The Controversial Rise Of Henry VII: The First Tudor | Henry VII Winter King | Chronicle
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 มิ.ย. 2024
- In 1501, England had been ravaged for decades by conspiracy, coups, and violence. Based off his best-selling book, Thomas Penn invites us into the dark and chilling world of the world of the first Tudor king, Henry VII. From his victory over Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth, to his secret death and the succession of his son Henry VIII, this programme reveals the ruthless tactics Henry VII used to win - and cling on to - the ultimate prize, the throne of England. Exploring magnificent buildings and long-lost documents, Penn reveals the true story of this suspicious, enigmatic and terrifying monarch.
Welcome to Chronicle; your home for all things medieval history! With documentaries covering everything from the collapse of the Roman Empire to the beginnings of the Renaissance, from Hastings to Charlemagne, we'll be exploring everything the Middle Ages have to offer.
Subscribe now so you don't miss out!
Chronicle is part of the History Hit Network. To get in touch please email owned-enquiries@littledotstudios.com.
It's like Netflix for history... 📺 Sign up to History Hit, the world's best history documentary service and get 50% off using the code 'CHRONICLE' 👉 bit.ly/3iVCZNl
The roles that both his mother Margaret Beaufort and his wife Elizabeth of York played in his success can not be discounted. Margaret laid the foundation so he could show up, swing a sword and pluck up his crown. Elizabeth was arguably the rightful heir to her father's crown and conveyed all of her rights and aims onto Henry when she married him.
I think Clarences son Edward Plantagenet ;Earl of Warwick was next in line following Bosworth Field
Remember this above all: he was the smartest person in the room, and he had learned in the hardest schools of the time: the snake-pit courts of France and England. And he was supremely blessed in the persons of his mother and his wife.
Remember, too, that the 2,000 French troops and Scottish auxiliaries at Bosworth Field were some of the finest in Europe. And he had the Stanley's. They knew he was the future. And they, too, had vied with Richard of Gloucester over control of the Marches. Never forget the local elements of politics.
This is a great documentary but I've seen it about 5 times on this channel alone under different titles. Changing the title doesn't change the video, and if you are a huge fan of medieval history like I am, you start to come to resent being "tricked" by click-bait to click on the same video over and over again simply because the title has been changed. How about something new on your channel once in a while? I mean something REALLY new--not just an old video with a new name!!
Dude i was thinking the same thing how come no channels in the now our now as i write obiously in digital format but you get me the now no great specials
I thought I wss the only one who noticed them doing this. Same shows recycled w 15 different titles
Try being a Titanic armchair historian. The clickbait is even worse than medieval documentrys. Its annoying as hell and I feel your pain. Lucky for me I've never seen this one.
A wonderful documentary. I love reading about Medieval history. I would have to say that one of the best things that Henry VII had was his wife Elizabeth of York. Even his mother Margaret Beaufort was another good thing for him. They played a huge part in his success.
Agree and from all accounts it was a love match for them. He was a kinder King with her around. And she was smart to let her Mother in law feel she was in control and stayed out of her path. The fact he never married again was a testament to their relationship.
Henry Tudor right to be king was by conquest - nothing else. He had no legitimate right by lineage as his father's line was not part of Plantagenet family. True his grandmother on his father's side had been Queen of England (widow of Henry V), but that did not give him the right to the crown. On his mother's side he claim was only slightly better. She was a descendent of Edward III through John of Gaunt.(the 3rd son of Edward III) but as a woman at this time her right for succession was not recognized, especially since there were other Plantagenet family members who were alive and had better claims. All that being said, Henry Tudor did win the crown at Bosworth by combat.
‘Heavy is the head that wears the crown.’ I remember this as something my father told me. Just looked it up - Shakespeare wrote it. Thank you for telling us about Dudley. I’m curious as to how many plots there were about him. Dudley sounds like he was impressed with his own power. He let it go to his head. 😀
Weary, I thought 🤔
It is, “UNEASY is the head that wears the crown.” My goodness, @Grace American, where did you look it up???
Call him a miser king but he was really a visionarie. He left his son Henry VIII a fortune that Henry VIII managed to squander in about a decade or so. He was a brilliant strategist and a founder of the most famous , notorious British dynasty , the Tudors
He was Welsh. Nothing can remove that taint.
@@andrewemery4272 What’s wrong with the Welsh people?
@@andrewemery4272 Don’t be silly and pedantic….he was only partly Welsh, even if that part wasn’t royal.
Excellent presentation, thanks very much
Amazing video
Well put !
This is absolutely gripping!
That floor is… stunning.
Loved this.
Fascinating. Great to see the actual evidence applicable to the context.
Loved this
Oh I love this
This is extremely important in British history. As a history buff I’m interested in the Tudor dynasty. I’m trying to learn as much I can about this period.
I might watch too many scary movies, but I swear the effigy of Henry VII’s eye moved lol. That’s fun lol
Yes he was the first Tudor King. What a great usurper and he succeeded in ushering a notorious dynasty. I still find him fascinating!
What dynasty could not be called 'notorious'! Henry VII ended The Wars of the Roses and established responsible gov't in England for the first time in generations. This would finally put England on the path to grandeur and its eventual place on the world stage. I think that spoke well of him in the scheme of things.
All dynasties start off with *usurpers*: look at William of Normandy ("the Conqueror").
i think common and bastard blood is good for a bloodline, owen tudor the stable man who gave the name to this dynasty, margaret beaufort as henry s mother : beaufort is just a made up last name for a bastard line of a prince, John of Gaunt head of house of Lancaster as third son of Edward III. Margret was descended from John ad his mistress, the governess of his kids........Elizabeth Woodville , grandmother to Henry VIII, commoner family whose marriage to Edward IV dismayed friends and relatives.. Elizabeth I and Elizabeth of York, henry vii s wife were named after Elizabeth Woodville, who worked with margaret beaufort for the marriage of their children future henry vii and elizabeth york , in order to end the War, and save their kids lives. Elizabeth Woodville had gone looking for sanctuary for herself and her kids several times during the wars and in the end, lost her two boys, one of them a king
@@kweejibodali7009 John of Gaunt's paramour Katherine was married to one of his knights. When he died they became lovers and he installed her as governess of his diseased wife Blanche of Lancaster's 3 children. They parted after the peasant's uprising. Later reuniting, they married and the Pope legitimised their 4 children.
Henry Tudor usurped the throne from a usurper named Richard III, who usurped the throne from the son of a usurper named Edward IV, who usurped the throne from the grandson of a usurper named Henry IV.
Christ! 3 ad breaks in less than 6 minutes. 21:25, 24:03, 27:04.
I'm someone who usually lets the ads run so you get paid for them all. Not a chance on here.
Try now, I've skipped 20 ads and had 5 unskippable 2 minute ads. Almost at 75% of the show. They're really pushing premium.
This is nothing more then a series of adds interrupted every two minutes by a history program .
Brilliant video and very informative, but, there are literally adverts every 10 minutes making it a very hard watch
Its intentionally done by youtube to drive you nuts and make you want to get the premium
They will LITERALLY put an 8 min commercial in the MIDDLE OF A SONG PLAYING, and if ur not near your phone, itll be 16 mins by the time you get to hear the last min of said song.
Quite a bit of important information glossed over or left out. Margaret Beaufort was a real mover and shaker and Stanley as well. Richard was besmirched forever by the machinations of the powers to put Henry on the throne. All done for money and power.
He was smart and powerful King who took the crown from usurper and his nephews murderer, made England wealth and strong country and finished War of Roses. Richard would never achieved anything of it. Margaret Beaufort married Stanley and arrange marriage between Henry and Elizabeth of York,but it was Henry and his army who convinced Stanley to support him in battle. Stop learning history from Philippa Gregory’s books
@@greendragon4870 I think Richard III & Henry VII were more similar than they were different. Both of them were more-or-less usurpers with shaky blood-claims who imprisoned various relatives, & both attempted the curb the powers of the nobility so as to centralize & stabilize England.
I have to give credit to Henry VII for achieving this goal; even at the height of his unpopularity, no one was in a position to depose him & he managed to leave the treasury fuller than he found it (of course, we both know his son would fritter away that small fortune). All the more impressive when he did it all without prior experience in estate management.
But Richard III was gearing up to do much of the same; he promised he would treat Commons and Lords equally before the laws (read: hold the nobility accountable), and Henry VII adopted many of Richard's policies. Henry VII was certainly an able man, but I don't think his ability was unique; Louis XI of France had done similar reforms a generation earlier in France, & had Richard III lived, I think he would have been equally successful in implementing them.
Richard, for all his many faults, was a better paper-pusher than his brother (whose sole talents appear to have been on the battlefield & in the bedroom), & were it not for his (perhaps justified) unpopularity with his brother's partisans, he probably would have turned out o-kay.
@@jeandehuit5385 great comment, I agree,they both were usurpers. Also Henry spend a lot of time in Brittany and France where he probably learn how to rule following example of Louis XI. But my sympathy still with Henry VII because I think he was not only a great king,but also because he achieved his goals no matter how hard and almost impossible it was and he was a good faithful husband. For me it is an example of strong personality. It’s a tragedy that his son and granddaughters destroyed the dynasty and legacy that’s he build
@@jeandehuit5385 Didn't Henry VII get all his money from putting taxes in everything possible? He had a city lawyer who helped him & when the lawyer decided to get in on the act & make £ for himself, Henry VIII separated the lawyer's head from his body once he was king.
@@citizen1163 That's the general idea, yeah. The part they leave out is that the people he was taxing was by-&-large the English nobility & gentry classes (e.g. people who can largely afford to pay such hefty taxes, & a group of people that don't inspire much sympathy given their otherwise overwhelming privilege).
But I'm a guy who would have supported Wat Tyler's peasant's revolt, so I suppose that lays my cards on the table.
I am descendants of King Jame V of Scotland who maternal grandfather was King Henry VII..
the art on the buildings,cloths and flags etc is so fucking impressive
This same documentary is called so many different names. The winter king is one of them. Can anyone make a new documentary on this guy? He is very interesting
BBC had The Shadow of the Tower series about him. Available on YT.
@@alancoe1002Thank you! Hadn’t heard of that one.
Does this chap narrate any other Docs? he is the best I have heard on this subject, by far.
If you like it, youll like the fact that they keep putting out this same show over and over under different titles, so it looks like a wide selection on the subject matter. According to this channel, this guy has done DOZENS of others...but when you click on them, they're all the same goddamn video
@@BRIANMASON1202 shame, hes fuxxing brilliant
As much as I adore Queen Elizabeth I.
I often wonder what would've happened if King Edward IV didn't die when he did and survive abit longer until his son, Prince Edward later King Edward V become of age to properly take the throne - who knows? I've often wondered if Perkin Warbeck was truly Prince Richard of York considering the majority support from the international monarchies beside Castile and Aragorn.
Or if Prince Arthur didn't die - would he treat Catherine of Aragorn alot better compared to his younger brother later King Henry VIII? what would've his reign been like? We all probably still be Roman Catholics but would he practice religious tolerance and acceptance like his niece did in her reign? We will never know...
It's a shame that the women weren't recognized as next in line to the throne as Margaret of York had a direct line to the throne from her father, George Duke of Clarence, brother to King Edward IV, and cousin to Princess later Queen Elizabeth of York. Yet, years later
King Henry VIII had an elderly Margaret Pole, Countess Sailsbury and her sons and grandsons executed due to their claim to the throne.
Perkin Warbeck WAS NOT the Duke of anything, let alone of York….where did you get your information, “The Tudors”? And all of your “what if’s” are just plain irrelevant….why even ask? These lives were not an intellectual exercise, and Fate drove the cart. The facts are, Henry Tudor had zero claim to the throne, _because his mother’s rich and powerful family, the Beauforts, WERE ILLEGITIMATE,_ THAT is why they were barred from inheriting the Crown. The other point you missed is that, _during the Wars of the Roses, WOMEN DID NOT LEAD MEN INTO BATTLE, AND NO SOLDIER WOULD HAVE BACKED A WOMAN._ Did you not know that when daughters of kings had children, they weren’t princes or princesses?? Only the sons of the Blood can call their children “Prince” or “Princess.” This was also true of today’s Princess Anne, whose children wouldn’t have been “Prince” or “Princess,” but she refused titles for her kids; and her Aunt Princess Margaret was also of the royal blood, but as a woman her children also weren’t eligible for the titles “Prince” or “Princess” (her children were “Lord” and “Lady,” but her son inherited the title Earl of Snowden after his father’s death). The rest is mere twaddle.
Mental illness and con artists was as prevalent back then as it is today. I would chalk it up Perkins conviced themselves they were King and tried to take a stab at the throne. The same as the woman that claimed she was the Czarina Anastasia. Until DNA proved she wasn't years later.
By the time Henry VIII started his new church there were already Lutherans and Reformed as well as Anabaptists and Waldensions.
The "niece" you speak of was his daughter Elizabeth 1, Queen Of England.
One thing this series has taught me.... Power corrupts even the best of Kings
What this video needed more of was adds. I don't know about you but if I go longer than 3 whole minutes without an add...I get a little crazy. .
Oh yeah... The stuff between the adds was good too.
For an extra $11 a month you can watch You Tube without commercials. I think it's worth it.
Disorientating is not a word.
people have no idea, do they? Language changes and new words are created all the time which I accept; but when, through either ignorance or laziness, people corrupt existing words (as per your example) bile rises in my throat and I want to punch something.
There are several things that trigger me. When people say ...more unique, very unique, almost unique...
also mispronunciation of the word 'vulnerable' to vunerable ...even people who should know better are doing it.
Of course there are the old chestnuts, there/their; your/you're; of/off etc. Lately I have noticed that 'hes for his' is getting a run.
But the one that tops them all is 'addicting' for 'addictive' eg. this game is so addicting! Heaven help us.
@@PetroicaRodinogaster264 I've ignored myriad examples of the use of this. But this one really chafed me. This is a documentary about the English crown and the editors even let it through.
Very misleading account, as Henry's mother Margaret Beaufort Stanley was a major schemer/player thrusting her son forward. Jasper Tudor not even mentioned! Margaret did the household books! She had a massive roll, yet was glossed over as though she didn't exist.
Truly lacking.
Who is jasper Tudor? I’m learning so much about Henry the 7th. I love the show the Tudors about Henry the 8th.
Same here. I understand that Henry VII and his reign was the focus but his mother Margaret Beaufort was absolutely instrumental in his usurpation of the throne.
@@mayonaissse
There is a new (?) book out by Phillipa Gregory and noted historians entitled 'The Women of the Cousins War'. It sounds like a fantastic collaboration. I can hardly wait to get it! Gregory is meticulous in researching her recreations of historical people and how they lived. Just reading history books notably disregards half of the human race.
Women are reduced to whores, sluts, witches or ignored entirely.
Beaufort must have been the mother in law from hell. The hand writing in those books is likely to be Margaret's. I seriously doubt Henry's ability to keep track of every cent. He signed off, but she ordered everything.
@Ready For Anything.
No. She was a barren pawn, who ended up having tremendous power through her son.
Women could not be Queens, unmarried.
She got what she wanted in the end.
Horrible woman though!
The roles that both his mother Margaret Beaufort and his wife Elizabeth of York played in his success can not be discounted.
In this case losing the battle really meant losing the war 😕
I love hearing about this what a strong person he was
He wasn't strong, it was the people around him, like his mother and Stanley (not called the 'King Maker' for nothing) who were the driving force. But it is what it is.
Lynne Reyes - @Robyn A. Jones is correct, without his mother-Margaret Beaufort-making highly strategic marriages which kept him safe after his father died, getting him out of the country when the country’s king changed again, and filling his coffers with huge sums of her money to buy his army, Henry’s cause would really have very difficult to achieve and uphold. And the fact that he was smart enough to agree to marry a Lancastrian heiress helped, too.
One of my great great great great grandparents
My ancestor
Anybody have a clue what the music is that starts at minute 26? Shazam hasn't, unfortunately.
Excellent series. But you'd think they would do them in a chronological order. Not finding One on the obvious next chapter, Henry VIII. That's just dumb.
Welsh dynasty
🏴
We need more commercials in this video please.
yes more, and as irrelevant and annoying as possible
I would subscribe if you would dial down the relentless commercials. Shameful
For some reason I thought Hampton court was given to Henry viii by wosley.
As far as i recall, Henry took Hampton court after he disowned and dispossessed that other "fat bloke" (Wolsey).
That’s what I thought too. I came to the comments only to see if anyone else had picked up on that. Great story but I question some of the “facts” put forth.
Can we get a new documentary please ? They keep repackaging the same one with a different title.
All of their videos are reupload
At least it's not yet another Tony Robinson show we've all seen a million times.
I re-watch everything anyway, they don't have to deceive me into it. I'm actually more likely to re-watch when I already know what to expect.
@@oh_riley7104 lol I confess I rewatch them too. I’ve read and watched all things Plantagenet/ Tudor so I get my hopes up when I see a notification and it’s related to that time period.
@@oh_riley7104 Me too, I have a bunch of documentaries that I've downloaded and I watch them all the time. Because I like the host or just the vibe of the show, I find many of them relaxing.
I wish they bring back a show called Lost Worlds. There's a bunch of episodes on the History channel TH-cam channel, if you haven't seen them, check them out.
King Henry VII was my 13th great grandfather on my mom's father's side 💙
The line would be longer if so.
My family came to North America from the Netherlands in 1627 I am13th generation from them. A group of Huguenot ancestors came in 1653. I am 12th generation from them.
Henry VII lived from 1485 to 1509. That's over 100 years longer just from my North American ancestors. That would be 3-4 generations more.
It's truly amazing how far back our heretige goes
Alway weird to hear music I know from Buzzfeed Unsolved played in history documentaries 😂
Henry the V11 died by today's money a Billionaire. He learned a few things that carryover to the present. If your heart is broken, that trumps all else.
Related to like...ALL of them.
I am not a fan if any of these figures but I acknowledge the need for survival and the sad fact that these royal figures were usually either in power, or killed, or imprisoned permanently.. Earlier on, during the reign of Henry IV, the first Lancaster king, for the ones like Edmund Mortimer, House of Clarence, who actually had a better legal claim to the throne than the Lancasters or the Yorks,it was not accepted that he wanted to live a quiet life, in service to the king, or that he knew he did not have a chance of fighting the power of Henry IV, Edmund was called a coward and constantly solicited by his circle to fight for the throne. there are a lot of personal letters in support of this. Edmund, house of Clarence descends from second son of the late king Edward III, Lancaster and York descends from 3rd and 4th sons.
It is understandable that Henry VII , Tudor, and earlier, Henry IV , first Lancastrian king, that they were paranoid. there were constant plots, and both of these Henrys, though unrelated, lived a time of exile, before they became king, fleeing for survival, because they were a threat to others due to their royal blood.
Lancastrian Henry IV preserved his dynasty by keeping a watchful eye on his cousin Edmund... Edmund Mortimer was incredibly wealthy with great lands,
and future generations of Lancaster kings, Henry V and Henry Vi, did not keep as watchful an eye on the Mortimer inheritance.
Richard , Duke of York, age 14 , inherited the Mortimer wealth, and this is how he was able to help win that segment of the War of Roses, and put his son Edward IV, Richard III s older brother, on the throne, the first York king. The Yorks had a claim from two different bloodlines, and two different power bases of property and wealth., the Mortimers related to house of Clarence.
this is how Richard III eventually came to power.
Which English Civil War is the most known about between the 4
A= The Anarchy (Empress Matilda VS King Stephen)
B= Wars of the Roses (King Henry VI VS King Edward IV)
C= The War of the 3 Kingdoms (King Charles I VS Oliver Cromwell)
D= The Troubles (Margaret Thatcher VS Bobby Sands IRA)
i wonder if there ever will be a time without kings or queens on this planet?
There are still quite a few but they are heavily inter related in Europe and in most cases they are largely figureheads rather than having a real power and in the UK at least they have married non royals so eventually they will be defunct.
@@jonwingfieldhill6143 I hadn’t considered that not marrying into more royalty would lessen the links.
if not kings or queens then what? corrupt politicians; presidents; despots; communists; oil rich sheiks?? Or, even worse, religious maniac terror groups. The 1% ers rule this planet, and don't you forget it. Admittedly royalty doesn't get voted in but except for politicians, neither does anyone else and the politicians are the worst because they have a peoples mandate to do what they want. Anyone who thinks that democracy is the bees knees needs to think again. We don't have democracy as it was intended. Nor should we have. Half the people who vote are borderline idiots and have no idea what they are doing. The other half are self serving and only vote for what will help them, not the whole country.
Why shoehorn "he was a refugee" into it?
Henry ruled by might instead of right.
Saint Henry The VII, Pray For Us
This man face was in my dream young age ..he were whit soft caller in look in up like his picking me up.
Henry vii only became king because his mother had married into the Stanley family. Richard was by far the better soldier and administrator. The Stanley's were looking after they're own skins and switched away from Richard on the battlefield. The Stanley's were going to Kingmake that day and it suited them to have Henry, as his mother had married into the Stanley clan. This treason has always irked me and I hated All the Tudor dynasty, weak, gutless, heirless worthless Oh had Richard prevailed.
The wars of the Roses is a period of internal conflict where most monarchs usurp each other or play for positions of power to put them on the throne. Also I am curious as to what aspects of Richard's administration you think made him a better king than Henry Vii as we all know that Henry Vii is not a warrior king. Those Arguably die with Richard Iii if not earlier in English monarchs
Interesting take and not without merit. So what are your views on Richard and the 2 prince's in the tower? It's hard to see the truth through what we know. Elizabeth Woodville certainly thought he was responsible and why she pledged her daughter to wed Henry... I love Plantagenist history, it was a shame the dynasty had to end the way it did.
Pure projection. Richard overthrew and disappeared the nephew he had sworn to Edward IV to protect. And waded to the throne through the blood of Hastings, Anthony Woodville, Richard Grey, and Vaughn, all without trial. Edward IV loyalists created Henry VII from Richard's deeds.
The Tudors ROCK!!!💯🥰🤣💖💕
@john brown unless you're extremely interested in a historic period, even an incident, then some of this can sound like 'how many angels on the head of a pin' stuff that clerics once debated. I have friends that argue endlessly over Gettysburg, not the the whole thing, but what happened at a hill or a crossroad.
Yes, by 8 in the morning on 22 Aug. 1485, Richard ceased caring about any of this.
Much of this commentary will reveal more about us than history. Wassail!
His story always contains bloodshed.
Jesus, not another old documentary repackaged and retitled to make it look fresh and new.
You would probably be better off in Idaho
How can a woman be the most chaste and the most fruitful? She had no sex and a ton of kids? Seems a contradiction, unless there's another definition of chastity I don't know about, which is possible, but she didn't have that many kids by the standard of the time either.
A virgin with 7 children is some feat isnt it 😂. I'm assuming chaste maybe meant well behaved? These two were notoriously pious so I'm thinking it's to do with her demeanour maybe.
I too am very chaste and have 4 children 👧 👦 🧒👧.
The only thing needed is to be delusional.😂. Think AH. 😉
"Chaste" doesn't actually mean "celibate." It just means that she followed all the rules for "proper" feminine sexuality of the time, i.e. no extra- or pre-marital sex; didn't flaunt her attractiveness or use her ~*feminine wiles*~ to tempt men; reserved any sensual/sexual behavior for her husband. So you can have a lot of sex and still be "chaste" so long as you're only having sex with your spouse!
It could also possibly be used as a synonym for modest or humble.
@@lunettasuziejewel2080 The 15th century was a funny old time in England. It wouldn't surprise me if HVII intended it as a contradiction, as a means of boasting about his dutiful wife and their blessed union. Or perhaps he meant "minimally sexual yet maximally fertile," perhaps another sign of divine blessing? I've never really looked into the historical meaning of chaste. I've always thought it meant celibate, so either that's true (which it likely isn't) and he was speaking figuratively, or the literal meaning must have been as you say - sexually well mannered as befits a wife. Either works for me, but it still sounds funny to someone who grew up with a different understanding of the word! 🙂
To think, all of this had to happen exactly the way it did for us to have America. For better or worse, I love America. God bless her and her military. God bless England, long live the queen.
Death to monarchies!
As an American, I appreciate your love, but I'm uncertain about your logic. Are you saying that if Elizabeth I had not occupied the throne from 1558 to 1603, that the English would not have colonized the Eastern Seaboard the way that they did? And thus there would be no United States of America the laws of which, for the most part, followed English Common Law? And maybe if it were some other country that colonized the Eastern Seaboard, those colonies would never have rebelled against their mother country?
" Sailing from France , an invading army is about to land.. "
If only UK Border Force had been around to help them
ashore ...?
We'll send them our Texas Border Patrol, they'll bus them all to London and set them up with phones, TV's, beds, and food.....lol.
Tudor? thought it was spelled tooter? LOL
I think that's a fart lol
@@jeng8401 that is the joke here. 😆
There is a documentary that says he was illegitimate and should never have been king
Pure evil
Henry Tudor Won His Rightful Crown 👑!!!
Not first. 🤣
First
Henry VII was the last Tudor to go to Heaven after death. The rest of them(except maybe poor crazy Mary I)followed the false religion of protestantism & promptly went to Hell when they passed from life.
Mmmmmmkay. And who the hell liked this?
@@jn8ive60 🤣🤣🤣🤣
First
First