister? Really? He showed more character than his son ever showed.
@rookieninetynine5 ай бұрын
Saying "Henry VII ...never knew a moment's peace..." is nonsense. Henry was in a happy marriage, had several children who lived to adulthood, and had the courage to take what he believed was his birthright.
@jilltagmorris11 ай бұрын
Excellent program and I learned a lot too!
@eboniestevenson23110 ай бұрын
People can say what they wanna say about this king but obviously he was very intelligent and business minded. He knew just how to deal with the rich and wealth of england when they got out of hand......ATTACK THEIR POCKETS!!!!🤷😎
@leitmotif4me9 ай бұрын
Hampton Court Palace was built by Cardinal Wolsey during the reign of Henry viii.
@kasie68011 ай бұрын
I don’t think he had a hunger for power, his mother had that hunger!
@blackcat2628zd10 ай бұрын
Right. But she had it so Henry had to have it too:-).
@t.l.161010 ай бұрын
They were both ambitious. Look what a firm grip Henry had during his reign. That happened just bc mum was ambitious? Not a chance. Margaret was a remarkable woman in her own right btw, but not the sole reason Henry was successful.
@anthonytroisi668210 ай бұрын
Even if he did not hunger after the English throne, Henry had to struggle just to keep from being killed. The cast in his eye was probably genetic because Henry III supposedly had one two. Significantly, Perkin Warbeck, the so-called imposter, also had a cast in his eye.
@jfholso10 ай бұрын
They were both ruthless @@t.l.1610
@101419232410 ай бұрын
After losing his land and titles I think It got to the point where he knew he was a dead man walking so his best and maybe only options was to try and become king. Die fighting for the ultimate glory or stay and live a life of isolation in France. I’m sure it was a easy decision to make really
@windward28189 ай бұрын
The clock tower looks really magnificent after its restoration. I expected the dial to have a more royal blue color.
@ordinarytheatreemmasheehan9 ай бұрын
Fabulous! Thank you - what a great presenter, much more my style..this fella knows how to tell a story. I didn't know that about the date change, I'd still turn out for Richard the Third, I love that Duke of Gloucester.
@judepower442524 күн бұрын
Check out "The Daughter of Time" by Josephine Tey, the story of Richard III in the guise of a detective novel. She specifically mentions the date change, also the fact that there's no evidence Richard murdered his nephews, let alone imprisoned them as stated by this narrator.
@elizabethhowe21106 ай бұрын
Thank you. I love this period of history. You have presented each person with his/her own personal wants/desires, yet not giving in to suppositions, or ideas not supported by facts. Most excellent research and narration. Loved it.
@lesliecarr31210 ай бұрын
It was necessary for Henry 7 to be the first Two Door king, because his younger son, the most memorable in English history, extended his circumference in his later years. This most memorable king, Henry VIII, fathered England's most memorable queen, Elizabeth 1.
@vernongrant35967 ай бұрын
I have been saying for years that Henry Tudor is far more a great man in history than his son. He was the last English King to take the crown in battle. It's like Edsel Ford being lorded and forgetting about Henry, the father of modern motoring.
@deborahbrottmiller294810 ай бұрын
I did not know of the extent of Henry’s ruthlessness. I’ve re-thought my opinion of him as a king. I can understand why he was such a suspicious man. but not extorting money from the nobles and even worse from his hardworking subjects. Thank you.
@fruitiusmaximus92510 ай бұрын
Sadly, history has shown us over and over again, that it takes a ruthless autocrat to end a civil war.
@brontewcat10 ай бұрын
At least he did not kill them in droves.
@duncanself511111 ай бұрын
A fascinating period and well explained by the historian
@roblyndon526711 ай бұрын
Where Henry VIII would go after your head (there is a disputed claim that he signed 77,000 death warrants in the course of his reign), his father Henry VII would go after your wallet. The father terrorised the English establishment more than the son.
@andrewsmith325710 ай бұрын
Henry the 8th was worse 😂
@thaloblue8 ай бұрын
Henry 8 went after women, so the men were fine with not being under scrutiny for once unlike life under his dad.
@lefantomer8 ай бұрын
@@thaloblue Wouldn't surprise me. Women were just brood mares then.
@rickrudd5 ай бұрын
Henry VII's life was infinitely more fascinating than Henry VIII's. Henry VIII was a spoiled, petulant brat, born into unimaginable privilege. Henry VII put his life on the line in the most literal sense, against all odds, to take the crown.
@alysonjenkins4369 ай бұрын
Owen Tudor was not simply a chamber servant
@bravo2zero7969 ай бұрын
That was brilliant, really enjoyed that
@michaelharrison36023 ай бұрын
Stanley betrayed Richard by switching sides at the last moment in return for lands and titles he had been promised by Henry's mum if he won
@ريانة-و7ط4 ай бұрын
I loved this documentary. Well written and produced. Thank you so much!
@chaffsalvo9 ай бұрын
Why wouldn't he be suspicious. Henry VII was just another plotter in a long series of plotters to secure the crown for themselves or their family.
@willhovell901910 ай бұрын
What an operator, a Welshman, major alliances, married Elizabeth of York and building up cash reserves and providing stability in the dawn of the age of exploration and humanism of Erasmus
@LeeDon767 ай бұрын
Money which Henry 8th squandered
@sunmoonstarrays7 ай бұрын
@willhovell9019 great summary ✅💯
@elenaadams50116 ай бұрын
The best documentary , thanks to all of you ❤
@themysteriousdomainmoviepalace7 ай бұрын
This is so interesting and well done! I never knew about Henry VII. He looks like----well, I wouldn't cross him! At the same time he seemed to have truly loved his wife and son whereas Henry VIII was a complete psychopath. And I admire anyone who makes beautiufl buildings. The presenter is extremely enjoyable! Great storytelling!
@marvwatkins70299 ай бұрын
You've got that wrong. His 2nd son was the most sinister and his 1st granddaughter was more sinister than her grandpa. And Henry VII killed off the murderous and ruthless Richard III. And Henry was stingy but left the Monarchy in good fiscal shape. So he may have been ruthless and sinister, but not the most. And you had to be brutal to be a monarch anyway.
@slurmsmckenzie177410 ай бұрын
Fantastic documentary. Thank you for posting this.
@bryanduncan164024 күн бұрын
I always thought that Richard lll got a bad press regarding the “princes in the tower” because Henry Vll had just as good a reason for wanting them out of the way as did Richard! Remember, history is written by the winning side, not the losing side.
@Catzilla93114 күн бұрын
Interesting observation!
@bryanduncan164013 күн бұрын
@ - What’s more interesting is that the only person to repeatedly call Richard lll a villain was Shakespeare, not history and if it had not been for Shakespeare and the semi-comical portrayal of Richard by Laurence Olivia, emphasising the hook nose and hunch back (of which there is no evidence other than a “slight deformity”), nobody would think too badly of him. If you want a real villain who was a total waste of space and a vicious S.O.B. as well, look no further than Henry Vlll.
@emma882110 ай бұрын
Too many adverts. At one point there was only one! Sentence between two adverts. Ridiculous
@snow86172 ай бұрын
His determination is immense!
@mohammedsaysrashid358711 ай бұрын
It was an informative and wonderful historical coverage documentary about Henry VII monarch..in Britain 🇬🇧 from 1485 and going forward 👍🏻
@rhonaharker581410 ай бұрын
England
@kevlartoneinternational83529 ай бұрын
Great story!
@bond124 ай бұрын
Now I Know Where The Author Of Game of Thrones Got His Ideas From.
@michaelclark40625 ай бұрын
Well he didn't deserve a moments peace because the throne wasn't rightly his/ house of York had a greater claim to it over the tudors who agrees ?
@DonMeaker9 ай бұрын
Henry VII, the usurper, is the person who had the very best motive to kill Edward V and his little brother.
@doriamurriola71889 ай бұрын
pretty much, with his very few and illegitimate drops of royal blood, he had the biggest motive to dissapear those 2 kids to establish his own (and horrific) royal line
@pfranks758 ай бұрын
His son, grandson and granddaughters had a profound influence on English, British and Scottish History!
@tondakremble666010 ай бұрын
Fabulous content & narration!
@starspike50910 ай бұрын
So many Henrys ! 🤯I cannot untangle them all ! It's a madhouse ! A MADHOUSE !
@adammac49604 ай бұрын
He was a talented battle commander and an excellent administrator. He sorted the kingdom out after years of civil war and left his son a lot of money. He might have had the weakest claim but he certainly was probs the most competent out of the bunch
@Eyewonder321010 ай бұрын
Very good. Thank you.
@ruthspanos253211 ай бұрын
The Tudors were megalomaniacs…just like all royalty back then. I find it odd that we should be upset about Henry VII having a less ‘legitimate’ claim to the throne. As if being born a son of someone was any great way to choose a leader, or in any way resulted in good governance.
@ruthspanos253211 ай бұрын
I am unfamiliar with this presentator but he does seem intent on portraying Henry VII in a bad light. Especially vs Richard III. And he doesn’t present enough sources for his information. So much of history depends upon the perspective of who wrote it down.
@windsong579710 ай бұрын
Conquest is a legitimate claim to the throne. Richard III had the princes in the tower overshadowing his reign. In the game of thrones, you win or you die.
@jfholso10 ай бұрын
Seems like a lot of royals are still that way
@supremeworld8710 ай бұрын
He had no legitimate claim. He was a usurper and a joke. He knee that he was a joke which is why he was so paranoid, he was a fraud
@bronsonperich94306 ай бұрын
500 and something years of hindsight, revolution, evolution and change means we often find it difficult to truly understand our ancestors.
@chuckselvage31578 ай бұрын
I can't really concentrate with these short ads every five minutes. Get rid of them.
@juanlui284Ай бұрын
Get youtube premium... it's worth it
@kubhlaikhan20159 ай бұрын
How is Winchester "the legendary seat of Camelot"? Never heard that before. Camelot was Camelodenum, the original Roman capital of Britain - and its in Essex. Apart from that, a great video.
@cambs01816 ай бұрын
Theres a few different theories. Winchesters, Cornwall, Wales. Some think he was Roman, others Celtic or Saxon.
@kubhlaikhan20156 ай бұрын
@@cambs0181 He might have been born Anatolian, but he was definitely ROMAN. That's what it was all about - restoring the Pax Romana. And the historic and symbolic capital of Roman Britain was Camulodenum. Hence Colchester is definitely Camelot. All other theories are random garbage that ignore the historical context.
@quickchris1026 күн бұрын
@@kubhlaikhan2015 Yeah, he looks Roman.
@Szaam2 ай бұрын
Nothing like the bloody and violent history of England to ease me into a good night's sleep
@kidmohair815111 ай бұрын
they got inside the cage of the winter king's tomb. that doesn't just happen for anyone. I am of the opinion that the paranoid, mercurial fragility of mind that all the Tudors displayed was the result of a previous melding of two rival families. the Lancastrians and the Valois. Hank7's great-grandmother, Catherine, was the daughter of the Valois king who thought he was made of glass. this fragility was also on full display in his numerical predecessor, Hank6.
@mikewilson48479 ай бұрын
Truly excelent.
@sheriking404110 ай бұрын
There is a bit of time discrepancy of Hampton Court Palace the great hall and adjoining rooms shown in this video was not built until 1514 for Cardinal Wolsey 5 years after the death of Henry VII. Then in 1529 Wolsey gavel the palace to Henry VIII. So Henry VII never set foot in this building as shown in the video. Yes palaces were built as described room after room and I’m sure he is correct in stating that the closer you got to the king the more important you were.
@netizencapet10 ай бұрын
Please tell me there's a project underway to digitize all of the records in those boxes!
@tbthomas51179 ай бұрын
Well done!
@midnightteapot563310 ай бұрын
And he seemed such a nice fellow in Sir Lawrence Oliviers version of Richard the Third, heh!
@supertolberto5 ай бұрын
Such a fantastic watch.
@pauloroarty17996 ай бұрын
Really well told.
@spaceman08144710 ай бұрын
I always thought that Henry VIII was "England's most sinister monarch." Wasn't he the one who was killing anybody who looked cross-eyed at him, especially his wives?
@thaloblue8 ай бұрын
Like they said, H7 was absolutely neurotic but overshadowed by his son and his granddaughters.
@thaloblue8 ай бұрын
I would argue that Mary was the worst of the Tudors.
@AntonioGarcia-ph5we5 ай бұрын
Enjoyed this story very much.
@marki232511 ай бұрын
Thanks. 🙏
@evanblackie75105 ай бұрын
Beautiful doc, thanks.
@coraltown110 ай бұрын
Edmund Dudley, the executed extorting grandfather of Robert Dudley, favorite of Elizabeth I.
@emabelsmithable6 ай бұрын
When kings were leaders who demonstrated grit on the battle fields. Henry VII with Lancastrian blood had the potential for the role that he came and took by stealth and sword!
@goshnodo10 ай бұрын
I love Toby and his work with Todd at Todd's workshop. I always thought it was hilarious that an American is in charge of the of the wallace collection. stick it to the brits
@NordieJ8 ай бұрын
I enjoyed that. Thank you.
@claverton11 ай бұрын
Superb material and presentation from Thomas Penn ... he should perhaps lash out and buy a new pair of shoes, although they do look very comfortable (8:45)
@calmandharmony7 ай бұрын
Your right..their trashed!
@NotoriousBenIG4 ай бұрын
I want this guy to do a full history
@DeboraNorton10 ай бұрын
Threads of this past are running through the trumpet -who- wants- to- be-king
@AntonioGarcia-ph5we5 ай бұрын
That was really well told.
@janismarsh323210 ай бұрын
Very good!
@12from12110 ай бұрын
They keep releasing this doco the book the winter King is awesome
@margaretgreenwood424310 ай бұрын
Sounds like Machiavelli would have loved Henry 7
@rjmusicltd7 күн бұрын
The man who was the protector of Arthur Prince of Wales is entombed in St Bartholomew's Church in Tong Village, Shropshire, Sir Henry Vernon. The death of the royal heir was under his watch. How unfortunate.
@robertalpyАй бұрын
He must have been conscious of money in ways most kings need not have been.
@drakecarter178010 ай бұрын
Henry was cunning and while a bad guy, he was no where near as bad as Henry VIII.
@KarenSanderson111 ай бұрын
Awesome
@annmolloy86007 ай бұрын
You are the only historian I have heard acknowledge the fact that the illegitimate Beauforts were barred from inheriting the throne. Even Edward IV and Richard III’s grandmother was a Beaufort. However the Yorkists lineage was through two of Edward III’s progeny whereas the Lancastrians was from the usurpation of Richard II’s throne by Henry IV. IT IS VERY SELDOM THAT THIS POINT IS MADE. Fantastic documentary, however seeing you in those archives in Westminster worries me. In these volatile times in which we live where history seems not to be valued, I worry that those beautiful manuscripts of our history could so easily be destroyed, especially by fire.
@CindyA7156 ай бұрын
Thank you for clarifying the lineage and stating the fact that that *point is very seldom made.
@MrMalvolio29Күн бұрын
As a professor of Tudor and Stuart Poetry and Rhetoric myself, I’ve actually *always* thought Henry VII and his wife, Queen Elizabeth of York, were the most skilled and adept monarchs of the ENTIRE Tudor Dynasty. Yes: even more adept and skilled than Henry VII’s famed granddaughter, Queen Regnant Elizabeth I, Gloriana, The “Virgin (?) Queen,” and Defeater of the sixteenth century’s largest and most powerful European navy, the famed Spanish Armada of King Philip II of Spain and Portugal. The *reason* I feel Henry VII was an even more adept ruler than Elizabeth I is all that Henry VII “inherited” after the victory over Richard III at Bosworth Field: a nation literally torn to pieces by 60 years of internecine Dynastic Civil War between the rival royal Houses of York and Lancaster; a *totally bankrupted royal treasury,* and, finally, a throne whose dignity, power, influence, and authority had been bartered and chipped away ever since the disastrous reigns of King John and his son, Henry III, and finally utterly besmirched by more than half a century of royal civil war and absolute instability at the top of the social hierarchy, largely bc the nobility had grown far too independent, restive, and independent in the 60 years of nearly no strong, central, royal administration. By the end of his reign, Henry VII was able to succeed in having an entirely peaceful transfer of power from royal father to royal son; he had “tamed” the heretofore fractious nobility by lending them money when they needed it, and charging truly tyrannically high interest rates when it came time for the indebted nobles to pay back the loans, with draconian punishments for those who failed to pay up; he had created and ruled over a peaceful and economically prosperous kingdom for 24 years; he had established one of the largest and most effective networks of royal spies not only in England, but in all of Europe, such that he was probably Europe’s best-informed monarch in all of Europe at the time of his death; and, finally, he established an effective and *loyal* royal administration made up, to a large extent, of “new men” from the gentry rather than from the old chivalric nobility, “new men” who often owed **everything they had** to the King, and to no one else….In other words, when Henry VII’s reign commenced, he--quite unlike his more charismatic and image-conscious granddaughter Elizabeth I--was faced with the *TRULY MONUMENTAL* tasks of 1) healing deep social wounds holding over from the Wars of the Roses; 2) re-establishing royal authority and real power and ensuring its stability and influence by finding ways to fill the royal coffers back not simply to solvency, but to surplus; 3) he had to bring the previously unruly medieval English nobility to heel by so badly handicapping them with debt that--in truth--they never again exercised any real authority or power *in their own right,* but solely as ministers or agents of either the monarchy or Parliament; and, finally, 4) he had to find England new industries to make it competitive in the economic market, and looking like a quite desirable and profitable trading partner. Basically, King Henry VII, with the able help of his Yorkist princess wife, Queen Elizabeth, had to “re-create England as a new sort of “kingdom,” a Renaissance rather than medieval nation…
@Iluvthe1960s8 ай бұрын
Excellent video
@japhfo9 ай бұрын
Man in gumboots--- ooh, look- clouds! Ponderous music. Man walking.... Streuth- GET ON WITH IT A 30 minutes material padded to an hour
@katherinecollins468510 ай бұрын
Really interesting
@mike-myke2210 ай бұрын
Excellent documentary. 👍
@amandabaird44018 ай бұрын
Excellent
@joeya23308 ай бұрын
Me in gym stopping workout and corner myself to check the output of the battle.