It wasn't an alliance and is misrepresented here. The only thing they shared in common was their wish to see Edward stay. Churchill and Loyd George never met Mosley nor was there any group called the 'Kings Party', it was simply a rumour that was circulated by the press to identify them as the tabloids thought they were going to team up which never happened. I mean, it is literally like saying that because American presidents and Hitler liked having a strong military that means that every American President is a fascist. I.e. dumb.
@@Wanderer628 Woah, dude, chill out. I don't know the context behind this bit of British history beyond what was said in this video, hence why I watched the video. I'm not trying to cast aspersions on anyone involved, I just didn't know, no need to start calling people dumb.
Cook Really? He did not call anyone dumb. He stated that the practice of grouping people together and assuming they share similar major common interests simply because they share a vague one is dumb. Which it is. It’s a common misrepresentation and slander tactic. Not to mention, it was actually nice of him to cast some light on how there was no such thing as a King’s Party. I also didn’t know the context behind this historical event and this guy had the common decency to correct a misconception in the video. Good on him. That’s one of the things the TH-cam comments section is for- people pointing out inaccuracies and better educating others on the topic.
@@its_drez I mean, he did seem really touchy about my use of the word 'alliance'. I didn't say Winston Churchill and the fascists played footsie under the table, I just described a group of factions and people who shared a common political goal and, from what I can tell, advocated for that goal as being in 'alliance' with one another, which doesn't seem like a particularly gratuitous misuse of the word. But alright, let's just say their goals aligned, yes?
Fun fact: the British government and the church of England's opposition to marring Wallace wasn't only because she was an American divorcee. During the period, the laws regulating divorce were much more strict in the UK then the US. For example, divorcing your husband on the grounds of domestic abuse (the exact reason for wallices divorce) was recognised in the US, but not in the UK. As a result, under U.K. Law, Wallace would have still been married to her previous husband, which created an even bigger religious backlash against the kings decision.
@John Alejandro He was an idiot for a lot of things but I fail to see how you can call him an idiot for falling in love. He had been with plenty of women and he chose her for whatever mix of reasons.
@John Alejandro given the fact that they remained married (and by most accounts happily) until his death seems to show that Edward knew what he was doing. Sure, he could have easily found another woman of suitable status, but they were very clearly in love. That it turned out how it did actually speaks volumes to Edward's choice, as despite every indication and fear, they ended up in a long, stable, and successful marriage.
@John Alejandro Well for one, how do you know that she married him for the status, exactly? The only thing you said to back that claim up was that it's what "women like her" do, which is at best vague. I would also like to know why emotional love apparently doesn't count. Seems to be the only explanation that makes sense given how, like you pointed out, he had plently of hot, young, fertile, virgin women that he could have married instead.
@John Alejandro actually she didn't even want to marry him but he threatened to kill himself. She enjoyed being the Kings mistress and the social doors it opened.
How King George V was killed so that he could appear in the more respectable morning newspaper over it's evening counterpart is scandalous enough and deserves it's own video.
not certain if that was the reason. some speculate that, but there is no hard evidence. Others speculate, and let's be honest here this is probably true... that it was euthanasia. The guy was dying of lung failure, it's a horrendously slow and painful death. The doc just gave him an easy way out.
@@icecold1805 That’s what I was thinking, he was suffering to the point where he asked somebody to end it or the family came to that consensus. If appearances mattered that much just save the info until the next day.
In his later years ,TH-cam upset 10 minute History, but he wouldn't have to be upset for long, because in 2019 he came down with a severe case of being demonitized.
@@quietcorner293 I sometimes do wonder if there might be another abdication crisis if Charles doesn't die first. ESPECIALLY if he tries to get Parliament to change the law regarding consorts. The outrage (particularly among older folks) would be huge. I could see him being forced to abdicate in favor of William, who's much younger and far more popular anyway.
Krasipol Oh no, it kind of is. There was no group called the “Kings Party”, only a disparate collection of interests who wanted to see Edward VIII remain on the throne, and a rumour circulated by some tabloids. It was never a group, nor did it have a good chance of succeeding
David Josephus Daniel Nuntius Not technically. He simply went to Germany with his wife and met Hitler. The Duke of Windsor claimed to his dying day that he never even contemplated treachery. The only thing to suggest that he might’ve was Operation Willi, a Nazi plot to literally kidnap him. To quote the man himself: “A few hours ago I discharged my last duty as King and Emperor, and now that I have been succeeded by my brother, the Duke of York, my first words must be to declare my allegiance to him. *This I do with all my heart* “
David Josephus Daniel Nuntius Well, according to British law, the Duke of Windsor never did anything treasonous, and I am a firm believer in innocent until *proven* guilty. Duke of York is still very very guilty though
England in 1500s: What do you mean the king can't divorce his wife whenever he pleases? Screw that, we'll create our own church so that our king can divorce/kill whatever wife he wants. That same church in 1900s: The king wants to marry a divorcee? Well that's just totally contrary to everything our church stands for!
@@seamonster936 Which he could only do because he made himself head of the church of England. He couldn't get his marriage annulled in the Catholic Church because he very clearly had consummated the marriage (and the fact that child would become Queen pretty strongly refutes the notion of the marriage being "annulled", even if the question regarding Mary's legitimacy/illegitimacy was resolved on purely pragmatic grounds). Now that he was head, he could get his divorce and call it whatever he liked, and change things as he saw fit, which adds to the irony of the later situation with his successor Edward VIII.
Justafan IV The pope would have most likely revoked his dispensation and granted an annulment. This would be unsound but Henry and Cardinal Wolsey were turning the screws on Church property, anyway, the Pope was Charles V’s prisoner at this time. The legal fiction of annulment remain in the Church of England.
Technically he created the Church of England so he could annul, not divorce, his wives. Also, he only actually annulled two of them. Other than the one who outlived him, the others ended the marriage through dying (two of which were not through natural causes....)
they sometimes have to take on new names to show their direction as leader, Albert isn't a kingly name, at least in British standards. It's similar to France where you need to be name Louis to be King or something. I looked it up. There are three King names. Edward, William and by far the favorite. George. There was two alberts but both had to change their name. prior , was restricted to Henry and a couple of others.
@@Edmonton-of2ec Francis? really Francis! No wonder so many countries don't take them seriously. They are allow to change their name when King. COuldn't they rename themselves something manly like.. I don't know Ajax or something.
Slew One Why do so? By taking the name of a previous monarchy, you are trying to conjure up images of the successes and glories of their reigns, or pick a name with which your countrymen can identify with. Hence why Queen Elizabeth II is Elizabeth II. Not only did she want to keep her name, but it was smart to equate herself with the intelligent, remarkable and crafty Elizabeth I
The lesson I’m taking from this is that if an English king is named the eighth, they’re bound to spark controversy. I think I'm gonna call that phenomenon "Tudor's Law."
@@jonathanredacted3245 That was fairly normal for the time, for example the buisness plot of 1933 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot, george was partial to the germans trying to keep king Prince Louis of battenburg as first sea lord during ww1 but i think thats just anglo german family ties rather than sympathy for the enemy
Not really, though. David Lloyd George, although an incredible prime minister during WW1, did meet Hitler a few times and said he liked him as a leader. Hitler attended Mosley's wedding (at Joseph Goebbels' house) and Mosley was a big fan of other fascists like Franco and Mussolini. At the wedding, Mosley married Diana Mitford (Churchill's cousin). Churchill had also worked with both of them having been both a Conservative and a Liberal at different times in his career.
@@chrisdugas1226 I'm sorry Hitler attended what? Please tell me more I feel this would be documented such as when I find out Rudolph huss flew to the UK before people talked about it
It’s a great film, but naturally tilted against Edward’s side of the story. I think the fact that they stayed married for so long at least speaks for something.
I love that movie. Colin Firth won an academy award for playing Bertie/George VI. However, as Christopher Hitchens noted at the time, it takes a great many liberties with the actual history. Churchill is practically a made up character. Stanley Baldwin did not resign because he misjudged Hitler or something like that. Most funny of all is that Elizabeth and Margaret stay young children over the course of the movie, roughly six or seven years.
-Actually, I'm not quite dead sir! -ah I see, then you shall not have been mortally wounded in vain! - actually, I think I might actually pull through!
"He was taking too long to die...so they injected him with a lethal dose of cocaine and morphine....." Crusader Kings 2 players: "Been there, done that."
The sign jokes are always funny, so is every video. The main things I like about this channel are facts, commedy, and running through a field of flowers.
You'reThatMantis 1.) Annulment 2.) Shut Up 3.) Yes there is a difference 4.) The only reason I say "Shut Up" is because I'm sick of correcting people 5.) See #2 and repeat
@You'reThatMantis Nope, the COE was established in Elizabeth’s reign as her settlement, and in the centuries afterwards carried a very strong taboo for divorce. Also, it was annulment so it was hardly the same thing.
The Church of England was significantly revised by Elizabeth I after the deaths of her father and step sister. It became MUCH stricter in doctrine, particularly on marriage and prayer life (she even had "The Book of Common Prayer" issued).
Incidentally Edward VIII's abdication is what led to Queen Elizabeth II. It wouldn't have even been a distant possibility (presuming he'd have children) until Edward shifted the chain over. Next thing you know 16 years later she's queen and ends up ruling longer than anyone.
Actually, Elizabeth might have become Queen even if Edward married Wallis, just a decade or two later than she did. The only way parliament would have allowed the marriage would have been a Morganatic marriage, which meant that his children (if any; they never did have them) could not inherit. As long as Albert did not die before Edward, then the succession would have happened the way it did. If Albert *did* die first, then I’m not sure how the succession would have gone. There was still a surviving younger brother, so he probably would have become King on Edward’s death.
@@flyboy152 The throne would still have passed through Albert, even if he was dead, to Elizabeth. So, as Edward VIII never had any children, Elizabeth would have ended up being Queen anyway, just much later on.
@@johnbarham6406 OK, interesting to know. I wasn't sure if the succession would pass to her if her father had never ruled, and there was still a surviving younger brother.
I also find it interesting that Edward is the one saying "Can we speed things up?" From what I've seen, the decision to euthanize the King came exclusively from his physician, Lord Dawson, and he did not consult the Prince of Wales on it.
I virtually never comment on youtube, but you guys make me want to learn about the world! I know animation is ridiculously time-consuming, I just want you to know that I appreciate what you do!
@@henryvkingofenglandandfran7220 You can retake the Raj pretty fast, Malasya is still allie to you, and almost all dominions are pretty weak, the problem is that more than 90% of canada's victory points are in the west, but the rest is in the east, and there isn't any good place to naval invade the east, so you will have to wait like a year until you reach the east
Yeah I know that what I meant was you can’t resotre the Raj and puppeting India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Burma just doesn’t look right and annexing the Raj is just a waste of the manpower you can get. As for the dominions they lose their unique focus tree and the imperial flags looks horrible
@@henryvkingofenglandandfran7220 The UK once you remove "The war to end all wars" and complete the focus tree that gives you 10% manpower from non core territory will have more than enought man power, once you annex India, plus Nigeria. Anyway usually if you have good divitions you won't need more than 300 divitions
While he was regal name was Edward VIII, his name was actually David. George V's doctors speeding up his death was not known until a biography of George V by Kenneth Rose came out in 1984.
@2:15. Wait wait, a divorced American woman marrying British royalty and the British not taking it well with the royalty giving up his titles for his wife. Man history is circular
Little error I actually only know just caught, Edward VIII signed his abdication document on December 10th, but it didn’t come into legal affect until December 11th, when he signed His Majesty’s Declaration of Abdication Act, 1936. This is what he refers to when he says “...I discharged my last duty as King and Emperor...” in his Abdication Speech
Funny thing is, George VI actually lost his stutter (90% of it at least) thanks to work with a speech therapist. His speech to the British people after World War II broke out was if I remember correctly the first major speech he ever gave without once stuttering or struggling. Heck of a time for him to do it!
Doesn't want an American on the throne... *Proceeds to have a half-American as Prime Minister* Britain, enough with your copious amounts of inconsistency
@@chazbertino6102 If they were true, why was Wallis so unpopular? Most of the alleged Nazi philandering and what happened behind closed doors didn’t become public knowledge until later
@@Edmonton-of2ec damn dude chill I forgot about that. Not sure if a lot of people in Britain at the time as necessarily being half American I know that’s a factor in wether or not someone is a citizen in the American context
OD-ing the king to "announce the death in the much more respectable morning paper instead of the evening paper" is the most British thing I have ever heard.
It's worth noting that Wallis Simpson was by all accounts perfectly happy just being the king's mistress, and Edward is the one that insisted on formalizing it with an actual marriage. Wasn't all her fault....
Stuart Aaron Little mistake in your comment, I think you meant neither Prince Harry nor Archie Mountbatten-Windsor (his parents didn’t give him a title) DON’T have a snowballs chance in Hell of sitting on the throne
2:26 "You're now a d-Duke" -- kind of a bad-taste reference to the new king's stuttering. You know, there's actually movie about that called "The King's Speech"...
Events of the mid 1930s: Spain: **undergoing an incredibly bloody civil war** Dominican Republic: **engaging in a genocidal massacre of thousands of Haitian civilians** Germany: **the Reichstag fire leading to near absolute power being put in the hands of the Chancellery and the death of democracy in Germany** England: "OMG! The king's trying to marry a woman who's still married and already had a divorce!"
As someone who had a terrible speech impediment most of my youth I found the stutter reference...... HILARIOUS 😂😆 Thanks for not being wusses at humor.
Considering the lives led by the last three generations of Royals, the House of Windsor, the Church of England and the British govt owe posthumous apologies to the Duke & Duchess of Windsor.
“You won’t BELIEVE who just SNUFFED IT”
This channel is Absolute Brilliance
Lecker Schnitzel The whole paper is perfection
"Rheinland? More like Meinland"
I love evening news.
'He totally wasn't murdered', says Palace
Delivering punchlines straight is hilarious.
Wow, the King's Party was a really weird alliance of interests.
It wasn't an alliance and is misrepresented here. The only thing they shared in common was their wish to see Edward stay. Churchill and Loyd George never met Mosley nor was there any group called the 'Kings Party', it was simply a rumour that was circulated by the press to identify them as the tabloids thought they were going to team up which never happened.
I mean, it is literally like saying that because American presidents and Hitler liked having a strong military that means that every American President is a fascist. I.e. dumb.
@@Wanderer628 Woah, dude, chill out. I don't know the context behind this bit of British history beyond what was said in this video, hence why I watched the video. I'm not trying to cast aspersions on anyone involved, I just didn't know, no need to start calling people dumb.
Cook
Really? He did not call anyone dumb. He stated that the practice of grouping people together and assuming they share similar major common interests simply because they share a vague one is dumb. Which it is. It’s a common misrepresentation and slander tactic.
Not to mention, it was actually nice of him to cast some light on how there was no such thing as a King’s Party. I also didn’t know the context behind this historical event and this guy had the common decency to correct a misconception in the video. Good on him. That’s one of the things the TH-cam comments section is for- people pointing out inaccuracies and better educating others on the topic.
@@its_drez I mean, he did seem really touchy about my use of the word 'alliance'. I didn't say Winston Churchill and the fascists played footsie under the table, I just described a group of factions and people who shared a common political goal and, from what I can tell, advocated for that goal as being in 'alliance' with one another, which doesn't seem like a particularly gratuitous misuse of the word.
But alright, let's just say their goals aligned, yes?
The dream team right there.
Fun fact: the British government and the church of England's opposition to marring Wallace wasn't only because she was an American divorcee. During the period, the laws regulating divorce were much more strict in the UK then the US. For example, divorcing your husband on the grounds of domestic abuse (the exact reason for wallices divorce) was recognised in the US, but not in the UK. As a result, under U.K. Law, Wallace would have still been married to her previous husband, which created an even bigger religious backlash against the kings decision.
@John Alejandro He was an idiot for a lot of things but I fail to see how you can call him an idiot for falling in love. He had been with plenty of women and he chose her for whatever mix of reasons.
@John Alejandro given the fact that they remained married (and by most accounts happily) until his death seems to show that Edward knew what he was doing.
Sure, he could have easily found another woman of suitable status, but they were very clearly in love. That it turned out how it did actually speaks volumes to Edward's choice, as despite every indication and fear, they ended up in a long, stable, and successful marriage.
@John Alejandro
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions there, mate.
@John Alejandro
Well for one, how do you know that she married him for the status, exactly? The only thing you said to back that claim up was that it's what "women like her" do, which is at best vague.
I would also like to know why emotional love apparently doesn't count. Seems to be the only explanation that makes sense given how, like you pointed out, he had plently of hot, young, fertile, virgin women that he could have married instead.
@John Alejandro actually she didn't even want to marry him but he threatened to kill himself. She enjoyed being the Kings mistress and the social doors it opened.
How King George V was killed so that he could appear in the more respectable morning newspaper over it's evening counterpart is scandalous enough and deserves it's own video.
Sound british enough
Overly fond of apostrophes, I see
@@kourii Soon joining Apostrophe Anonymous mate
not certain if that was the reason. some speculate that, but there is no hard evidence. Others speculate, and let's be honest here this is probably true... that it was euthanasia. The guy was dying of lung failure, it's a horrendously slow and painful death. The doc just gave him an easy way out.
@@icecold1805 That’s what I was thinking, he was suffering to the point where he asked somebody to end it or the family came to that consensus. If appearances mattered that much just save the info until the next day.
its 2019, and 10 minute history, is dead
he was succeded by his brother history matters who made major legal reforms
I read this with his voice in my head
@Wise and Free, he does.
@Wise and Free That would be nice, but fun fact, no
In his later years ,TH-cam upset 10 minute History, but he wouldn't have to be upset for long, because in 2019 he came down with a severe case of being demonitized.
@@georgeamesfort3408 *thud*
Imagine coming home to see your wife cheating on you with the King Of England
Sadly, that happened with a certain Prince of Wales too. Ugh.
@@thunderbird1921 Good point. This wouldn't be the last time.
@@quietcorner293 I sometimes do wonder if there might be another abdication crisis if Charles doesn't die first. ESPECIALLY if he tries to get Parliament to change the law regarding consorts. The outrage (particularly among older folks) would be huge. I could see him being forced to abdicate in favor of William, who's much younger and far more popular anyway.
@@thunderbird1921 given the current queen's immortality, i doubt we will ever have to worry about that
@@jwil4286 she hates Meghan Markle. she is not dying anytime soon. her hatred won't allow it until another car accident
I thought the Kings Party was some crazy Invention by Paradox Interactive. Thanks for proving me wrong!
Krasipol Oh no, it kind of is. There was no group called the “Kings Party”, only a disparate collection of interests who wanted to see Edward VIII remain on the throne, and a rumour circulated by some tabloids. It was never a group, nor did it have a good chance of succeeding
Paradox might embellish things, but they do know their history.
The only thing they invent is USSR getting eastern poland without a fight, and the non aligned joining the allies if declared war upon.
David Josephus Daniel Nuntius Not technically. He simply went to Germany with his wife and met Hitler. The Duke of Windsor claimed to his dying day that he never even contemplated treachery. The only thing to suggest that he might’ve was Operation Willi, a Nazi plot to literally kidnap him. To quote the man himself: “A few hours ago I discharged my last duty as King and Emperor, and now that I have been succeeded by my brother, the Duke of York, my first words must be to declare my allegiance to him. *This I do with all my heart* “
David Josephus Daniel Nuntius Well, according to British law, the Duke of Windsor never did anything treasonous, and I am a firm believer in innocent until *proven* guilty. Duke of York is still very very guilty though
England in 1500s: What do you mean the king can't divorce his wife whenever he pleases? Screw that, we'll create our own church so that our king can divorce/kill whatever wife he wants.
That same church in 1900s: The king wants to marry a divorcee? Well that's just totally contrary to everything our church stands for!
Yeah, Henry VIII did not divorce Catharine of Aragon, he had the marriage annulled.
@@seamonster936 Which he could only do because he made himself head of the church of England. He couldn't get his marriage annulled in the Catholic Church because he very clearly had consummated the marriage (and the fact that child would become Queen pretty strongly refutes the notion of the marriage being "annulled", even if the question regarding Mary's legitimacy/illegitimacy was resolved on purely pragmatic grounds). Now that he was head, he could get his divorce and call it whatever he liked, and change things as he saw fit, which adds to the irony of the later situation with his successor Edward VIII.
Lmao!
Justafan IV The pope would have most likely revoked his dispensation and granted an annulment. This would be unsound but Henry and Cardinal Wolsey were turning the screws on Church property, anyway, the Pope was Charles V’s prisoner at this time. The legal fiction of annulment remain in the Church of England.
Technically he created the Church of England so he could annul, not divorce, his wives. Also, he only actually annulled two of them. Other than the one who outlived him, the others ended the marriage through dying (two of which were not through natural causes....)
"Rheinland? More like Meinland!"
That one is good :D
Meincraft
*Meme* lland
That stuttering sign joke, oof... but also 😂
I reacted similarly tbh. Poor George
It's the truth though.
Knowing Better Do an episode on George VI, or Queen Elizabeth, or SOMEBODY
Knowing Better hi
Didn't know you watched History Matters
“Taking too long to die...” I hate when that happens!
I know right.
I smell a CK2 player!
Bring out your dead
George V was a stubborn old man that’s why it took so long for him to die he wanted to cuss Edward for as long as he could
"she is taking too long to die" Prince Charles, probably (not)
1:33
"You've s-shamed us all."
I see what you did there… nice touch.
B-Berty
Did king George had trouble speaking?
@@littlechemie5425 yes
@@littlechemie5425 did you not see t
The King's Speech?
Little Chemie He had quite a stutter as a result of a pretty bad childhood....
”The throne passed to his brother Albert who became king George VI”
I feel like we missed a step there
happyswedme What step was missed?
they sometimes have to take on new names to show their direction as leader, Albert isn't a kingly name, at least in British standards.
It's similar to France where you need to be name Louis to be King or something. I looked it up. There are three King names. Edward, William and by far the favorite. George. There was two alberts but both had to change their name. prior , was restricted to Henry and a couple of others.
Slew One Actually with France it’s either Louis, Charles, Henry, or Francis
@@Edmonton-of2ec Francis? really Francis! No wonder so many countries don't take them seriously. They are allow to change their name when King. COuldn't they rename themselves something manly like.. I don't know Ajax or something.
Slew One Why do so? By taking the name of a previous monarchy, you are trying to conjure up images of the successes and glories of their reigns, or pick a name with which your countrymen can identify with. Hence why Queen Elizabeth II is Elizabeth II. Not only did she want to keep her name, but it was smart to equate herself with the intelligent, remarkable and crafty Elizabeth I
Those stuttering jokes are too good.
I didn't even click till I read this comment.
Top notch
I dont get it
Baby TJ GEORGE VI had a stutter
@@hagrid1123 there was a movie about it called The Kings Speech in 2010.
Yea lmfaoo
The lesson I’m taking from this is that if an English king is named the eighth, they’re bound to spark controversy.
I think I'm gonna call that phenomenon "Tudor's Law."
George the 8th can literally happen in this century 🙄
@@chakraborty1989 😳
@@chakraborty1989 if he manages to survive his mother, that is
@@SantaMuerte1813 with the current events
@@alfredoyelisa I have to admit, I was surprised by the Queen dying this decade
1900s Edward Marrying an American *Scandal* Laughs in 2018
Yeah so ironic now but to be fair he was KING.
She was a twice divorcee, the real scandal though was his facist sympathies.
@@scvboy1 yeah ik but it doesn't sound as funny that way, anyway harrys third in line so its not like hed be on the throne
@@jonathanredacted3245 That was fairly normal for the time, for example the buisness plot of 1933 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot, george was partial to the germans trying to keep king Prince Louis of battenburg as first sea lord during ww1 but i think thats just anglo german family ties rather than sympathy for the enemy
@@jonathanredacted3245 ikr
Avengers: We're the most ambitious crossover yet!
The King's Party: *Cute*
Not really, though. David Lloyd George, although an incredible prime minister during WW1, did meet Hitler a few times and said he liked him as a leader. Hitler attended Mosley's wedding (at Joseph Goebbels' house) and Mosley was a big fan of other fascists like Franco and Mussolini. At the wedding, Mosley married Diana Mitford (Churchill's cousin). Churchill had also worked with both of them having been both a Conservative and a Liberal at different times in his career.
@@chrisdugas1226
I'm sorry Hitler attended what?
Please tell me more I feel this would be documented such as when I find out Rudolph huss flew to the UK before people talked about it
Also "The King's Speech" is a good movie that covers a bit of this topic. It mostly focuses on Albert's actions and how he dealt with this.
Whereas this video hints at it by having Albert stutter on his signs.
It’s a great film, but naturally tilted against Edward’s side of the story. I think the fact that they stayed married for so long at least speaks for something.
I love that movie. Colin Firth won an academy award for playing Bertie/George VI. However, as Christopher Hitchens noted at the time, it takes a great many liberties with the actual history. Churchill is practically a made up character. Stanley Baldwin did not resign because he misjudged Hitler or something like that. Most funny of all is that Elizabeth and Margaret stay young children over the course of the movie, roughly six or seven years.
Cool that you showed that George the VI was stuttering.
Britain: Oh well...we killed our King
Anyone: why? Corruption? Absolutist plots?
Britain: nah, newspapers
Me: WTF 🤣
It was more managing the timing. He was already done,he was just taking forever about it.
King: I'm not dead yet...
Doctor: You are now.
@@morganrobinson8042 that is the most british thing ive ever heard.
tfw you find out the Monty Python "I'm not dead yet" bit really happened. To the King.
at least they used drugs instead of a chopping block (like their historical enemies yet recent allies)
*In 1936 King George V is DEAD*
*Well, Almost*
*He was dying*
*Almost Dead*
He just really likes saying that doesn't he?
Only mostly dead.
Yes, I did in fact watch the video as well.
-Actually, I'm not quite dead sir!
-ah I see, then you shall not have been mortally wounded in vain!
- actually, I think I might actually pull through!
Looks like i need to fire up HOI4 and make sure King's Party wins
Ben Clarks install Simpson as queen of America 🤔
@@Jimpa-lj3is And rename Washington to "Wallington"
Don't bother with the new tree either, use the British Overhaul mod and use their King Edward tree, SO much better.
Got to remind you Ben. The Empire is at stake if you carry on the marriage between them.
HOI4
You won't belive who just snuffed it.
The fine print underneath
Hitler: Rheinland? More like meinland
Absolute gold!!
This channel is amazing
"He was taking too long to die...so they injected him with a lethal dose of cocaine and morphine....."
Crusader Kings 2 players: "Been there, done that."
Not so bad of a way to go compared to other English kings.
Now I understand why this is no longer called Ten Minute History.
James Bissonette is going broke!
"It's mental" - Derek from Stevenage, 1936
The sign jokes are always funny, so is every video. The main things I like about this channel are facts, commedy, and running through a field of flowers.
"d-duke"
nice touch.
I can’t believe you put the stutter in 😂
wait the Church of England, a religion founded to allow more divorces has very strict rules about who can or can't be divorced?
You'reThatMantis 1.) Annulment
2.) Shut Up
3.) Yes there is a difference
4.) The only reason I say "Shut Up" is because I'm sick of correcting people
5.) See #2 and repeat
@@Edmonton-of2ec Joe mama
AnnoyinglySalty sounds like a dance around hypocrisy to me
@You'reThatMantis Nope, the COE was established in Elizabeth’s reign as her settlement, and in the centuries afterwards carried a very strong taboo for divorce. Also, it was annulment so it was hardly the same thing.
The Church of England was significantly revised by Elizabeth I after the deaths of her father and step sister. It became MUCH stricter in doctrine, particularly on marriage and prayer life (she even had "The Book of Common Prayer" issued).
Incidentally Edward VIII's abdication is what led to Queen Elizabeth II. It wouldn't have even been a distant possibility (presuming he'd have children) until Edward shifted the chain over. Next thing you know 16 years later she's queen and ends up ruling longer than anyone.
Actually, Elizabeth might have become Queen even if Edward married Wallis, just a decade or two later than she did. The only way parliament would have allowed the marriage would have been a Morganatic marriage, which meant that his children (if any; they never did have them) could not inherit. As long as Albert did not die before Edward, then the succession would have happened the way it did. If Albert *did* die first, then I’m not sure how the succession would have gone. There was still a surviving younger brother, so he probably would have become King on Edward’s death.
@@flyboy152 The throne would still have passed through Albert, even if he was dead, to Elizabeth. So, as Edward VIII never had any children, Elizabeth would have ended up being Queen anyway, just much later on.
@@johnbarham6406 OK, interesting to know. I wasn't sure if the succession would pass to her if her father had never ruled, and there was still a surviving younger brother.
1:41 NO CROWN FOR YOU ... strumpet. Golden!
At 0:17 - "Hitler: 'Rhineland? More like Meinland'
History Matters always sneaks in these subtle jokes. I love it
I also find it interesting that Edward is the one saying "Can we speed things up?" From what I've seen, the decision to euthanize the King came exclusively from his physician, Lord Dawson, and he did not consult the Prince of Wales on it.
The stutter cards were priceless. Bless you
This was to a degree shown in the movie: The King's Speach. Great video keep up the great work!
I virtually never comment on youtube, but you guys make me want to learn about the world! I know animation is ridiculously time-consuming, I just want you to know that I appreciate what you do!
" You've s-shamed us all" Hahahaha... Your best yet!
Well at least his marriage turned out okay in the end, so that's a win
Rumor has it he loved her but she was just 0k about him
They were still Nazi sympathizers, though.
@@maxthexpfarmer3957 k
@@maxthexpfarmer3957
Vast majority of European, Americans, heck even Asians were ok with the Nazis before all hell broke loose.
@@millardwashington6216 thats about the best youcan hope for in a two-bit trollup i guess
Loved the 'Two-bit trollop' and 'Ditch the doxy' cards...😄
A change in course - The king's party best UK focus
Another Hoi4 connoisseur i see
Very annoying cause you lose your dominions and the Raj
@@henryvkingofenglandandfran7220 You can retake the Raj pretty fast, Malasya is still allie to you, and almost all dominions are pretty weak, the problem is that more than 90% of canada's victory points are in the west, but the rest is in the east, and there isn't any good place to naval invade the east, so you will have to wait like a year until you reach the east
Yeah I know that what I meant was you can’t resotre the Raj and puppeting India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Burma just doesn’t look right and annexing the Raj is just a waste of the manpower you can get. As for the dominions they lose their unique focus tree and the imperial flags looks horrible
@@henryvkingofenglandandfran7220 The UK once you remove "The war to end all wars" and complete the focus tree that gives you 10% manpower from non core territory will have more than enought man power, once you annex India, plus Nigeria. Anyway usually if you have good divitions you won't need more than 300 divitions
I totally forgot that King George had trouble stuttering. I like that little reminder for when you show Albert.
"ditch the doxy" and " two bit trollup" --- love it!!!
yes
While he was regal name was Edward VIII, his name was actually David. George V's doctors speeding up his death was not known until a biography of George V by Kenneth Rose came out in 1984.
Actually his first given name was Edward, but he went by his last given name, David.
@2:15. Wait wait, a divorced American woman marrying British royalty and the British not taking it well with the royalty giving up his titles for his wife. Man history is circular
At least Meghan isn't a Na*i
the stutter on the cards for King George, brutal lol
I was just waiting for the guy to drop dead when he said the words "is dead.... almost" you got me good Bubba.
Little error I actually only know just caught, Edward VIII signed his abdication document on December 10th, but it didn’t come into legal affect until December 11th, when he signed His Majesty’s Declaration of Abdication Act, 1936. This is what he refers to when he says “...I discharged my last duty as King and Emperor...” in his Abdication Speech
I love how George the 6th all have an extra letter for example like S- because he had a stutter.
Funny thing is, George VI actually lost his stutter (90% of it at least) thanks to work with a speech therapist. His speech to the British people after World War II broke out was if I remember correctly the first major speech he ever gave without once stuttering or struggling. Heck of a time for him to do it!
@@thunderbird1921 You didn't watch "The King's Speech" by any chance, did you? (Good movie btw).
Absolutely love your channel! Keep up the good work!
Doesn't want an American on the throne...
*Proceeds to have a half-American as Prime Minister*
Britain, enough with your copious amounts of inconsistency
It was the snudy royals who who had a problem with it, not so much the common people.
@@chazbertino6102 If they were true, why was Wallis so unpopular? Most of the alleged Nazi philandering and what happened behind closed doors didn’t become public knowledge until later
Johnson renounced his American citizenship in 2016
@@sadboi3204 I’m talking about Winston Churchill you twit. His mother, Jenny Churchill was American
@@Edmonton-of2ec damn dude chill I forgot about that. Not sure if a lot of people in Britain at the time as necessarily being half American I know that’s a factor in wether or not someone is a citizen in the American context
2.26 is ducking amazing haha, I love this channel
That subversion of expectation at the beginning of the episode
OD-ing the king to "announce the death in the much more respectable morning paper instead of the evening paper" is the most British thing I have ever heard.
He got the stutter into cards. Impressive.
I love you, and these videos
Could you do a Short Animated Documentary (or maybe a Ten minute one) about the Kalmar Union?
You've got to make a 10 minute history sometime.
I hate that .10 weekly stability drop
@@Americana1453 HOI4!
You're a d- duke, I really love this channel
2:08 Oh, Mosley!
0:08 this deserves its own video
0:39 there goes Churchill
I really enjoy watching your videos. Keep up the good work.
It's worth noting that Wallis Simpson was by all accounts perfectly happy just being the king's mistress, and Edward is the one that insisted on formalizing it with an actual marriage. Wasn't all her fault....
Tbf tho we did get a better king than Edward 8 with George 6 so technically win win
You have 's-shamed' is the funniest thing in this video
George, Mosely, Churchill
The good, the bad, the ugly.
Ultimate British early 20th century crossover episode.
Lloyd George was no good. Look at what he did at Versailles, then look at him trying to make a comeback on Neville Chamberlain's ruination
Fun Fact. English Children, in 1936, sang, to the tune of "Hark the Herald Angels Sing"
"Hark the Herald Angels Sing. Mrs Simpson's nicked our King"
And now we have Megan markle, Edward must be spinning in his grave
Hey hey that was different times for Edward, we still had vaules back then lmao
@Stuart Aaron wait wait so Archie is not in the line of succession for the throne?
@Stuart Aaron damn then I guess his mom is going to have to cut in line game of thrones style lmao
Stuart Aaron Little mistake in your comment, I think you meant neither Prince Harry nor Archie Mountbatten-Windsor (his parents didn’t give him a title) DON’T have a snowballs chance in Hell of sitting on the throne
Edward's probably giving Harry a thumbs up from beyond the grave.
King George was probably still hanging on waiting for Edward to abdicate…
“You’re now a d-duke”...
The King’s Speech ahahaha
It took me a while to catch on to the king’s stuttering. The “You’re a d-duke” sign finally clued me in, lol.
"Sir" Oswell Mosley.
The fucking stutter killed me
2:26 "You're now a d-Duke" -- kind of a bad-taste reference to the new king's stuttering. You know, there's actually movie about that called "The King's Speech"...
How dare he make fun of the stutter of someone who died 70 years ago
I loved how you managed to write George VI's stammers on the signs
*"King's Speech" prequel*
Prince Albert's stutter on his sign completely slayed me.
Can't wait to see him in The Crown season 3. Always thought he was one of the more interserting characters on the show
Because the duke of windsor died in 1972 and every season covers 10 years, we will see his death in season 3
I
Adding the stutter to George VI was a low blow. 🤣
Stanley Baldwin.
The Man.
The Bold.
The Meme of HOI4.
The only year in British history that is known as the year of the three emperors
Events of the mid 1930s:
Spain: **undergoing an incredibly bloody civil war**
Dominican Republic: **engaging in a genocidal massacre of thousands of Haitian civilians**
Germany: **the Reichstag fire leading to near absolute power being put in the hands of the Chancellery and the death of democracy in Germany**
England: "OMG! The king's trying to marry a woman who's still married and already had a divorce!"
the audacity!!! 😱
Excellent work. Just a suggestion, maybe a video on the Phony War or the Falkland Island war in the 80s.
When the video started, the narrator announced the year, 1936. I looked up and found that the time on my phone was 19:36.
😱😱😱😱😱😱😱
I always get a chuckle when the CoE starts talking about the importance of marriage LOL
The Church of England not allowing divorce and remarriage is pretty hilarious given how the Church of England came into existence.
Even King George's signs have stammers...
Any chance you do a video about the schism between eastern and western christian churches?
I'd watch this over The King's Speech any day
*hoi4 man the guns comes out*
Very timely indeed
Edward the VIII: **Abdicates**
Nazi Germany: You're my friend now
As someone who had a terrible speech impediment most of my youth I found the stutter reference...... HILARIOUS 😂😆
Thanks for not being wusses at humor.
Tony the tiger agrees: It's the little details that make this channel ggg- great 🐯
😊👍
Got to love the titles on those evening papers:
Hitler: 'Rheinland? More like Meinland'
Considering the lives led by the last three generations of Royals, the House of Windsor, the Church of England and the British govt owe posthumous apologies to the Duke & Duchess of Windsor.
0:10 death thud
1:10 "The church of England didn't allow people to remarry if their ex-spouses were still alive"
I can hear Henry VIII spinning in his grave
"Dominions break with the crown!"
Malaysia is still loyal though.
J. Peterman (of Seinfeld fame)- Edward VII was “one of the most dashing and romantic Nazi sympathizers of the entire British Royal family.”
0:48 *Shut Up Ed* 😆😆😆😆😆😂😂😂