Henry VII's Dark Truths: The First Tudor King | Henry VII Winter King | Real Royalty
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 06. 2024
- Author Thomas Penn takes an extraordinary journey into the dark and chilling world of the first Tudor, Henry VII. From his victory over Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth, to his secret death and the succession of his son Henry VIII, this programme reveals the ruthless tactics Henry VII used to win - and cling on to - the ultimate prize, the throne of England. Exploring magnificent buildings and long-lost documents, Penn reveals the true story of this suspicious, enigmatic and terrifying monarch.
From Elizabeth II to Cleopatra, Real Royalty peels back the curtain to give a glimpse into the lives of some of the most influential families in the world, with new full length documentaries posted every week covering the monarchies of today and all throughout history.
Subscribe to Real Royalty: bit.ly/3tofGQL
Content licensed from All 3 Media to Little Dot Studios.
Any queries, please contact us at: owned-enquiries@littledotstudios.com
Love or or hate him, he and Elizabeth of York were the founders of one of the most remembered dynasties. The Infamous Tudors. One does wonder how things might have gone had Arthur lived.
a lot less memorably for sure..
And pretty much the same for us 'grunts'
Margareth Beaufort and Elizabeth York's mother were the founders.
We never would have had Queen Elizabeth I
Probably a few more axemen searching the jobs section.
Why can't all documentaries be like this? Sober and interesting.
because most things today pander to the short attention span crowd.
@@kevinc8099m
M
Ip
po it
Particularly that part about Richard III being bludgeoned to death and put naked on a donkey.
😲
This is an incredibly boring documentary on a very boring individual... Far more interesting is the life and times of Albert the snail 🐌
Because most are made for people with at least Alevel history, this is pre gcse stuff for our children to explain how the monarchy developed.
Who else goes straight to the comments? Love the quality of the debate here you guys are awesome
Yes me, The comments are valuable. Why waste time when people can tell you if it's ok.
He's my great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grandfather from the 'wrong side of the blanket'.
ME!!! It's entertaining to watch people battle to the death defending their favs, lol!
Me all up in the comments first love me some history of any kind
I love the comments. I go straight to the comments as I listen to the documentary.
Missed the first part of the story, Henry's mother who paved the way with cunning, determined, plotting and tenaciousness. What a woman.
I agree!
there’s an amazing documentary on Margaret Beaufort here on CZcams - highly recommend
Margaret Beaufort would’ve been a formidable ruler
The Tudor dynasty owes everything to Margaret Regina
@@plamenivanov92 with only one child, born when she was a 13 year old widow, with a tenuous, at best, claim to the throne, she sure knew how to make lemonade out of lemons!!! The guts, nerve and determination of the woman is astounding.
7:12 "and Richard III, King of England was viciously battered to death" and ingloriously buried under a carpark.
Yeah they really wanted to humiliate him by burying him under a car park. Lol.
@@ChristineKelly1000 I'm surprised they built Windsor Castle under the Heathrow flight path too.
@@capcompass9298 they really didn’t know what they were doing back in the day. Lol.
They buried him. The car park came later duh.
@@kathleensmith644 Hurray, it worked, I've caught my first womble.
Did someone tell you or you worked it out yourself?
What bliss: to hear a young historian so adept in his field, talking about the lesser known Henry. Respect.
I'm not surprise why Henry the Seventh was such a paranoid man. His childhood and past was plague by the War of the Roses.
Here I am, a South African, obsessing over England's history and I'm loving every second of it😂😍
A very good documentary treating the viewer with a measure of intelligence and NO continuous din of mindless loud music Thank you
Dodgy music and dalek narrators.lol
Agreed
Kev The Rev haha Dalek narrators, happens far too often
Packed with good info and well paced.
And not repeating themselves over and over to stretch 20 minutes into 45
So glad how the British documented their history, so we can obsess over it 500 years later, I wish we had more accounts of history this detailed from other countries & cultures, that was Europes true accomplishment, even over the Egyptians to immortalize their stories in such vivid details..I'm a black German but I enjoy the British royal history most, followed by the French & then Egyptian..such fun👍🏾🔥💥❤
I bet you would love the Roman history which is entwined with Egypt’s. Starting with Julius Cesar.
Visited Germany as a military spouse, had my Son there beautiful country.
Lol french can hardly be called fascinating given all the decaps
They destroyed the histories of all the places they conquered.
Not everything gets recorded, not all records are accurate/objective, not all records survive, not all records are found. At best we have diminishing pieces of an ever enlarging jigsaw from which pieces continually go missing or destroyed and can never be replaced by something other than 'guesswork', even if highly qualified guesswork :)
I am so grateful to be able to watch such a high quality production such as this for free on CZcams. As a Baby Boomer, I still marvel at this opportunity when for most of my life an opportunity such as this didn't exist.
I love your screen name♥️🙏
Thats a very nice reminder for us gen z to be grateful for what we have. Thanks
totally agree - i was born in 1964 and would have loved to have something like the internet/youtube when i was in my teens and used to (really) hitchhike to the library on weekends so that i could research things....
I KNOW!
As a baby boomer myself , I wonder what world you have been living in and what schools you went to , history at my schools was colourful and full of details on so many famous people in history including Queen Victoria.
Lord Mountjoy, a pupil of the Dutch scholar Erasmus, described Henry VIII at his coronation this way, "Our king doesn't desire gold, gems or precious metals, but virtue, glory, immortality." It really shows how promising the 18-year-old king was in the eyes of many at the very start of his reign.
Roman Emperor Caligula started out the exact same way. There was a lot of high hopes that he would be a good emperor. And he started out good, but then had a personality change around his third or fourth year of rule. Things went crazy from that point forward. Lots of similarities and parallels between Caligula and Henry VIII.
I believe he was 28 when he took the crown from Richard
That's Henry the Seventh, and you are correct on that, but I was referring in my comment to his son who would be king afterwards, Henry the Eighth.
@@sivanlevi3867*VII and VII, and Henry VIII was 17 when he became king.
But ultimately your comment is of no relevance to this video whatsoever
Getting whatever you want, unconditional praise and always being told yes from 18 years old is probably very corrupting long term. Especially if, before that, you had a very sheltered upbringing.
His story is fascinating. What amazed me is that he knew his daughter Margaret would become Queen of Scotland; the wife of James IV. I have often wondered what England would have been like if Arthur had lived. Would have been quite different than what we know with Henry VIII.
grdhrdhrh
Snap..I've often wondered that too.
*I Just Can't Stand these HoRRiBLe Events of History!!!!*
*I Stopped Watching after the Death of ELizabeth!!!*
*Since age 22, I Chose to Never Marry of have Sex/Kids in this Life!!!*
*I am Hanging onto a Just & MoraL God!!!*
@@Ann_Miller_Proves_GOD I can't have children for medical reasons. I am happy that I have a niece who I can spoil with a ton of love. I haven't married for personal reasons. I love learning about history especially about this period in England. I have always been fascinated with this history of England since my ancestry comes from the British Isles.
@@Ann_Miller_Proves_GOD yes, those events were horrible. You have to remember what those times were like. We can't change what happened in history. You have a choice in your life of getting married and having children. I feel for someone who closes their minds to history and learning about history so we don't repeat what happened in the present time. People can only try to live a "just and moral" life.
I never understood how Richard trusted Stanley. Stanley was married to Henry's freaking mother for cryin out loud.
Kevin C I know right!? She’d have to be one of the luckiest women. I think Richard III was ver keen to be seen as a good guy amongst the nobles, given the murderous way he gained the crown. Maybe that’s why she kept her head after Henry’s first attempt at invasion.
Probably they didn't really think Henry was a threat or that they were serious - he had no claim! ... but even this documentary is so catered to how the tutors wrote the story
@@amandarussell8185 Winners write history and losers write headstone engravings.
Just to clarify, there are 3 Stanleys who are a part of the Bosworth story. Thomas Stanley was married to Margaret Beaufort, Henry's mother. He was an extremely powerful York loyalist, though Richard was already beginning to distrust him as part of the plot for which he had Hastings beheaded and Thomas Stanley arrested, along with Morton, Bishop of Ely. This was not the Stanley who led his army to fight against Richard. That was his brother William Stanley. Thomas Stanley, while not openly fighting on either side, kept his army out of the action. George Stanley was the 3rd Stanley in the Bosworth story. He was the son of Thomas Stanley. Richard had taken him hostage and said he would kill him if Thomas Stanley refused to fight for Richard.
So... Richard didn't trust any of the Stanleys, but what else could he do? He couldn't have seriously expected Thomas Stanley to fight against Henry, but by holding his son hostage, maybe he thought he could at least keep Thomas and William from fighting against Richard. I don't see that he had much choice. The battle was happening, and the Stanleys were going to be there, on one side or the other.
@@beenaplumber8379 Wow I did not know all that. Thanks
No mention of how Henry VII treated Katherine of Aragon after Arthur's death. He treated her rather badly.
It's always about money and Katherine's dowry had not been fully paid by her father.
@@candyclews4047 apparently that matter went to the grave with Henry VII, because Henry VIII never mentioned it.
@@gidzmobug2323 yes and at least Henry VIIIth loved Katherine for the best part of 15 years or so, certainly in the beginning.
Do arthur really love catherine? I heard from a movie that he was as fragile as flower
@@dewihajar555 Katherine said there were no intimacies. Arthur's health was not great.
I always thought if Arthur had of lived- Catherine and him would of had numerous children. from all accounts, even though they were young, seemed soo happy together.
But it's all 'what ifs'. Arthur and Catherine were married for like 3 months or so. If he had survived, he could also have been worse than Henry VIII
@@tasi4372 Pretty hard to be worse than Henry VIII. Imagine how many people who were ultimately executed might have lived if Arthur had survived.
How do you know they were 'so happy'? The real inflection point here is that Henry VII son Henry VIII legitimized England's new religious order The Protestant C of E.. Gone was the monopoly of The Papacy and The Reformation was officially upon us! Wow!!
@@tasi4372 He famously did get to say he "was in Spain last night". FWIW.
Then again , Elizabeth never would have been Queen. Her Brother would likely have chosen her a husband. She would have hated that.
I'm no british but I'm always fascinated by it's history. It displayed how far a man can do to achieve or retain his power. How thousands die because of a family feud with another member or with relatives,how a country's history is shaped by bloodshed,greed and deception.
That's basically all countries. LOL. Rome had worse rulers. Italy as well.
Me too-I am not related in any way, but back in the 60’s, ETV ran a series called “The Six Wives of Henry VIII” and I became an Anglophile.
@@sandranorman5469 with a name like "Sandra Norman", I wonder what your heritage actually is....you probably have some "Anglophile" in you.
we in the modern day are not as immune to this as we think.
@@allengordon6929 Idi Amin!
Some would say that the most important event during his reign was the marriage of his daughter to the Scottish king. It was suitable but underestimated, since was their line who united both kingdoms and became the monarchy that would endure.
The Stuart dynasty reigned only about 80 85 years.
@@margarettaft7362 Their descendants still rule today.
One would wonder why both countries didn't do that sooner.
A wonderful doc about Henry but I think it's worth mentioning at the beginning that he would never have been king if his mother hadn't planned all of his life, his victory, and funded most of his invasions. She married Stanley mostly to protect her son and use his influence to rescue her son's lands from the king.
Not really (the last part). The marriage to Stanley, like all of her marriages, was arranged by Margaret's mother.
He and Elizabeth of York were the founders of one of the most remembered dynasties. The Infamous Tudors. One does wonder how things might have gone had Arthur lived.
Well done for copying and pasting someone else's comment
I really didn’t get into history until maybe 5 years ago. Seeing the buildings that were built Back in the 1400’s and other centuries. Absolutely amazing what they were able to accomplish and they didn’t have any electricity, computers, all the forms of travel that we thankfully have access to
England has a lot of historical buildings still in use today. A pub that I frequent from time to time was built in 1644. The interior has been renovated, but the exterior still has the traditional architecture.
Funny how Henry 8’s first child is technically more royalty than himself through Catherine of Aragon.
More Royalty than all of the Tudors, come to think of it.
Tudor married Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV. That makes Henry VIII his grandson, inheritor of his status as King and his physical stature.
She has a name
Actually they were plantagenets through the queen of Henry 7 Elizabeth of york who was daughter of edward 4 and queen elizabeth. So even if the king himself were not really royal his wife was and thereby also his children among whom henry8was one
@@FiveLiver There's very good evidence Edward IV was illegitimate which means so was Elizabeth of York.
@@lottesrensen8004 We can't forget the growing evidence (discovered in the records of the cathedral of Rouen) that Edward IV was likely illegitimate, leaving Elizabeth of York as having no royal blood at all.
The women in his life got him the crown. His mother was the mastermind behind h8m becoming king. If it wasn’t for his mother he would just had faded in history like so many others.
Very true!
Yesss
Margaret Beaufort, Henry VII's mother, was ambitious enough for her son, to have had the 'princes n the tower' taken care of.
Yeah,yeah go read another Philippa Gregory romans)) Maybe she also won a battle of Bosworth instead of him ?)
@@colonialgal1750 It's an interesting theory but there's no evidence that either Margaret or Henry had anything to do with the Princes's disappearance.
This is what I like about the Britsh, they value their History their historical Buildings even the original acts of parliament is saved. They know who they are.
@Sarel Brits It's comforting.
Well said
Stuck in the past; see Brexshit.
Really, because Richard III was found under a carpark.
What about historical statue that thrown into river by mob recently?
It makes you wonder how much we don't know... What secrets could lie within the past that were stamped out and rewritten by kings and queens and dyansties, and all things we just simply accept as fact.
THIS!💯
To the victors go the spoils of war and the writings of the history books.
Kinda like the US Supreme Court saw all the evidence of voter fraud and still upheld the election of sleepy joe
@@Monica_Baja In what way is this relevant to historic rewriting? You're on the wrong comment section for those kind of politics my friend
@ Monica. Thankyou for that.
The contribution and efforts of his mother in making bringing him to the throne is priceless
David Starkey have a great documentary that tell about her. Poor girl.
56:12
It's a truly stunning story and a testament to her strength of will and character that she didn't go mad from how often she managed to claw her way back to a relatively comfortable position only to have it snatched away from her.
I feel like this skips over how big her part was but I know this video was more about him
55:38 does anyone know that piece of music - please send me the name 🙏 thank you
The erudite, poetical, moral Thomas More could never have anticipated that the handsome and kind young Henry would turn into a tyrant like his father and one day would execute him. Later in life. More and Henry became good friends but as we all know Henry's ego was more important to him than friendship. Even more than love.
Henry was not really kind. Perhaps benevolent at times might be the word. Yes, he did seem to change for the worse w age, but he was basically a malignant narcissist. Imagine you are on a throne which could teeter at any passing breeze. You would be as paranoid as all of the royal clan were. And ALL were scared out of their minds and killed thousands and justified it. Henry became a monster because, quite frankly, he followed his evil desires instead of taking the higher path. It was downhill from there as it is with all who do wrong continually. Henry allowed his “friends” to all die bc he could not be bothered to sort out the truth of anything. He used others, like Wolsey and Cromwell, to take care of the details he couldn’t be bothered with. Although highly intelligent, his judgment was skewed by his narcissism. And were his progeny any better? As far as More, he knew what he was dealing with but had a moral code born of his own brand of egotism. Most folk want to believe More, a highly educated and mostly ethical man, was some sort of total victim. Not true! More kept a rack in his house to “help” those who might be heretical against the Roman Church. Nothing in life is black and white, but a highly intricate tangle of events and personalities. That’s what makes it fun!
More was a victim to the ego and wrath of Henry VIII. More wanted to save England from the 'heresy' of Martin Luther and Protestantism. More written to Henry expressing his desire for Henry's happiness and Anne's health. More said that the marriage was not legitimate and that Henry was not the supreme head of the church. More did not mind that the Parliament had said that Anne was the Queen of England. He was accused of high treason. Before he was beheaded he said that he died as the king's servant and died God's first. Did he done horrible things in his life but also did almost everyone else. More cared about the king but the king and the court saw him as a traitor.
Yes, well Thomas Moore had "heretics' burned. He wrote some lies about Richard, too.
But More was no Saint.He was happy to burn Protestants.
@@susanmccormick6022 interesting fact. Sir Thomas More was very friendly with the grandfather of Sir Henry Neville, (descendant of Ralph Neville, father of the Earl of Warwick, “the King Maker”.) Sir Henry Neville is now known to be another candidate to be William Shakespeare. The other Shakspear being an actor and not a playwright, according to his will.
I have never thought that Stanley wavered between fighting for Richard III or Henry Tudor. I think he purposefully held his men back until later in the battle, to conserve that strength. I think he planned all along to fight for Henry Tudor. He was married to Henry's mother.
There is a theory that Henry VII brought the "sleeping sickness" to England from France when he invaded the British Isles. Stanley was late for the mustering of troops for Richard III because he was sick with an illness that resembled "sleeping sickness". The fact Stanley suffered from an illness that was supposedly introduced by Henry VII's invasion troops is ,to me, proof that he had contact with Henry VII before he joined Richard III at the battle site. Personally, I felt the Stanleys were experts at playing both sides against the middle.
@@Orphen42O Stanley provenly had contact with Henry before the battle. He provided Henry with 4 knights before the battle, one of whom went on to command the left flank of his army.
As I understand it Richard held his son as a hostage. Richard expected his loyalties to be split but thought he ultimately wouldn't take the risk.
Considering Henry was his stepson. Richard messed up trusting my 16th great grand daddy.
Duh
I highly recommend "the winter king". Packed with so much history, yet reads as a interesting story that you can follow.
Annie Freiler Thank you! I shall read it next! Hope you are having a lovely day/night 🙃
some say this is the winter of our discontent..
D
King Henry the 7th, when he died, passed on an incredible fortune which his spendthrift son, King Henry the Eighth, spent to excess and ruin.
Trump probably would have killed his wives if he could have gotten away with it.
@@paintinganimalsonrocks7633 how can people see Trump literally everywhere, it blows my mind.
The Tudors were a bloodthirsty dynasty. All they did was behead people!
Along with the hundred thousands gold coins of princess Catherine of Aragón Dowry from spains catolic kings
@@Elainerulesutube there were an awful lot of people ACTUALLY after their lives and thrones - no paranoia. Firstly because the dynasty's claim to rhe throne was thin to start with. Then Henry VIII's marital.shenanigans and split with the Church. Then resulting religious quarrels and doubts over the legitimacy of both his daughters (sibling rivalry much?)
I thought it was so neat how Margaret Beauford (the mother of Henry the 7th) and and Elizabeth Woodville the mother of (Elizabeth of York) got together on this marriage of their children and finally bought the War of the roses to a stop. Both lines came from Edward the third. Open Ride that's her memory not my book.
Very well noted. Although there is strong evidence to suggest neither of their lines were actually descendants of edward 3rd and both were illegitimate.
Ann M, What do you mean by your last sentence?
i think elizabeth wood ville may have been particularly motivated as her two sons young boys were killed in the war of the roses and she didn't want her daughter to be next...better to find a strong contender and set her daughter up....elizabeth and her children have had a harrowing existence with her supposedly giving birth to the first son in westminster abbey as she tried to find sanctuary for her children from the lancastrians...all that just to have the boys perish in the tower of london..she pretty much had one if the worst mothering experiences , i think she and margaret were very motivated to stop this horrible war which had so much potential to continue in perpetuity considering both houses had almost equal rights to the throne of england. they needed a strong character to marry her daughter, one who could get support all around
@@givesmeconniptions7621 There is no such documented evidence. Stop repeating garbage. You're not even original.
False statement. Another fool who repeats garbage to try and seem intelligent.
"His wife killing son." Love that description-right to the point.
Yeah, I chuckled at that too
It's definitely frowned upon today. Perhaps the old school divorce? Jk don't kill your husband's, or wife's.
😊@@Monica_Baja
The best part of the whole documentary was the king and queen's tombstone, wow.
gloria commenting; Richard III betrayed not only by Stanley but also Northumberland.Richard sent Northumberland orders to bring his large force of men up.Northumberland
did not respond. He simply held back and waited.
I’ve seen so many shows where the host handles documents and artifacts without gloves or care for that matter, it’s refreshing to one show respect for what he is touching, even the taking off his shoes is a nice touch.
Obviously they get permission from the curators/guides for permission to film and instructions on how to handle documents. Idk why y'all always bring this up under these videos as if you know better. These are accredited historians you're talking about. Of course they'd follow best practices. It's part of their jobs. Duh.
To be honest, it’s often better to let people handle these things (carefully!) without gloves. Gloves are thick, deaden the sense of touch, and if you’re unused to wearing them they can give a false sense of security and can make it easier to rip pages, etc. Most people are better off just washing their hands and being careful. (Source: I used to look after old documents and books in a university library.)
I have been a history lover all my life. I absolutely love these documentaries on British history!! I keep coming back to learn more and I really do not think I will ever be bored!! So keep bringing us new videos on the Kings, Queens, and everything else history!!! Thank you!!
Why the fuck was King Henry VIII so fat if his dad, King Henry VII was very skinny his entire life? 👑💍🎭🩰🎨
He had to be paranoid. His claim to the throne was paper thin. He knew that could be used as just cause for someone else with a stronger claim to overthrow him. Although it's never been proven that Richard III had the princes killed, if they were alive when Henry took the throne, he DEFINITELY would have had them killed.
If the princes were alive they threatened the claim of Henry's wife Elizabeth of York to be heiress of York. Henry claimed to be the Lancastrian claimant, although the best surviving Lancastrian claimants were the Portuguese royal family. Richard failed to deal with allegations being made of their death, both in England and abroad, to deal with them by producing the princes. When faced with the Simnel rebellion, to make the Earl of Warwick king, Henry VII produced the real Earl of Warwick and exposed the pretender.
True greg. But I think they were dead otherwise Elizabeth Woodville wouldn't have let Henry marry her daughter.
But not only Henry vii claim. Ever since Henry iv usurped Richard iii, English kings were of dubious legitimacy. That is what the wars of the roses was all about. However, Henry vii lived at a time when conquest was still a path to a throne. And yes, he would have been paranoid. After all anyone else could do what he had done and with luck and the right circumstances defeat him in battle too.
I think it's more likely that Henry killed the princes than Richard.They were a threat to his claim it they were alive. The prince's were proclaimed illegitimate, due to a previous engagement of King Edward, and that was the basis of Richard's claim to the throne. Henry revoked the proclaimed illegitimacy, so that his wife would one again be legitimate. That would have given the prince's the claim to the throne again.
Jenny Jen1010 Richard lll took the two young princes never to be seen or heard from again. Until anything other can be proven, he should be credited with their death. I agree with the previous commenter that EW would never have allowed her daughter to marry Henry if their death was questionable in any way.
I like this presenter. Not melodramatic but easy to follow and understand. Good feature enjoying it a lot. Isn't History brilliant.? Especially British History its crazy stuff.
I'm having fun delving into history in my retirement. Hated history in school, but can't get enough of it now. Go figure. 😏
@@sweettrubble4635 u for that rite
Me to lol
@@sweettrubble4635 really? I loved history classes in school and with my great memory, I always aced the grades:)
@@sweettrubble4635 I am in the same position. What excites me is when I was in school, English history was presented to us being kind of pieced together. I was always under the impression that we didn't know a great deal about this era.
I thought we had spotty old writings, some paintings, some artifacts etc and had to piece that history together. I was blown away to find out that, in many cases, we have day to day accounts of their lives.
In the 1970s & 80s we were presented with a very low resolution picture of this era. I had no idea how much written record actually survived. I would have been far more interested had I known the paragraph or two our textbooks presented on each king or queen was not all we knew. For me, it's the details, the "deep dive" into something that brings history to life.
Anyways, lol Gotta love the US public school system.
@@shananagans5 High school history was nothing but dates and names to me. But delving into the nooks and crannies is so much more fun. My former boss was a big Civil War buff, and the stories he could tell just made me more curious. It's too bad that America doesn't have the history like Europe has. The native Americans intrigue me, esp. since I learned that there is Cherokee in our family's past. A bit of French and English, too.
I’ve been watching these documentaries for 4 days. They’re the best.
Henry VII managed to reign in his nobles very well after decades of civil war.
People wonder why the tudors made such crazy decisions(especially Henry viii). It was because in hindsight the war of the roses was over, but to the tudors it could’ve happened all over again. All it took was a bad set of heirs.
Or worse, no heir.
I've been looking for this documentary for a long time. I remember seeing it when it was originally on TV, and I used to live in the flat above Thomas Penn during the time he was writing the book from which this doc was derived. It's fantastic stuff, and really sheds light on a rather neglected part of Tudor history, in comparison to VIII.
😊😊
I had never noticed how often the tutor rose has been used in architecture over the years. When they kept showing it I was shocked that something so historical I hadnt even noticed
Why the fuck was King Henry VIII so fat if his dad, King Henry VII was very skinny his entire life? 👑💍🎭🩰🎨
That was by far the best description I have heard of Henry the VIII’s father. Nicely done. Thank you.
Theresa Nardino
Yes! I find Henry VII to be the most fascinating Tudor monarch. Of course Elizabeth being the 1st truly successful female to rule is fascinating but her grandfather was truly dynamic. Henry VIII ... meh. Lol
Its amazing that these records still exist. I cant even find my school year books.
From the sounds of it, the way Henry the 7th acted, explains a lot of why Henry the 8th acted the way he did.
I am not surprised that he has become the man he has become. First, he fought for survival, until Richard III was alive, he could not sleep peacefully. Later he fought for the throne and finally for both. Often people have the wrong, revolutionary thinking that monarchy is just balls and money. Henry VII was not the first to be weighed down by fear and opponents at every turn. As I read it, many aristocrats, kings and queens often struggled with similar problems. Not to mention political marriages, which were often filled with cheating and violence. Tough times for everyone.
How did they write so straight across the page back then. I'm always going either uphill or down! I NEED lined paper!!
Why does this only have 1800 likes? As an American, I’m sensible of the importance the English show in keeping history in such a prominent position in their culture. Videos like this help me stay connected with a portion own ancestry.
Lived in the 18th century.
It’s that stupid Kraken. Almost made me turn it off. What were they thinking?
I am no British but I really enjoy and love documentaries like this one, love history from Egypt .Brittain,romans,etc,etc,etc
I have spent the last 3 weeks at work watching all sorts of documentaries on monarchies and the clickiness of British people’s voices is absolutely insane. Please stay hydrated, y’all.
Not even a brief mention of Jasper Tudor, Henry’s uncle? Without Jasper’s shelter & guidance, Henry would never have been crowned.
Jasper was the ultimate Lancastrian. Never gave in. The men of Pembroke would come and fight for him every time.
@@alancoe1002 Exactly!
Absolutely BRILLIANT Documentary which was not only enjoyable to watch, but also highly educational. Thank you, kindly, for sharing this Masterpiece.
20:05 - impressed by the openness of the royal families' linages despite the issues.
It seems pretty clear to me that Elizabeth of York kept Henry from giving into his darker nature and once she was gone, he became his true self.
Anakin Skywalker has joined the conversation...
Dark Nature? WTH are you talking about? Every person has many sites. He was not dark, he was a realist. Try to live without the one person your heart belongs to and see how DARK you will be if you ever survive it. As soon as someone does what he has to do to survive people call them Evil or dark. It is called LIFE!
What people really don't understand is that Henry VII was extremely smart. Look how he mastered and controlled the Habsburgs.
Her love kept him stable. Also reunited England.
I don't know of he became his true self, or that the joy was gone from his life. By that time, he'd also lost his eldest child as well, so I think he had really lost the light of his life when he lost her.
Henry Tudor didn’t have any legitimate claim to the throne, he pulled off a miracle, mostly through luck, getting himself on it.
He had a claim but it was very shaky (through his mother who was descended from Edward III). Had Richard been a better king, Henry might have been unable to muster enough support to take the throne.
@@tmage23 .. better king, how so?
All dynasties usurp power until they have enough of it to legitimize their claims
@@mdstanton1813 yeah Richard's claim was shaky as well and so was that of his brother and their father before them.
@@athelstan927 Not a child murderer.
Excellent no-nonsense documentary. When the presenter made a dramatic pause in "His name....was Henry VII", I thought it was Harry Enfield parodying a presenter of a documentary about...Henry VII.
I'm loving these videos, but they are utterly vandalized by ads.
Yep since Google bought? You tube intercepted by ads all the time!
@Valarie The kind you would marry if you could HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! THAT WAS A GOOD ONE!!!!!! PAY BIG BROTHER!!!!! HILARIOUS!!!
Ads?You are so not wrong,like fleas,a damned itch!!
foxy games ads are pretty cool tho
They're getting worse, like the 5-MINUTE ad for what looks like a scam telephoto lens for your phone. They keep showing different units for the time until I skip. Then the 4-minute ads for something about cleaning your ears, featuring a voice talking over a video presentation. Another scam?
His wife was the rightful heir. He reigned thanks to her. Poor siblings of hers, victims of the blood-starving person who ordered their death (whoever that person was).
technically the rightful heir was Edward Plantagenet, Elizabeth's cousin. In order for Richard to be king, all his brothers children (the princes' in the tower and Elizabeth) were claimed bastards
His wives were hung. Six wives. Technically it's eight.
Supposedly her father was a bastard..but he did get the throne by conquest
@@msrainbowbrite No, Edward Plantagenet, Earl of Warwick, the son of George Duke of Clarence wasn't the rightful heir. His and his sisters claims were attained after their father was executed for treason, which is why he didn't become King after his cousins' claims were called into question, as his father was older than Richard III he would have held a better claim if it hadn't been attained. Though this could have been reversed by parliment... or by an army. Also, the Titus Regius, which declared the children of King Edward IV and Queen Elizabeth Woodvile illegitimate, wasn't officially enacted by parliment until early in the year after Richard was crowned King, by then the Princes in the Tower had already gone missing.
Fascinating history aside--the music in this documentary is incredible. I'd love to get my hands on the soundtrack. The pieces were evocative, and really set the tone for the entire program.
You're never really safe on the throne in those days,, awesome video, thank you for posting!
Or before those days. Pagan kings were always a knife stab away from losing their position.
You couldn't pay me to take that shit. If I was 3rd in line or closer I'd go into the witness protection program and disappear 🤣🤣🤣
To lose one that you actually loved. Heartbreaking.
First notable in this segment is how the narrator completely ignored the fact that Henry VII's marriage to the daughter of Elizabeth Woodville was orchestrated by the tireless efforts of Margaret Beaufort. As male-centric as the power politics of feudalism was, women often made or broke the movements of that power. Beaufort is one prime example, and her name is never mentioned here. I also find it strange that, for all the interest and intrigue of royal English history, no one ever admits that the monarchy and the feudal system was not once a functioning system of governance that did anything other than enrich itself and the noble land-owning families who held positions at court. It would be refreshing to see histories made of these various monarchs' impact on the actual people of England instead of just the rich and privileged.
Very cunning man...changing historical record back dating Bosworth, thereby indicting his opposition as treasonous. The Tudor line was damn well off to rousing gallop, I’d say.
I think all the tutors were a bit crazy and Elizabeth was just as paranoid and vain as her father Henry the 8th. I would have to say that Elizabeth the first was the better ruler of the Tudors but she had her issues. Considering how she grew up there's no wonder.
@@montrelouisebohon-harris7023 Rulers have to be stern.
@@montrelouisebohon-harris7023 the tudors were definitely products of their time especially henry 7th and there's an arguement that Henry the 8th suffered from mental instability caused by head trauma from a jousting accident in his youth and contracting possible malaria. It would certainly explain his "crazy" decisions! Also worth noting that while Elizabeth 1st did prevent England from being torn to shreds by sectarianism (the 30 years war was in full swing on the continent) she never produced a male protestant heir. It was pure luck that nobody challenged James the 1st's claim to the throne and caused a civil war.
Montre' Louise Bohon-Harri
@@cupofcustard was the 30 years war held in the 1500's ?
He surely was cunning and an hard worker. About the fact that he was also suspicious, even paranoid at the end of his life, and ruthless.. well, he had a weak claim to the throne, only through his mother; for more than 50 years a king couldn't seat quietly on his throne. In addition, he was a conqueror and the first of his dinasty, like William the Conqueror, and like him he had no scruples in enforcing his position. If nowadays no one criticizes William for his action, then why should Henry be found wanting? Maybe he wasn't glorious, or loved by his people, but he brought a stable reign.
His mother was really ambitious and truthfully she would have rather been Monarch, but at that time as a woman, it wasn't possible and her claim to the throne was very distant.
Henry the 7th is personally my favorite Tudor
@@montrelouisebohon-harris7023
Zainab Wardah Sheikh Hamdan Fazaa
Salam AHLEHKUM RAHMEHTULLAH my friend my friend without the blood that I wish you to live in the super success that you also in the family
Outstanding success without blood-soaking things for a long time The Vantanti's Family Success Framework is YLL for your successful global light from earthquakes.
Hamdan Mohammed bin
RED CRAZY Elizabeth DAVREZ FROM ILIR ALIMEHMETI **** Phone + 355682088555 WOTSAP E VAJBER **** PO TË DËRGOI ADRESËN SELAM ARESEE LIE SOFERI BIIRITE WHOTH RAHMEHTULLAH MO In my family and mom we have a lot of things that we have more than 100 Long to send the account ******** number: 0010440041
Currency account: USD
Beneficiary Bank: Raiffeisen Bank Sha ******
******** International bank account number: *****AL47202110370000000010440041 USD ******
*****Account number: 0000440041 USD ******
*****Currency account: EUR
International bank account number: *****AL65202111300000000000440041 ******
SWIFT Code: SGSBALTX
(City: Tirana
Customer code: 440041
Branch: 022_AGJENCIA BLVD.ZOGU I I.
Card Validity: 05/24
Card account number: 0000440041
Card number: 5375 1422 1548 7436 EUR
Credit card) ******
ILIR ALIMEHMETI
God you have happened to him with superlative life, superlative health and living things supreme success but please my girlfriend i have needed to be sufficient already
MUSIC FORCLED will be well understood in Albania and I have an urgent need for this financial assistance from value to value value *****360,000$*******
Or Euro RAIFFEISEN BANK ALBANIA Two 2 IBANI COPY
*****ID G40906023N ***** ILIR ALIMEHMETI TEL + 355682088555 WOTSAP E VAJBER How to send an address I wish you your life for the ultimate success You are also in my family ******
@@meghanodonoghue9066
Zainab Wardah Sheikh Hamdan Fazaa
Salam AHLEHKUM RAHMEHTULLAH my friend my friend without the blood that I wish you to live in the super success that you also in the family
Outstanding success without blood-soaking things for a long time The Vantanti's Family Success Framework is YLL for your successful global light from earthquakes.
Hamdan Mohammed bin
RED CRAZY Elizabeth DAVREZ FROM ILIR ALIMEHMETI **** Phone + 355682088555 WOTSAP E VAJBER **** PO TË DËRGOI ADRESËN SELAM ARESEE LIE SOFERI BIIRITE WHOTH RAHMEHTULLAH MO In my family and mom we have a lot of things that we have more than 100 Long to send the account ******** number: 0010440041
Currency account: USD
Beneficiary Bank: Raiffeisen Bank Sha ******
******** International bank account number: *****AL47202110370000000010440041 USD ******
*****Account number: 0000440041 USD ******
*****Currency account: EUR
International bank account number: *****AL65202111300000000000440041 ******
SWIFT Code: SGSBALTX
(City: Tirana
Customer code: 440041
Branch: 022_AGJENCIA BLVD.ZOGU I I.
Card Validity: 05/24
Card account number: 0000440041
Card number: 5375 1422 1548 7436 EUR
Credit card) ******
ILIR ALIMEHMETI
God you have happened to him with superlative life, superlative health and living things supreme success but please my girlfriend i have needed to be sufficient already
MUSIC FORCLED will be well understood in Albania and I have an urgent need for this financial assistance from value to value value *****360,000$*******
Or Euro RAIFFEISEN BANK ALBANIA Two 2 IBANI COPY
*****ID G40906023N ***** ILIR ALIMEHMETI TEL + 355682088555 WOTSAP E VAJBER How to send an address I wish you your life for the ultimate success You are also in my family ******
At an intolerable cost, not just to himself.
HenryVII is overlooked and people do not understand him. All focus only on Henry VIII, and mostly only about and because of his wives. HernyVII I find very interesting. And sadly most people do not take the time to really look into his life. Most interesting was his love for his wife. He did not cheated and loved her dearly. When she died it broke him. He was surrounded by enemies and had every reason to take them out. He knew what it means to live in fear and have nothing... And yet he had a kind side to him , something movie maker and documentary maker love to overlook. Trying to make it look like he or his family killed the princes in the tower, to not having a right to the throne in the first place. Very one sided.
Why the fuck was King Henry VIII so fat if his dad, King Henry VII was very skinny his entire life? 👑💍🎭🩰🎨
I know this is about Henry the VII but when watching these documentaries I cant help but wonder how history would have been if Arthur didn't die. Seeing the strategy that Henry VII encompassed there would be no doubt that Arthur would have received the tutelage befitting of a future king from birth unlike his younger haphazard brother. Not to say he would have been remarkable but he may have been more inclined to his duty and familial image.
HenryVIII really had no place holding that much power.
One of the most fascinating parts of analyzing history is querying how different things could be today if one piece of it unfolded in an alternate way
Before Arthur died Henry was being groomed for a role in the priesthood funnily enough
Would he? If Henry VII felt that heirs were the key to survival, would Arthur have felt the same way? Remember, Henry VIII's Queen - Katherine of Aragon - would have been Arthur's Queen. What would Arthur's response have been in the face of Katherine's same fertility issues and inability to provide a (surviving) male heir? Or, would Henry have ended up on the throne anyway - eventually?
@@GaelinW Henry VII likely would have asked Henry to leave the priesthood (assuming he still went through with it) and get the Pope to release Henry from his vows in order to marry and take a bride. Portugal ended up in the same situation where the only extant heir of the ruling house was a cardinal. Unfortunately as the Pope was friendly to the Hapsburgs who wanted to take Portugal for themselves, he didn't let him
Arthur was in good health for most of his life, no-one had any cause to expect him to die young. Since he was married young there was likely a further expectation he'd have sired a legitimate child by then anyway. His passing really threw the succession for a loop
@@Zeruel3 - True Arthur didn't expect to die. But Henry and Katherine had been married 23 yrs before Henry gave up hope (for lack of a better description) of her producing an heir. What would Arthur have done when faced with the same? Decades of marriage and still no heir. Certainly, Arthur would have been capable of producing a child for decades to come (maybe) but via Katherine? Definitely not. Thus, no legitimate heir. So then what does a King do? As you suggest, find a non-direct heir or find another wife.
This is Amazing just found out from my father that we’re direct descendants to Henry my16th Great Grandfather
BRAVO👏👏👏👏👏
This is an exceptionally well presented story! During the ad breaks I had to remind myself that this was not a fictional story that had me on the edge of my chair but real events. Thank you everyone involved for not over-dramatizing the story but instead letting the facts shine in all their nail-biting glory. WHEW...gotta go catch my breath!
Thank you, this was a comprehensive and fascinating record of the beginning of the Tudors. Congratulations.
That first portrait of HenryVII always makes me think of Steve Winwood.
I loved it, thank you so much for this incredible film!
What an amazing documentary. So well told and beautifully made. I love that it switches from old London to modern London.
He got the throne.. but hadn't a moment's peace....stress probably brought on his ill health or certainly didnt help it one bit..
Karma. Steal your throne, live in fear.
@@msvaleriah True.. after looking at the documentary.....was it really worth it...for Henry....youd think the battle of Bosworth was the hard part ...it wasn't...it was the easy part ...
That museum curator Toby is amazing, he has first hand experience of Henry jr. jousting. Imagine what he has seen over the centuries...
Thank you Thomas Penn. Very enjoyable documentary and deeply insightful.
I'm so sorry for Queen Elizabeth,she went through so much and never spoken a word,thats real torture,may God have mercy on her soul.
a lie. a huge fate fuckin' lie. Henri loved his wife, she was less political than her mother. Elizabeth Of York preferred to be with her children. Not only that, according to historical records he treated her as queen consort from the start of their courtship.
If Beaufort and Tudor killed the princes then she literally married the son of the mother who had her own brothers killed
@@fredbarker9201 Bold of you to assume Margaret Beaufort killed 2 children. 2 young boys. If anything, it would’ve been someone acting on Richard’s orders.
@@hayleymariewhoawhoa1804 you’d actually put it past any of these political Middle Ages guys to not murder a child? Of course she would have done (and in my opinion did) do anything to help out her little Henry’s shitty claim. she had the most motive and opportunity out of every single possible candidate. Richard is an already coronated king who had them declared illegimate. If Richard killed them why not show their bodies to stop future pretenders ? Have u read Horace Walpole book on historical doubts ? Or know how pathetic the James Tyrell confession is? The same confession done under duress. I could of course be wrong, but Beaufort certainly had the most to benefit. So the consensus is that it was Richard (who was utmost loyal to Edward IV and didn’t have any other claimants killed) who killed them and it’s just a really really super lucky coincidence that this set up her son to be king. I’m supposed to blindly believe that ? Lol winners write the history.
You might not like a fictional comparison but In the history of Westeros it reads Tyrion killed Joffrey
@@fredbarker9201 There were still those opposed to his rule, Richard would’ve murdered them so he didn’t have competition. Hell, maybe it wasn’t Richard. It could’ve been Buckingham. Then again, I don’t think Richard would’ve cared if he murdered children.
That old receipt book was extraordinary.... so much history in those old pages!!!!
Let's not forget that Lord Stanley - who threw his army to Henry's aid - was married to Margaret Beaufort.
I enjoyed this very much. I love the Tudor History even though I'm Irish. Thank you. I've subscribed to your channel and will check out what more on the Tudors you have
I love Tudor history so much as well. It's incredibly fascinating! Every one of them (starting with Henry VII and his mother of course) was amazing in their own right whether good or bad but for me Elizabeth being my favorite of them all.
Fionnuala we Irish ought to be fascinated with this as it is the very framework on which our own history hangs. We can't understand Irish history without understanding the monarchs that governed/misgoverned it. Since independence, history in our classrooms defies this and instead sets up 1916 as a sort of 'year zero', as revolutions are wont to do. Irish schoolkids as a result have no context for, say, Cromwell and may end up even thinking that he was sent over by the crown to torment us. A rough outline of English history at the very least is a must for understanding Irish history. The Normans, though harder to study, are the most significant for me. England has 1066 but we have 1169. When Henry II became lord of Ireland he changed everything utterly, down to the fields of the countryside and even the wildlife that inhabits it.
My family, Holland, came from County Clare. My DNA says that they were English. I once randomly opened a history book and the page was about Henry VIII and his mistress, Elizabeth Holland in Ireland. My mom was always reading about the Brit monarchy and one day off-hand mentioned that we were related to them. Ironically, my husband was a huge fan of Thomas More and out son is named after him.
Wish they'd hurry up and invent a time machine. I would love to hang out in Tudor England!
Yeah and have your head lopped off 😦
@@anastasiaisabella7354 weeeell, as a commoner, you'd most likely be hanged. So, yeah, 'hanging out' might be apt in a medieval society, consisting almost entirely of superstitious, intolerant, uneducated, and unwashed idiots.
It probably smelled something awful.
As long as your in a blue police box
that's bigger on the inside than out
you're fine!
Lots of war,poverty and disease.Great.
Henry VII. America’s greatest amongst the collection of both worst & forgotten presidents. This I learned from watching Jay Leno’s street walk interviews.
Henry VII: I'm dark
Henry VIII: Hold my beer
Hold my mead 🤣🤣🤣
Anne Boleyn: hold my head
One of best comment I have ever seen in my life.
Bloody Mary: "Hold my sacramental wine"!
Very informative and presented in an interesting manner, thank you!
a programme worthy of being giving an Emmy Award or Oscar nomination where the presenter does'nt go to far or attempt to steal the show or spoil it with purial jokes or stupid antics.it steers a sensible course and holds your attention from begining to end and was neither over the top or under parr.it respected the viewer with common sense and captured the atmosphere and real essence of what it was really like over 500 years ago.this documentary makes it clear to anyone that Henry VII(had many qualities)and really did embody everything a king should be...........good and righteous,sensible,shrewd and feared but certainly not to the extent as his son henry VIII.........who ended up being just the opposite and probably the most fearsome monarch in history...........as well as being one of the most dangerous people in history ever----------------------along side adolf hitler....
Henry VIII was certainly brutal, but he was far from the worst monarch in history. The 16th century alone is littered with kings and queens having tons and tons of people killed and many probably surpass Henry in bodycount, such as Ivan the Terrible.
These videos are EVERYTHING! So interesting, so informative.
Thank you 😊
His mother put him on that throne, not him.
he was an usurper
@@nikivanespen8980 true!
Well, yes and not
His mother's husband did
Lord Stanley
I respect King Henry Tudor because despite surviving the war of the roses he still came back to England to take the throne. He had power, money and all the time to leave thanks to the insanely strong woman his mother was but he still came back and honestly he wasn't a bad king all things considered.
He only got worse with his paranoia after the death of his wife, to me it seemed like when the Queen died she took his soul with her and left an unstable shell behind.
these historical videos are absolutely wonderful
I honestly have no idea how I came across this channel, But I'm sure as hell glad I did!
Excellent Presenter and presentation. He should do more of these documentaries.
Thank you for uploading this.
He probably killed the whole bloodline with Richard III.the Tudor's began with Elizabeth of York and end the Elizabeth Tudor😱
Richard 3rd killed his own bloodline. There was no one who could replace Richard 3rd except Henry Tudor who had royal blood but from females and not males. Richard 3rd was never meant to be king and was a usurper more than Henry Tudor.
@Theresa Nardino when the Princes were declared illegitimate, there was no need to kill them. It was on a different person's instructions that cleared the path for Henry V11 who had every reason to fear for his reign.
@@amandadassonville4043 no. As long as the princes were alive, an uprising could have happened in their name. They were still a danger. Popularity fades and if Richard became unpopular, the princes would have been restored or at least revolts and a civil war could have happened again. But if someone really wants an other culprit, try Buckingham. If I remember right, descendant of the youngest son of Edward III.
No he married the daughter to Edward 4th.
@@amandadassonville4043 There's always the "Need" to kill them as was shown during Henry VII's reign. All the rebels needed was someone they could REFER to as one of the princes in the tower to use them as such and raise the rabble to try and enthrone him. It's also why he eventualy had to kill poor Warwick. FWIW.
The Brits have given many of us Americans from the US and Canada a rich and interesting history.
This was great, just a couple of things never mentioned or changed. No mention of his mother who was the reason he got to where he did.
Again why do people keep writing this? Henry was his own man.
@@johnnotrealname8168 nope. Henry vii would have lost without Margaret's planning. Her efforts led to Stanley's betrayal of Richard III and Henry VII becoming king. Before that, Henry was in exile with little army and no lands. It was Margaret who planned it all. She was the mastermind
@@tasi4372 Yeah no. She was where his claim came from but Henry was busy getting French support, employing seasoned Veterans and going to his ancestral homeland. Sir William Stanley's brother was married to Margaret hence why, well he was a wild card, he helped so yes in that respect. However for half of his life it was him in exile with his uncle. NOT JUST HIS MOTHER, though she had a huge influence on his rule.
@@johnnotrealname8168 She was the biggest influence lol. She controlled him because Henry VII was insecure and quite mad towards the end of his rule. Margaret was the mastermind behind the Crown and it was her efforts which won him the Throne. Henry VII was guided by his mother and barely made any decisions on his own. He didn't even kill Richard III. It was his stepfather who killed Richard under Margaret's orders. Otherwise Henry VII was screwed on the battlefield.
@@tasi4372 What on God's green earth are you on about? Richard III was killed in battle by neither Henry or his Step-Father. Further there was no certainty the Stanley brothers would join, of course Sir William Stanley's marriage to Margaret helped a lot. She certainly was a powerful political person but she did not control the King that is just plain rubbish. Henry did have a mind of his own and a competent cabinet.
Thank you for this excellent viewing, informative and fascinating. Well narrated and without the usual racket of “background music”.
Let’s have more in similar vein.
An excellent, interesting, and above all, factual documentary.
Thank you for posting this. It seems that things never change.
Queen Elizabeth 2 is the current Monarch and has been so for 69 years. Her Great Great Grand Mother Victoria was Queen for 63 years, Elizabeth 1 for 44 years. The moral is: If you give up your seat to an intelligent woman don't expect to get it back for a while.
Out of all the stresses in my life when I watch this Channel it eases everything down for me. Thank you 😊
At 29:40 a possible connection- some of the Tudor court musicians came from Flanders- the Van Wilder's who were in the service of the Tudor court. One piece of music was The Duke of Sommersetts Dump, though probably written towards the end of Henry VII's reign. Court musicians were sometimes spies for their access to the king's household.
I love the Tudor history, I find it so fascinating.
The dynasty of Taffy Duck LOL