Too true. And like her opposite number, Elizabeth Woodville, falsely maligned: Margaret for her true power, Elizabeth for her imagined ones over Edward IV.
You're paying internet, electricity and you paid for your phone or laptop/pc to watch this so basically and technically it isn't free.. Aside from that your data and info are at risk lol
It started with a Margaret and ended with a Margaret also. In fact, oddly enough, it started with a Henry and ended also ended with another Henry. A totally amazing coincidence of history Henry VI to Henry VII and Margaret of Anjou to Margaret Boufort. The tale of 2 Margarets, 2 Richards, 2 Edwards and 2 Henrys.
@@horminmangfi5653 many were deliberately named after an illustrious ancestor, henry viii s sister margaret tudor, was named after margaret beaufort , who was their grandmother. Elizabeth I was named for Elizabeth of York, who was very important as her marriage contract to marry henry tudor, henry vii, was part of how they sealed the end to the war of the roses.
Yh true,but I will also say that when they filmed the episode for Richard II,THAT PICTURE HAD TO HAVE DISTURBED HIM DURING FILMONG LOL!!.it would me!!and yet I find that painting fascinating 🤷♂️🤪✌️🤣🍻
To have high quality, entertaining documentaries like this to watch for free on TH-cam at any given time is a luxury in my book. Amazing series by an amazing channel 👏
Dan Jones is one of my favorite historians. His play-by-play of actual events, backed-up with the historical records, is a refreshing change to the speculations often presented in some documentaries. The script writing for this series is excellent! Well-done!
Margaret was always portrayed as an evil ambitious woman but I think her decisions were understandable. She was protecting her husband and her son's future. Any wife and mother would do that.
What if she were a man? I'm sure the historians at the time would have painted her as a noble ruler holding the country together during anarchy. Its because she stepped out of her role she becomes this power hungry woman.
Other contenders - Aethelraed II “Unraed” who murdered the Danes of York, his own subjects; William II “Rufus”, so mad, bad and violent he was assassinated; King John - such a tyrant his own people offered the French King the crown just to get rid of him...
Poor Henry should have been the luckiest monarch who ever lived. Instead he was used up and spat out by his own family. He just wanted a quiet life. Rest in peace. He deserved better.
Personally I don't 100% agree that both wanted whats best for England, I think they saw Henry's weakness and sought out to exploit it for their own benefits firstly and England secondly.
Good analysis - Henry VI was a magnet for people who saw him as an easy target for people who were on the make. He did whatever the strongest person in the room told him he should do. Henry VI was a gentle soul who should have spent his days in the classroom or library - not the sort of guy who should have been ruling England in this turbulent period.
Yes, that is exactly how it was. England as an entity was a secondary consideration to factional power. In many ways it was the same in Scotland. A weak or disputed monarchy is fertile ground for civil wars between thuggish nobles.
I think Margaret wanted the ultimate power to rule in the name of her husband since she was raised watching her aunt take the power of her uncles position. I think that she wanted to raise her son without competition so she could pass the crown and country down to him. Her plan did work out in the end but she did what she had to for the survival of her son.
I feel this is very unfair on Henry VI. He was a weak ruler sure, but let's face it he never asked to be king and it's pretty clear he had mental health problems that were no fault of his own. He was a religious man who preferred peace to violence. That wasn't a good quality to have at the time, but I'm not sure he deserves to be hung out to dry for it. Also, Henry's claim to the throne was so tenuous that a challenge was pretty much inevitable. It's only because his father was so good at beating the French that his rule was accepted!
I agree 100% ..... Well put .... Like blaming Your kid with low IQ for getting bad test grades in school ..... Some people are just very simple ..... Not Their fault .....
Thank you! I entirely agree. He also did a lot of other great things that he never gets credit for, like founding Eton College and King's College, Cambridge, having music written down (so we now have access to the music from the period, which otherwise was just memorized), and commissioning amazing architectural achievements. He wasn't good at getting or keeping power, but he was an incredible patron of education and art!
@@lauragehrke2165 I didn’t know that, very interesting. I think he had a tough legacy to live up to, with his father being so famous and having achieved so much glory in France. Compared to him, he practically lost all of France and never held the same grip on power as his father did. But those achievements shouldn’t be underestimated
I absolutely agree. I kept thinking “what exactly did you expect Henry to do?” Yes, he was wholly unfit for the role. But the only way out of his position was his death, so I guess he should’ve just killed himself…? Peaceful abdication wasn’t a thing back then. Even if he willingly gave up the throne he’d still be a threat to his successors and a pawn to their rivals. He would’ve never been allowed to live.
True, he lost France, but that was because Charles VII had the great Jean and Gaspar Bureau reorganize his army’s cannons, and he also had a secret weapon: Joan of Arc, one of the greatest heroes in all of Medieval history.
What's with the demonising of Henry VI? 1. He was mad (which was not his fault) 2. Yes he was no warrior king, but he wasn't completely useless. He founded Eton and made developments in education. The Yorkists had a claim, sure, but they sat on their hands whilst Henry IV & V were alive, mainly because they were battle-hardened warriors and well liked. When Henry VI was king, the crown was easy pickings. As for Margaret....she made the best out of a bad situation, she was defending her son's birthright.
Henry VI wasn't a bad guy, all being all. He was an infant when Henry V died, and he was dominated for most of his life by other people. A lot of the people around him (Suffolk, Somerset to name a couple) saw him as a means to get titles and privileges. Margaret was hurt by the fact that part of her dowry was the surrender of English holdings in France. She could be ruthless, but she was defending her husband and later her son's right to the throne. You can only do so much in a 45-minute show - Dan Jones' book is a lot more informative on these characters.
It seems less like he has been demonized but definitely shown as useless because, well, he was. He was an incompetent king, especially by the medieval standards. If you can find a specific bit that attacks Henry for something apart from being a useless imbecile (which he undoubtedly was even if it wasn't his fault) then please let me know.
I wonder if Henry VI was as he is portrayed. I've read that he didn't enjoy bloodshed and tried to avoid it all costs which in my opinion is very noble. History is truly written by the victors and we can never know the full story.
That is probably a fine attitude for a leader to have - in some time periods. It was a disaster in the 15th century. Apart from the catatonia, he was the wrong type of man to be king in that place and time. History may be written by the victors, but we also know the actual events and can give them a second look based on original sources. And by any interpretation, his perceived weakness made him, his country, and his people a target for the ruthless and ambitious.
In those days it wasn't noble, where you needed to rule with the sword. Children were taken to kill deer as toddlers to experience their first blood. Wanting to find solutions other than fighting but where you still win is different from shying away from everything.
Margaret is one of my favourite historical characters. She was ruthless, but she was brave, and fought for her family against a usurper. Historical shows shouldn't portray her as a villain, she was acting as a good Queen should.
Margaret was complicated, as were most of the "villains" in this era - she had a ruthless streak, but she was protecting her husband and son. If you go looking for heroes and villains in this era you're not going to find them easily - look at what happened to Richard III.
I don't know if we should go so far as to portray her as a "good" queen, but her actions are definitely reasonable and understandable. York was trying to depose her husband and delegitimize her son.
Someone should make a television historic fantasy show based on this. With fire breathing dragons and ice beings bringing dead people to life as zombies.
I had heard that GoT was partially inspired by the events of the War of the Roses. Initially, I was not able to see how but, upon watching this particular explanation of the war, I can see strong parallels.
The wars of the roses may not have dragons but they are still infinitely more interesting, nuanced, and complicated than game of thrones. As the cliche goes, fact is stranger than fiction.
@@RESIST_DIGITAL_ID_UK I still like game of thrones but I like it because it’s fiction. History I find interesting because of the explanations of how things have changed over time and also how they have stayed the same. How people lived in those days and talked. Game of thrones to me is like escapism from daily life.
You can see the similarities between Henry 6th and the Mad King Areys. They both were captured and held prisoner and later released. They both had manic depressive moods, which changed on a dime. Henry had a great father, Aerys had a great son. Henry caused the teenage Edward 4th to overthrow him after causing the death of his father and brother, Aerys causes a teenage Robert Baratheon to rise up after killing Ned Starks father and brother. Aerys seems to be a mix of numerous historical characters, not just Henry Vi. I can see some Charles Vi, some Caligula, George iii, and some Howard Hughes thrown in there for good measure. I think Tywin is a dead ringer for Edward Longshanks also.
That's what comes of marrying the daughter of a Mad French King who thought he was made of glass. The house of Lancaster were themselves afflicted with some disease. Henry 4th died fairly young of some wretched disease & I don't believe Henry 5th was entirely sane either. The real surprise to me was that Henry 7th, who was the grandson of the same French Queen who gave birth to Henry 6th, didn't inherit the family insanity.
@@vernmosquin3026 I read Henry V died of exhaustion, around age 40. Been out battling most of his life. No wonder they needed to be wed & bred so young. 👑Heavy is the head that bears the crown.🙌🤴
I might have enjoyed history class a bit more had I a historian the likes of Dan Jones giving the lectures. My history teachers were dull and boring with no enthusiasm whatsoever.
I agree completely. If history teachers were to show that these were actually people, not just a list of names, dates, etc., history is much more interesting.
Many History Professors suck at teaching. They don't feel the need to be interesting and do not admit that makes for a more effective teacher. I'll never forget my History of Argentina professor. He divided it into four time periods and handed out notes and assigned text book reading. Each time period then had a test afterward. During class he would sit head down at his desk and read out-loud from his notes. The notes he had already given us. The notes we had already read. And while reading he would pick at himself. Pick at his nose, pick at his ear, roll something around a bit. Simply disgusting. So I read his notes, did the reading and took the first test. Got a 'C'. I was not used to getting Cs. Something was wrong. For the second test I ignored his notes and readings. Went to the library and did my own research on that time in Argentine history, until I had a handle on what was going on there. I got an 'A'. So when he was handing back the papers he said to me "Looks like somebody decided to study." I wanted to punch him in the face. But kept my mouth shut. "Live in ignorance" I thought to myself.
@James Snee - I'd want to punch him myself. Glad to know you out thought him! :) I'll never understand why history teachers/profs insist on making history the dullest subject. I guess they get bored with their subject, like anything else.
Can we see a series on this focusing on the Scottish kings? We in the US always see a lot about the English kings, but next to nothing about Scottish kings and feuds except for Robert the Bruce.
@sybyly All very well, but he is a unionist with a political agenda. Approach with care, and check out other sources as well to ensure you get both sides.
as an avid enthusiast of history myself, I've always found actual historical events more interesting than works of fiction, which only serve to imitate and present in an artistic narrative! And man, this balance of power and maneouvres truly are gripping! :O
The casting is great, and so appropriate. Richard, Duke of York is played by an older, grey haired but rugged and clearly fit guy. Warwick is a slightly short guy with long greasy hair, with centre parting, matching his somewhat slimy personality. Would be happy to see a full on War of the Roses drama with these actors.
Yes . It seems there have been a few kings with mental illness . People who marry cousins produce children from chromosomal gene pools that are too closely related .
@@otherboleyngirl9 I can think of 8 right off the top of My head ..... Do You have a deck of playing cards ?? .... Oh wait , that's stupid , I would delete this comment normally but I forgot how because I'm dumb ..... Please don't report Me to TH-cam for making this comment because I just got reinstated for making stupid comments ..... Did I mention I'm in love with You because it says "girl" in Your "Username" ????? EDIT :: You tricked Me !! It says "Boleyn" Girl ..... You must be 400 years old ..... You don't even have a picture , it's a DRAWING !! ..... I am NO LONGER in love with You , Do You think I'm a MORON !!! I'm reporting You to TH-cam !! AS CLICK BAIT !!!!!
@@otherboleyngirl9 Don't threaten Me !! I'm only 4 years old !! My Mom says You're one of those girls She always tells Me about .... I said "Can You lend Me money , then" ?? Then She sent Me to My Room !! ..... BUT THERE WAS NO MONEY !!!!
My third time watching this as this part of history is particularly special to me as I’m a fellow Yorkshireman and I of course support Richards actions:). Love your vids btw. Maybe do a War of the Rose vid... for me and all my fellow brethren’s from the White and Red rose;)
He needs to dress appropriately, not like an extra from Greace, he is too old. It ruined the series for me, and the fact that he couldn’t keep still. Very irritating.
These drama infused narrated docs make it easy to follow what can be a confusing sequence of historical events… makes it easy to understand and assimilate rather than just hearing a narrated script of the events. Dan Jones is grand!
I think "The Hollow Crown - Wars of the Roses" had Henry VI right - Tom Sturridge played him as a man with a conscience, trying to keep things together, but ultimately overwhelmed by events and strong personalities. Granted, Shakespeare was not a history documentary, but Henry VI was portrayed with sympathy. This Henry VI is portrayed as what Private Baldrick would call "a poor, ghormless idiot."
Lets not exaggerate ... Henry VI was not an imbecile ... sometimes he was extremely lucid ... he devoted himself to the establishment of Eton College, and was very involved in the details of the design. It is very nice. The school was designated for boys from less privileged families than the other colleges at the time. Just one example. Other times he copped out from reality, it is true. Not one dimensional though ...
I completely agree! Henry had the misfortune of being a gentle soul in a time of war and conquest, much like Edward the Confessor. It wasn't his fault that he didn't have the temperament typical of a medieval King. The sad thing is that if he didn't have those periods of illness, he and Margaret would have been an unstoppable couple - considering she had enough ambition and bloody-mindedness for the both of them!
Couldn't afford "Premium" this month..but even with the ads,this brilliant series has me totally enthralled! Bravo! I was confused about the historical sequences and now this has clarified the timeline SO WELL! Bravo! And Bravo to this channel!
Though factually somewhat questionable in parts. As one example, it’s not certain that Richard of York was executed after being captured; other accounts have him killed fighting. The same applies to the death of Beaufort, who killed four Yorkists before being cut down.
While in college, I wrote a paper on this period in English history and, in particular, the Lancastrian line of kings, from Henry IV to the VI. One of the most interesting things I learned of them was that mental illness seemed to run in the male line. Henry IV, in the years prior to his death, began to decline, becoming both physically debilitated as well as mentally impaired, suffering from what modern doctors have diagnosed as paranoia stemming from early-onset senile dementia or perhaps Alzheimer's disease. There's also the possibility that he suffered from Parkinson's disease, which can also lead to psychosis. Henry V died of dysentery at a young age, and though he showed no signs of incipient mental illness, it's been suggested that, as both his father and son seemed to suffer from mental incapacity, he too would have fallen afoul of such a condition, had he lived to an older age. The line ended with Henry VI being murdered, and as his son, Edward, was killed in battle, there is no way of knowing if their hereditary mental illnesses might not have continued through successive generations. If not for the usurpation of the Yorkist factions and, ultimately, the Tudor family, England's 16th century might have followed a very different path, being governed by generation after generation of mentally ill kings descended from the Lancastrian line.
well, Henry IV survived several killing attempts. it isn't surprising that he became a paranoid. I think it is more likely that Henry VI inherited his illness through his mother.
None of their diseases where inherited at all, bar Henry VI but from the Valois line of Charles VI. Henry IV’s leprosy of some sort was caused on spur, and Henry V was dysentry from a siege. If anything, the Lancasters only disease was being unlucky.
Margaret watches her hopes crumbling one by one and lives bravely to her very last little hope. She watches her favourites killed, her husband captive, her enemies winning, her son dying and yet she's the last one to fall!
...and cut down still alive, then their guts were pulled out and burned in front of them, then they were (mercifully) beheaded and their bodies quartered, with the four pieces sent to various places to be displayed publicly.
I do believe that I heard the famous "Wilhelm scream" at 2:49. It originated in the 1951 movie "Distant Drums," purportedly recorded by actor and singer Sheb Wooley, and has been used in movies and television thousands of times ever since.
Margaret looked at henry with absolute contempt when she was dealing out the punishments to those men considered traitors poor guy really didn't want to be there. I don't blame him.
For sure. A lot of bloody and deceitful power-plays for control there in medieval Britain. The commonwealth history of Canada (where I'm from) is pretty boring by comparison. haha
I love Dan Jones, is anyone surprised he was a student of David Starkey? :) Why is it all my favourite historians are British? (I'm a proud Canadian :) )
I’m American and also follow British historians . The Brits have a precious command of our language and love the stories of their history. I enjoy watching their passion for telling the stories of Britain.
Had English royals and nobility spent as much effort and resources towards the prosperity of their people as they had infighting for power England would have been the first to the Moon... by the year 1750!
They werent English - they were all french and all related to each other - the french royals/lords supplanted the English King/lords and from then on it was french versus french. Basically some french controlled England and they were fighting other French living in France
There's literally *thousands* of perfectly dressed, equipped, armed and armoured re-enactors for this period and they couldn't get ten for this series?!
Eh just knit some chainmaille and the mouth breathers will still be in awe. Who needs an accurate representation of history in a history documentary?! Durrr i like game of thones lol durrr. Facebook is kool! Durrrp!
King Henry just seems like a boy conflicted by the brutality of the medieval world especially being noble he most likely grew up seeing heads being cut off too early some people don’t grow a custom to things like that I don’t see him as weak at all just Someone who can’t bare the weight placed on his shoulder
As king though he has too. If he were strong like his father or grandfather none of the chaos would have happened. He even has a good queen to help him and he still was incompetent. He was consumed by favouritism and this is shown by his appointing of Suffolk, Somerset etc.
@@noname-fv3knwe don't choose our qualities. He couldn't rise to the occasion anymore than a housecat can become a lion. He was unsuitable for the role, it's an obvious problem with inherited authority.
The host is energetic and full of scholarship, so that he leads you very well through the troubled beginning of the War of the Roses. The scene of the death of the Duke of York is remarkable for its dramatism.
@@thundercrow777 I think according to historical texts, she was indeed beautiful. And the depiction of her strong and powerful character definitely adds to her appeal. I know it does for me for this docudrama (also, the actress is pretty hot).
Wild Child To be fair, if you’re white and American, there’s a good chance you have British blood in you anyway. It’s probably your history as well. (I’m English, and did a DNA test. It’s so far put me in contact and linked me to 146 Americans who have done the same test, with similar DNA) Fascinating stuff.
These are actually the wars that Game of Thrones was based on. GRRM was clear on this, and he changed some names specially. Neddard = Edward, House Stark = House of York, House Lannister = House of Lancaster. Several others.
Great documentaries. One thing that sticks out is the fact that, no matter what country around the world, war and blood shed seemed, to the only answers to royal rule, and settling arguments. And it seems like the old saying history repeats itself. To find out how to win, or how to progress we need historians. A window in the past to show with war, brings only more war and divide. That's always what I see when I look upon these videos, and lessons
This documentary has many quality elements to it. It speaks volumes that I didn't even notice the host's faux Fonz jacket until it was too late to care. Really nicely done, both in terms of presentation, visuals, and content!
Henry VI is the worst of England's rulers, and Margaret of Anjou had to deal with a husband who was not interested in getting an heir. For a long time, Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou didn't have an heir. They also made the mistake of having favorites and spending lavish amounts of money and raising of taxes. And she was vengeful. When she did finally give birth. Henry went into a mental breakdown.
I think poor Henry VI had inherited a gene for insanity from his mother's father, the King of France that Henry V fought. Symptoms seem similar. The guy playing Henry VI doesn't look very "Plantagenet".
7:26 LOL! seriously, you're going to introduce Richard of York like that? The editing team might as well have put a "He's the bad guy" text at the bottom.
To be fair, the "talking head" historian (Dan Jones) introduces the episode by making it clear that he blames King Henry VI's weakness--not the houses of Lancaster or York. Also, you could just as easily turn around and say that the editing makes Margaret look like a "Lady Macbeth type conniving shrew."
To be fair, nothing he actually says in that first bit is made up. There were records of this stuff that could be found in the Royal Archives. York was, by all accounts, pretty much like a bull in a china shop. Not that he wasn't right, he just...had no subtlety whatsoever.
Richard was not considered the "bad guy", no matter what dramatization, he felt that his mother Anne was the legitimate heir. she was a female but the oldest surviving child of Philippa,, the only child of Lionel, the second son of Edward III, who is the father if the lancasters and yorks. once the line if the first son dies out, in the case if Richard ii, who produced no heirs, the line if the second son is next. The female can inherit, she only comes AFTER her brothers , but if they die, she is next
Indeed she was. Check out Caterina Sforza (Lady of Imola, Countess of Forli), Eleanor of Aquitane (massively badass woman!), and Empress Matilda (aka Empress Maude) daughter of Henry I of England. She should have been England's first queen but her cousin Stephen claimed the throne before she could get there.
@@Luubelaar The agreement made was that Matilda's son Henry would inherit the throne from his uncle Stephen of Blois instead of Stephen's son Eustace. Henry became King Henry II, the first Angevin king.
@@mfjdv2020 - Not quite the whole story. After Henry I's son William Adelin drowned in the 'White ship sinking', he considered naming his nephew Stephen as his heir, but after a few other things happened, he got the barons (including Stephen) to support his daughter Matilda as being his heir. Then when Henry I died, Matilda was in Anjou (with her 2nd husband Geoffrey V, Count of Anjou) and as such, Stephen got to Westminster before her and had a hasty coronation. Matilda fought him over it but eventually conceded and the arrangement was made that her son Henry (later Henry II) would succeed Stephen.
Poor Dan Jones. He presented (and presumably wrote) such a good set of stories, and then Channel 5 used terrible re-enactment! All the foot soldiers are incorrectly armed in the style of at least 100 years earlier, and the "chain mail" is black fabric mesh. The few who are in plate armor are wearing it dirty. Henry Tudor and Richard III are shown in beards, which neither wore. For pity's sake, there are re-enactment groups who could have provided much better advice and costuming! Then the queens are put in modern makeup and plastic jewelry. Ugh.
Not even reinactment more like larp even gor 100 years before the Wars of the Roses in the 14th century that gear is off and the "plate" armour they are wearing is all off with the breastplate not even being the right shape I understand it's budget cuts but if you are doing live actor for documentary you better get the gear right using reenactors would have worked wonders for this production.
Everyone says that but I don't get it. Obvious points aside. King, scheming queen, North vs South, rebellious lords. But these were common themes in many countries and different times.
mikey forrester It's because GRRM has admitted to having used historical events, including the War of the Roses, as inspiration. I agree they are common themes, but GRRM specifically used this event as inspiration for at least the first arch of A Song of Ice and Fire.
mikey forrester lancasters/Lannisters vs Yorks/Starks he said it was a big inspiration and there’s even a video on here you can watch that explains how they correlate even the mad king and the child king
The wars of the roses is severely underrated. I hope someday a worthy director/writing team would be able to create a show around the wars of the roses that is as good as the first 4 seasons of game of thrones as it deserves to be.
@@jamiemohan2049 But *any* GOT-style show would have to have a lot of fiction thrown in. Why? Because dialogue. We don't have much from records, and none reliably spoken verbatim in any case. It would just be a matter of keeping everyone relatively "in character" from what we know, but even then there would be contradictions - truly, two sides to every story in the Wars of the Roses. How do you do that on TV, in that story-telling format?
"It's like Netflix, but for history documentaries" -----> Sign up to History Hit with code 'timeline' for a huge discount! bit.ly/3rs2w3k
Narrator sucks!!!
@@rodneyreyes5543 he is great. make your channel and give it a try
@@rodneyreyes5543 mmk mmk KK.k.oo
Oo
O
O
O
Oo
O
Oolo
Ool
@Pools Closed What?
@@rodneyreyes5543 I don't know what you're talking about, he's fine
Henry VI is pretty much just a chess king. Essential to not lose the game, but the queen is the one with all the moves.
Now that I think about yeah, you are right.
Too true. And like her opposite number, Elizabeth Woodville, falsely maligned: Margaret for her true power, Elizabeth for her imagined ones over Edward IV.
All the Henri kings are little crazy
How come?
Maybe when your name is Henry, people pick on you. Warning: A Henry's reaction may vary, depending on his Roman numeral.
In and out of the bedchamber? ;)
Man, I just can't believe I get to watch documentaries of this quality for free on TH-cam :O
You might find taking a look at Yale Courses worthwhile, they have some amazing stuff there! th-cam.com/users/YaleCourses
It is amazing. Where are you from Zach btw?
You're paying internet, electricity and you paid for your phone or laptop/pc to watch this so basically and technically it isn't free.. Aside from that your data and info are at risk lol
Romellia: Don't spoil his fun! This is a great series, tho. I Love history and herstory!
This is my third or fourth time watching lol - I'm fascinated by middle age - renaissance lore! Classical too, like Rome.
It started with a Margaret and ended with a Margaret also.
In fact, oddly enough, it started with a Henry and ended also ended with another Henry.
A totally amazing coincidence of history
Henry VI to Henry VII and
Margaret of Anjou to Margaret Boufort.
The tale of 2 Margarets, 2 Richards, 2 Edwards and 2 Henrys.
Not a Tiffany nor Scott amongst them?
Because of the constant name reuses, it doesn't even feel like a coincidence anymore
@@horminmangfi5653 many were deliberately named after an illustrious ancestor, henry viii s sister margaret tudor, was named after margaret beaufort , who was their grandmother. Elizabeth I was named for Elizabeth of York, who was very important as her marriage contract to marry henry tudor, henry vii, was part of how they sealed the end to the war of the roses.
That york guy is pretty damn awesome too lol
Didn’t Henry VI mother marry a Tudor after Henry V death?
The way Dan talks about Henry VI like he has personal beef with him 😭 he takes literally every opportunity to just utterly roast him
😂
😂
Yh true,but I will also say that when they filmed the episode for Richard II,THAT PICTURE HAD TO HAVE DISTURBED HIM DURING FILMONG LOL!!.it would me!!and yet I find that painting fascinating 🤷♂️🤪✌️🤣🍻
To have high quality, entertaining documentaries like this to watch for free on TH-cam at any given time is a luxury in my book. Amazing series by an amazing channel 👏
Nothing is free - Google owns TH-cam and they're selling all of our data to advertisers. Just read the fine print and you'll see it is so.
Shill.
If this series has taught me anything it's that English history can be summed up with... "banged up in the Tower of London".
Bigger army diplomacy
Mongo Bongo c.
The lesson should be that England has a long succession of very strong female rulers.
To us dutch that says more about the men of england....
Ikr Mongo Bongo hahaha.
Dan Jones is one of my favorite historians. His play-by-play of actual events, backed-up with the historical records, is a refreshing change to the speculations often presented in some documentaries. The script writing for this series is excellent! Well-done!
his books read the same but with more detail. would recommend the plantagenets and the hollow crown (which is the basis for this series)
Dan Jones is not a historian.
@@kareno7848 Why do you say that? He is officially considered a historian.
Yes totally excellent!
@@kareno7848 He earned a 1st class degree in History at Cambridge , what further credentials are required to satisfy you.
Margaret was always portrayed as an evil ambitious woman but I think her decisions were understandable. She was protecting her husband and her son's future. Any wife and mother would do that.
What if she were a man? I'm sure the historians at the time would have painted her as a noble ruler holding the country together during anarchy. Its because she stepped out of her role she becomes this power hungry woman.
@@lilacfantasy4 True
She did not have any heir, the first time York came. And, York was more interested in Sommerset than her...
I think she was an evil woman who loved power.
@@nlight7773 They all loved power. That's how they got there. She was in power, they just didn't respect her for it.
reads title: "the mad king"
immediate next thought: which one?
Your question would be answered, right at the 1:35 mark lol
Aerys Targaryen?
Yes..which one ..😂😂🤣
Other contenders - Aethelraed II “Unraed” who murdered the Danes of York, his own subjects; William II “Rufus”, so mad, bad and violent he was assassinated; King John - such a tyrant his own people offered the French King the crown just to get rid of him...
Brittany Peterson Exactly what I thought😃🐉🔥
Poor Henry should have been the luckiest monarch who ever lived. Instead he was used up and spat out by his own family. He just wanted a quiet life. Rest in peace. He deserved better.
There’s a theory going out there proposed by a psychiatrist that Henry VI had schizophrenia. If that was true, poor Henry VI is right!!!
I think it had much to do with that plus having to hear all his life what a great man his father was and what a hoe his mother was....true or not.
Personally I don't 100% agree that both wanted whats best for England, I think they saw Henry's weakness and sought out to exploit it for their own benefits firstly and England secondly.
Good analysis - Henry VI was a magnet for people who saw him as an easy target for people who were on the make. He did whatever the strongest person in the room told him he should do. Henry VI was a gentle soul who should have spent his days in the classroom or library - not the sort of guy who should have been ruling England in this turbulent period.
Yes, that is exactly how it was. England as an entity was a secondary consideration to factional power. In many ways it was the same in Scotland. A weak or disputed monarchy is fertile ground for civil wars between thuggish nobles.
Agree. There is zero evidence presented that either one had the good of the realm in their hearts. It is purely a speculative opinion.
@Taps fan No, Margaret was not a disaster. I hear a bit of sexism.
I think Margaret wanted the ultimate power to rule in the name of her husband since she was raised watching her aunt take the power of her uncles position. I think that she wanted to raise her son without competition so she could pass the crown and country down to him.
Her plan did work out in the end but she did what she had to for the survival of her son.
The actress playing Margaret is gorgeous.
fudgefase yes sheis but your avatar makes that look like you’re sad about it
Kara Ruckle Brilliant 😂
Tywin lannister you have Excellent tastes Tywin
She IS! :) :)
@Tywin
hahhahahaha! XDXD ...now! THAT was a GOOD ONE, Tywin! ...hahahaha! XDXDXD :D :D ...seriously!! :D :D
Love this period in British history. Dan Jones' ability to make it come alive is worth the listening/watching
I feel this is very unfair on Henry VI. He was a weak ruler sure, but let's face it he never asked to be king and it's pretty clear he had mental health problems that were no fault of his own. He was a religious man who preferred peace to violence. That wasn't a good quality to have at the time, but I'm not sure he deserves to be hung out to dry for it. Also, Henry's claim to the throne was so tenuous that a challenge was pretty much inevitable. It's only because his father was so good at beating the French that his rule was accepted!
I agree 100% ..... Well put .... Like blaming Your kid with low IQ for getting bad test grades in school ..... Some people are just very simple ..... Not Their fault .....
Thank you! I entirely agree. He also did a lot of other great things that he never gets credit for, like founding Eton College and King's College, Cambridge, having music written down (so we now have access to the music from the period, which otherwise was just memorized), and commissioning amazing architectural achievements. He wasn't good at getting or keeping power, but he was an incredible patron of education and art!
@@lauragehrke2165 I didn’t know that, very interesting. I think he had a tough legacy to live up to, with his father being so famous and having achieved so much glory in France. Compared to him, he practically lost all of France and never held the same grip on power as his father did. But those achievements shouldn’t be underestimated
I absolutely agree. I kept thinking “what exactly did you expect Henry to do?” Yes, he was wholly unfit for the role. But the only way out of his position was his death, so I guess he should’ve just killed himself…?
Peaceful abdication wasn’t a thing back then. Even if he willingly gave up the throne he’d still be a threat to his successors and a pawn to their rivals. He would’ve never been allowed to live.
True, he lost France, but that was because Charles VII had the great Jean and Gaspar Bureau reorganize his army’s cannons, and he also had a secret weapon: Joan of Arc, one of the greatest heroes in all of Medieval history.
'He's lost Champagne,' that made me look up in horror.
My first thought on hearing that line was "Oh, no! He dropped a bottle of bubbly! How tragic!"
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
oh no... not that
What's with the demonising of Henry VI? 1. He was mad (which was not his fault) 2. Yes he was no warrior king, but he wasn't completely useless. He founded Eton and made developments in education.
The Yorkists had a claim, sure, but they sat on their hands whilst Henry IV & V were alive, mainly because they were battle-hardened warriors and well liked. When Henry VI was king, the crown was easy pickings.
As for Margaret....she made the best out of a bad situation, she was defending her son's birthright.
Henry VI wasn't a bad guy, all being all. He was an infant when Henry V died, and he was dominated for most of his life by other people. A lot of the people around him (Suffolk, Somerset to name a couple) saw him as a means to get titles and privileges. Margaret was hurt by the fact that part of her dowry was the surrender of English holdings in France. She could be ruthless, but she was defending her husband and later her son's right to the throne. You can only do so much in a 45-minute show - Dan Jones' book is a lot more informative on these characters.
It seems less like he has been demonized but definitely shown as useless because, well, he was. He was an incompetent king, especially by the medieval standards. If you can find a specific bit that attacks Henry for something apart from being a useless imbecile (which he undoubtedly was even if it wasn't his fault) then please let me know.
It never helps a king when his father dies before being able to train him, or protect him. Cf. the Scots.
Yes- no use demonizing a man who was truly mentally incapacitated.
Wasn't George III. a mad king, too?
I wonder if Henry VI was as he is portrayed. I've read that he didn't enjoy bloodshed and tried to avoid it all costs which in my opinion is very noble. History is truly written by the victors and we can never know the full story.
That is probably a fine attitude for a leader to have - in some time periods. It was a disaster in the 15th century. Apart from the catatonia, he was the wrong type of man to be king in that place and time. History may be written by the victors, but we also know the actual events and can give them a second look based on original sources. And by any interpretation, his perceived weakness made him, his country, and his people a target for the ruthless and ambitious.
@@katrinaprescott5911 he was more cut out to be a scholar or a Priest or a religious man. He was not cut out to be a King in the 1400s
In those days it wasn't noble, where you needed to rule with the sword. Children were taken to kill deer as toddlers to experience their first blood. Wanting to find solutions other than fighting but where you still win is different from shying away from everything.
Men were men and women were women.
Still had common sense back then😂
Margaret is one of my favourite historical characters. She was ruthless, but she was brave, and fought for her family against a usurper. Historical shows shouldn't portray her as a villain, she was acting as a good Queen should.
Margaret was complicated, as were most of the "villains" in this era - she had a ruthless streak, but she was protecting her husband and son. If you go looking for heroes and villains in this era you're not going to find them easily - look at what happened to Richard III.
sounds like Cersi lol.
The winner gets to write history!
I don't know if we should go so far as to portray her as a "good" queen, but her actions are definitely reasonable and understandable. York was trying to depose her husband and delegitimize her son.
are you a 15th century woman? are you acting the same as all the men around you? then you should remember your place you villian
this is the best acting in documentary-filler scenes I've ever seen
The costumes are appalling.
And 600 years later, there is Game of Thrones
I am obsessed with this period in British history. And on a side note, I have a massive crush on Dan Jones :-)
Try the Anarchy, 1130 to 1155 I believe. It's even more fascinating as it provides the right conditions for the birth of the Angevin Empire.
Me too, I am so obsessed with this and the Tudor dynasty, love it!!
GAGIRL1979 he loves to use the word orgy too
He's married..besides I think he likes the curly blond haired historian chick he works with on some series...
English History, thank you.
Took charge without hesitation at the age of 20, way to go queen!!
"A Lancaster always pays his debts."
I have a feeling that wasn't a coincidence.
Lanester
Game of Thrones reference
Someone should make a television historic fantasy show based on this. With fire breathing dragons and ice beings bringing dead people to life as zombies.
I effing love you. Lol. Just perfect. 🤣
@@datheamore6395 Lol. ;)
itll never fly
@@simac8640 lol
Just as long as the final season ends with a bang and not with a whimper.
I had heard that GoT was partially inspired by the events of the War of the Roses. Initially, I was not able to see how but, upon watching this particular explanation of the war, I can see strong parallels.
The wars of the roses may not have dragons but they are still infinitely more interesting, nuanced, and complicated than game of thrones. As the cliche goes, fact is stranger than fiction.
@@RESIST_DIGITAL_ID_UK I still like game of thrones but I like it because it’s fiction. History I find interesting because of the explanations of how things have changed over time and also how they have stayed the same. How people lived in those days and talked.
Game of thrones to me is like escapism from daily life.
Also house of the dragon is based off of The anarchy- Queen matilda and her cousin Stephen
@@RESIST_DIGITAL_ID_UKnah game of thrones is more interesting, since it virtually is limitless when it comes to theories, speculation and head-canon
You can see the similarities between Henry 6th and the Mad King Areys. They both were captured and held prisoner and later released. They both had manic depressive moods, which changed on a dime. Henry had a great father, Aerys had a great son. Henry caused the teenage Edward 4th to overthrow him after causing the death of his father and brother, Aerys causes a teenage Robert Baratheon to rise up after killing Ned Starks father and brother. Aerys seems to be a mix of numerous historical characters, not just Henry Vi. I can see some Charles Vi, some Caligula, George iii, and some Howard Hughes thrown in there for good measure. I think Tywin is a dead ringer for Edward Longshanks also.
Shame how Henry VI basically unraveled all the blood, sweat and tears his father and grandfather did to keep the kingdom together.
Indeed imagine Henry the fifth learning that all the territory in France that he fought for was lost, he’d be spinning in his grave!
*Either youre a lot better than your father or a lot worse* Tyson Fury the Gypsy King
Strega 0 his father yes, but his grandfather Henry IV essentially contributed to the cause of the War of the Roses by usurping Richard II.
That's what comes of marrying the daughter of a Mad French King who thought he was made of glass. The house of Lancaster were themselves afflicted with some disease. Henry 4th died fairly young of some wretched disease & I don't believe Henry 5th was entirely sane either. The real surprise to me was that Henry 7th, who was the grandson of the same French Queen who gave birth to Henry 6th, didn't inherit the family insanity.
@@vernmosquin3026 I read Henry V died of exhaustion, around age 40. Been out battling most of his life.
No wonder they needed to be wed & bred so young. 👑Heavy is the head that bears the crown.🙌🤴
I might have enjoyed history class a bit more had I a historian the likes of Dan Jones giving the lectures. My history teachers were dull and boring with no enthusiasm whatsoever.
I agree completely. If history teachers were to show that these were actually people, not just a list of names, dates, etc., history is much more interesting.
Many History Professors suck at teaching. They don't feel the need to be interesting and do not admit that makes for a more effective teacher.
I'll never forget my History of Argentina professor. He divided it into four time periods and handed out notes and assigned text book reading. Each time period then had a test afterward. During class he would sit head down at his desk and read out-loud from his notes. The notes he had already given us. The notes we had already read. And while reading he would pick at himself. Pick at his nose, pick at his ear, roll something around a bit. Simply disgusting.
So I read his notes, did the reading and took the first test. Got a 'C'. I was not used to getting Cs. Something was wrong. For the second test I ignored his notes and readings. Went to the library and did my own research on that time in Argentine history, until I had a handle on what was going on there. I got an 'A'.
So when he was handing back the papers he said to me "Looks like somebody decided to study." I wanted to punch him in the face. But kept my mouth shut. "Live in ignorance" I thought to myself.
@James Snee - I'd want to punch him myself. Glad to know you out thought him! :) I'll never understand why history teachers/profs insist on making history the dullest subject. I guess they get bored with their subject, like anything else.
annette fournier mine too but my teacher was American
The class was about Argentina but the Prof was American.
One can't blame Argentina for him.
Can we see a series on this focusing on the Scottish kings? We in the US always see a lot about the English kings, but next to nothing about Scottish kings and feuds except for Robert the Bruce.
Try Neil Oliver's series for the BBC, "A History of Scotland",
They were brutal, would be good to see.
Check out "The Outlaw King" just came out we need much more but has Chris Pine and goes over a little bit!
@sybyly All very well, but he is a unionist with a political agenda. Approach with care, and check out other sources as well to ensure you get both sides.
The same reason we see a lot about American Wars but not the Mexican War. Because the big countries make the movies.
as an avid enthusiast of history myself, I've always found actual historical events more interesting than works of fiction, which only serve to imitate and present in an artistic narrative! And man, this balance of power and maneouvres truly are gripping! :O
you should watch the timeline documentary on Harem's. It's not what you would expect and very Game of Throne-ish.
And I always found works of fiction to be more interesting. Because usually when I read a historical novel I already know the story.
I REALY LIKE DAN JONES, HE JUST HAS THE KNACK TO MAKE HISTORY SO INTERESTING, I AM NOT EVEN BRITISH AND EVEN I CAN'T GET ENOUGH OF ENGLISH HISTORY
This is one man who knows how to tell a story
I love all your documentaries.
Keep it up
The casting is great, and so appropriate. Richard, Duke of York is played by an older, grey haired but rugged and clearly fit guy. Warwick is a slightly short guy with long greasy hair, with centre parting, matching his somewhat slimy personality. Would be happy to see a full on War of the Roses drama with these actors.
The guy who played Richard, Duke of York has appeared in the Crusades documentary as a knight who speaks about his experiences of the First Crusade.
Feel bad for Henry VI, his self and the expectations of him, decided before he was even born did not fit
"The Mad King" - as if he were the only one.
*cough* Not in this kinda way
More like the useless king
Well he did have madness inhereted from his mother catherine d'valois which was also the same madnes that rekked charles VI the sixth of france
Yes . It seems there have been a few kings with mental illness . People who marry cousins produce children from chromosomal gene pools that are too closely related .
@@annfeeney1662 Then what's the excuse for all the world leaders of today, who exhibit serious signs of personality disorders?
This documentary makes me sympathize for Margareth of Anjou. If she was born 500 years later none of the barriers she faced would have been an issue
There are no Queens with any real power now though .....
@@stevenattanasso2003 Not many royals nowadays - kings or queens do.
@@otherboleyngirl9 I can think of 8 right off the top of My head ..... Do You have a deck of playing cards ?? .... Oh wait , that's stupid , I would delete this comment normally but I forgot how because I'm dumb ..... Please don't report Me to TH-cam for making this comment because I just got reinstated for making stupid comments ..... Did I mention I'm in love with You because it says "girl" in Your "Username" ?????
EDIT :: You tricked Me !! It says "Boleyn" Girl ..... You must be 400 years old ..... You don't even have a picture , it's a DRAWING !! ..... I am NO LONGER in love with You , Do You think I'm a MORON !!! I'm reporting You to TH-cam !! AS CLICK BAIT !!!!!
@@stevenattanasso2003 🙃
@@otherboleyngirl9 Don't threaten Me !! I'm only 4 years old !! My Mom says You're one of those girls She always tells Me about .... I said "Can You lend Me money , then" ?? Then She sent Me to My Room !! ..... BUT THERE WAS NO MONEY !!!!
Watched this a couple of years ago, great series.
HistoryMarche you should do videos on that! I love your channel btw
Thank you kindly.
I return to it.
My third time watching this as this part of history is particularly special to me as I’m a fellow Yorkshireman and I of course support Richards actions:). Love your vids btw. Maybe do a War of the Rose vid... for me and all my fellow brethren’s from the White and Red rose;)
I am subscribed to you :D
Excellent series. I'm so glad you've used actual footage too, I can't believe how good it still looks after all these years.
Moz MWhite 😂
🤣
Yes. I didn’t even know they had video recorders in those days.
The footage was restored ..... the original film was found wrapped in a linen bundle .... with an old English recipe for Popcorn .....
Lol
Poor Wilhelm. He was just visiting some friends in London...
Give a like for Wilhelm, every man's every man, always getting caught in the crossfire!
I was wondering if anyone noticed that bizarre Wilhelm scream in this documentary, lol! XD
I love watching Dan Jones's documentaries, especially the Plantagenets and the War of the Roses. He makes history very interesting and engaging!
He needs to dress appropriately, not like an extra from Greace, he is too old. It ruined the series for me, and the fact that he couldn’t keep still. Very irritating.
@sopie. It ruined the series that Dan wore a leather jacket and skinny jeans? Hahahaha. Classic.
@@Grdngnome43 I think he dresses well and in a unique manner befitting the series.
@@sophiemaya3153 This made me laugh so much😭😭😭
@@AmalSaidi123 I just find him irritating.
These drama infused narrated docs make it easy to follow what can be a confusing sequence of historical events… makes it easy to understand and assimilate rather than just hearing a narrated script of the events. Dan Jones is grand!
I'm Henry after each time I look at my bank account
hahahaha well put - I am likewise, after discovering that ScotiaBank's slogan "You're richer than you think" is a shocking lie
I've always thought it should be "You think you're broke now? Come bank with us and see how much worse it can get":.
Ellie Cee lol
Me after seeing my paycheck.
0:50 there was an asian soldier in the medieval britain?
I think "The Hollow Crown - Wars of the Roses" had Henry VI right - Tom Sturridge played him as a man with a conscience, trying to keep things together, but ultimately overwhelmed by events and strong personalities. Granted, Shakespeare was not a history documentary, but Henry VI was portrayed with sympathy. This Henry VI is portrayed as what Private Baldrick would call "a poor, ghormless idiot."
It drives me crazy that he keeps opening these old books with ungloved hands
Amanda Saint gloves do more damage
Using gloves causes ripping of delicate manuscript pages
They've determined that washing your bare hands does less damage than gloves after all.
Lady Jay Mac why is that? Because you lose your dexterity and are more likely to rip it?
@@RyanLittrell111 yes sir. Exactly that. I imagine they scrub the first layer of skin clean off getting them clean too. Haha
Lets not exaggerate ... Henry VI was not an imbecile ... sometimes he was extremely lucid ... he devoted himself to the establishment of Eton College, and was very involved in the details of the design. It is very nice. The school was designated for boys from less privileged families than the other colleges at the time. Just one example.
Other times he copped out from reality, it is true.
Not one dimensional though ...
I completely agree! Henry had the misfortune of being a gentle soul in a time of war and conquest, much like Edward the Confessor. It wasn't his fault that he didn't have the temperament typical of a medieval King. The sad thing is that if he didn't have those periods of illness, he and Margaret would have been an unstoppable couple - considering she had enough ambition and bloody-mindedness for the both of them!
I believe he was like Le Grand Dauphin son of Louis XIV he was not an imbecile he was just slow
Henry vi didn't copped out of reality, he willed himself to go autopilot to random points in his life, kinda fast forwarding through time
Couldn't afford "Premium" this month..but even with the ads,this brilliant series has me totally enthralled! Bravo! I was confused about the historical sequences and now this has clarified the timeline SO WELL! Bravo! And Bravo to this channel!
Very good documentary. Dan Jones' ones are usually worth watching.
Great bloke to wacth
Though factually somewhat questionable in parts. As one example, it’s not certain that Richard of York was executed after being captured; other accounts have him killed fighting. The same applies to the death of Beaufort, who killed four Yorkists before being cut down.
Welcome to the real game of thrones my friends
While in college, I wrote a paper on this period in English history and, in particular, the Lancastrian line of kings, from Henry IV to the VI. One of the most interesting things I learned of them was that mental illness seemed to run in the male line. Henry IV, in the years prior to his death, began to decline, becoming both physically debilitated as well as mentally impaired, suffering from what modern doctors have diagnosed as paranoia stemming from early-onset senile dementia or perhaps Alzheimer's disease. There's also the possibility that he suffered from Parkinson's disease, which can also lead to psychosis. Henry V died of dysentery at a young age, and though he showed no signs of incipient mental illness, it's been suggested that, as both his father and son seemed to suffer from mental incapacity, he too would have fallen afoul of such a condition, had he lived to an older age. The line ended with Henry VI being murdered, and as his son, Edward, was killed in battle, there is no way of knowing if their hereditary mental illnesses might not have continued through successive generations. If not for the usurpation of the Yorkist factions and, ultimately, the Tudor family, England's 16th century might have followed a very different path, being governed by generation after generation of mentally ill kings descended from the Lancastrian line.
well, Henry IV survived several killing attempts. it isn't surprising that he became a paranoid. I think it is more likely that Henry VI inherited his illness through his mother.
@@sorceressofaeaeaYeah, I wonder if that's more likely. Through his mother, Henry was the grandson of Charles the Mad.
None of their diseases where inherited at all, bar Henry VI but from the Valois line of Charles VI. Henry IV’s leprosy of some sort was caused on spur, and Henry V was dysentry from a siege. If anything, the Lancasters only disease was being unlucky.
Margaret watches her hopes crumbling one by one and lives bravely to her very last little hope.
She watches her favourites killed, her husband captive, her enemies winning, her son dying and yet she's the last one to fall!
By husband, do you mean her pawn? Or her lover and father (-godfarher-) of her child?
Spoiler alerts! 😉
After reading a number of Dan Jones books, I'm surprised to see he's so young.
Beheading was a punishment reserved for nobility, peasants were hanged.
It depended on what crime you committed and when in the medieval period you’re talking about.
Peasants could be hanged, drawn and quartered
...and cut down still alive, then their guts were pulled out and burned in front of them, then they were (mercifully) beheaded and their bodies quartered, with the four pieces sent to various places to be displayed publicly.
Fantastic performance by David Mitchell as Henry. Going to sleep and waking up deserve an Oscar.
I love how this documentary was created plus the engaging narrator/host truly makes me applaud this video
"a well developed sense of his own importance."
A very kind way to put it.
33:25 - I imagine the queen telling Henry that they're going to Disneyland, and Henry not cluing in until he sees the battle lines.
15:20: HenryVI.exe has stopped working.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
HenryVI the program itself is full of bugs and runtime errors
Yeah it stopping working after about ten min. Too bad it was really good, would like to the whole program!
Yay! It’s working!
It's a Windows executable, so of course it has. Then again, everything is 'executable'.
why would they put the Wilhelm scream in the documentary? made me lol X-D
the same reason they used fabric maille. The production was cheap.
Jonny One-Truck ay. This is a documentary, not a feature film
I thought I heard that in there!
Yeah it was unnecessary so early in the doco too!
Yeah it was unnecessary so early in the doco too!
Don't think I didn't notice the Wilhelm scream
I do believe that I heard the famous "Wilhelm scream" at 2:49. It originated in the 1951 movie "Distant Drums," purportedly recorded by actor and singer Sheb Wooley, and has been used in movies and television thousands of times ever since.
why are we fighting over Game Of Thrones when this documentaries are Solid Gold? Thank you TimeLine
Fans of ASOIAF/GOT might find this interesting as this was the real life inspiration for the Stark-Lannister feud.
Lancaster!?!
Margaret looked at henry with absolute contempt when she was dealing out the punishments to those men considered traitors poor guy really didn't want to be there. I don't blame him.
Ok....I’m officially obsessed with this series!. 😋
Henry just peacing out is a mood
I’m an American and I love the good ole USA 🇺🇸 but dang, UK history is crazy interesting lol
For sure. A lot of bloody and deceitful power-plays for control there in medieval Britain. The commonwealth history of Canada (where I'm from) is pretty boring by comparison. haha
Kelsey B Why so rude?
Depending on your ancestry, it is your history too.
Interesting history is wonderful to learn about, but very painful to live through (or NOT live through)!
@@DamonNomad82 that depends on what you consider to be interesting.
I always liked York, and this is my favourite period of political history.
I love Dan Jones, is anyone surprised he was a student of David Starkey? :) Why is it all my favourite historians are British? (I'm a proud Canadian :) )
hehehe I love him too. There's something about attractive and intelligent men. He also has a very open face.
I’m American and also follow British historians . The Brits have a precious command of our language and love the stories of their history. I enjoy watching their passion for telling the stories of Britain.
@@annfeeney1662 Irish,, American miss feeney ! definitely not a fan of England, your language 🤣 ✊☘️.
Had English royals and nobility spent as much effort and resources towards the prosperity of their people as they had infighting for power England would have been the first to the Moon... by the year 1750!
They werent English - they were all french and all related to each other - the french royals/lords supplanted the English King/lords and from then on it was french versus french. Basically some french controlled England and they were fighting other French living in France
@@billygd100 by this time they were transforming from french to english, and by now likely more english than french.
They may still yet be first to the moon
@@mrdarren1045 nope
@@billygd100 Henry I did marry the descendant of an English king, so his descendants did have English blood.
There's literally *thousands* of perfectly dressed, equipped, armed and armoured re-enactors for this period and they couldn't get ten for this series?!
You have to pay them tho🤔 stop complaining and enjoy ya goob
Eh just knit some chainmaille and the mouth breathers will still be in awe. Who needs an accurate representation of history in a history documentary?! Durrr i like game of thones lol durrr. Facebook is kool! Durrrp!
So, my takeaway from these videos, is "traitor" really just means someone who's in the way.
Please make or release a series on the Crusades. I absolutely love this channel.
That's exactly what they did mate 😃 th-cam.com/video/vOyswuA8wEs/w-d-xo.html Ok...well not this channel, but the BBC....good enough??
This channel is just reposting documentaries that have already aired on TV made by other TV channels and companies
As some Greek dude once said, pride without reflection will turn you into that which you fear the most!
King Henry just seems like a boy conflicted by the brutality of the medieval world especially being noble he most likely grew up seeing heads being cut off too early some people don’t grow a custom to things like that I don’t see him as weak at all just Someone who can’t bare the weight placed on his shoulder
As king though he has too. If he were strong like his father or grandfather none of the chaos would have happened. He even has a good queen to help him and he still was incompetent. He was consumed by favouritism and this is shown by his appointing of Suffolk, Somerset etc.
@@noname-fv3knwe don't choose our qualities. He couldn't rise to the occasion anymore than a housecat can become a lion. He was unsuitable for the role, it's an obvious problem with inherited authority.
The host is energetic and full of scholarship, so that he leads you very well through the troubled beginning of the War of the Roses. The scene of the death of the Duke of York is remarkable for its dramatism.
What I Want To Know Is....WHO plays Margaret? She BEAUTIFUL !
"Queen is back on top exactly where she wants to be" heh :D
If she were British I doubt it... but she was French
@@thundercrow777 I think according to historical texts, she was indeed beautiful. And the depiction of her strong and powerful character definitely adds to her appeal. I know it does for me for this docudrama (also, the actress is pretty hot).
Thats what she said
Gotta ask yourself don't you, you's gonna protect them from Mohammad?
I am completely obsessed with British history. It's much more exciting than American history, given that I am American. I know its SAD, But I love it
Well, there's more of it, so there's more chance of it being exciting.
European History in general is the worlds most intriguing game of power politics. Espically in Central and Western Europe
Wild Child To be fair, if you’re white and American, there’s a good chance you have British blood in you anyway. It’s probably your history as well.
(I’m English, and did a DNA test. It’s so far put me in contact and linked me to 146 Americans who have done the same test, with similar DNA)
Fascinating stuff.
I don't know man, the old west was pretty dope.
Wait! Am I watching Game of Thrones?
Sopheak Seng The real game of thrones!
These are actually the wars that Game of Thrones was based on. GRRM was clear on this, and he changed some names specially. Neddard = Edward, House Stark = House of York, House Lannister = House of Lancaster. Several others.
The real history of Britain is far greater than any fiction written
Nice info
also much of Scottish history- the red wedding is based on the black dinner where clan Douglas were massacred in Edinburgh castle
I love these documentaries on British history by Dan Jones. Highly educational and entertaining. SUPERB.
Henry isn't the villain. He is what he is, the villain is the system thst put him in that role when he was clearly unsuited for it.
English history is pretty much Game of Thrones minus the dragons and abominable snowmen...
There are dragons in Wales, I’ve seen them.
Is that a fact? So history followed a series? And here I was thinking it was the other way around!
I just love the acting of the guy who portrays His Majesty Henry VI.
And the Queen also is an amazing actress. 😍😍
Great documentaries. One thing that sticks out is the fact that, no matter what country around the world, war and blood shed seemed, to the only answers to royal rule, and settling arguments. And it seems like the old saying history repeats itself. To find out how to win, or how to progress we need historians. A window in the past to show with war, brings only more war and divide. That's always what I see when I look upon these videos, and lessons
This documentary has many quality elements to it. It speaks volumes that I didn't even notice the host's faux Fonz jacket until it was too late to care. Really nicely done, both in terms of presentation, visuals, and content!
Are you practicing with materials such as these and not accepting the full reward?
Coin?
Henry VI is the worst of England's rulers, and Margaret of Anjou had to deal with a husband who was not interested in getting an heir.
For a long time, Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou didn't have an heir.
They also made the mistake of having favorites and spending lavish amounts of money and raising of taxes.
And she was vengeful.
When she did finally give birth.
Henry went into a mental breakdown.
I think poor Henry VI had inherited a gene for insanity from his mother's father, the King of France that Henry V fought. Symptoms seem similar. The guy playing Henry VI doesn't look very "Plantagenet".
7:26 LOL! seriously, you're going to introduce Richard of York like that? The editing team might as well have put a "He's the bad guy" text at the bottom.
To be fair, the "talking head" historian (Dan Jones) introduces the episode by making it clear that he blames King Henry VI's weakness--not the houses of Lancaster or York. Also, you could just as easily turn around and say that the editing makes Margaret look like a "Lady Macbeth type conniving shrew."
To be fair, nothing he actually says in that first bit is made up. There were records of this stuff that could be found in the Royal Archives. York was, by all accounts, pretty much like a bull in a china shop. Not that he wasn't right, he just...had no subtlety whatsoever.
Richard was not considered the "bad guy", no matter what dramatization, he felt that his mother Anne was the legitimate heir. she was a female but the oldest surviving child of Philippa,, the only child of Lionel, the second son of Edward III, who is the father if the lancasters and yorks. once the line if the first son dies out, in the case if Richard ii, who produced no heirs, the line if the second son is next. The female can inherit, she only comes AFTER her brothers , but if they die, she is next
Oh dear, this man was my ancestor
Blaming one dude for everything going bad is quite an oversimplification.
This is one of my favorite eras of history to learn about of all time.
I love how POWER and WEALTH are masked with GOOD INTENTIONS.
Margaret of Anjou was a Badass!
I love discovering these badass historical women too. We can learn from them.
Indeed she was. Check out Caterina Sforza (Lady of Imola, Countess of Forli), Eleanor of Aquitane (massively badass woman!), and Empress Matilda (aka Empress Maude) daughter of Henry I of England. She should have been England's first queen but her cousin Stephen claimed the throne before she could get there.
Yea "badass" that caused needless war and death.
@@Luubelaar The agreement made was that Matilda's son Henry would inherit the throne from his uncle Stephen of Blois instead of Stephen's son Eustace. Henry became King Henry II, the first Angevin king.
@@mfjdv2020 - Not quite the whole story. After Henry I's son William Adelin drowned in the 'White ship sinking', he considered naming his nephew Stephen as his heir, but after a few other things happened, he got the barons (including Stephen) to support his daughter Matilda as being his heir. Then when Henry I died, Matilda was in Anjou (with her 2nd husband Geoffrey V, Count of Anjou) and as such, Stephen got to Westminster before her and had a hasty coronation. Matilda fought him over it but eventually conceded and the arrangement was made that her son Henry (later Henry II) would succeed Stephen.
Poor Dan Jones. He presented (and presumably wrote) such a good set of stories, and then Channel 5 used terrible re-enactment! All the foot soldiers are incorrectly armed in the style of at least 100 years earlier, and the "chain mail" is black fabric mesh. The few who are in plate armor are wearing it dirty. Henry Tudor and Richard III are shown in beards, which neither wore. For pity's sake, there are re-enactment groups who could have provided much better advice and costuming! Then the queens are put in modern makeup and plastic jewelry. Ugh.
good thing only 1/100 people would know that. And im glad im not the one lmao. Enjoying it tremendously.
I agree, it's important to do right. 🧙♂️📯🗝
I agree, it's very very distracting. I can't look at Margaret without cringing.
Wow that's unfortunat e...
Not even reinactment more like larp even gor 100 years before the Wars of the Roses in the 14th century that gear is off and the "plate" armour they are wearing is all off with the breastplate not even being the right shape I understand it's budget cuts but if you are doing live actor for documentary you better get the gear right using reenactors would have worked wonders for this production.
I love the political intrigue and maneuvering. it was savage,
Thanks for the series. This is very useful for me. I love English history
How I LOVE this channel!
Such amazing quality programs!
Thank you!
GRRM took soooo much from the War of the Roses. 😂
Everyone says that but I don't get it. Obvious points aside. King, scheming queen, North vs South, rebellious lords. But these were common themes in many countries and different times.
mikey forrester It's because GRRM has admitted to having used historical events, including the War of the Roses, as inspiration. I agree they are common themes, but GRRM specifically used this event as inspiration for at least the first arch of A Song of Ice and Fire.
teako north That's very true.
mikey forrester lancasters/Lannisters vs Yorks/Starks he said it was a big inspiration and there’s even a video on here you can watch that explains how they correlate even the mad king and the child king
Kara Ruckle Hadrinas wall the keep the celts away like the Ice wall and the wildings
The wars of the roses is severely underrated. I hope someday a worthy director/writing team would be able to create a show around the wars of the roses that is as good as the first 4 seasons of game of thrones as it deserves to be.
Watch the White Queen
@@bailarcoruna9546 that is highly fictionalised
I would love to see one. But no doubt they would force wokeness into it somehow and ruin it.
@@jamiemohan2049 But *any* GOT-style show would have to have a lot of fiction thrown in. Why? Because dialogue. We don't have much from records, and none reliably spoken verbatim in any case. It would just be a matter of keeping everyone relatively "in character" from what we know, but even then there would be contradictions - truly, two sides to every story in the Wars of the Roses. How do you do that on TV, in that story-telling format?
@@jamiemohan2049 That word doesn't mean anything, anymore. What wokeness (however you define it) could they insert?
The wars of the roses may have not included dragons but it’s still infinitely more interesting, complicated, and nuanced than game of thrones.
the amount of times I've watched this series is astounding