@@allanbarton exactrly the same for me ! I am French and my English is getting more and more approximate as I haven't been to England or Ireland for many years, but still I understood everything yu said ... i am fascinated by English history and particularly with this boy who was once the only hope of Henry VIII !
I would have put my money on the Pole family, Henry VIII did not regard them as dangerous adversaries for no reason. They had a strong claim to the English throne . Robert Prummel Groningen
@@RobertPrummel it is academic of course, but Henry VIII did rather a lot of things in his reign that were unthinkable. A woman as queen regnant was unthinkable too (empress Maud doesn't really count), but it happened anyway and he made that happen.
@@RobertPrummel certainly the Pole family were the biggest threat and Henry constantly felt that. I suspect that by 1547, if they were still at liberty, their Catholicism would have prevented their general acceptance.
What a treat this was! This is a hugely interesting period of history, and we can only speculate on the might-have-beens. I think if the king had really been preparing to make Henry his heir, then we would have some better portraits of him. As usual your illustrations are excellent, and the more usual 'antiquary'' content at the end of the video was fascinating. Thank you again.
I wonder if there might originally have been some larger, better portraits of Fitzroy that don't survive? Edward VI, Mary I, and Elizabeth I might not have been likely to have had a huge interest in preserving full-size portraits of their illegitimate half-brother, and it might not have been a high priority for the Stuart kings either. Then there was the Civil War and Commonwealth of the mid-1600s, in which innumerable things connected with royalty were destroyed. We'll never know, of course, but I do wonder if the little miniature of Fitzroy survived just because it was small and relatively easy to keep hidden?
@@wormswithteeththere are a number of usurpers, but I can only think of one confirmed bastard, William I. Every other allegation I've read is a tenuous attempt to sell books or the ranting of madmen. Click bait isn't a new thing
The greater danger is that England would have been plunged into dynastic conflict again, which would have been disastrous against the back drop of the reformation. Absolute carnage
@christinesuccop1812, "An illegitimate king might have set a dangerous precedent?" So George 111 from Germany and William 111 of Netherlands were "legitimate?" Wonderful what "legal gymnastics" can be done with a "little influence. "Religion", Money and the ensuing power-- all that's needed is the "right" news."
Ah, Henry Fitzroy, one of the two main characters in the Canadian Blood Ties TV show. The show wasn't that great but I loved they chose to create the vampire character as a Henry Fitzroy who never died, just became a vampire back in the day.
I "stumbled" upon Fitzroy's tomb at Framlingham in Sept 2019 when visiting the area. I knew his half sister Mary was well loved in the area but wasn't aware of his Howard connection and how it ended up with his remains being entombed there. Was a beautiful sight to behold nonetheless.
Thank you so much for bringing up the idea about the stability of the country being the reason for needing a male heir. I despise Henry as a manipulative cruel man. However, civil war is the one thing that will hurt a country more than anything else. Economically it's devastating. That's why they needed a male heir. Most people just think Henry was being selfish and wanting a boy to follow him. Some of it was selfish of course, but most of it was needed for the country.
Totally, with what was effectively a 32 year long civil war within living memory and regular bouts of plague it's quite understandable. Most people in the West today are very comfortable and often miss very important context.
Z@@allanbarton My expertise is 15th century Scandinavis, thesis subject, Use some 15th century comparisons in it. Just love the detai level of your work
@allanbarton He didn't take much responsibility on, but that was probably quite universal with Kings 🙄 I also believe he had his father's tax collectors executed soon after his reign started to appease the people 🤷♀️ I just personally think the king we see in his later years was always there but life treated him better when he was younger. If Prince Henry had survived, Henry probably would have stayed good and kind.
@@cenedra2143He may have stayed a decent King had he not endured a Jousting injury that, it seems likely, caused a head injury and a resulting change of disposition for the worst. Certainly there are reports that he changed after the accident. A leg ulcer that left him in constant pain in his later life would also have contributed to his bad temper.
Henry VIII remembered the “Anarchy”. Henry I persuaded the nobles to agree that his daughter, the Empress Mathilda, should succeed him. Following his death, the nation was divided. Half accepted the Empress Mathilda, half supported Stephen. The resulting civil war lasted several years, until a compromise was reached. Stephen would be King, but the Empress Mathilda’s son would then succeed him as Henry I. Nevertheless, by the time of the death of Edward VI, views had changed. The nation was, by then, prepared to accept a female Sovereign. Some supported Lady Jane Grey, some Mary. There was a short civil war, which everyone expected Lady Jane Grey’s forces to win. Instead, by good fortune, Mary’s forces won against all the odds. There then followed successful reigns by female Sovereigns - Mary I, Elizabeth I, Queen Anne, Queen Mary II, Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II.
He had initially nominated his daughter, but later named Stephen when they fell out. She persuaded half the nobility to follow her, and they did so because she was the granddaughter of William
To bad not knowing where she is buried and that there is only that small portrait of the kings son. You would think that the king would have wanted more portraits of his son. There are so many movies about the older king. I was wondering if you knew of any movies about his life as a younger king?
Interesting. Henry Fitzroy is one of the great "what-ifs" of history - what if Henry VIII hadn't had a legitimate son with Jane Seymour and Fitzroy hadn't died in 1536 - would he have been made heir and subsequently become King?
Bessie Blounts husband Clinton had lands directly adjacent to hers in Lincolnshire so it was mutually beneficial for them to get together in terms of power in the area
I am not sure that you mentioned this but, I believe that Henry Fitzroy was also created Earl Of Nottingham by Henry VIII as well. There is also a book about this young man that I have read. It's called Bastard Prince Henry VIII Lost Son by Beverly A Murphy. It is truly an interesting read.
It is not insignificant, and I think I mentioned it. He was made Earl of Nottingham just before being created duke on the same day. I've not read Dr Murphy's book - I should give it a go, thanks for the recommendation.
It is actually a rather contentious issue, but the general consensus among art historians at present is that the Berger portrait is of Henry, and that it was painted around 1509 at the beginning of his reign when he was seventeen. The trouble is Arthur and Henry were brothers, and most probably looked very alike. www.denverartmuseum.org/en/object/2021.29
@allanbarton I always thought his Dad was trying a bit too hard naming him Arthur. But he seemed to go ott with a number of things imo. Great video btw, thanks for replying 👍
@@davidevans3227 they are all directly relate to the audio - when a new person is mentioned, a new image pops up of them. So best to follow the audio as your guide.
@allanbarton mm.. Thankyou, taking time for so many replies.. that metal thing on top of the stone? something to do with child's death? and i thought i'd seen the pic of the lady used for Elizabeth, elsewhere.. ? (i don't mean with you, it seems a recognisable picture) sorry, it probably comes across like i'm having a go.. as far as i'm concerned i'm not, but nevermind 🙂 x i appreciate your immense hard work (no idea if it's just you? or a team) i mentioned st Fagan's to you years ago, not far from where i live, and the painted church there (st teilo is it?) was stunned when i first saw that church, even shocked maybe? but was so pleased that you knew of it and visited, if i remember rightly.. 🙂 x love it and the place.. and also i'm fairly sure you said you worked on wolf hall? (for some reason i want to say quills) 🙂 if i got that right.. that's wonderful i think.. makes me wonder about the mirror and the light.. ? thankyou, anyway, david.
No - it's fantasy fiction and FitzRoy wasn't a vampire. They do sound like fun books though, they may even entice me (not a fiction reader) to read them.
Oh what a tangled web we weave. The Royals have always played away as it were. May I take this opportunity to wish you and your family a Happy Christmas and all the best for 2025.
Nice pictures! It should be noticed though that this depicted "procession of the Knights of the Garter" is just symbolic. These kings never assembled and they would not have worn "heraldic mantles" as depicted. In fact, I am convinced that heraldic mantles were never actualy worn, they were just a ploy to identify a royal or armigerous person. Moreover, these monarchs would never have consented in giving precedence to a bastard!
Like the Black Books produced by other establishments (such as cathedrals) the Black Book of the Garter is essentially a ceremonial manual for the officers, its made function is to lay down existing tradition and establish precedent in ceremonial. The image was about about establishing clearly the order of precedence among the knights. None of the stranger knights attended as far as I'm aware, had they done so as sovereigns they would have taken precedence over all English lords. The heraldic mantles were certainly never worn, but it was a helpful way of visually showing that established precedence. I ought to do a short video on the Black Book as part of my irregular Garter series.
Henry proved he could sire a son but no end to problems in pregnancy of his wives Catherine and anne which leads me to believe they may have contracted a disease such as chlamydia from Henry who was no stranger to outside dalliances.
If you go into the disastrous 'Confinement' practices, lack of hygiene and nutritional beliefs of the upper classes at the time it made them as equally prone to childbirth issues as their Peasant counterparts, if for different reasons.
@@Arielsfork chlamydia wasnt known then and wasnt detectable like the “pox” of henry’s time. Of course there are many other reasons for problems of this kind and this is just one possibility.
@@OdeInWessex Yes indeed. Medical historians speculate that in those days, a pregnant woman had a far better chance of surviving childbirth if she were attended by a midwife (who would have used harmless/helpful herbal medicines and would have had extensive delivery experience) than if she were attended by a physician. These Doctors, whose "medical" studies at university consisted of the Classics i.e. the superstitions of the ancient Greeks, used toxic alchemical concoctions containing metals such as mercury, and their practical "training" was obtained from observing dental work and operations performed at barbers' surgeries. What they were taught about obstetrics was outright dangerous.
The U.K. wouldn’t exist, and England may have become a person union or vassal state of the Spanish empire. The British empire likely wouldn’t have existed and would have been under the Spanish, meaning the USA as we currently know it wouldn’t exist, and neither would modern China, as the fall of the Qing dynasty was heavily influenced by the opium wars. Most countries we currently know would be completely different without the British empire which began under Elizabeth I and later the Stewarts who wouldn’t have had the throne had Arthur lived, and since it is the cause of more independence days than any other nation and without its influence the world would be unrecognisable
Yes, and Henry was terribly anxious about the possibility of Civil War again, which accounts in a large degree for his paranoia about the need for a male heir.
I have a number of atheist and agnostic friends today who are far more superstitious than I am, and when you start digging into the past you often find some very rational attitudes
I was hanging on every word. Henry would be proud of the respect you showed him.
Thank you David.
@@allanbarton exactrly the same for me ! I am French and my English is getting more and more approximate as I haven't been to England or Ireland for many years, but still I understood everything yu said ... i am fascinated by English history and particularly with this boy who was once the only hope of Henry VIII !
Hi Allan! One is given the impression that Henry VIII was most certainly hedging his bet with Fitzroy just in case a legitimate heir did not...emerge.
I think that is very much the case Terry. I wonder what England would have been like if FitzRoy had lived and succeeded?
No, an illegitimate child would not have been accepted as a king, the distant plantagenet descendents would have rebelled and taken the throne.
I would have put my money on the Pole family, Henry VIII did not regard them as dangerous adversaries for no reason. They had a strong claim to the English throne . Robert Prummel Groningen
@@RobertPrummel it is academic of course, but Henry VIII did rather a lot of things in his reign that were unthinkable. A woman as queen regnant was unthinkable too (empress Maud doesn't really count), but it happened anyway and he made that happen.
@@RobertPrummel certainly the Pole family were the biggest threat and Henry constantly felt that. I suspect that by 1547, if they were still at liberty, their Catholicism would have prevented their general acceptance.
Another piece of history quite new to me in full. Thanks a lot for posting. Regards, John.
My pleasure!
You always do a fantastic job. Cheers!
Thank you very much!
What a treat this was! This is a hugely interesting period of history, and we can only speculate on the might-have-beens. I think if the king had really been preparing to make Henry his heir, then we would have some better portraits of him. As usual your illustrations are excellent, and the more usual 'antiquary'' content at the end of the video was fascinating. Thank you again.
I wonder if there might originally have been some larger, better portraits of Fitzroy that don't survive? Edward VI, Mary I, and Elizabeth I might not have been likely to have had a huge interest in preserving full-size portraits of their illegitimate half-brother, and it might not have been a high priority for the Stuart kings either. Then there was the Civil War and Commonwealth of the mid-1600s, in which innumerable things connected with royalty were destroyed. We'll never know, of course, but I do wonder if the little miniature of Fitzroy survived just because it was small and relatively easy to keep hidden?
So well done as usual Alan. Thank you.
Another wonderfully proper and wholesome video. So much better than anything traditional telly has supplied in decades! Thank you and God Bless
Wow, thank you very much! I’m so glad you’re enjoying my videos!
As always, superb content. Thank you.
My pleasure!
Forever in your debt for these wonderful installments, Allan. Thank you very much.
My pleasure!
Actually something new.
Excellent upload.
New sub.😊
Thank you and welcome to the channel, I hope you enjoy it.
While it's sad that Fitzroy died young i think it was for the best. An illegitimate king might have set a dangerous precedent.
Great video ❤
Have you r e a d English history??
@@wormswithteeththere are a number of usurpers, but I can only think of one confirmed bastard, William I. Every other allegation I've read is a tenuous attempt to sell books or the ranting of madmen. Click bait isn't a new thing
The greater danger is that England would have been plunged into dynastic conflict again, which would have been disastrous against the back drop of the reformation. Absolute carnage
@christinesuccop1812, "An illegitimate king might have set a dangerous precedent?" So George 111 from Germany and William 111 of Netherlands were "legitimate?" Wonderful what "legal gymnastics" can be done with a "little influence. "Religion", Money and the ensuing power-- all that's needed is the "right" news."
Ah, Henry Fitzroy, one of the two main characters in the Canadian Blood Ties TV show. The show wasn't that great but I loved they chose to create the vampire character as a Henry Fitzroy who never died, just became a vampire back in the day.
The books are great!
Fantastic! Thank you, Alan!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Just short of 100k subscribers! Well deserved and congratulations ❤
Thank you very much!
What a great video, truly fascinating. I had no idea that H8 held his son in such high regard, despite his illegitimacy.
I "stumbled" upon Fitzroy's tomb at Framlingham in Sept 2019 when visiting the area.
I knew his half sister Mary was well loved in the area but wasn't aware of his Howard connection and how it ended up with his remains being entombed there. Was a beautiful sight to behold nonetheless.
Thank you so much for bringing up the idea about the stability of the country being the reason for needing a male heir. I despise Henry as a manipulative cruel man. However, civil war is the one thing that will hurt a country more than anything else. Economically it's devastating. That's why they needed a male heir. Most people just think Henry was being selfish and wanting a boy to follow him. Some of it was selfish of course, but most of it was needed for the country.
Totally, with what was effectively a 32 year long civil war within living memory and regular bouts of plague it's quite understandable. Most people in the West today are very comfortable and often miss very important context.
Your videos are so wonderful. I love the warmth and humanity with which you describe these figures from history. They really come to life.
Thank you very much, I’m so glad you’re appreciating my work!
Great video and very well researched.
Thank you very much, glad you enjoyed it!
so interesting. Love this channel.
Glad you enjoyed it 😊
Z@@allanbarton
My expertise is 15th century Scandinavis, thesis subject,
Use some 15th century comparisons in it.
Just love the detai level of your work
A very well prepared and presented account..
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you again. Late seeing this so I will wish you a Happy Christmas too ❤😊
You too Jill, thank you!
There was a fantasy series by Tanya Huff that has Henry Fitzroy surviving to the 20th century as a vampire.
Thank you ❤
I wish more people would remember his younger days, in appearance at least. He was always a monster if he thought he needed to be!
I think he was a good king in his early years, a fine, strong and able prince.
@allanbarton He didn't take much responsibility on, but that was probably quite universal with Kings 🙄 I also believe he had his father's tax collectors executed soon after his reign started to appease the people 🤷♀️ I just personally think the king we see in his later years was always there but life treated him better when he was younger. If Prince Henry had survived, Henry probably would have stayed good and kind.
@@cenedra2143He may have stayed a decent King had he not endured a Jousting injury that, it seems likely, caused a head injury and a resulting change of disposition for the worst. Certainly there are reports that he changed after the accident. A leg ulcer that left him in constant pain in his later life would also have contributed to his bad temper.
Henry VIII remembered the “Anarchy”. Henry I persuaded the nobles to agree that his daughter, the Empress Mathilda, should succeed him. Following his death, the nation was divided. Half accepted the Empress Mathilda, half supported Stephen. The resulting civil war lasted several years, until a compromise was reached. Stephen would be King, but the Empress Mathilda’s son would then succeed him as Henry I. Nevertheless, by the time of the death of Edward VI, views had changed. The nation was, by then, prepared to accept a female Sovereign. Some supported Lady Jane Grey, some Mary. There was a short civil war, which everyone expected Lady Jane Grey’s forces to win. Instead, by good fortune, Mary’s forces won against all the odds. There then followed successful reigns by female Sovereigns - Mary I, Elizabeth I, Queen Anne, Queen Mary II, Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II.
He had initially nominated his daughter, but later named Stephen when they fell out. She persuaded half the nobility to follow her, and they did so because she was the granddaughter of William
To bad not knowing where she is buried and that there is only that small portrait of the kings son. You would think that the king would have wanted more portraits of his son. There are so many movies about the older king. I was wondering if you knew of any movies about his life as a younger king?
The Tudors series is a good depiction of his youth
*Too bad
Looking forward to this! Have you made a feature on Prince Arthur? Would you consider doing so?
That is on the cards - but I'm going to do some filming in Ludlow and Worcester before I do it, so it may be next Spring.
@allanbarton Nice! Another one to anticipate.
Very captivating
I am very pleased for Elizabeth Blunt who had a very pleasant life after all ...
Interesting. Henry Fitzroy is one of the great "what-ifs" of history - what if Henry VIII hadn't had a legitimate son with Jane Seymour and Fitzroy hadn't died in 1536 - would he have been made heir and subsequently become King?
I feel spoilt with all this informative content.
Burial for the powerful in those days was the start of a journey.
Bessie Blounts husband Clinton had lands directly adjacent to hers in Lincolnshire so it was mutually beneficial for them to get together in terms of power in the area
more accurate than Wolf Hall
I am not sure that you mentioned this but, I believe that Henry Fitzroy was also created Earl Of Nottingham by Henry VIII as well. There is also a book about this young man that I have read. It's called Bastard Prince Henry VIII Lost Son by Beverly A Murphy. It is truly an interesting read.
It is not insignificant, and I think I mentioned it. He was made Earl of Nottingham just before being created duke on the same day. I've not read Dr Murphy's book - I should give it a go, thanks for the recommendation.
Who's portrait is it early in the video? I've seen some say it's Arthur, Henry's brother. Or is it Henry himself? 0:32
It is actually a rather contentious issue, but the general consensus among art historians at present is that the Berger portrait is of Henry, and that it was painted around 1509 at the beginning of his reign when he was seventeen. The trouble is Arthur and Henry were brothers, and most probably looked very alike. www.denverartmuseum.org/en/object/2021.29
@allanbarton I always thought his Dad was trying a bit too hard naming him Arthur. But he seemed to go ott with a number of things imo.
Great video btw, thanks for replying 👍
there are a few pictures/images,
wondering what they are of..
e.g. 01.30 mins, what's that?
01.55 mins, who's that?
etc..
@@davidevans3227 they are all directly relate to the audio - when a new person is mentioned, a new image pops up of them. So best to follow the audio as your guide.
@allanbarton mm..
Thankyou, taking time for so many replies..
that metal thing on top of the stone? something to do with child's death?
and i thought i'd seen the pic of the lady used for Elizabeth, elsewhere.. ?
(i don't mean with you, it seems a recognisable picture)
sorry, it probably comes across like i'm having a go..
as far as i'm concerned i'm not,
but nevermind 🙂 x
i appreciate your immense hard work (no idea if it's just you? or a team)
i mentioned st Fagan's to you years ago, not far from where i live,
and the painted church there (st teilo is it?)
was stunned when i first saw that church, even shocked maybe?
but was so pleased that you knew of it and visited, if i remember rightly.. 🙂 x
love it and the place..
and also i'm fairly sure you said you worked on wolf hall?
(for some reason i want to say quills) 🙂 if i got that right..
that's wonderful i think..
makes me wonder about the mirror and the light.. ?
thankyou, anyway,
david.
I have a question : where is Framingham ? this monument is awesome !
Framlingham, it is right smack in the middle of Suffolk.
@@allanbarton thanks !
So Henry didn't mind having the grave of his son disturbed. Kind of sounds like if someone wasn't of used to him, Henry discarded them.
That's what narcissists do.
Merry christmas
At last ! Cadavers!
There is always a dead body waiting just around the corner on my channel!
No mention of the books by Tanya Huff, or the series "Blood Ties"?
No - it's fantasy fiction and FitzRoy wasn't a vampire. They do sound like fun books though, they may even entice me (not a fiction reader) to read them.
@@allanbarton they are good escapist fiction. Well thought out plots.
They do sound entertaining - another alternate universe.
Why would he mention fictional books? This is about actual history
@@ArielsforkT'was a comment mayde in jest methinks..(hope this is historical enough for your tastes)..
Oh what a tangled web we weave. The Royals have always played away as it were. May I take this opportunity to wish you and your family a Happy Christmas and all the best for 2025.
Thank you Chris, and a merry Christmas to you too.
Nice pictures! It should be noticed though that this depicted "procession of the Knights of the Garter" is just symbolic. These kings never assembled and they would not have worn "heraldic mantles" as depicted. In fact, I am convinced that heraldic mantles were never actualy worn, they were just a ploy to identify a royal or armigerous person. Moreover, these monarchs would never have consented in giving precedence to a bastard!
Like the Black Books produced by other establishments (such as cathedrals) the Black Book of the Garter is essentially a ceremonial manual for the officers, its made function is to lay down existing tradition and establish precedent in ceremonial. The image was about about establishing clearly the order of precedence among the knights. None of the stranger knights attended as far as I'm aware, had they done so as sovereigns they would have taken precedence over all English lords. The heraldic mantles were certainly never worn, but it was a helpful way of visually showing that established precedence. I ought to do a short video on the Black Book as part of my irregular Garter series.
That Gucci headscarf is very chic.
Masterwork. Thank you.
Thanks very much, you are very welcome!
Henry proved he could sire a son but no end to problems in pregnancy of his wives Catherine and anne which leads me to believe they may have contracted a disease such as chlamydia from Henry who was no stranger to outside dalliances.
This has been ruled out as the cause. He didn't have an std.
If you go into the disastrous 'Confinement' practices, lack of hygiene and nutritional beliefs of the upper classes at the time it made them as equally prone to childbirth issues as their Peasant counterparts, if for different reasons.
@@Arielsfork chlamydia wasnt known then and wasnt detectable like the “pox” of henry’s time. Of course there are many other reasons for problems of this kind and this is just one possibility.
@@OdeInWessex Yes indeed. Medical historians speculate that in those days, a pregnant woman had a far better chance of surviving childbirth if she were attended by a midwife (who would have used harmless/helpful herbal medicines and would have had extensive delivery experience) than if she were attended by a physician. These Doctors, whose "medical" studies at university consisted of the Classics i.e. the superstitions of the ancient Greeks, used toxic alchemical concoctions containing metals such as mercury, and their practical "training" was obtained from observing dental work and operations performed at barbers' surgeries. What they were taught about obstetrics was outright dangerous.
His face looks a bit like Elizabeth I's and Henry V's.
Yeah, it really does! Certainly a strong family resemblance!
Makes one think about what the world would be like under the timeline of King Arthur the 1st
The U.K. wouldn’t exist, and England may have become a person union or vassal state of the Spanish empire. The British empire likely wouldn’t have existed and would have been under the Spanish, meaning the USA as we currently know it wouldn’t exist, and neither would modern China, as the fall of the Qing dynasty was heavily influenced by the opium wars. Most countries we currently know would be completely different without the British empire which began under Elizabeth I and later the Stewarts who wouldn’t have had the throne had Arthur lived, and since it is the cause of more independence days than any other nation and without its influence the world would be unrecognisable
HENRY DUCK
Any danger of an M.R. James adjacent video for Christmas?
I may just be up in Yorkshire working on one - if it gets finished it will land on Christmas Eve.
@allanbarton oh my giddy aunt!!!
That whole legitimate. Illegitimate comes back to bite him in the arse
I think if Fitzroy had survived Henry, there would have been an almighty battle for the succession. Wars of the Roses part 2 anyone ?
Yes, and Henry was terribly anxious about the possibility of Civil War again, which accounts in a large degree for his paranoia about the need for a male heir.
❤🇳🇱
I suppose back then and in the UK moving bodies was normal. Seems strange being they were so superstitious.
Yes, it was pretty routine. There were no superstitions regarding dead bodies.
I have a number of atheist and agnostic friends today who are far more superstitious than I am, and when you start digging into the past you often find some very rational attitudes
Abolish the monarchy.
Jolly good. I'm afraid I'm not a dictator, so don't have the power to do so.