Claim your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: try.magellantv.com/peopleprofiles/ Start your free trial TODAY so you can watch Secrets of the Magna Carta - Immortal Document about Magna Carta and the rest of MagellanTV’s history collection: www.magellantv.com/series/secrets-of-the-magna-carta/immortal-document
Henry II's chief flaw was his refusal to share power or give some level of independence to his sons who would have served well as his lieutenants. Great and competent king, bad husband and father, and not much loved by his people
The lion in winter! If only he had raised some loyal children, his reign would have amounted to a golden age. Still my all time favourite English king.
My Second Favorite English King after Edward I. Ironically if the English did the exact same thing in the Battle of Stirling Bridge as they did in the Battle of Owain Bridge(Sent a portion of their Army across a different point in the river to flank the enemy.) The English commander could have done in fact he sent out a force lead by his grandson because he thought he didn’t need them. Perhaps for a Time, Edward I could control all of Britain but with a son like Edward II it wouldn’t last.
@@CommonSwindler He was a bad parent for sure, moved around the country with his court, abandoning the kids with his wife. Who grew resentful after his many affairs, turning his sons against him. He only had John left with him as he was the youngest but even he grew to be treacherous. The love story of Henry and Eleanor turned real sour. Was a great King, not a good man.
@@CommonSwindler I wouldn't say he showed them too much love. Probably the tough love which was the way of the time. He was especially quite cold and controlling towards thr Young King. Who became deeply insecure and leaped at any oppurtunity to break free. Richard was his mother's champion, never forgave Henry for imprisoning her. John was a weasel who manipulated him. Real bad family dynamic. I must clarify, I meant to say a good family man. As you guys might know how the saying goes, A great man is almost always not a good man. He could've tried being more respectful of Eleanor's possessions and rights. He slept around a lot after some years of great love, and wasn't always quiet about it too. Eleanor was also a great woman she could not accept those humiliations.
@@CommonSwindler Phillip definitely had cunning in abundance. Probably even more than Henry tbh. As he never truly had Henry or Richard's strength or wealth. Mostly his brains.
@@RobenArjen Laid the groundwork for the modern English legal system? Pretty much established the idea of everyone being equal before the law in England? Restored England to wealth after the chaos of The Anarchy brought economic strife?
@ Raymond Hernandez He had it coming. To this day, this bloodline is ruthless in getting their way. Never ask them to help with anything as they will either stand you up or arrive and take everything over.
@@CommonSwindlerWhat a bunch of tosh that last line is. It was King Henry II’s own mistake in conferring the archbishopric on Becket, against the protests of Becket and the electors, and making his own trouble. The whole episode can be blamed on Henry’s lust for control and expectation that St. Thomas would be his lackey instead of Archbishop. In the end, Henry was fittingly rewarded by God for his ambitions with humiliation, sickness and betrayal; whereas St. Thomas Becket died a martyr for God. Thank God for He is merciful, Henry made confession before his death!
@@CommonSwindler at the same time, not allowing his sons some level of power to practice the business of ruling contributed to their bad kingship, like hoe Nicholas II of Russia was not properly trained to rule the empire of his father. Did he expect to live forever and that his empire would only be his? Sorta reminds me of Emperor Palpatine.
@graceamerican3558 The magna carta was John I acting out of coercion. The magna carta was , at times, supressed, and other times, it was reinstated and expanded. The biggest influence the magna carta had was on our constitution. Henry II basically set up how courts operate. Trial by jury, some of the rules of evidence, etc. What Henry set up, much like our constitution, has undergone little change over a mich longer time. Henry II made a lot of other changes to the system, and for the sake of centralizing royal power, but what i mentioned was far more enduring than anything else.
I find English History fascinating. Power, intrigue, bloody battles, marriages, claims to the crown, blood witted barons, linage, occasionally some total madness, mercilessness, and conspiratorial.
I think he was pretty awesome! For him to bring order to a country that had been torn apart by a civil war that had lasted 20 years was pretty remarkable. From what I've read, Stephen was not a very strong king. There didn't seem to be any semblance of order. Barons had free rein to do whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted. For him to come in, quell the war, bring the barons to heel, create a centralized court system, tax system, etc. - all the while taking care of the other provinces in his empire - was really extraordinary. I'm sure those barons resented the curtailing of their power and having to adopt to a new system of law and order; so I'm sure they didn't make it easy!
This video was awesome. Very well made. I have one critique. At 53:40, technically Saladin was a Kurd, not an Arab. Other than that, this was an excellent video. I enjoyed it very much!
Henry had such an incredible political mind. To go into that fight in Ireland, invited with his men to fight, and he ends up taking over Ireland. Henry probably even told the French King that he should divorce Elenore. And then the two of them immediately got married. And to be smart enough to fight his son's and Elenore plus half the Kingdoms in Europe, and some of it through diplomacy was quite the feat.
Ive watched these half an hour/hour long documentaries on every english monarch since Alfred the Great. Man this is taking a long time but its so interesting.
I think Henry II is undoubtedly one of the greatest English kings ever. He ended the anarchy, stabilised the kingdom by establishing the rule of law, produced many children and married them off well. His failings are incredibly tragic in that they are so personal: he came into conflict with his best friend, his wife and his children and it ultimately brought him down. His legacy though is to be seen in Magna Carta: during John's quite disastrous rule, the English barons sought to use the rule of law, rather than anarchy, to restrain him and accept limits on his power. The barons obviously realised they preferred law and order to chaos and thought it was possible because of the changes Henry II had instigated. One of the great questions, I think, is this: Henry II's youngest son, John, was born on Christmas Eve, 1166 (almost 100 years to the day that William the Conqueror was crowned as King of England); as such, given that the shock of John's betrayal is quite possibly what finished Henry II off, was John the most dubious Christmas present ever received by a king of England or a kingdom? John's misrule is such a watershed moment in English history too, that it's hard not to argue that it was ultimately A Good Thing (to borrow a term from Sellar and Yeatman).
Stephen of Blois be the Grandson, if he is the son of the daughter, of William of Normandy . Not his nephew. Many Norman nobles chose Stephen over Matilda
I just found out from my aunt who's been doing extensive research on our genealogy and lineage that I'm related to King Henry II. Pretty wild because I was raised very poor and always thought we were just nobodies, lol.
In medieval terms he was an amazing leader to my mind: He had to try to lead, deceive and influence many people with different agenda including England based Barons, France based Barons, numerous other European rulers and his family who all had their own personal interests at heart: None of whom seemed to want to keep the Angevin Empire as a single entity, unlike Henry. He juggled all these interests and diplomacies throughout his kingship but his family did not seem to want to understand and support the project. Most of all he brought some peace to England which the peasant society must have valued; however like today the general population don't know when they are on to a good thing and IMO the Barons couldn't see the wood for the trees. I do understand that warfare was a way of life in those times but it destroyed national economies and killed off the young peasants who otherwise would have been building up their country. His regulation of the legal system is still valued today in English Common Law. He was a leader with many medieval leadership skills but no one wanted such a large empire for their own reasons. He was a great king but his project was not wanted by anyone.
During the 12th century monarchs like Henry II and Richard the Lionheart were influential figures in England. Henry II, known for his legal reforms and expansion of royal authority, established the foundation for the common law system. Richard the Lionheart, on the other hand, gained fame for his military prowess and leadership during the Third Crusade. Together, these monarchs played significant roles in shaping England's political and military landscape during this period. These assholes hurt the country's economy and caused social unrest with their heavy taxation policies. Additionally, their constant conflicts with neighboring kingdoms strained diplomatic relations and hindered England's overall stability.
I was pretty close with my prediction, but i doubt next middle age biography will be about Richard the Lionheart. Father and then son? Too easy. My prediction for the next middle age figure: Cnut the Great.
Phillip Augustus got revenge on the Normans for us English. He invaded Normandy and completely erased the Norman nobility and replaced them with his trusted Frenchmen, ironically like the Normans did to England.
Counts of maine were subject to the duchy of normandy, hence the confusion I assume. Therefore one could say that le man was technically in the entity of normandy.
The castle at 21:00 is Bunrathy in Co. Clare Ireland. Built by a branch of my family a long time ago. I'll be fighting in a tournament there tomorrow. Funny coincidence
If the throne can’t go thru women, Stephen shouldn’t claim the throne either. No matter which way we cut it, he’s taking advantage of the rightful heirs. Funny that he would pay 💰 for someone to fart 💨 at him. One book 📚 claims Eleanor rebellion was linked to Henry’s infidelity, but he’s definitely one of England’s best kings Et tu John!!
Thomas Beckett was nothing but trouble. But, his murder was even greater trouble. Henry ll's biggest problem was, he didn't know how to handle his wife, and children.
No Stephen was empress Matilda’s cousin. William the conqueror was his mothers father. She was Henry I (father of empress Matilda’s) sister who is Henry II grandfather.
@@CommonSwindler This is the problem with Monarchy. A King could be the Greatest Ruler in all of history but his dumbass son can ruin everything. The Only difference between Henry III and Richard II/Edward II was that Henry had a smart son to save his ass while Edward and Richard had a young son or no son at all.
No mention of the Treaty Henry signed with the Pope to resolve the matter of Beckets murder? Nor the annual stipend Henry was forced to pay to the Pope? Nor the gauntlet he was forced to walk while being beaten by 2 rows of 40 friars? Both were concessions Henry made to the Pope in the addition to the Treaty before the Pope was satisfied. The murder of Becket is the most important event in English history because it led to the Treaty, breached by King John (when he signed the Magna Carta) and subsequent forfeiture of the Crown. The Templars were sent by the Pope to collect his compensation for the breach of the Treaty and the Crown Corporation was created. The Crown Corporation is located in what is now known as the City of London - where the monarch requires permission to access…
If Stephen was born to "The Conquerors daughter" as asserted here, that would make Stephen his grandson not his nephew. Adela (Stephen's Mother) and Matilda (Henry's Mother) were sister or at least half sisters. Stephen would be Matilda's nephew not her cousin. That would make Henery I and Stephen Blois first cousins. From an argument of decent, it would seem both would have a claim to Grandaddy William's throne.
If it was the only mistake of this video, that would be fine. Adela, the mother of Stephen was a daughter of William the Conqueror whereas Mathilda was the daughter of Henry I. So Stephen and Matilda were indeed first cousins and yes Stephen was the grandson of the Conqueror. Not only there are several mistakes but it is interesting what they chose to omit at 4.21 "Stephen accession was not accepted without hesitation by his English and Welsh subjects". Firstly the Normans didn't give a fuck about what their conquered Anglo-Saxon and Welsh subjects thought about who should be the next king, but they omit to say that Stephen had the majority of the Normans barons supporting him, well the real power behind the throne. Secondly they also omit to say that at the time of the death of Henry I, Matilda and her husband Geoffroy were actually supporting and taking part in a rebellion against Henry I's royal authority in southern Normandy. Not the smartest move if they want to appear as the legitimate heirs.
Adela was Stephens wife lol. Look it up he married into the house. Adela Is the daughter of William the conqueror. William had many children: Robert II, Richard, Adeliza, Cecilia, William II, Constance, Adela, Henry I. Theobald was stephens father. Henry I was Henry II grandfather. Henry II mother was empress Matilda Henry I daughter. William the conqueror was henry II great grandfather. Henry I is my 28th great grandfather. Henry II is my 26th great grandfather. Stephen is related by marriage to Adela.
I think it’s anachronistic to call Henri FitzEmpress Plantagenet ‘King of England’ in the way one would give that title to Henry 8th Tudor, for example. In 12th Century, most of the territory we now call England was ruled by dynasts who did not speak English, but some variety of French (first in the Norman, later in the Parisian dialect) who were part of a wider feudal structure that it might be more accurate to describe as ‘French’. They certainly wouldn’t have thought of themselves as ‘English’. The territories ruled by Plantagenet kings started to become more ‘English’ when Henri’s son Jean Sans Terre (aka ‘John Lackland’) lost control of more of the possessions that he held in fief to the King of France.
That's a complete French-washing of English history and is totally false. Firstly Henry II and Henry VIII had two different political climates to work in so your point is nonsense, Henry II set up England to be run by a series of ministers because he was an extremly busy man that had to attend to a vast collection of lands, whereas Henry VIII is a post Magna Carta king so he rules with a parliament. England was a totally seperate kingdom to France, it wasn't a part of the same fuedal structure, en contraire, King Henry I as King of England invaded Normandy with a English army and conqured the duchy after the Battle of Tinchebray, which technically makes Normady feudally subservient to England, "why should I have to pay homage to the king of France for these lands when I'm a king myself...n'est-ce pas?". That's why the Kings of England and Kings of France had so much friction, they Kings of England believed they didn't need to pay homage and weren't fuedal obliged to the French in anyway. Henry II was called Fitzempress after his Anglo-Norman mother and was related to the House of Wessex, he spent his studying years in Bristol and was educated by Anglo-Saxon scholars, William of Malmesbury wrote the Gesta Regum Anglorum for him so he could study his Anglo-Saxon ancestry, he supported Bishop Osbert's appeal to Rome to get King Edward cannonised and he founded Oxford school so that his English glery would no longer have to go to Paris or Rome to study Church Latin, he also built his largest and most expensive castle in Dover. He was mixed heritage and clearly cared just as much for his English lands as he did for his French lands. Also, you comment about the French language and Plantagenets seeing themsevles as French after losing their lands is another false claim. When King Richard was taken to France, he was raised as a Frenchman because they who he lived around. His brother however Prince John, was left in England and he was very much English. King John wore English clothes "Opus Anglicana", he was a part of the English saint cult of Wulfstan, he preferred to drink English wine from Corfe over French, he ate the tradional Anglo-Saxon Christmas dinner of pigs head pickled in beer and most importantly, he could also speak English! He even supported Hugh Bishop of Conventry's letter to King Richard to get William Longschamps removed from power as Lord Chancellor for not being able to speak English. When the English finally arrested Longschamps they made it a national joke that he couldn't ask an Englishman for a boat back to France. So King John could 100% speak English as well as French. His son Henry III was also fluent in English. And interestingly, when his brother Richard of Cornwall ( or Richard Von Cornwall) was elected as King of Germany, Mathew Paris his contemporary chronicler said "Richard will have no trouble learning how to speak German as he can already speak English". Edward I said "The French wish to destroy our English tongue, a plan I trust god will forbid" Edward II was also known to go to fishermen and buy fish with his own hands and he would often go to markets and taverns, one of the biggest insults his peers would give him was saying he enjoyed the company of common folk...which is also a clear indication he could speak English too. Simply saying the Plantagenets "spoke French" is totally ignorant and French-washing. While they could speak French and only wrote in French, they most certainly could speak English as well, not just the king but their extended family members too. *funny side note. When Stephen Langton went on the run to France during thr barons rebellion, him and a band of Englishmen would meet up with the French in Laon, Paris and Orleans to talk politics in England, the French noted Stephen and his friends always drank cider at the dinner table and spoke a version of French so strange they could barely understand them.
You seemed to confuse alot of people so here William the conqueror and Matilda of Flanders had children: Robert II Duke of Normandy Richard Adeliza Cecilia William II who was supposed to be king and died during the white ship crisis. Constance Duchess of Brittany Adela countess of Blois (who married Stephen of Blois and they had a son Stephen of Blois who is the one that came to claim the throne) Henry I king of England Empress Matilda was Henry I daughter. Matilda married Geoffrey Plantagenet. Henry II was there son. So Henry I was Henry II grandfather. Henry I had no living male heirs to take the throne upon his death. He wished for Matilda to be regent until Henry II was of age to take the throne. But Stephen Matilda’s 1st cousin came to take the throne as his mother was Adela Williams daughter and he was Williams grandson. Henry I was his uncle but he was Henry II grandfather. So Henry II and Stephen were second cousins. Adela was Matilda’s aunt and Henry II great aunt. Matilda and Stephen were 1st cousins. William was stephens grandfather and Henry II great grandfather. William was Matilda’s grandfather. If still confused: ok look at your own family tree if you have an aunt her kids are your 1st cousins, and your 1st cousins children are your second cousins so on and so on…
At 4:17 you state that Stephen is the nephew of William the Conqueror, having been born to the Conqueror 's daughter Adela. Wouldn't that make him William's grandson? Nephew to King Henry I.
No. Ok here William the conquerors daughter Adela married Stephen they had a son named Stephen. Stephen who married Adela his father was theobald. Henry I was Adela’s brother Williams son. Empress Matilda was Henry I daughter Williams granddaughter. Henry II was Henry I grandson making William his great grandfather. So William was also stephens grandfather as Adela was Williams daughter and Stephen was her son. So Henry I was stephens uncle. Making Adela empress Matilda’s aunt. Henry II was Matilda’s son so Stephen would be her first cousin. Henry II was second cousin to Stephen his uncle was Henry I so his daughter matilda is his first cousin her son is his second cousin. So like you have an aunt her kids are your first cousins and there kids are your second cousins so on and so on…Henry II was my 26th great grandfather. Does that answer your question?
Henry II and Stephen were second cousins to sum that up. Adela was his great aunt or his mothers aunt, and his grandfathers sister. Henry I was not his father he was his grandfather and Matilda married into Plantagenet and never got the throne because Stephen took it from her. Even though in Henry I will he wished for Matilda to be regent until his grandson Henry II was of age to take the throne as he had no other heirs to take the throne. But Stephen came in and took claim to the throne as his mother was daughter to William. But Henry I Williams son had the throne. Williams children in order: Robert II Duke of Normandy, Richard, Adeliza, Cecilia, William II (who was also king of England before Henry I), Constance Duchess of Brittany, Adela Countess of Blois, Henry I king of England.
@@wiscochic861plutochic5 That's exactly what I said. Stephen was William's grandson & Henry's nephew. NOT William the Conqueror's nephew, as the video said.
Claim your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: try.magellantv.com/peopleprofiles/ Start your free trial TODAY so you can watch Secrets of the Magna Carta - Immortal Document about Magna Carta and the rest of MagellanTV’s history collection: www.magellantv.com/series/secrets-of-the-magna-carta/immortal-document
Can't wait to watch! 😍😍
Richard the Lionheart next!
Henry II's chief flaw was his refusal to share power or give some level of independence to his sons who would have served well as his lieutenants.
Great and competent king, bad husband and father, and not much loved by his people
O
grandson of William not nephew.
Whew! This man hit the ground running and never stopped for a breath
Yeah feels like someone reading from a book
The lion in winter! If only he had raised some loyal children, his reign would have amounted to a golden age. Still my all time favourite English king.
My Second Favorite English King after Edward I. Ironically if the English did the exact same thing in the Battle of Stirling Bridge as they did in the Battle of Owain Bridge(Sent a portion of their Army across a different point in the river to flank the enemy.) The English commander could have done in fact he sent out a force lead by his grandson because he thought he didn’t need them. Perhaps for a Time, Edward I could control all of Britain but with a son like Edward II it wouldn’t last.
@@CommonSwindler He was a bad parent for sure, moved around the country with his court, abandoning the kids with his wife. Who grew resentful after his many affairs, turning his sons against him. He only had John left with him as he was the youngest but even he grew to be treacherous. The love story of Henry and Eleanor turned real sour. Was a great King, not a good man.
@@absurdist9609 It is important to not forget that Philip Augustus had a part to play in the familial tension between Father and Sons.
@@CommonSwindler I wouldn't say he showed them too much love. Probably the tough love which was the way of the time. He was especially quite cold and controlling towards thr Young King. Who became deeply insecure and leaped at any oppurtunity to break free. Richard was his mother's champion, never forgave Henry for imprisoning her. John was a weasel who manipulated him. Real bad family dynamic. I must clarify, I meant to say a good family man. As you guys might know how the saying goes, A great man is almost always not a good man. He could've tried being more respectful of Eleanor's possessions and rights. He slept around a lot after some years of great love, and wasn't always quiet about it too. Eleanor was also a great woman she could not accept those humiliations.
@@CommonSwindler Phillip definitely had cunning in abundance. Probably even more than Henry tbh. As he never truly had Henry or Richard's strength or wealth. Mostly his brains.
Henry II is my favorite Plantagenet and among my top 3 favorite English royals. Truly a great man from a great time in history!
What did he do was so great???
@@RobenArjen Laid the groundwork for the modern English legal system? Pretty much established the idea of everyone being equal before the law in England? Restored England to wealth after the chaos of The Anarchy brought economic strife?
Who are the other two favorites? I'm curious!
Henry II is England's greatest king, and the first ruler since the Normal Conquest to actually try to build a functioning state.
You had me at “he employed the services of a flatulist.” (Who apparently was so adept at his job as to earn himself a manor house-well played.)
One jump one whistle and one fart 🍑💨😆
And he only had to show up once a year to perform it
my dad likes to whistle the start of a tune and then farts the rest in perfect rhythm… it’s one hell of a talent really.
😂😂
This is actually the story of Sir Roland's Rents and nothing to do with Henry.
I love how he defeated his sons+ his wife and wife's ex husband in the 1170s.
His greatest feat
Winning against his own family, half his barons and the Kings of France and Scotland
@ Raymond Hernandez He had it coming. To this day, this bloodline is ruthless in getting their way. Never ask them to help with anything as they will either stand you up or arrive and take everything over.
I like how he attacked Stephen'scastles and got him to pay for it when his mother refused at the age of 14.
Roland The FART💨!!🤣🤣🤣💯
Thankyou for this.
Henry the second A Great and Noble King.
"Who will rid me of this turbulent algorithm!?" - Henry II (probably)
Yes, I was curious as to why this wasn't mentioned in Henry's problem with Beckett. Although "algorithm" wasn't exactly what I had in mind.
@@CommonSwindlerWhat a bunch of tosh that last line is. It was King Henry II’s own mistake in conferring the archbishopric on Becket, against the protests of Becket and the electors, and making his own trouble. The whole episode can be blamed on Henry’s lust for control and expectation that St. Thomas would be his lackey instead of Archbishop. In the end, Henry was fittingly rewarded by God for his ambitions with humiliation, sickness and betrayal; whereas St. Thomas Becket died a martyr for God. Thank God for He is merciful, Henry made confession before his death!
I love this fast paced, info packed overview!😃
Superb images (bar that of Henry II), insightful analysis, and dramatic tension. Great!
I just started researching this incredible king perfect timing ♥️
Thanks!
Thank you!
In many ways one of England’s greatest kings.
But his need for total control and habit of alienating people really caused him a lot of problems.
@@CommonSwindler at the same time, not allowing his sons some level of power to practice the business of ruling contributed to their bad kingship, like hoe Nicholas II of Russia was not properly trained to rule the empire of his father. Did he expect to live forever and that his empire would only be his?
Sorta reminds me of Emperor Palpatine.
Massive problem, but understandable given the clusterfuck his formative years were.
Henry II and Eleanor are my 28th set of great grandparents. Glad Eleanor had John before she started plotting against Henry or I wouldn’t exist
@Saedrix, our family tree must converge at some point then as they were mine to.
No kidding? I wonder what percentage of blood we share
Henry is my 14th great father apparently
Amazing ❗
@@aroundthecoast3334 AMAZING
The series on this dynasty is quite intriguing.
Dynasty*
Love your voice. So clear and concise. This was very interesting.
Henry II is often cited as the founder of the modern legal system in England and America
The Magna Carta? I do know a lot of our laws come from this.
@graceamerican3558 The magna carta was John I acting out of coercion. The magna carta was , at times, supressed, and other times, it was reinstated and expanded. The biggest influence the magna carta had was on our constitution.
Henry II basically set up how courts operate. Trial by jury, some of the rules of evidence, etc. What Henry set up, much like our constitution, has undergone little change over a mich longer time. Henry II made a lot of other changes to the system, and for the sake of centralizing royal power, but what i mentioned was far more enduring than anything else.
@@mattgambill5543 That’s what I was referring to as well - the Constitution.
This reference goes to Henry's role in the development of the English Common Law. This predates the Magma Carta. The Common Law is a priori.
This was a splendid video! I been interested in Henry II ever since A Lion in Winter. Never had much sympathy for Beckett.
I find English History fascinating. Power, intrigue, bloody battles, marriages, claims to the crown, blood witted barons, linage, occasionally some total madness, mercilessness, and conspiratorial.
thank you for posting it is a very good doco on my ancestors
I think he was pretty awesome! For him to bring order to a country that had been torn apart by a civil war that had lasted 20 years was pretty remarkable. From what I've read, Stephen was not a very strong king. There didn't seem to be any semblance of order. Barons had free rein to do whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted. For him to come in, quell the war, bring the barons to heel, create a centralized court system, tax system, etc. - all the while taking care of the other provinces in his empire - was really extraordinary. I'm sure those barons resented the curtailing of their power and having to adopt to a new system of law and order; so I'm sure they didn't make it easy!
Love this. But also, this narrator makes the entire 50 minutes sound like a single paragraph 😂🤷♂️
This video was awesome. Very well made. I have one critique. At 53:40, technically Saladin was a Kurd, not an Arab. Other than that, this was an excellent video. I enjoyed it very much!
Great information has always.Thank you
Loved this so much. Brilliant work.
Suggestion: A more detailed documentary about the life of Edward III
The portrait of him in the video should give you a clue. 😁
I believe that Beckett is getting off too lightly. His role should be put under a very strong microscope.
He was no priest. Martyred for political not religious reasons.
He was an absolute pain in the backside
My god, I love this channel.
He's an ancestor of mine. Very fascinating watching family history Iike this.
Henry had such an incredible political mind. To go into that fight in Ireland, invited with his men to fight, and he ends up taking over Ireland. Henry probably even told the French King that he should divorce Elenore. And then the two of them immediately got married. And to be smart enough to fight his son's and Elenore plus half the Kingdoms in Europe, and some of it through diplomacy was quite the feat.
Ive watched these half an hour/hour long documentaries on every english monarch since Alfred the Great. Man this is taking a long time but its so interesting.
I think Henry II is undoubtedly one of the greatest English kings ever. He ended the anarchy, stabilised the kingdom by establishing the rule of law, produced many children and married them off well. His failings are incredibly tragic in that they are so personal: he came into conflict with his best friend, his wife and his children and it ultimately brought him down.
His legacy though is to be seen in Magna Carta: during John's quite disastrous rule, the English barons sought to use the rule of law, rather than anarchy, to restrain him and accept limits on his power. The barons obviously realised they preferred law and order to chaos and thought it was possible because of the changes Henry II had instigated.
One of the great questions, I think, is this: Henry II's youngest son, John, was born on Christmas Eve, 1166 (almost 100 years to the day that William the Conqueror was crowned as King of England); as such, given that the shock of John's betrayal is quite possibly what finished Henry II off, was John the most dubious Christmas present ever received by a king of England or a kingdom? John's misrule is such a watershed moment in English history too, that it's hard not to argue that it was ultimately A Good Thing (to borrow a term from Sellar and Yeatman).
Great documentary. Good to see real historical research overcoming the biased views of the historians of the period.
Great work - clear and detailed.
Minor point - those aren't the cliffs of Dover, that is Beachy Head by Eastbourne:)
Some beautiful scenery.
Very beautiful indeed I have taken so many screen shots ..
Compliments to the commentator. Absolutely perfect. Nov. 2022.
Stephen of Blois be the Grandson, if he is the son of the daughter, of William of Normandy . Not his nephew. Many Norman nobles chose Stephen over Matilda
I think they mean he was Henry's I nephew
my favourite English king and the star in my favourite play lion in winter
I just found out from my aunt who's been doing extensive research on our genealogy and lineage that I'm related to King Henry II. Pretty wild because I was raised very poor and always thought we were just nobodies, lol.
I love Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine! Amen!
Lovely!! Thank you :)
Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine were my 22nd great grandparents. John I was my 21st great grandparent. Lost France. Lost absolute monarchy.
In medieval terms he was an amazing leader to my mind: He had to try to lead, deceive and influence many people with different agenda including England based Barons, France based Barons, numerous other European rulers and his family who all had their own personal interests at heart: None of whom seemed to want to keep the Angevin Empire as a single entity, unlike Henry. He juggled all these interests and diplomacies throughout his kingship but his family did not seem to want to understand and support the project. Most of all he brought some peace to England which the peasant society must have valued; however like today the general population don't know when they are on to a good thing and IMO the Barons couldn't see the wood for the trees. I do understand that warfare was a way of life in those times but it destroyed national economies and killed off the young peasants who otherwise would have been building up their country. His regulation of the legal system is still valued today in English Common Law. He was a leader with many medieval leadership skills but no one wanted such a large empire for their own reasons. He was a great king but his project was not wanted by anyone.
Certainly the brightest spark of the English kings.
Im a direct descendent of King Henry the II on my mothers fathers side. Exciting!!
Great biopic on Henry II!
The People’s Profiles : Here’s Henry II
Me(Who was expecting William II) : A Surprise to be sure but a welcome one.
During the 12th century monarchs like Henry II and Richard the Lionheart were influential figures in England. Henry II, known for his legal reforms and expansion of royal authority, established the foundation for the common law system. Richard the Lionheart, on the other hand, gained fame for his military prowess and leadership during the Third Crusade. Together, these monarchs played significant roles in shaping England's political and military landscape during this period. These assholes hurt the country's economy and caused social unrest with their heavy taxation policies. Additionally, their constant conflicts with neighboring kingdoms strained diplomatic relations and hindered England's overall stability.
I was pretty close with my prediction, but i doubt next middle age biography will be about Richard the Lionheart. Father and then son? Too easy. My prediction for the next middle age figure:
Cnut the Great.
Cnut needs to be talked about more. The man was an absolute unit
A most underrated monarch.
I've seen that you focus mostly on Europe and US. Is there a chance that you might someday cover east Asian history
agreed
Why isn't the doc about Eleanor of Aquitaine in this playlist?! 😢
Hope to know more about him.
He was a great king !
I my eyes Henry II is the greatest king England ever had. A man I truly admire.
Video Suggestion: Philip Augustus of France, one of the Greatest Medieval Kings of France who played the Plantagenets like a fiddle.
To be fair he only really played John, Richard was successful in his war with Phillip
@@CommonSwindler I agree he was easily the best king of this period
@@CommonSwindler True I think it would be between him, Phillip and Edward III
Phillip Augustus got revenge on the Normans for us English. He invaded Normandy and completely erased the Norman nobility and replaced them with his trusted Frenchmen, ironically like the Normans did to England.
Le Mans is absolutely not in Normandy. Le Mans was located in Le Maine (currently Sarthe, Pays de la Loire).
Counts of maine were subject to the duchy of normandy, hence the confusion I assume. Therefore one could say that le man was technically in the entity of normandy.
The castle at 21:00 is Bunrathy in Co. Clare Ireland. Built by a branch of my family a long time ago. I'll be fighting in a tournament there tomorrow. Funny coincidence
He is in my family line of great great grandfathers!
Love Henry11nd I soak up everything I can on him , I read somewhere that he used to go on the floor and bite a rug in temper like a dog 😂😂😂
Thank you
If you like this you must read David Mitchell's 'Unruly'....simply brilliant...and funny!
great video
If the throne can’t go thru women, Stephen shouldn’t claim the throne either. No matter which way we cut it, he’s taking advantage of the rightful heirs.
Funny that he would pay 💰 for someone to fart 💨 at him. One book 📚 claims Eleanor rebellion was linked to Henry’s infidelity, but he’s definitely one of England’s best kings
Et tu John!!
He was a good seducer, he seduced and used to bang the sister of Philippe Augustus
Very good
Am I the only one wondering how the king could possibly do spot of riding with that flaturist firmly attached to the Royal butt😄😂😂😅
Can you guys make videos about Anglo-Saxon English kings? That would be great to see.
Y’all should do documentaries on all the French kings
He was indeed one of the greatest Kings of England
Very interesting fakts. Thx
He certainly gives a whole new meaning to the concept of strong leadership. Unlike the weak insipids of leadership in today's world.
I think the answer to your question is a question that is easier to answer. Did the good outweigh the bad?
Roland the Farter... a true medieval legend.
Where is the video about Eleanor?
Thomas Beckett was nothing but trouble. But, his murder was even greater trouble. Henry ll's biggest problem was, he didn't know how to handle his wife, and children.
The fact that I’m his ancestor makes me so happy
Please do a video on Edward the Confessor
My granny princess Marianna Cottone she was born in the County of Naso city in Sicily on February 13 , 1912 and me on February 6 , 1983
Henry Ii bit of a weirdo and pervert who had a fart fetish 😬
4:15 How can Stephen be nephew of William if his mother was william's daughter Adela?
That would make him William's grandson,no?
He was a king of the times.
No Stephen was empress Matilda’s cousin. William the conqueror was his mothers father. She was Henry I (father of empress Matilda’s) sister who is Henry II grandfather.
I wish I could say "the handsome" and "the fair" were the epithets people use for me
My granny princess Marianna Cottone she descents from king Henry II of England but also from Charlemagne and from all the Kings of Wessex too
Does Hugh Laurie know that you have him playing King Henry II on yoir thumbnail?
Terrific video. I like Henry II. I think his children were horrid.
@@CommonSwindler This is the problem with Monarchy. A King could be the Greatest Ruler in all of history but his dumbass son can ruin everything. The Only difference between Henry III and Richard II/Edward II was that Henry had a smart son to save his ass while Edward and Richard had a young son or no son at all.
Edward III & Black Prince
@@PeopleProfiles The Best Duo in English History
No mention of the Treaty Henry signed with the Pope to resolve the matter of Beckets murder? Nor the annual stipend Henry was forced to pay to the Pope? Nor the gauntlet he was forced to walk while being beaten by 2 rows of 40 friars? Both were concessions Henry made to the Pope in the addition to the Treaty before the Pope was satisfied. The murder of Becket is the most important event in English history because it led to the Treaty, breached by King John (when he signed the Magna Carta) and subsequent forfeiture of the Crown. The Templars were sent by the Pope to collect his compensation for the breach of the Treaty and the Crown Corporation was created. The Crown Corporation is located in what is now known as the City of London - where the monarch requires permission to access…
If Stephen was born to "The Conquerors daughter" as asserted here, that would make Stephen his grandson not his nephew. Adela (Stephen's Mother) and Matilda (Henry's Mother) were sister or at least half sisters. Stephen would be Matilda's nephew not her cousin. That would make Henery I and Stephen Blois first cousins. From an argument of decent, it would seem both would have a claim to Grandaddy William's throne.
If it was the only mistake of this video, that would be fine. Adela, the mother of Stephen was a daughter of William the Conqueror whereas Mathilda was the daughter of Henry I. So Stephen and Matilda were indeed first cousins and yes Stephen was the grandson of the Conqueror.
Not only there are several mistakes but it is interesting what they chose to omit at 4.21 "Stephen accession was not accepted without hesitation by his English and Welsh subjects".
Firstly the Normans didn't give a fuck about what their conquered Anglo-Saxon and Welsh subjects thought about who should be the next king, but they omit to say that Stephen had the majority of the Normans barons supporting him, well the real power behind the throne.
Secondly they also omit to say that at the time of the death of Henry I, Matilda and her husband Geoffroy were actually supporting and taking part in a rebellion against Henry I's royal authority in southern Normandy. Not the smartest move if they want to appear as the legitimate heirs.
Adela was Stephens wife lol. Look it up he married into the house. Adela
Is the daughter of William the conqueror. William had many children: Robert II, Richard, Adeliza, Cecilia, William II, Constance, Adela, Henry I. Theobald was stephens father. Henry I was Henry II grandfather. Henry II mother was empress Matilda Henry I daughter. William the conqueror was henry II great grandfather. Henry I is my 28th great grandfather. Henry II is my 26th great grandfather. Stephen is related by marriage to Adela.
I think it’s anachronistic to call Henri FitzEmpress Plantagenet ‘King of England’ in the way one would give that title to Henry 8th Tudor, for example. In 12th Century, most of the territory we now call England was ruled by dynasts who did not speak English, but some variety of French (first in the Norman, later in the Parisian dialect) who were part of a wider feudal structure that it might be more accurate to describe as ‘French’. They certainly wouldn’t have thought of themselves as ‘English’. The territories ruled by Plantagenet kings started to become more ‘English’ when Henri’s son Jean Sans Terre (aka ‘John Lackland’) lost control of more of the possessions that he held in fief to the King of France.
That's a complete French-washing of English history and is totally false.
Firstly Henry II and Henry VIII had two different political climates to work in so your point is nonsense, Henry II set up England to be run by a series of ministers because he was an extremly busy man that had to attend to a vast collection of lands, whereas Henry VIII is a post Magna Carta king so he rules with a parliament. England was a totally seperate kingdom to France, it wasn't a part of the same fuedal structure, en contraire, King Henry I as King of England invaded Normandy with a English army and conqured the duchy after the Battle of Tinchebray, which technically makes Normady feudally subservient to England, "why should I have to pay homage to the king of France for these lands when I'm a king myself...n'est-ce pas?". That's why the Kings of England and Kings of France had so much friction, they Kings of England believed they didn't need to pay homage and weren't fuedal obliged to the French in anyway.
Henry II was called Fitzempress after his Anglo-Norman mother and was related to the House of Wessex, he spent his studying years in Bristol and was educated by Anglo-Saxon scholars, William of Malmesbury wrote the Gesta Regum Anglorum for him so he could study his Anglo-Saxon ancestry, he supported Bishop Osbert's appeal to Rome to get King Edward cannonised and he founded Oxford school so that his English glery would no longer have to go to Paris or Rome to study Church Latin, he also built his largest and most expensive castle in Dover. He was mixed heritage and clearly cared just as much for his English lands as he did for his French lands.
Also, you comment about the French language and Plantagenets seeing themsevles as French after losing their lands is another false claim. When King Richard was taken to France, he was raised as a Frenchman because they who he lived around. His brother however Prince John, was left in England and he was very much English. King John wore English clothes "Opus Anglicana", he was a part of the English saint cult of Wulfstan, he preferred to drink English wine from Corfe over French, he ate the tradional Anglo-Saxon Christmas dinner of pigs head pickled in beer and most importantly, he could also speak English! He even supported Hugh Bishop of Conventry's letter to King Richard to get William Longschamps removed from power as Lord Chancellor for not being able to speak English. When the English finally arrested Longschamps they made it a national joke that he couldn't ask an Englishman for a boat back to France. So King John could 100% speak English as well as French.
His son Henry III was also fluent in English. And interestingly, when his brother Richard of Cornwall ( or Richard Von Cornwall) was elected as King of Germany, Mathew Paris his contemporary chronicler said "Richard will have no trouble learning how to speak German as he can already speak English".
Edward I said "The French wish to destroy our English tongue, a plan I trust god will forbid"
Edward II was also known to go to fishermen and buy fish with his own hands and he would often go to markets and taverns, one of the biggest insults his peers would give him was saying he enjoyed the company of common folk...which is also a clear indication he could speak English too.
Simply saying the Plantagenets "spoke French" is totally ignorant and French-washing. While they could speak French and only wrote in French, they most certainly could speak English as well, not just the king but their extended family members too.
*funny side note. When Stephen Langton went on the run to France during thr barons rebellion, him and a band of Englishmen would meet up with the French in Laon, Paris and Orleans to talk politics in England, the French noted Stephen and his friends always drank cider at the dinner table and spoke a version of French so strange they could barely understand them.
One of our greatest kings.
A suggestion. Otto I “The Great.” Holy Roman Emperor.
My favourite king
And you hear things names of Earls that go on for years.
Buchingham, Oxford, Richmond…it’s confusing! I have to hear dates.
You seemed to confuse alot of people so here
William the conqueror and Matilda of Flanders had children:
Robert II Duke of Normandy
Richard
Adeliza
Cecilia
William II who was supposed to be king and died during the white ship crisis.
Constance Duchess of Brittany
Adela countess of Blois (who married Stephen of Blois and they had a son Stephen of Blois who is the one that came to claim the throne)
Henry I king of England
Empress Matilda was Henry I daughter. Matilda married Geoffrey Plantagenet. Henry II was there son. So Henry I was Henry II grandfather. Henry I had no living male heirs to take the throne upon his death. He wished for Matilda to be regent until Henry II was of age to take the throne. But Stephen Matilda’s 1st cousin came to take the throne as his mother was Adela Williams daughter and he was Williams grandson. Henry I was his uncle but he was Henry II grandfather. So Henry II and Stephen were second cousins. Adela was Matilda’s aunt and Henry II great aunt. Matilda and Stephen were 1st cousins. William was stephens grandfather and Henry II great grandfather. William was Matilda’s grandfather. If still confused: ok look at your own family tree if you have an aunt her kids are your 1st cousins, and your 1st cousins children are your second cousins so on and so on…
The shield 🛡️ masks are incredible 🙌....
Are they period or reproduction??? Replicas....the 🗡️ swords... scenery are beautiful 😍 beyond words
King Henry III was very handsome from looking at his portrait What can I say🤫
yeah right... its his looks.... you see that big nose and you knows he has a big dong.
@Titanius Anglesmith Do you see that you are a true A** backward moron
Henri Fitz-Empress, or Henri Fitzempress?
A great King...my grandfather!
Mine too, through my great grandfather who was English. I’m Indian
Truly enjoy ur documentary impressive details keep it up with different historical details.
At 4:17 you state that Stephen is the nephew of William the Conqueror, having been born to the Conqueror 's daughter Adela. Wouldn't that make him William's grandson? Nephew to King Henry I.
No. Ok here William the conquerors daughter Adela married Stephen they had a son named Stephen. Stephen who married Adela his father was theobald. Henry I was Adela’s brother Williams son.
Empress Matilda was Henry I daughter Williams granddaughter. Henry II was Henry I grandson making William his great grandfather. So William was also stephens grandfather as Adela was Williams daughter and Stephen was her son. So Henry I was stephens uncle. Making Adela empress Matilda’s aunt. Henry II was Matilda’s son so Stephen would be her first cousin. Henry II was second cousin to Stephen his uncle was Henry I so his daughter matilda is his first cousin her son is his second cousin. So like you have an aunt her kids are your first cousins and there kids are your second cousins so on and so on…Henry II was my 26th great grandfather. Does that answer your question?
Henry II and Stephen were second cousins to sum that up. Adela was his great aunt or his mothers aunt, and his grandfathers sister. Henry I was not his father he was his grandfather and Matilda married into Plantagenet and never got the throne because Stephen took it from her. Even though in Henry I will he wished for Matilda to be regent until his grandson Henry II was of age to take the throne as he had no other heirs to take the throne. But Stephen came in and took claim to the throne as his mother was daughter to William. But Henry I Williams son had the throne. Williams children in order: Robert II Duke of Normandy, Richard, Adeliza, Cecilia, William II (who was also king of England before Henry I), Constance Duchess of Brittany, Adela Countess of Blois, Henry I king of England.
@@wiscochic861plutochic5 That's exactly what I said. Stephen was William's grandson & Henry's nephew. NOT William the Conqueror's nephew, as the video said.
I’m a descendants king Henry the second