Henry IV did not pass in 1483, and he was not the father of Edward V. Henry IV was Henry V's father and VI's grandfather. Edward IV died in 1483, who passed the crown to his son, Edward V. Richard was not given the title of Lord Protector straight away. He siezed his nephews and then received the title.
Edward the eighth described his younger brother Prince John, who died as a young teenager, of long-term illness, as an animal, after the boy died. Horrid man.
@@paulmoneill Very true, by the time of young John's death, his epilepsy was out of control and his mental condition had quite deteriorated. Queen Mary had written to someone towards the end that John's condition was such that she tried to limit the other children's exposure to him because it really unnerved them. The Duke of Kent who was closest to him was really affected by John's deterioration as they had been close and he probably saw the most of John.
@@annehersey9895 There's a very good tv movie about him from around 2002 called The Lost Prince that Gina McKee starred in. It's worth looking out for.
Didn’t PH just publish in his book that he had sex with an older woman when he was 17? Isn’t that what PA was accused of? Sex with a 17 year old? Why aren’t people outraged for PH? Do we still have double standards?
There's sooooo much more to Andrew! He's just an awful sort! That man has done so many terrible things, on the dark grey side of illegal, you could have a video just about him!!!
Henry VIII should be the undisputed number one! That man was a monster and his treatment of his wives is the reason his daughters Mary and Elizabeth acted the way they did.
Does Richard III really belong on the list? Most of his vilifying I have heard comes from propaganda by the people who defeated him, the Tudors, who Shakespeare lived under, hence why Richard III was portrayed as so evil in the play.
Well, tbh, I don't think they did a lot of real research. It seems more like it was "people we've heard of and ones that Shakespeare wrote about" No Charles I, no Henry or Stephen, no William I, no Aethelred or even mention of Richard bleeding the country dry resulting in the poor reign of John.
Queen Victoria should be in there somewhere. She definitely had blood on her hands throughout her empire...for one, the Irish Famine was considered genocide.
Considered NOW. You cannot put how people feel now with how people felt then. AND, she DID care. She sent food. Money from her own purse. AND, remember, they have had a constitutional monarchy. She wasn’t the bottom line, like say, the president. She couldn’t just command whatever she wanted. When she found out she was horrified. The “empire” and all that goes with that now horrible word, even though that’s what humans have ALWAYS done throughout HISTORY, if you CAN, you WILL. Ancient Greece. Aztecs. Lakota. If you could, you WOULD. I’m not sure where this peaceful wonderful before world idea came from. We’re the ones who have it the best, and I’m sorry people can’t see that. Of course, It could be better, and I wish that as heartily as anyone in the world.
What most Irish people failed to acknowledge was at the time of the Irish famine, there was also famine in Western Scotland and Western England, the potato disease had crept across the water to England and Scotland, so who is really at fault here? Many English landowners in Ireland also paid for passage to the New World for the Irish due to the famine, that also seems to have been forgotten.
@@suzannehaigh4281 The Queen was the sovereign with enough money to solve famine anywhere and everywhere in her empire.Poverty and suffering in London at the time was some of the worst any modern city has ever seen. There is no excuse or any type of gaslighting that can ever erase how her people suffered on her watch while she lived in luxury getting fatter and fatter off of her people in more ways than one. Lest we ever forget.
@@mattieb7348 This may be true but I am sick of hearing how Ireland suffered when people in England, Wales and Scotland were going through the same. Blame British royalty not the British people
I disagree vehemently regarding Elizabeth the First. Having witnessed and been victimized by her parents' disastrous marriage and seen how horribly her father treated his subsequent wives, there was no way she was going to give any man control over her life, Amy Dudley's death may not have been accidental, but trying to attach blame to the queen in any way is way off the mark. As for Richard the Third, there's no doubt in my mind that he did not kill his nephews. There were many others who wanted the boys dead and buried, not least Margaret Beaufort, whose son Henry Tudor had as near a valid claim to the throne as any of the potential candidates. Beaufort's third husband, William Stanley, was Warden of the Tower of London, into whose supposed safe-keeping the young princes had been given for their own protection. They may well have actually outlived their uncle Richard. When Henry became king, their elder sister, Elizabeth, was re-legitimized by act of parliament in order to marry him, which meant that the boys were also re-legitimized and therefore a threat to him. There were several other possible murderers as well. Richard may not have been any better than any other medieval monarch, but he was no worse either.
I agree on Elizabeth I; all the catholics she supposedly killed were plotters against her and her life; she faced one plot after another, which she discovered thanks to Walsinghams talents, they were by no means innocent victims.
I totally agree with you. I immediately disagreed with the classification of Elizabeth I as one of the most evil. Mary had way more people killed for religious beliefs than Elizabeth. Her reliance on Phillip of Spain was also technically treason by allowing him to basically rule from Spain. Her mental illness is understandable due to Henry VIII's treatment of her mother, Catherine of Aragon.
Glad to find someone who agrees with me. Also I never believed Richard 3rd was a hunchback. That was proved when his remains was found under a car park in Croydon.
I'm surprised Henry VII didn't make it onto this list, since he locked up his wife's cousin, a 10 year old boy who probably had intellectual disabilities, and then had him executed for pretty much no reason. Then again, he was Henry VIII's father, and that's reason enough for me.
@@kayleigh35 no people got manipulated to hate on them because they were simply used to distract from the pedo in the family and his relation with one of the most vile pedos in history. The rf wanted to distract from this disaster by creating a bigger enemy and pretend that meghan is the one we need to worry about. It doesn't make sense how many so called journalists write stuff like "meghan is the most dangerous person to happen in the royal family in decades" like seriously? not the pedo and the millions we had to pay from OUR money for his settlement? some people are gullible i guess..
I don't believe she had anything to do with Amy Dudley's death. As for her killing of Catholics, the Pope had branded her a heretic and pretty much encouraged her Catholic subjects to kill her. Mary Stuart was put to death for plotting her assassination along with others. Elizabeth was actually not concerned with her people's religious beliefs. She was concerned about survival. There is a good case for Mary 1st being on this list, though. Mary knew her cousin, Jane Grey, had been a pawn of others and was not a threat to her, but because Mary was eager to marry Philip of Spain, she ordered Jane's death because the Spaniards refused to allow the marriage as long as Jane was living.
I have to say, I'm disappointed in this video. Elizabeth I is NOT "most famous" for her execution of what at that time, were truly traitors to her rule. She's "most famous" for defeating the Spanish Armada, for a second, even more glorious English Renaissance. Had these people NOT tried to dethrone her and replace her with a twit (even the Scottish at the time thought so little of Mary, Queen of Scots, they called her a whore and tossed her out of their country), they wouldn't have been executed. Up until the 1950s, countries executed traitors. Why wouldn't a more brutal time do the same?
Mary was definitely evil... anything and everything were deemed traitor to their rule...people were executed by the mere word of someone else. ...our judicial system isn't perfect...but so far we can still go to church a mosque or a cathedral and have a difference of opinion without being burned at the stake...(so far) .....The royal inbreds are notorious for killing family and close friends...bloody Mary especially
As with that which was screened though , it would be heavily edited and fail to mention her drug addiction or penchant for tinctures containing powdered human skulls etc etc.
George v should be in this list put his crown before the lives of the Romanov family he could have given them sanctuary in the UK but feared he might lose his crown so instead left them to die then some time later in a letter he wrote it was a shame what happened to cousin Nicolas what a bastard he has the blood of 2 adults and 5 children is on his hands
supposably the family wouldn t leave until they couldnt anymore. and there was the other royal families that took them in. and he might not have lost the crown, he could have started a war. europe is very touchy.
@@aturniakane4539 still put his crown first still got blood on his hands we were their last hope and he turned his back as for starting another war this was 1917 the great war was still going on and would continue for another year so it couldn't start another one
King George was a great man and King, one of the greatest kings of the UK, at least in modern British history. His cruelty as a father and his denial to give asylum to his Russian relatives might be really bad, but there's no compare to those bloody freaks on the list. George himself prayed to God for forgiveness when he found out about his cousin's execution.
William the Conqueror was a bloodthirsty ruler who could not break down the people of the north. He sent his troops up to the north in order to massacre, and lay to waste entire counties who refused to recognize him as king. This is known today as the Harrowing of the North. It took 100 years to force the northerners to surrender and accept William.
William The Bastard, as he was known at the time was essentially a Viking with a haircut and a French accent. A cleric estimated around 1,000,000 people died during and as a result of the Harrying of the North.
I must give a plug for Kate Auspitz' splendid little novel which came out in 2015--"Wallis's War: a Novel of Diplomacy and Intrigue." Auspitz' argues that certain Conservative politicians knew very well about Edward's Nazi sympathies. They also understood that war between Britain and Germany was likely. They were horrified at the prospect of the sitting monarch being a Nazi and German sympathizer during a. war between the two countries. Therefore encouraged the romance between Simpson and Edward to get him off the throne. The plot made perfect sense to me. I wouldn't be surprised if it were true, either.
No he wasn't killed by his nephew! He was killed by a Welsh man fighting on behalf of Henry Tudor who went on to become Henry VII. Edmund Tudor was Henry's father who died when Henry's mum Margaret was pregnant - they were not related at all. Richard's nephews were the princes in the tower -.-
Magma Carta needs no article. And it really ahould have been noted that multiple copies were made to prevent the king from destroying a single document.
Why is Charles I not on this list? The king who started a civil war with his parliment and kept it going for years, flat out refusing to even consider any reconciliation offer parliment made. And thay made many.
Elizabeth murdered less Catholics in her 45 year reign than Mary’s murder of Protestants in her five year reign. Elizabeth was all happy to accept her Catholic subjects until many put a target on her head, including the Pope, who proclaimed that any to kill her would be hero in the eyes of the Church.
Mary was not evil! She was trying to be a female king, she's the first Queen Regnant. Without her we don't get Elizabeth I nor Mary II, Queen Anne, Victoria or Elizabeth II. Let's be honest there was less death in Mary's reign than there was in Elizabeth's, at least Mary paid for her men, Elizabeth didn't after the Armada. More men died from sickness and starvation after the Armada than Mary put to death for herasy.
These historical" top most" are usually dumb, she wasn't more bloody than those before and after her. Even her brother hanged more catholics than she burned protestant, and he ruled 5 to 6 years, almost like her
@@solsticebaby not really. She didn't make people into candles, nor did she kill children. Bare in mind the times, it was believed that if you let a heretic live you would be damned. Plus she didn't hurt her ladies in waiting, Elizabeth did. Elizabeth also killed a fellow monarch, after imprisoning her for nearly 20 years.
Mary knew that her cousin, Lady Jane Grey, was no threat to her. She knew Jane had been a pawn of her in laws and was ok with allowing Jane to live. But Mary wanted to marry Philip of Spain and he and his people refused to agree to the marriage as long as Jane Grey still lived. So she had her axed, literally. And by today's standards, Jane was a kid. She was 16 at the time of her death. Sorry, but for that, if nothing else, Mary was evil.
Just curious to see what Mojo would say. Expecting Kings and Queens of old to match our sensibilities is absurd. I am exceedingly glad to not have been born in those times.
She also sensibly decided that her children, should have as normal lives as possible, including not letting them have titles and all the trouble that occurs, from that.
I may not care for the royals that are not in American but I definitely got mad love for princess Anne. She would make a wonderful queen & a different timeline. The respect she showed her mother until the last day earned my respect.
You missed one, what about a prince and heir to the throne 30 something courting a teenager for the only purpose of securing succession to the throne? In some circles that would be considered predatory at best!
Interesting video, thank you, but where is Longshanks? I think us Celts would feel he strongly belongs on this list… I also hoped that Susan who bit poor old Leonard Hubbard in 1954 might have at least got an honourable mention…
Queen Mary I was not an evil woman, in fact, if anything Both Elizabeth I and Henry VIII deserve the first and second place. She was responsible for the deaths of only 276 protestants, who were an active threat to her life, whereas Elizabeth I, a woman who rightly deserves to be put in the second place, second only to her father Henry VIII, was responsible for the deaths of Thousands of Catholics even before the Rebellion and the Excommunication had taken place. If anything Queen Mary I deserves the number 1 spot for, "Top ten greatest Queens of the United Kingdom", followed by other good queens of history.
Somehow, I don't think pregnant women, and the babies they gave birth to while in the flames, were a "threat against her". None of the people she burnt alive took part in any rebellion or conspiracy against her. Did the people Elizabeth I execute do so (and they were NOT burnt alive)? Yes, yes they did. Did those Elizabeth I also execute (again, NOT burnt alive) hold a Papal Bull saying that any "good Catholic" should kill her? Yes, yes they did. Tell me, who gave the order for those 276 men, women and CHILDREN who were burnt alive to rebel against Mary I? What battle did they fight to do so? Oh, wait, that's right, there was none. No Holy Father gave the order to his followers to kill Mary, was there? I will give you, she did not order those burnings out of spite. She ordered them so she could "save" their souls, again, NOT because they were a "threat" to her. Also, the people she had hung, drawn & quartered who were part of Wyatt's Rebellion were also executed by law, which should not be held against her. But saying those she burnt were an "active threat to her life" is not held up by ANY historical FACTS. Try sticking with those when you talk about ranking kings & queens.
Medieval kings did some horrible things in trying to strenghten their throne and make England stronger. Both Edward I and Edward III were responsible for many deaths as was William I. They could be considered evil if you are using the same considerations used for Elizabeth I. We will never know if Richard III was responsible for the deaths of his nephew. Andrew is nor evil, just arrogant and not very bright. Interesting analysis but a wee bit biased.
No one knows who really killed the princes. Some say Richard some say it was Margret Beaufort. Remember she had more to gain with all hhree of them killed.
@@michellekinder3051 Lady Margaret certainly had motive - and she was both intelligent and ambitious. However as the remains of the Princes have yet to be identified we don't know for certain if they were even murdered.
Edward VIII was not evil. He was just naive. He went to Nazi Germany with a genuine interest in their approach to housing and social reforms. But was oblivious to much about the regime and how it might come across. Remember that this was the same time that UK were seeking a deal with Nazi Germany, before WW2 had started and before anyone knew about concentration camps, or anything else of a similar nature.
He was racist if not evil. He did say later that the Roosevelts and the Jews were to blame for WWII and that he "never thought Hitler was such a bad chap"
I wouldn't call Prince Andrew "evil," but he did make some very questionable and bad decisions. Edward the 8th, I would definitely call evil. Look at what he said about his baby brother's illness and death, what he did with and for the Germans and Hitler during WWII. How Henry the 8th isn't higher on the list, idk
Leave Harry and Meghan alone. That poor woman has been vilified by the British Tabloids and the people who consume it. I call it racism, sexism, misogynistic and depravity. People don’t stop to think that she’s someone’s daughter, wife, mother, and dear friend. By today’s standards I call the British tabloids evil. Jeramy Clarkson’s words were grotesque! Stop the hate!
I'm American and I don't know, but Edward Duke of Windsor, along with Price Andrew of York respectively remind me a great deal of Donald J. Trump, in so far as to their respective conduct was concerned. Bone chilling for me.
@@pennyboulton9676 actually I'm making a reference to Donald Trump being a fascist like the Duke Of Windsor; Prince Andrew Of York having the utter foolishness of associating himself with Jeffrey Epstein & Ghislaine Maxwell, two people that Trump himself associated with. Also, Trump has been accused of underage sexual assault as was Prince Andrew.
Ridiculous. When Trump was president we had no inflation, we were energy independent, had control of our borders and wars were coming to an end. Just the opposite of where traitorous Joe has taken us.
Would the people at WatchMojoUK be interested in some British history books? ... you didn't even touch on any of the kings involved in civil wars in England.
Mary I also burned a pregnant woman at the stake according to a book published by an author that studied her life. Out of fear and pain, the woman went into labor and the child fell to the floor. Instead of giving it for adoption, Mary I threw the newborn into the fire. She had nightmares after that and went to the church often believing their souls will forgive her, but it wasn't that way. Their cries of agony haunted her for the rest of her life.
Present Prince Edward, never put a step wrong. Harry and his "wife" should be on this list also, never heard of someone being so evil towards their loving parents.
Prince Harry has to be in this list, he’s breached the privacy to his family by writing about private conversations especially at funerals and when the late queen was dying. I could go on about all the things he’s done try to destroy the monarchy. He even ‘joked’ about killing his father with a typhoon etc
Care to back that up with legitimate sources? Oh and British tabloids don't count seeing as they lie. Unless proven otherwise, it's complete and utter bullshit.
Henry VIII didn't just kill 2 of his wives and their suspected loves, he killed 70,000 of his own people. He alone was worse than the entire Plantagenet 300 yr reign, BUT if you include his daughter Bloody Mary and the burning at the stake of thousands of Protestants, then, Elizabeth I's, the Tudor Dynasty make anytihng any king or queen had ever done, angelic for sure!
10. James VI (Scotland)/James I(England) 9. George IV 8. Prince Andrew 7. Henry VIII 6. Richard III 5. John(Magna Carta) 4. Richard II 3. Edward VIII 2. Elizabeth I 1. Mary I
@@markbarker6739 Well we don't know what the Queen has done but can you really tell me that she was squeaky clean? And no, I didn't watch this video. I just saw it in my video's and Prince Andrew pop in my head straight away. 😀
@@spacejam8765 We probably not know in our lifetimes and when her history is released to the public it will be too late for anyone to give a damn about it.
Well you aren't wrong but Henry the 8th last wife should be with these ppl. Elizabeth 1st was the way she was partly because of Henry 8th 6th wife and her evil brothers. All of her other step mothers wasn't as bad to her. As his final wife.
If my knowledge serves me correctly about James the VI, historically he's been looked at as one of the worst monarchs ever, but in recent history that's been re-examined and he's thought of as a serious and thoughtful monarch with the best of intentions that just couldn't quite rise to the occasion and devastated most of central Europe in his attempt to unify everyone
@@timallardyce1216 At the time of being filmed, as depicted in the Sun newspaper , Alfred , Harold , Arthur , George brother to the then King and Nazi agent , was born with the name Saxe Coburg Unt Gotha. His First name was Alfred not George and his given name was not Windsor. Von Battenburg , Windsor, Hanover or Saxe Coburg Unt Gotha, it changes little in that they are all inherently racist.
Richard the first (the lion hearted) upon his return was Coronated where some of the richest Jews in England "dared" to attend bearing appropriate gifts his men and he were so insulted they carried out the first pogrom murdering, maiming, and otherwise harming the Jewish population of London after which Jews were banned from living in England for hundreds of years. He also belongs on this list.
Word was actually sent out prior to the coronation, that witches and jews were told not to come. Apparently several of the Jewish community didn't receive the message. Richard De Clare Earl of Pembroke, has the account of what happened in his papers.
Perhaps there's a lesson here: the monarchy has had its share of lemons over the years. Not all the individuals were "king" material. You can add Harry's name to your list----number 11.
Anne, the Princess Royal is my favorite and the hardest working. Megan would be my least favorite as she's all about herself and whines like a toddler. Have to mention Edward, the spoiled baby and embarrassment to the Royal family.
A little piece of information about Edward the 8th he was the rightful King and the English Church conspired against his rain told him that he couldn't marry who he wanted. Basically committed treason against him. Slandered him in every way I'm sure he wasn't to happy with england that doesn't make him Evil as a matter of fact he was a kind person and much more normal and humble than the modern day royal's
What about Richard 1 (the Lionheart) who had 2000 Muslim soldiers beheaded at Ayyadieh ? Or William IV (Queen Victoria's uncle) who actively and aggressively campaigned against the end of the Transatlantic slave trade and who represented the interests of West Indies solve owners in Parliament ? He also abandoned his long term lover Mrs Jordan who bore him 10 children (she would die in poverty) Or Edward I who expelled the Jewish community from England (the first country to do so?)
Actually he helped the average everyday man with different things. Like making life easier for them, or reforms, by having the idea of a bail that was easy to make.
No Harry is not evil. Wanting to bring up his children without the British Public and British press hassling Harry & Meghan evil. Nor does their interview with Oprah or other interviews make them evil.
Harry is a traitor! His wife is a gold digger! Nutmeg tells lies, mocks and makes fun of queen Elizabeth and British traditions on national television while Harry is too stupid to see it. They only sees $$$$.
10 Shocking Royal Family Assassination Close Calls
th-cam.com/video/nI20bYueSqQ/w-d-xo.html
Most unprobmatic royal is a dead one like
RICHARD III WAS NOT EVIL!
Henry IV did not pass in 1483, and he was not the father of Edward V. Henry IV was Henry V's father and VI's grandfather.
Edward IV died in 1483, who passed the crown to his son, Edward V.
Richard was not given the title of Lord Protector straight away. He siezed his nephews and then received the title.
@@mattthesilent777RED how?
@@gkjaerby2441 A Shakespearean play does not a reliably historical source make
Edward the eighth described his younger brother Prince John, who died as a young teenager, of long-term illness, as an animal, after the boy died. Horrid man.
That is messed up.
What's even more messed up is that plenty at the time would have agreed with him and thought even worse.
@@paulmoneill Very true, by the time of young John's death, his epilepsy was out of control and his mental condition had quite deteriorated. Queen Mary had written to someone towards the end that John's condition was such that she tried to limit the other children's exposure to him because it really unnerved them. The Duke of Kent who was closest to him was really affected by John's deterioration as they had been close and he probably saw the most of John.
@@annehersey9895 There's a very good tv movie about him from around 2002 called The Lost Prince that Gina McKee starred in. It's worth looking out for.
THE STORY ABOUT PRINCE JOHN IS SO HEARTBREAKING.
The grand old duke of York
He paid 12 million quid
to stop someone from exposing
Something he "never did"
Lol
He’s a sweaty nonce (Nonce)
He’s a sweaty nonce
You know it’s true that Prince Andrew
Is a sweaty nonce
That's clever. I'm not saying he's innocent but many people settle to make the story go away. This is why the Royal Family helped him.
Didn’t PH just publish in his book that he had sex with an older woman when he was 17? Isn’t that what PA was accused of? Sex with a 17 year old? Why aren’t people outraged for PH? Do we still have double standards?
There's sooooo much more to Andrew! He's just an awful sort! That man has done so many terrible things, on the dark grey side of illegal, you could have a video just about him!!!
Since Henry the 8th is a known serial killer, why is he not number 1 on this list?
During his reign over 10000 people were killed.
All monarchs are serial killers. All have people "taken cared of" for their reign. You just don't like that he killed his wives. Don't be biased.
The list isn't ranked
I don't really know if I would classify Andrew as "evil"; he's more like vile and loathsome.
Henry VIII should be the undisputed number one!
That man was a monster and his treatment of his wives is the reason his daughters Mary and Elizabeth acted the way they did.
Does Richard III really belong on the list? Most of his vilifying I have heard comes from propaganda by the people who defeated him, the Tudors, who Shakespeare lived under, hence why Richard III was portrayed as so evil in the play.
There’s a Horrible Histories song that debunks this.
Well, tbh, I don't think they did a lot of real research. It seems more like it was "people we've heard of and ones that Shakespeare wrote about"
No Charles I, no Henry or Stephen, no William I, no Aethelred or even mention of Richard bleeding the country dry resulting in the poor reign of John.
@@MrTheGadfly I'm thinking the same thing. Plus the definition of evil in regards to this video is so crazy. Most of these listed are not truly evil.
@@MrTheGadfly I'm not even from the UK & know most of what was said in this video was BS.
History is told by the winners.
Fun fact: Evil people don't sweat, so take a guess who's the evilest
I see what you did there
Lol.i know i know.
@@Hilde_Norway no need to name names.
Apparently if you yawn in front of a narcissist they won’t end up yawning themselves because it not a learned behaviour. Just what I heard
2nd - 1st is Ginger traitor
Queen Victoria should be in there somewhere. She definitely had blood on her hands throughout her empire...for one, the Irish Famine was considered genocide.
Considered NOW. You cannot put how people feel now with how people felt then. AND, she DID care. She sent food. Money from her own purse. AND, remember, they have had a constitutional monarchy. She wasn’t the bottom line, like say, the president. She couldn’t just command whatever she wanted. When she found out she was horrified. The “empire” and all that goes with that now horrible word, even though that’s what humans have ALWAYS done throughout HISTORY, if you CAN, you WILL. Ancient Greece. Aztecs. Lakota. If you could, you WOULD. I’m not sure where this peaceful wonderful before world idea came from. We’re the ones who have it the best, and I’m sorry people can’t see that. Of course, It could be better, and I wish that as heartily as anyone in the world.
What most Irish people failed to acknowledge was at the time of the Irish famine, there was also famine in Western Scotland and Western England, the potato disease had crept across the water to England and Scotland, so who is really at fault here? Many English landowners in Ireland also paid for passage to the New World for the Irish due to the famine, that also seems to have been forgotten.
@@suzannehaigh4281 The Queen was the sovereign with enough money to solve famine anywhere and everywhere in her empire.Poverty and suffering in London at the time was some of the worst any modern city has ever seen. There is no excuse or any type of gaslighting that can ever erase how her people suffered on her watch while she lived in luxury getting fatter and fatter off of her people in more ways than one. Lest we ever forget.
@@mattieb7348 This may be true but I am sick of hearing how Ireland suffered when people in England, Wales and Scotland were going through the same. Blame British royalty not the British people
@@suzannehaigh4281 Absolutely. I could not agree more.
I disagree vehemently regarding Elizabeth the First. Having witnessed and been victimized by her parents' disastrous marriage and seen how horribly her father treated his subsequent wives, there was no way she was going to give any man control over her life, Amy Dudley's death may not have been accidental, but trying to attach blame to the queen in any way is way off the mark. As for Richard the Third, there's no doubt in my mind that he did not kill his nephews. There were many others who wanted the boys dead and buried, not least Margaret Beaufort, whose son Henry Tudor had as near a valid claim to the throne as any of the potential candidates. Beaufort's third husband, William Stanley, was Warden of the Tower of London, into whose supposed safe-keeping the young princes had been given for their own protection. They may well have actually outlived their uncle Richard. When Henry became king, their elder sister, Elizabeth, was re-legitimized by act of parliament in order to marry him, which meant that the boys were also re-legitimized and therefore a threat to him. There were several other possible murderers as well. Richard may not have been any better than any other medieval monarch, but he was no worse either.
I agree on Elizabeth I; all the catholics she supposedly killed were plotters against her and her life; she faced one plot after another, which she discovered thanks to Walsinghams talents, they were by no means innocent victims.
👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾. Very nice supplement.
Agree!
I totally agree with you. I immediately disagreed with the classification of Elizabeth I as one of the most evil. Mary had way more people killed for religious beliefs than Elizabeth. Her reliance on Phillip of Spain was also technically treason by allowing him to basically rule from Spain. Her mental illness is understandable due to Henry VIII's treatment of her mother, Catherine of Aragon.
Glad to find someone who agrees with me. Also I never believed Richard 3rd was a hunchback. That was proved when his remains was found under a car park in Croydon.
I'm surprised Henry VII didn't make it onto this list, since he locked up his wife's cousin, a 10 year old boy who probably had intellectual disabilities, and then had him executed for pretty much no reason. Then again, he was Henry VIII's father, and that's reason enough for me.
People hate on Harry and Meghan but forget about how vile Andrew is
Yeah Andrew is an absolute freak
People only hate harry and Megan because they keep banging on about having privacy but keep putting out private family dramas
Guess what? You can dislike all three! It's not like people forgot about Andrew.
@@kayleigh35 no people got manipulated to hate on them because they were simply used to distract from the pedo in the family and his relation with one of the most vile pedos in history. The rf wanted to distract from this disaster by creating a bigger enemy and pretend that meghan is the one we need to worry about. It doesn't make sense how many so called journalists write stuff like "meghan is the most dangerous person to happen in the royal family in decades" like seriously? not the pedo and the millions we had to pay from OUR money for his settlement? some people are gullible i guess..
Never been a fan of Andrew but he's never run his family down. MM and H keep on and on and on
Elizabeth I is an example of how you can both Evil and Great at the same time...
How was she evil
I don't believe she had anything to do with Amy Dudley's death. As for her killing of Catholics, the Pope had branded her a heretic and pretty much encouraged her Catholic subjects to kill her. Mary Stuart was put to death for plotting her assassination along with others. Elizabeth was actually not concerned with her people's religious beliefs. She was concerned about survival. There is a good case for Mary 1st being on this list, though. Mary knew her cousin, Jane Grey, had been a pawn of others and was not a threat to her, but because Mary was eager to marry Philip of Spain, she ordered Jane's death because the Spaniards refused to allow the marriage as long as Jane was living.
I have to say, I'm disappointed in this video. Elizabeth I is NOT "most famous" for her execution of what at that time, were truly traitors to her rule. She's "most famous" for defeating the Spanish Armada, for a second, even more glorious English Renaissance. Had these people NOT tried to dethrone her and replace her with a twit (even the Scottish at the time thought so little of Mary, Queen of Scots, they called her a whore and tossed her out of their country), they wouldn't have been executed. Up until the 1950s, countries executed traitors. Why wouldn't a more brutal time do the same?
Exactly!!!
Mary was definitely evil... anything and everything were deemed traitor to their rule...people were executed by the mere word of someone else. ...our judicial system isn't perfect...but so far we can still go to church a mosque or a cathedral and have a difference of opinion without being burned at the stake...(so far) .....The royal inbreds are notorious for killing family and close friends...bloody Mary especially
Having watched this, I think Netflix ought to do "The Crown - The early years" I think they would have a winner on their hands ;)
Yeah maybe call it “The Empire” and start it during Queen Victorias reign
As with that which was screened though , it would be heavily edited and fail to mention her drug addiction or penchant for tinctures containing powdered human skulls etc etc.
Why not start from 1066 and call it The really early years?
@@B-A-L I like it 😁
Prince Edward is the most unproblematic Royal.
True, he is the only one the never had a scandal and is still married to his wife
If you don't count that awful Royal It's A Knockout he helped to bring about. What was he thinking?
@@daviniarobbins9298 who are you talking about
@@TealCloud09 Edward organised a terrible Royal version of a popular game show years ago. Saying it was cringe isn’t the half of it.
@@portlyoldman oh I know from Lindsay Holliday I forget when I was typing
George v should be in this list put his crown before the lives of the Romanov family he could have given them sanctuary in the UK but feared he might lose his crown so instead left them to die then some time later in a letter he wrote it was a shame what happened to cousin Nicolas what a bastard he has the blood of 2 adults and 5 children is on his hands
supposably the family wouldn t leave until they couldnt anymore. and there was the other royal families that took them in. and he might not have lost the crown, he could have started a war. europe is very touchy.
@@aturniakane4539 still put his crown first still got blood on his hands we were their last hope and he turned his back as for starting another war this was 1917 the great war was still going on and would continue for another year so it couldn't start another one
King George was a great man and King, one of the greatest kings of the UK, at least in modern British history. His cruelty as a father and his denial to give asylum to his Russian relatives might be really bad, but there's no compare to those bloody freaks on the list. George himself prayed to God for forgiveness when he found out about his cousin's execution.
Great in what way he was a complete bastard who would put a crown before family
William the Conqueror was a bloodthirsty ruler who could not break down the people of the north. He sent his troops up to the north in order to massacre, and lay to waste entire counties who refused to recognize him as king. This is known today as the Harrowing of the North. It took 100 years to force the northerners to surrender and accept William.
No wonder he was known as william the bastard .His ruthless viking ancestry came to the fore .
William The Bastard, as he was known at the time was essentially a Viking with a haircut and a French accent. A cleric estimated around 1,000,000 people died during and as a result of the Harrying of the North.
@@christopheraliaga-kelly6254 How many of them can actually claim to have English blood. I thought he was a fine example.
I must give a plug for Kate Auspitz' splendid little novel which came out in 2015--"Wallis's War: a Novel of Diplomacy and Intrigue."
Auspitz' argues that certain Conservative politicians knew very well about Edward's Nazi sympathies. They also understood that war between Britain and Germany was likely. They were horrified at the prospect of the sitting monarch being a Nazi and German sympathizer during a. war between the two countries. Therefore encouraged the romance between Simpson and Edward to get him off the throne.
The plot made perfect sense to me. I wouldn't be surprised if it were true, either.
Richard III was the last king to be killed in battle at Bosworth Field, not by a nobleman, but by his nephew Edmund…
No he wasn't killed by his nephew! He was killed by a Welsh man fighting on behalf of Henry Tudor who went on to become Henry VII. Edmund Tudor was Henry's father who died when Henry's mum Margaret was pregnant - they were not related at all.
Richard's nephews were the princes in the tower -.-
@@FrankieJayUK You're wrong. Edmund killed him thinking he was stealing his horse. I saw it in a documentary.
@@FrankieJayUK Beware his deadly flashing blade, unless you want to end up shorter...
Your correct it was Edmund Blackadder
Magma Carta needs no article. And it really ahould have been noted that multiple copies were made to prevent the king from destroying a single document.
Why is Charles I not on this list? The king who started a civil war with his parliment and kept it going for years, flat out refusing to even consider any reconciliation offer parliment made. And thay made many.
Henry VIII, Edward, and Elizabeth I murdered ten times as many Catholics than Mary did with Protestants.
Elizabeth murdered less Catholics in her 45 year reign than Mary’s murder of Protestants in her five year reign. Elizabeth was all happy to accept her Catholic subjects until many put a target on her head, including the Pope, who proclaimed that any to kill her would be hero in the eyes of the Church.
Richard III is on this list over an assumption? How does that make me higher ranked than that scoundrel egomaniac Henry VIII?
Horrible histories did point this out
@@Dim4323I ain't buying.
Mary was not evil! She was trying to be a female king, she's the first Queen Regnant. Without her we don't get Elizabeth I nor Mary II, Queen Anne, Victoria or Elizabeth II. Let's be honest there was less death in Mary's reign than there was in Elizabeth's, at least Mary paid for her men, Elizabeth didn't after the Armada. More men died from sickness and starvation after the Armada than Mary put to death for herasy.
These historical" top most" are usually dumb, she wasn't more bloody than those before and after her. Even her brother hanged more catholics than she burned protestant, and he ruled 5 to 6 years, almost like her
She was out of her mind and beyond evil
@@solsticebaby not really. She didn't make people into candles, nor did she kill children. Bare in mind the times, it was believed that if you let a heretic live you would be damned. Plus she didn't hurt her ladies in waiting, Elizabeth did. Elizabeth also killed a fellow monarch, after imprisoning her for nearly 20 years.
Mary knew that her cousin, Lady Jane Grey, was no threat to her. She knew Jane had been a pawn of her in laws and was ok with allowing Jane to live. But Mary wanted to marry Philip of Spain and he and his people refused to agree to the marriage as long as Jane Grey still lived. So she had her axed, literally. And by today's standards, Jane was a kid. She was 16 at the time of her death. Sorry, but for that, if nothing else, Mary was evil.
I feel like a lot of indigenous people around the world wouldn't have minded not having a few of those you listed...
Just curious to see what Mojo would say. Expecting Kings and Queens of old to match our sensibilities is absurd. I am exceedingly glad to not have been born in those times.
Princess Anne easily the least problematic
She stayed out of the spotlight.
She also sensibly decided that her children, should have as normal lives as possible, including not letting them have titles and all the trouble that occurs, from that.
Prince Edward is even less problematic and the only one of Elizabeth's children who has never divorced.
I may not care for the royals that are not in American but I definitely got mad love for princess Anne. She would make a wonderful queen & a different timeline. The respect she showed her mother until the last day earned my respect.
She was incredibly smart and knows about so many people and organizations.
Good well narrated and told but please put in chronological order.
You missed one, what about a prince and heir to the throne 30 something courting a teenager for the only purpose of securing succession to the throne? In some circles that would be considered predatory at best!
Interesting video, thank you, but where is Longshanks? I think us Celts would feel he strongly belongs on this list… I also hoped that Susan who bit poor old Leonard Hubbard in 1954 might have at least got an honourable mention…
James I trying to be the "peacemaker" watching this video: 👁️👄👁️
Most of these I wouldn't describe as "evil" just extremely petty and paranoid.
Queen Mary I was not an evil woman, in fact, if anything Both Elizabeth I and Henry VIII deserve the first and second place. She was responsible for the deaths of only 276 protestants, who were an active threat to her life, whereas Elizabeth I, a woman who rightly deserves to be put in the second place, second only to her father Henry VIII, was responsible for the deaths of Thousands of Catholics even before the Rebellion and the Excommunication had taken place. If anything Queen Mary I deserves the number 1 spot for, "Top ten greatest Queens of the United Kingdom", followed by other good queens of history.
Somehow, I don't think pregnant women, and the babies they gave birth to while in the flames, were a "threat against her". None of the people she burnt alive took part in any rebellion or conspiracy against her. Did the people Elizabeth I execute do so (and they were NOT burnt alive)? Yes, yes they did. Did those Elizabeth I also execute (again, NOT burnt alive) hold a Papal Bull saying that any "good Catholic" should kill her? Yes, yes they did. Tell me, who gave the order for those 276 men, women and CHILDREN who were burnt alive to rebel against Mary I? What battle did they fight to do so? Oh, wait, that's right, there was none. No Holy Father gave the order to his followers to kill Mary, was there? I will give you, she did not order those burnings out of spite. She ordered them so she could "save" their souls, again, NOT because they were a "threat" to her. Also, the people she had hung, drawn & quartered who were part of Wyatt's Rebellion were also executed by law, which should not be held against her. But saying those she burnt were an "active threat to her life" is not held up by ANY historical FACTS. Try sticking with those when you talk about ranking kings & queens.
You know there are nonbritish royals, right?
The description says
*Most Evil Royals in British history*
I wonder why the title was cut.
Well this is the Watchmojo UK channel.
Generations of inbreeding will have that effect
Marauding halfwits!
3:11 in the words of Russell Howard...I BET HE'S FUCKING SWEATING NOW
James I executed a popular mariner Sir Walter Raleigh because he failed to find the fabled El Dorado.
And embarrassed him politically with the Spanish.
Raleigh on his death Sharp medicine that cures all ills !! Brave man
Medieval kings did some horrible things in trying to strenghten their throne and make England stronger. Both Edward I and Edward III were responsible for many deaths as was William I. They could be considered evil if you are using the same considerations used for Elizabeth I. We will never know if Richard III was responsible for the deaths of his nephew. Andrew is nor evil, just arrogant and not very bright. Interesting analysis but a wee bit biased.
Andrew is not evil
It was not Henry 4th that died in 1483 it was Edward 4th.
History repeats itself!!!!
They are all a bunch of over pampered fusspots full of their own self importance
Richard the 3rd?
I thought it was established that his usurper was the true villain but Richard was Villified for losing
No one knows who really killed the princes. Some say Richard some say it was Margret Beaufort. Remember she had more to gain with all hhree of them killed.
@@michellekinder3051 Lady Margaret certainly had motive - and she was both intelligent and ambitious. However as the remains of the Princes have yet to be identified we don't know for certain if they were even murdered.
Edward VIII was not evil. He was just naive. He went to Nazi Germany with a genuine interest in their approach to housing and social reforms. But was oblivious to much about the regime and how it might come across.
Remember that this was the same time that UK were seeking a deal with Nazi Germany, before WW2 had started and before anyone knew about concentration camps, or anything else of a similar nature.
He was racist if not evil. He did say later that the Roosevelts and the Jews were to blame for WWII and that he "never thought Hitler was such a bad chap"
@@alexandrazisk7091 Winston Churchill was antisemitic too
@@bertrandklermannb2k768 that doesn't surprise me much.
Him and Wallis did tour a concentration camp. Make no mistake, they were not naive
@@alexandrazisk7091he was not racist. Most upper class English were anti semitic
One of my ancestors was executed by queen Mary in the 1500s.
I wouldn't call Prince Andrew "evil," but he did make some very questionable and bad decisions.
Edward the 8th, I would definitely call evil. Look at what he said about his baby brother's illness and death, what he did with and for the Germans and Hitler during WWII.
How Henry the 8th isn't higher on the list, idk
On 11th spot 😂 in ter heart's of hearts; many will be thinking Harry and Megain Sparkle ✨
But they will be fools. Those two just need to be left alone. Stop consuming their media.
Leave Harry and Meghan alone. That poor woman has been vilified by the British Tabloids and the people who consume it. I call it racism, sexism, misogynistic and depravity. People don’t stop to think that she’s someone’s daughter, wife, mother, and dear friend. By today’s standards I call the British tabloids evil. Jeramy Clarkson’s words were grotesque! Stop the hate!
Nope. Most people love them.
Now you can add an 11th! Congrats Harry!
Evil is such a sick thing!
I'm American and I don't know, but Edward Duke of Windsor, along with Price Andrew of York respectively remind me a great deal of Donald J. Trump, in so far as to their respective conduct was concerned. Bone chilling for me.
Edward Duke Of Windsor was queen Elizabeth ll uncle and Andrew Duke of York is Queen Elizabeth II son. They’re nothing like trump
@@pennyboulton9676 actually I'm making a reference to Donald Trump being a fascist like the Duke Of Windsor; Prince Andrew Of York having the utter foolishness of associating himself with Jeffrey Epstein & Ghislaine Maxwell, two people that Trump himself associated with. Also, Trump has been accused of underage sexual assault as was Prince Andrew.
Oh for goodness sake. The Trump derangement syndrome is strong
Ridiculous. When Trump was president we had no inflation, we were energy independent, had control of our borders and wars were coming to an end. Just the opposite of where traitorous Joe has taken us.
Please don’t insult Edward VIII or Prince Andrew like that.
Would the people at WatchMojoUK be interested in some British history books?
... you didn't even touch on any of the kings involved in civil wars in England.
No royal is “unproblematic.” Anywhere.
1:56 NO!!!
Mary I also burned a pregnant woman at the stake according to a book published by an author that studied her life. Out of fear and pain, the woman went into labor and the child fell to the floor. Instead of giving it for adoption, Mary I threw the newborn into the fire. She had nightmares after that and went to the church often believing their souls will forgive her, but it wasn't that way. Their cries of agony haunted her for the rest of her life.
Henry the black widower.
Lots of horrible Royals in Spain, Denmark, Japan, let’s hear those stories .lol
The Tudors slandered Richard III to suppress the Plantagenet line. There has never been evidence the Princes were murdered.
They are all a bunch of over pampered fusspots pampered
Andrew behaps
Present Prince Edward, never put a step wrong. Harry and his "wife" should be on this list also, never heard of someone being so evil towards their loving parents.
I didn't know about Elizabeth I.
Prince Harry has to be in this list, he’s breached the privacy to his family by writing about private conversations especially at funerals and when the late queen was dying. I could go on about all the things he’s done try to destroy the monarchy. He even ‘joked’ about killing his father with a typhoon etc
Care to back that up with legitimate sources? Oh and British tabloids don't count seeing as they lie.
Unless proven otherwise, it's complete and utter bullshit.
Please, do go on. I would like to hear how much you know. 😂
Henry VIII didn't just kill 2 of his wives and their suspected loves, he killed 70,000 of his own people. He alone was worse than the entire Plantagenet 300 yr reign, BUT if you include his daughter Bloody Mary and the burning at the stake of thousands of Protestants, then, Elizabeth I's, the Tudor Dynasty make anytihng any king or queen had ever done, angelic for sure!
This is why prince John aka king John was really the phoney king of England in real life
10. James VI (Scotland)/James I(England)
9. George IV
8. Prince Andrew
7. Henry VIII
6. Richard III
5. John(Magna Carta)
4. Richard II
3. Edward VIII
2. Elizabeth I
1. Mary I
Any one seen its a royal knockout ,,Edward should be no 1 ,,its evil being in a 2 hr car crash 😮
Harry should be in this list helloooooo.
How come Prince Andrew isn't on this list or the Queen? We don't know what goes behind close doors.
You mean the Prince Andrew at #8 or a different one?
@@MrTheGadfly The Queen's son Prince Andrew and the Queen. Both have done terribly things.
@@spacejam8765 Andrew is on there didn't you watch it and tell me what hideous things the queen did please state facts not stories
@@markbarker6739 Well we don't know what the Queen has done but can you really tell me that she was squeaky clean? And no, I didn't watch this video. I just saw it in my video's and Prince Andrew pop in my head straight away. 😀
@@spacejam8765 We probably not know in our lifetimes and when her history is released to the public it will be too late for anyone to give a damn about it.
There are several families that have ruled England.
Well you aren't wrong but Henry the 8th last wife should be with these ppl. Elizabeth 1st was the way she was partly because of Henry 8th 6th wife and her evil brothers. All of her other step mothers wasn't as bad to her. As his final wife.
If my knowledge serves me correctly about James the VI, historically he's been looked at as one of the worst monarchs ever, but in recent history that's been re-examined and he's thought of as a serious and thoughtful monarch with the best of intentions that just couldn't quite rise to the occasion and devastated most of central Europe in his attempt to unify everyone
Classic watchmojo fact checking!
He says Henry VIII lined up Catherine Howard right after Anne Blloleyn, missing out two other wives in the meantime.
You forgot Harry!
Good afternoon everyone
So prince John aka king John was a real life Disney villian
Today days they go away with murder blaming the paparazzi.
If this doesn't have Andrew as No 1...
Hi pretty lady. How are you doing today? And how is the weather over there????
4:55 - 4:59 King Henry the 4th? Don't you mean King Edward the 4th?!!!!
The lion king was based on the true story of king Richard 3
Interesting
Seriously?
That second entry made it in????
As opposed to bad king John or Edward who invaded Scotland
Edward iv was edward v s father. You obviously don t know that henry vi son died before his father
No George Brett?
Surprisingly the late queen's mother and father didn't receive a mention for forcing those poor little darlings to perform their Sieg Heils.
1) because they were not royal
& 2) it wasn't her parents, it was her brother and sister in law
@@timallardyce1216 They were all Saxe Coburg Unt Gotha.
@@jamesoneill2933 no they weren't. They were Bowes-Lyons
@@timallardyce1216 At the time of being filmed, as depicted in the Sun newspaper , Alfred , Harold , Arthur , George brother to the then King and Nazi agent , was born with the name Saxe Coburg Unt Gotha.
His First name was Alfred not George and his given name was not Windsor.
Von Battenburg , Windsor, Hanover or Saxe Coburg Unt Gotha, it changes little in that they are all inherently racist.
@@jamesoneill2933 oops
Sorry. Just realised I replied to the wrong comment
Suggestion to British regents: don’t call your son Arthur or they are guaranteed to die before they can be crowned.
You forgot Prince Harry....
What about the rest?
Andrew no. One
Richard the first (the lion hearted) upon his return was Coronated where some of the richest Jews in England "dared" to attend bearing appropriate gifts his men and he were so insulted they carried out the first pogrom murdering, maiming, and otherwise harming the Jewish population of London after which Jews were banned from living in England for hundreds of years. He also belongs on this list.
Word was actually sent out prior to the coronation, that witches and jews were told not to come. Apparently several of the Jewish community didn't receive the message. Richard De Clare Earl of Pembroke, has the account of what happened in his papers.
@@ladyjustice1474 does that really matter? His soldiers ravaged the entire Jewish quarter.
Perhaps there's a lesson here: the monarchy has had its share of lemons over the years. Not all the individuals were "king" material. You can add Harry's name to your list----number 11.
Anne, the Princess Royal is my favorite and the hardest working. Megan would be my least favorite as she's all about herself and whines like a toddler. Have to mention Edward, the spoiled baby and embarrassment to the Royal family.
ONLY 10?
9:01 I'm sorry am I hearing this correctly 😳
A little piece of information about Edward the 8th he was the rightful King and the English Church conspired against his rain told him that he couldn't marry who he wanted. Basically committed treason against him. Slandered him in every way I'm sure he wasn't to happy with england that doesn't make him Evil as a matter of fact he was a kind person and much more normal and humble than the modern day royal's
ELIZABETH l what sort of joke is that she is Britain's greatest Monarch, and still admired today as she should be.🤨
What about Richard 1 (the Lionheart) who had 2000 Muslim soldiers beheaded at Ayyadieh ? Or William IV (Queen Victoria's uncle) who actively and aggressively campaigned against the end of the Transatlantic slave trade and who represented the interests of West Indies solve owners in Parliament ? He also abandoned his long term lover Mrs Jordan who bore him 10 children (she would die in poverty) Or Edward I who expelled the Jewish community from England (the first country to do so?)
This is very imaginative, manages to fall into every Heffalump trap.
tabloid history
Richard the third wasn't a bad man Shakespeare wrote him as a villain to get in Queen Elizabeth the first's favour.
Exactly!
Actually he helped the average everyday man with different things. Like making life easier for them, or reforms, by having the idea of a bail that was easy to make.
You missed Prince Harry.
You can now add Prince Harry to the list.
He is not evil he just wants people like you to leave him alone to bring up his children with his wife
No Harry is not evil. Wanting to bring up his children without the British Public and British press hassling Harry & Meghan evil. Nor does their interview with Oprah or other interviews make them evil.
@@pennyboulton9676the borrowed children you mean ?
Harry is a traitor! His wife is a gold digger! Nutmeg tells lies, mocks and makes fun of queen Elizabeth and British traditions on national television while Harry is too stupid to see it. They only sees $$$$.