Do you think the Old and Young Pretenders should have made the list? Let me know below and remember to check out: BUY MY BOOK (Find Your Irish Ancestors Online): amzn.to/3Z2ChnG Website (with 2 FREE DOWNLOADS): www.historycallingofficial.com/ Patreon: www.patreon.com/historycalling Amazon storefront: www.amazon.com/shop/historycalling Instagram: instagram.com/historycalling/ Edit: Prince Frederick was 44 when he died, not 47. Oops!
The old one was at one time prince of Wales but Bonnie Prince Charles never was, so not on the list even though it is a good story. But not on this particular list
I think James III counts on this list from when he was a baby, but not Bonnie Prince Charlie. However, I’m glad you included them because it’s very interesting to learn about the jacobites. The dynasty that never was…
Can I just say I immensely appreciate how you present these biographies. I love history and historical videos, but it’s frustrating when the creator state things or makes claims without acknowledging the values and limitations of the sources they’ve used. Thank you for all your hard work and awesome, informative videos
Ooops. I just read that as The Princess of Wales who never became king. To quote somebody - "I have ridiculously bad eyesight, but I have learned to live with an impressionistic view. ..."
Thank you for another wonderful presentation! They are always so well done. As to the Old and Young Pretenders, I’m going to defer to official, constitutionally determined titles. The Old Pretender was briefly recognized as PoW before his father abdicated, so he counts (in my book). His son doesn’t, because he was never recognized as such by any official British process or by any recognized British monarch. I’m glad you included him, though! And I am glad that the present monarch got his chance! As the oldest PoW ever, he could easily not have made it.
Thanks Ann. Yes, I suppose it wouldn't have been the strangest thing in the world if King Charles had died before getting to the throne. With genes like his though, I'm hoping he makes it to his 90s.
I think James the Old Pretender belongs on the list. He was the acknowledged PoW at least for a short time. His son, Bonny Prince Charles, the Young Pretender, doesn’t belong, since he wasn’t acknowledged as such by any English/British authority. I was glad you included him though. As an American, my knowledge and understanding of the various conflicts and controversies in British history is limited.
The Stuarts were their own worst enemies. They seemed determined to destroy their own dynasty. I am glad you included the two Charles Edwards. They are interesting, even if not particularly valid Princes of Wales.
Yes, they are a case of a family who killed each other a lot of the time, but then again the Plantagenets did the same thing. It's a problem with royalty in the medieval/early modern period. Your family are also your rivals.
@@HistoryCalling True of course! What I really meant was who very bad they were at PR. The Stuarts, with the notable exception of Charles 2, seem to have been really bad at making themselves likeable. They were even worse than the Hanoverians, I think.
I'm glad. I remember it took me ages to choose it from the TH-cam audio library. It was surprisingly tough to find a tune that I could lift 10 seconds out of that would still sound like a complete little intro.
THANK YOU SO MUCH AS ALWAYS STEPHEN FOR SO KINDLY DONATING TO THE CHANNEL. Yes, those family trees are horrendous (and those are the simplified versions)!
I feel you were right to add the "Old" and "New" Pretenders. Even though they were rejected, they were still a part of the History of England and Europe of the Day. Even the Rejects are a part of real History. -- Keep up the good work.
I love all your Royal history videos. I’ve been reading about the history of the Royal family since around 1990. Each Monarch and Royal House have unique histories all of their own. I’ve studied each one from Queen Elizabeth II going backwards and I’m currently studying the Henry V era. I’m doing it for personal interest.
That's brilliant. I wish everyone was as dedicated to history as you. Enjoy Henry V. I have a video on the incident where he was shot in the face if you haven't seen it.
What an excellent piece of work! These aren't thumbnail sketches but are actually as detailed as anyone could reasonably expect! Two very minor corrections though Tewkesbury was fought on 4th May 1471 not the 3rd. Edward of Middleham died there not at Nottingham Castle where Richard 3rd and Anne Neville where at the time. Thereafter Richard called it 'The castle of his care!' I mentioned Lady Katherine Gordon the wife of Perkin Warbeck to you a while back. I know Perkin had to confess to marrying her under false pretences and that she was 'favoured' by Henry vii especially after the death if Elizabeth of York which might mean a lot or nothing. I also know she subsequently married at least once and never went back to Scotland. That's a very interesting life that would benefit from your excellent research! Hope you don't mind my nitpicking it really was a brilliant presentation!
No, it's ok. One of the difficulties of doing videos like this where a lot of people are looked at is that it's so much to keep track of. Unfortunately there are a few minor errors like that. Yes, Lady Katherine is an interesting person. If there's enough info. available on her I might look at her in the future.
Thanks. I'm not sure there's that much but you're so good at research and drawing instructive insights from your work that I justvthink you could add real value to her story!
I thought for a moment that Henry I losing his son in the White Ship should qualify but he was never Prince of Wales of course - ty for excellent content as per usual - 🛸✨
Oh you had me worried for a split second as I read the start of your comment that I'd forgotten one, but yes, that was before England took over Wales. Phew!
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SUCH A GENEROUS DONATION TO THE CHANNEL. That would be lovely, though I doubt anyone's going to come a-knocking as even if a TV company was interested in my work, I imagine they'd be concerned that I don't show my face because I have a big boil on the end of my nose or something (I don't by the way - I just like my privacy and don't have the camera gear and lights for that sort of a set-up). Anyways, I'm not holding my breath for TV work, but thank you for the lovely thought.
Amazing video, as always! You must be a delight to your students, HC! A teacher can make or break a subject for their students. I always liked history and was passionate, but my high school history teacher really ignited my passion for this subject even more. She had such way of teaching it. As for the question, given than 18th century history is one of my favourite parts of history (although I found myself engrossed in Tudor history nowadays), I'm glad that Bonnie Prince Charlie and his father were mentioned. The Jacobite rebellion is such an interesting part of history. I feel bad for the Scottish people, though. It seems like Scots and Irish (Northern Irish, I mean) are rather forced to stay in the Union with England
Thanks Anna (or maybe it's Ann? - apologies if I've read it the wrong way). Sadly I have no students now except for the YT ones of course, but I will say that you are all more engaged than most of the undergrads I dealt with. Hmm, tricky question regarding the Union. Lots of people want to stay and lots want to go, so there's no easy answer there I'm afraid.
I love how you research and explain what you have found and your view on the research. Most of all I absolutely love how soothing and refreshing your voice is. I love history and listening you talk about it is so calming for my PTSD and boost my knowledge. ❤❤❤❤
@@HistoryCalling you have been a tremendous help to it. There are times when I go grocery shopping (one time for my bad anxiety times) I listen to you as I’m shopping and I feel much better.
Aww, thank you very much. My friends always laugh though and say that I don't sound like that in the 'real' world. They call it my TH-cam voice :-) I think it's because I make an effort to ever so slightly moderate my accent on TH-cam. I try to enunciate more clearly and not drop my ings off the ends of words. Apparently that makes all the difference!
THANK YOU SO MUCH KASIE for so kindly donating to the channel. I think (it was a long time ago now so I'm struggling to remember a bit) that I discussed Perkin a bit in my video on the life of Henry VII, part 2. It'll be in my Tudor monarchs' playlist if you ever want to check.
I would be incredibly interested in seeing you do a deep dive on Princess Charlotte Augusta of Wales -- I think you'd do an extraordinary job of it, as you do with all of your videos, frankly. :-)
@@HistoryCalling It's no issue; I just figured she would be a worthwhile figure for you to cover. But I'll watch whatever you do research and present on here. :-)
I think James Stuart does count as a Prince of Wales because he did briefly have the title before his father was overthrown. His son doesn’t because his father was never king, other than in the eyes of his supporters, and therefore Bonnie Prince Charlie really wasn’t a Prince of Wales but at least he got a memorable nickname instead.
Ah, I'm glad it's working better for you now. You know, I didn't originally plan to do this video. It was only after I saw the Princess one do well that I decided to do this. I had to bump the video originally planned for this week all the way back to December to slot this in! :-)
@HistoryCalling yes I know a few people that are content creators . Not history. But the same thing happens. Some videos do much better than others. But the ones that don't are often as good or. Better. Or long afterwards start to do well . ( the algorithm is a mysterious beast ) 😆
Yes, I've had the odd one take off much later or have a resurgence and for no apparent reason. It's so odd. My one on Friday 13th is doing well today and I can see why that has happened, but the Jackie Kennedy one went through the roof a few months ago out of the blue (which was great of course and that one had already done very well, so it was extra nice).
Thank you for including both pretenders. Your summaries of their lives were very instructive! I find it sad that so many kings and their heirs had bad relationships. Their feuds make any differences Elizabeth II had with Charles III exceedingly trivial.
Thank you. Yes, it's always sad (not to mention very difficult politically) when the royal family has fallings out. The current issues with Prince Harry are a good modern example. It does all pale in comparison to how the medieval and early modern royals dealt with each other though.
This is a great partner video to your excellent Princesses of Wales (which I loved). Should the 2 Stuarts have been included? The step brother to Queen Anne probably should, but his son definitely shouldn't. No real claim to the throne there. I liked the way you put it HC, if they can't put one step in the country, or have access to Royal regalia etc - dead in the water, no chance. Is there any possibility of a video on Edward the 1st's wife Eleanor? She is a bit interesting. Thanks HC, another excellent video. 🙂
Thanks Elisabeth. Honestly, I'd love to get to all the Queens consort of England :-) I really must finish my women of the wars of the Roses series first though. Still got Elizabeth of York to go (and maybe one other woman who I wasn't going to include originally, but I think I will as she's been much requested).
At first I was anticipating an entry for Prince Albert Victor, but then remembered that his father was still Prince of Wales at the time of his death. One topic which might make for an interesting future video though, is all the instances where the Duke of York (or 'Spare'), has ascended to the Throne. When I looked into it more in-depth, I found that there were more cases than I had previously realized. The rest of your viewers would probably find it an interesting and enjoyable jaunt down English History’s memory lane.
I actually did a video on spares who became heirs a while back. I've read the comment underneath though from Katie and see that apparently Lindsay Holliday did that topic too. I didn't know that as I don't follow any other history TH-camrs so I don't know if she thought of that idea first, or got it from me. I never intentionally do the same thing as someone else though and frankly I'm not gonna beat myself up on this as one of my Patrons told me recently that she'd very obviously copied my most successful video ever on "Digging up Anne Boleyn and Others" (like literally copied the exact title and everything), which I think must have been intentional.
Thank you for another interesting video. I remained surprised what little information is known about the fate and burial of Richard III's son, Edward of Middleham. Again, well done 👏
I know, right? You'd think we'd have a better idea of what happened to the King's child. Mind you, I say that, but I actually managed to screw up in the video regarding what we do know by saying he died at Nottingham when that was where his parents were when heard the news. Quietly kicking myself over here :-(
I know I shouldn't, but my lips did twitch a little at that way of putting it. In all seriousness though, I think there's a good chance the bones in Westminster Abbey are them and I have my fingers crossed for DNA testing being allowed.
Hi HC, another great video. I actually like when you may add someone or something as it gives me a better perspective and understanding of what was happening at the time. Some may not understand or like it, it helps me so please don't stop doing that. I so look forward to hearing you on Friday and do miss the patreon page.
@@HistoryCalling The reason I would like to get back there is that I have liked the extra stuff you have on there, I will take my time because I know it will be there and I can always read or listen to it later.
Hi HC, yet again loved your presentation with all its detail. Goes well alongside the Princess’s of Wales that you gave us the other week. Again you bring forth a topic that is rarely brought forth and discussed. Thanks. 😉
Thanks James. I wasn't going to do this one until I saw the Princesses do well and then decided I'd better get one on the Princes out before someone else stole the idea. Mind you, the speed at which I then had to put it together has led to a few little errors in it which are really annoying. I absolutely hate it when I mess up like that :-\
Thank you :-) Maybe it just wasn't on the curriculum your teacher was required to take you through? I never did any Tudor history at school for instance, even though it's so popular.
Alfred the Great wasn't King of England. He was King of Wessex, but never managed to join all the warring counties of what would eventually become England. It was his Grandson Athelstan who became the 1st King of England. He is worthy of a series from HC! 🙏
Your videos are always interesting and your narration style makes them so easy to listen to and understand. For my money if the country you claim the throne of doesn’t recognise you then you can’t hold any title from that country.
Yes, I think that's fair too. Of course if Bonnie Prince Charlie had won, no one would have dared to question that he'd been a Prince all along. History is written by the winners as they say.
the bonnie Prince is a very fascinating part of this history, although i’m with you as far as not considering him a true Prince of Wales. excellent vid HC!!
Thanks Delia. Yes, it was a pity in many ways that he didn't get to be monarch. It lead to a minority, a very sticky end for his son Richard and ultimately the Wars of the Roses.
Indepth and superb as always HC. I don't think the old pretender and the young pretender should be on the list, what I will say it's certainly a topic for debate, thank you as always.
Thanks Simon. Yes, I think Bonnie Prince Charlie in particular is on very thin ice to be included, but there would have been such a little storm in the comments if I hadn't mentioned him. :-)
I think you’re correct in not adding them to the list. Just because I believe I’m a princess doesn’t make it true by any means. It’s hard from a modern day secular view to imagine why monarchs were so staunch in their faith, choosing to be deposed instead of converting to Protestantism. But I imagine that when they took their eternal souls into consideration, it wasn’t worth it. But I also wonder if people were more like Henry VIII, and the change was just in name, not in true beliefs.
It's hard to know. Bonnie Prince Charlie was raised Catholic and I struggle to believe that he meant it when he converted to Protestantism (not that that conversion did him any good as regards getting the throne).
It is great that you are willing to share these stories of the historical PRINCES OF WALES. I 📚 ABOUT THE ANCESTORS OF ONE OF THESE PRINCE OF WALES THOUGH FORMER DIANA SPENCER SON (depends on health of the current leader of Britain) I.E., WILLIAM 🎉
Maybe I missed it, but could you tell me where the throne at 7:30 is? Doesn't look like the one in Westminster, but it's been a few years since I've visited England.
James Edward, the Old Pretender, who should have been king if he could not refused to renounce Roman Catholicism and become an Anglican in order to be designated Queen Anne's heir. So he should have been included on the list.However, Charles Stuart, the Young Pretender should not be on the list. He also had repudiated his tittle to British throne by Major Catholic powers. Another great video. Thank you very much.
I think the most tragic what-if was caused by the death of the potential Henry IX. As tyrannical as Charles I reputedly was, regicide was a shameful act. And Cromwell was no paragon of liberty.
Ah yes, Cromwell. We don't like him in my neck of the woods as he was pretty awful in Ireland (not that he was a picnic for the English to deal with either).
Yes, I get the impression he would have been quite a warlike King. I can't see him dealing any more successfully with Parliament than his little brother did though (unless he just killed them all).
These historical figures offer such wonderful “What if…” possibilities. I think including the Jacobite pretenders, especially the elder who genuinely was Prince of Wales for a time, are valid inclusions. I don’t think the story of the title Prince of Wales could be complete without those who may have had valid claims to the title. I think it will be interesting to see if the British monarchy continues to bestow the contentious title on future heirs apparent.
Yes, we'll have to see if George gets it in due course. I'm more interested actually to see if there is every a Princess of Wales in her own right, but I may not live long enough to find out, as that would only happen if George has a girl first and also after he becomes King (which could easily be 50 years from now).
I’m not sure you’ll be able to see this, but would you like to do a video on the mystery of the Sodder children? It’s a chilling mystery on which I have my opinions, but yours are always much better founded…
I'm vaguely familiar with that case, but it's so recent that I think it would be tough for me to do due to most of the images I'd need being still in copyright. It might also be difficult to get it around YT's aversion to 'distressing events'. I do remember watching a doc. on TV about it though and thinking that they probably died in the house fire.
I think the old and young pretenders should have been included and I really enjoyed learning about them. I’m American so I didn’t really know a lot about either of them besides what I saw in The Outlander.
Was George V's older brother never Prince of Wales? I think of him as being referred to as the Duke of Clarence so perhaps not. ETA; Even as I was writing that I recalled that his father, the future Edward VII, was still alive when he died and thus still Prince of Wales.
The old pretender lost his title when his sister and brother-in-law were crowned, so even though his father called him by this title he wasn’t a Prince of Wales!
Having just finished a biography of Flora MacDonald, I’d like to point out that Bonnie Prince Charlie escaped Scotland being dressed as an Irish maid for part of the time (I thought you’d like that detail) 😊
Yes, I came across Flora during my research. If I ever do a video dedicated to Charles I'll talk about her there and get into more detail on his Scottish escapades. Sadly there wasn't space to do them justice here.
Hi HC, for an American, there are a lot of confusing genealogical lines to follow! It was fascinating though and I enjoyed it as always. Yes to the old pretender and no to the younger. Bonnie Prince Charlie seems quite the character and probably best that he never became PoW or king. It also seems to me that as long as his father was alive and had been invested as PoW, Charles could not be PoW as long as his father lived and was not invested as king. Do I understand this right? I’m enjoying your channel so much! ❤
Don't worry. Those family trees are awful for Brits to understand too. Regarding James and Charles. James claimed to be James III once his father died and so (if we accept him as a King for a moment, for this hypothetical scenario) he was able to create his son Prince of Wales. A coronation is not necessary to make a monarch a monarch, nor is an investiture ceremony required to make a Prince of Wales a PoW (the current Prince hasn't had one for instance). Bonnie Prince Charlie's title is dubious, not because his father hadn't been crowned and Charles hadn't been invested, but because his father wasn't the generally recognised King of Great Britain at all and there was even another Prince of Wales alive at the same time as Charles (Prince Frederick, also discussed in the video). It is rather confusing. I hope that's helped a bit though.
I’m in agreement with you. The Old Pretender yes, he was made Prince of Wales while his father was king, and I believe his sister Anne did consider making him her heir, but he showed the same stubborn stupidity of his father and refused to renounce Catholicism, and that put paid to that claim. Had he shown a measure of sense and become Protestant, Anne and her ministers’ would still have had to go back to Parliament and revise the Act of Settlement, which in addition to barring Catholics and heirs married to Catholics, had established Sophia of the Palatinate (she was born a Wittelsbach) as the next in line after Anne to the throne. It’s ironic that for those who like to dwell on pretenders, if the line of succession established by the Act of Settlement and the Bill of Rights of 1689, which denied Catholics from ascending the throne were abolished, and the previous rules of succession restored, the current Duke of Bavaria (a member of the Catholic branch of the house of Wittelsbach) would have the best claim to the British Crown.
Well, I suppose we have to admire his faith. It was so important to him that he was prepared to give up a throne for it when, as you say, the easier thing to do would have been to either convert or pretend to convert. I can respect that. If you truly believe something and think that your very soul is on the line, I don't think you can just change. Lots of people here in Ireland would have had an easier time of it too over the centuries if they'd changed faiths, but they wouldn't/couldn't do it. Anyways, I didn't know the Duke of Bavaria would be the best claimant now. That's very interesting. Thank you for sharing :-)
@@HistoryCalling that’s true, I’m an agnostic from a Protestant background. Also living in Ireland (two years at the end of this month after Britain’s incredibly stupid decision to leave the EU), but I love it here so I’m not complaining. I lived in London 24 years before that but I grew up in America. I went from being a doubtful Christian to an atheist. Eventually I became agnostic when I realised atheists possess just as much certainty as convinced Christians. And as a committed rationalist I need evidence before I start making claims of certainty about anything. I have seen some evidence to persuade me that there could be a larger force in the Universe, the laws of physics have made that plausible to me. One of my projects when I was in my twenties was to read the Bible cover to cover in a modern English version (I skipped the Apocrypha). I had stopped believing in the Judeo Christian God by my early teens. I love the history of religion, especially the reformation. I wanted to look into it afresh. I was told in church that God made man in his image, but reading the Bible made me realise that was completely turned around. Man made God in his image. When I read the Old Testament that became very clear to me. When he’s mentioned, and you put all the pieces together, he’s presented as a stern, often arbitrary, Hebrew patriarch. The kind of figure many men were thousands of years ago in the Middle East. Why should God have a gender? He’s all powerful and immortal. When he wants to create beings somewhat like himself he can make them from clay. Anyway I digress. I would say in response to your points about the Old Pretender, that Anne was every bit as much a devout Anglican as her brother was a Catholic. And both of them got about as much benefit from it. I guess that opens me to the charge of being too materialistic. Oh well. You could argue that she suffered as much if not more than he did. Not just her children all dying, but the ugly fall out with her sister Mary of Orange when she moved back to England who was the only family she had at that point, aside from her husband Prince George of Denmark. This after her wrenching decision to put her faith over her father. When she became Queen she, a woman little schooled in a political system undergoing rapid institutional change, where her ministers were constantly trying to undermine and sideline her in her role as the prime executive, had to constantly try and keep their power grabs in check. All while badly suffering from a host of ailments that would eventually kill her. The Stuarts were in many ways a more interesting family than the Tudors to me. They were also a more exasperating yet tragic family. They’re much easier for me to sympathise with than the Tudors. Charles I and his fall, his zealously Catholic wife, which created some dreadful divisions with some of her children, notably Mary and her third son Richard, and young Elizabeth taken from her parents to live neglected with a bunch of sanctimonious Puritans, who were also religious zealots, until she died. Then there was Charles I’s elder sister Elizabeth the Winter Queen, and her many children exiled with little money to an old Palace in The Hague when her beloved husband Frederick died. Even James II learned nothing from his family’s experiences with his father deposed and executed and then the rest exiled. And the same happening to him exiled to the cold draughty old palace of St Germain with his wife Mary of Modena having to repeatedly beg King Louis for money, after he was optimistic enough to believe his subjects would accept his attempt to re-establish Catholicism in England, when they executed his father just for trying to create a high church version of the Anglican religion. Heaven knows he received enough for warning during his brother’s reign with the Popish Plot and the Exclusion Crisis. The Duke of Bavaria is descended from Charles I’s youngest child Henriette Anne, who was Louis XIV’s sister-in-law and bore her husband the Duc d’Orleans two daughters, one, Marie Louise, who became Queen of Spain. The younger, Anne Marie, who married the Duke of Savoy, and became Queen of Sardinia when her husband became king. It is this line who would produce a descendant that would marry into the House of Bavaria. One of Anne Marie’s other daughters would also go on to marry the Petit Dauphin, a great grandson of Louis XIV. It is through this marriage that Louis XVI was descended from Charles I. Like his direct ancestor he lost his crown and his head in his country’s revolution. Meanwhile, when Henriette Anne predeceased her husband, the Duc d’Orleans went on to marry as his second wife Elisabeth the daughter of Charles the Prince of the Palatinate, oldest surviving son of Elizabeth of Bohemia, and older brother of Prince Rupert and Princess Sophia of Hanover. Her niece Elisabeth produced a son for the Duc d’Orleans to carry on his line that would become the Orleanist line of French kings in the 19th century.
Charles was punished to be in his room without being able to go out by his father for threatething to kill his tutor until he apologised. He lasted for about a week inside his room before he gave up and apologised. His other behavioural problem was disliking studying he disliked academic stuff and liked more sports he hunted in forest around Rome and became very good at using weapons he trained a lot, but disliked academic stuff despite his father efforts to get him to focus more in academic matters. That is why his brother Henry was always the favorite of his Father almost always submissive towards his Father and interested in academic matters. Charles also famously refused to kiss the pope feet wich caused panic for his Father and Mother. His will/determination impressed some of his supporters who saw it has a good trait, but it caused headaches for his father who disliked his family members not being submissive towards him the head of the household.
At the start there's a shot of a throne in the Tower of London and then I think I had a red velvet one later on didn't I? That's in Hampton Court Palace.
Richard, the first is said to have only been in England for about three months of his reign, perhaps we should take him off the roster🤪 I do agree with you, the Stewart line ended with queen anne, alas.
Ah yes, the old Lionheart. Not a great King to be honest. Like you say, he was hardly ever in England and then, if memory serves, he got captured and the country had to be nearly bankrupted to get him back.
@@HistoryCalling me and my son absolutely love your channel. He’s autistic and nonverbal and loves all things history; especially medieval history. We now thanks to you have differing opinions on what happened to the princes in the tower.😛 he agrees 100% with you!
@@HistoryCalling And his poor wife Berengaria of Navarre never set foot in England as a queen. The only queen consort not to do so. (There are suggestions she visited after Richard's death, probably trying to get the income from her tin mines that dear brother-in-law John somehow kept failing to send.)
Who would you say is your favourite and least favourite Plantagenet King and why? for me, favourite has to be Henry II (though as a person he def had his drawbacks) and least favourite, John, though Edward II was also very bad, just like Richard II😭
I actually don't think I know enough about all of them to have an opinion. My earlier medieval history (pre Wars of the Roses) is actually quite limited.
I'll never understand why the raising and training of a "King in waiting" should be undertaken by people who were outranked by and subservient to their charge, who may fear being harshly judged by him when he eventually acceded to the throne. You alluded to this practice when you related the story of Anne of Denmark and Prince Henry. I was cheering Queen Anne's protest until the point when it ended so sadly, with her miscarrying, and his eventual death from typhoid, which may have been avoided if he'd not been with her. I have three sons, and I cannot imagine handing them off to live some place else, or leaving one of them behind for years at a time, while still claiming to "love" them. Even royals should have seen the problems with this practice! I can't help but feel the Brits would have benefitted from their Kings and Queens being better parents. I also think the Brits dodged a bullet when Prince Frederick died young, because of his estrangement from his family. Maybe he wouldn't have been "ze grrreatest ass etc." if he had been raised with his family.
I absolutely agree. If you want a family to feel and act like a family, then you have to keep that family together to make sure they're really bonded to one another. I'm even very much on the fence about the idea of modern boarding schools, although I have friends who boarded and loved it and are still very tight with their families, so I know it can work very effectively. I suppose it all depends on the individuals involved and the amount of time they still spend with their relations and how often they're in touch. It's much easier now of course to stay in contact remotely than it was 100s of years ago, so it's probably not a fair comparison.
Those who raised the heir to the Scottish throne were not particularly subservient. King James was soundly beaten by his governor as a boy. Perhaps that's in part what motivated his wife to retrieve their son.
That Fredrick probably died from a burst abscess in a lunch hit a little too close to home. I suffered from that very thing this past summer. I too thought I had recovered until suddenly I was so much worse. My lung collapsed and I required major surgery to remove essentially jello from the space between my lung and the lining covering it. Even now it’s a dangerous condition and dicey procedure. Frederick didn’t have a chance.
I am not sure they should. I believe an arguement could be made for the Old Pretender, but not the Younger. It is good to hear about them, and to be addressed in that manner as special conditions so they were not really Princes of Wales.
Haha, no, thankfully not. I always think when people complain that the British royals are inbred they should really take a look at the Hapsburgs and the ancient Egyptians. The British royals are honestly no worse than I'm sure a lot of people whose families came from remote villages in the countryside were in the past. We're probably all a little bit inbred.
@HistoryCalling While I think the average person (of the 1600s-1700s) was less inbred than a royal I do think you are correct. The royal genepool was about as big as a small village(?) with a few families. The habsburgs and Egyptians definitely overdid it and it certainly didnt turn out great
I'm a Jacobite sympathiser, so I guess I want the Old Pretender to count. But if the Young Pretender was never even declared to be heir, I can't really count him. It's hard to get worked up about who ought to have been king 300 years ago, in any case.
I think we focus on leaders and kings/Queens and overlook the fact that no leader can be in that roll without strong followers who really give them their power. A interesting history would be of all the king makers in British history. A King is probably one of the few offices one can steal and keep until you lose the power to maintain control and support of supporters. Lose support and you will lose the crown regardless of legitimacy. Thanks.. a big topic handled well. Prince Charlie's plaid seems a little odd.. maybe the French version. ; }
Yes, you've gotta have the support, no doubt about it. The Jacobites learnt that the heard way. Saying you're a King doesn't make it so if you don't have a lot of powerful people behind you. I actually know nearly nothing about plaid, so I'll have to take your word for it :-)
Given Richard II's parents and grandparents on his father's side were cousins, I wonder if his mental state as he got older could be attributed either to the lack of a father figure growing up to keep in him line or inbreeding. Edward of Woodstock, Arthur Tudor and Henry Frederick Stuart are interesting historical "What if's" had they survived to become king.
Cousin marriage does not necessarily result in defects. Recent historians have somewhat moderated the view of Richard's mental state toward the end of his reign. His policies were not in themselves unusual, but his manner of implementing them disturbed the nobility. Very hard to make an analysis at this distance. I think it wasn't so much the lack of a father figure, as perhaps feeling a bit resourceless during the regency, and feeling over controlled. He does seem to have had a fundamental desire for control
I consider Princess Charlotte of Wales and honorary member of this group. Her father was Prince of Wales when she died and she probably wouldn’t have been made Princess of Wales since she was technically heiress presumptive but she was 100% expected to become Queen one day before her tragic death.
Unfortunately Prince(ss) of Wales can only ever be given to the heir _apparent,_ which before 2015 could never be a woman. It wasn’t completely out of the question that George may have gotten rid of or otherwise divorced queen Caroline and remarried and had a son, at which point Charlotte would have been out of the line of succession
@@emilybarclay8831 Actually, due to the nature of William & Mary’s joint monarch, Anne was the heiress apparent after Mary died. That’s the only case the British monarch has ever had an heiress apparent.
@@graceneilitz7661 officially any children William and Mary would have would outrank Anne. No one expected there to be any children, but legally Anne was heir presumptive because there was still some hypothetical person who could supersede her. The Bill of Rights 1689 that invested Mary and William as monarchs stated that the succession was to Mary and William’s heirs, and then to Anne.
@@emilybarclay8831 Anne became heiress apparent to William after her sister Mary died. (If I’m remembering correctly). Any children born to William with a second wife would go in the succession after Anne.
Oh poo! You're right. *Sigh* There's always some silly little thing like that that slips through. I never have time to do the kind of proofreading and checking that I'd like :-( I've put a little correction in the pinned comment which is all I can really do at this stage of things.
@@HistoryCalling Well it was just a small detail, not of much significance considering the overall video, which was superb btw. I was reading about him last weekend and somehow remembered the age when he died, as it was an untimely demise, so I pointed out 😅
@HistoryCalling Prince Frederick almost married a woman who was named Lady Diana Spencer, granddaughter of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough. Sarah offered a dowry to Frederick for his debts. The Prime Minister Robert Walpole found out about this and thwarted the marriage. His idea of a bride for Frederick was Princess Augusta of Saxe Gotha whom as you said in your video, Frederick did marry. Lady Diana went on to marry lord John Russell, who became the Duke of Bedford after he married Lady Diana. She tragically died at age 25 of Tuberculosis.
There Was Actually An Unofficial Princess Of Wales,Princess Charlotte,The Daughter Of King George IV. I Would Like To See A Video About Her!!! After Her Death When She Gave Birth To Her Son,Who Also Died,A Race Between The King's Younger Brothers To Find An Appropriate Protestant Princess, Marry And Produce A Legitimate Heir Led To Edward Duke Of Kent Marrying Victoria Of Saxe-Coburg Saafield,A Widow With Two Children. She Gave Birth To Queen Victoria.
She was never the Princess of Wales as she died before her father became King before her marriage she was known as Princess Charlotte of Wales the same style by whivh Prince William's daughter is known today
Those Princes of Wales who didn't die before they became monarchs presumably ... became King no? So aren't you just asking for a chronological history of the Kings, or at least those who had previously been PoW?
@@lilymarinovic1644 Medieval Wales was not unified except for a few years under a particular king. Though apparently the kings of Gwynedd (in the north of Wales) would sometimes style themselves "Prince of Wales" to try, falsely, to convince the world they were actually ruling over the rest of Wales.
I feel like its fine to include the pretenders because some genuinely recognized them as Princes of Wales but as they never even sat on the throne officially that would mean they were never really King
Yes, it was a tricky one to decide on. It would have been less work for me to skip them of course, but I thought it would lead to trouble in the comments and I find them interesting anyway, so I wanted to have them :-)
Arthur was Victoria's 2nd son he was created Duke of Edinburgh. Her eldest son Albert Edwsrd was Prince of Wales and became King Edward VII. Only 3 Princes of Walez have had an actual investiture
James legitimizing his daughter Charlotte is no different than Henry VIII's divorcing Katherine of Aragon. If James couldn't legitimize his daughter, then Henry couldn't divorce his wife. Either they both had the authority to do their respective deeds, or they did not. The creation of the English Catholic Church by Henry VIII did not change the fact that the new church only held jurisdiction over marriages created under its authority. Side-stepping the issue of Katherine's specious claim of non-consummation of her marriage to Authur - after all, it is entirely believable that two 15-year-olds who were madly in love were said to be totally hot for each other, and were married to boot, would not take a tumble or two at the first opportunity sounds perfectly reasonable to nobody with a brain - this invalidates the reigns of Edward VI and Elizabeth which brings up the question of who would be the legitimate ruler when Mary died? That would make a good episode.
I must admit this topic does interest me a bit more than the Princess of Wales one since this would affect history more severely than the Princess of Wales. I mean the death of one prince helped kickstart a full blown war
Yes, they are arguably more important in that respect (plus I also like to do videos that aren't on women's history sometimes, for the sake of better variety).
George II and his wife were absolute jerks! I've read many things about this relationship and the parents were incredibly hateful to this son, something that obviously started when he was just a child.
Poor George II also had a very unhappy relationship with his father George I, who had divorced and locked up his (George II's) mother. He probably didn't know how to have a normal father/son relationship.
Yes, the Hanoverians were notoriously poor at parenting. I'm not surprised they had a tough relationship when the child was left behind in Hanover at such a young age (though that was the decision of George I).
Do you think the Old and Young Pretenders should have made the list? Let me know below and remember to check out:
BUY MY BOOK (Find Your Irish Ancestors Online): amzn.to/3Z2ChnG
Website (with 2 FREE DOWNLOADS): www.historycallingofficial.com/
Patreon: www.patreon.com/historycalling
Amazon storefront: www.amazon.com/shop/historycalling
Instagram: instagram.com/historycalling/
Edit: Prince Frederick was 44 when he died, not 47. Oops!
The old one was at one time prince of Wales but Bonnie Prince Charles never was, so not on the list even though it is a good story. But not on this particular list
Having recently learned of my Stuart ancestry, I'm going to have to say yes :)
Pretenders should get their own vid
James Edward, yes (actually made Prince of Wales by a ruling king); Charles Edward, no.
I think James III counts on this list from when he was a baby, but not Bonnie Prince Charlie. However, I’m glad you included them because it’s very interesting to learn about the jacobites. The dynasty that never was…
The turns history could have taken under a King Arthur Tudor or King Henry IX are really fascinating to consider.
Can I just say I immensely appreciate how you present these biographies. I love history and historical videos, but it’s frustrating when the creator state things or makes claims without acknowledging the values and limitations of the sources they’ve used. Thank you for all your hard work and awesome, informative videos
Thank you so much. That's very kind of you to say :-)
And the fact that she reply’s and reads the comments, she is so wonderful!!
Ooops. I just read that as The Princess of Wales who never became king. To quote somebody - "I have ridiculously bad eyesight, but I have learned to live with an impressionistic view. ..."
Haha, that's ok. It would be quite the story if any Princess of Wales did manage to become King!
🤣🤣You're not the only one, Chris!
LOL! I did the same!
Love that quote
@@stephencarrillo5905 A vote of confidence from Senor Esteban. That's reassuring. Ha!
Thank you for another wonderful presentation! They are always so well done. As to the Old and Young Pretenders, I’m going to defer to official, constitutionally determined titles. The Old Pretender was briefly recognized as PoW before his father abdicated, so he counts (in my book). His son doesn’t, because he was never recognized as such by any official British process or by any recognized British monarch. I’m glad you included him, though! And I am glad that the present monarch got his chance! As the oldest PoW ever, he could easily not have made it.
Thanks Ann. Yes, I suppose it wouldn't have been the strangest thing in the world if King Charles had died before getting to the throne. With genes like his though, I'm hoping he makes it to his 90s.
I think James the Old Pretender belongs on the list. He was the acknowledged PoW at least for a short time. His son, Bonny Prince Charles, the Young Pretender, doesn’t belong, since he wasn’t acknowledged as such by any English/British authority. I was glad you included him though.
As an American, my knowledge and understanding of the various conflicts and controversies in British history is limited.
The Stuarts were their own worst enemies. They seemed determined to destroy their own dynasty. I am glad you included the two Charles Edwards. They are interesting, even if not particularly valid Princes of Wales.
If James ii/vii doesn't insisted to convert, maybe the dynasty wouldn't fall apart,
Yes, they are a case of a family who killed each other a lot of the time, but then again the Plantagenets did the same thing. It's a problem with royalty in the medieval/early modern period. Your family are also your rivals.
@@HistoryCalling True of course! What I really meant was who very bad they were at PR. The Stuarts, with the notable exception of Charles 2, seem to have been really bad at making themselves likeable. They were even worse than the Hanoverians, I think.
@@vallerianredha8822 I can agree there because he only was tossed from his throne because he was Catholic
@@montrelouisebohon-harris7023 He got tossed because he didn't have sense about being a Catholic king in a majority Protestant country.
The introduction music to your videos always makes me smile... and i needed it today. Thanks! 😊
I'm glad. I remember it took me ages to choose it from the TH-cam audio library. It was surprisingly tough to find a tune that I could lift 10 seconds out of that would still sound like a complete little intro.
@@HistoryCallingYou chose just right, in my humble opinion!
All your videos merit repeat viewing, HC. The familial and succession lines remind me of a jigsaw I'd never have the gumption to solve. Great job!
THANK YOU SO MUCH AS ALWAYS STEPHEN FOR SO KINDLY DONATING TO THE CHANNEL.
Yes, those family trees are horrendous (and those are the simplified versions)!
I feel you were right to add the "Old" and "New" Pretenders. Even though they were rejected, they were still a part of the History of England and Europe of the Day. Even the Rejects are a part of real History. -- Keep up the good work.
What a great follow up to "All the Princesses of Wales." Thank you. 😊❤
I love all your Royal history videos. I’ve been reading about the history of the Royal family since around 1990. Each Monarch and Royal House have unique histories all of their own. I’ve studied each one from Queen Elizabeth II going backwards and I’m currently studying the Henry V era. I’m doing it for personal interest.
That's brilliant. I wish everyone was as dedicated to history as you. Enjoy Henry V. I have a video on the incident where he was shot in the face if you haven't seen it.
@@HistoryCalling Thank you. I will look for it. It sounds very interesting.
What an excellent piece of work! These aren't thumbnail sketches but are actually as detailed as anyone could reasonably expect!
Two very minor corrections though Tewkesbury was fought on 4th May 1471 not the 3rd. Edward of Middleham died there not at Nottingham Castle where Richard 3rd and Anne Neville where at the time. Thereafter Richard called it 'The castle of his care!'
I mentioned Lady Katherine Gordon the wife of Perkin Warbeck to you a while back. I know Perkin had to confess to marrying her under false pretences and that she was 'favoured' by Henry vii especially after the death if Elizabeth of York which might mean a lot or nothing. I also know she subsequently married at least once and never went back to Scotland. That's a very interesting life that would benefit from your excellent research!
Hope you don't mind my nitpicking it really was a brilliant presentation!
No, it's ok. One of the difficulties of doing videos like this where a lot of people are looked at is that it's so much to keep track of. Unfortunately there are a few minor errors like that. Yes, Lady Katherine is an interesting person. If there's enough info. available on her I might look at her in the future.
Thanks. I'm not sure there's that much but you're so good at research and drawing instructive insights from your work that I justvthink you could add real value to her story!
Poor Lady Katherine😔
I thought for a moment that Henry I losing his son in the White Ship should qualify but he was never Prince of Wales of course - ty for excellent content as per usual - 🛸✨
Oh you had me worried for a split second as I read the start of your comment that I'd forgotten one, but yes, that was before England took over Wales. Phew!
@@HistoryCalling - lol
You should have your own television series!
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SUCH A GENEROUS DONATION TO THE CHANNEL. That would be lovely, though I doubt anyone's going to come a-knocking as even if a TV company was interested in my work, I imagine they'd be concerned that I don't show my face because I have a big boil on the end of my nose or something (I don't by the way - I just like my privacy and don't have the camera gear and lights for that sort of a set-up). Anyways, I'm not holding my breath for TV work, but thank you for the lovely thought.
Amazing video, as always! You must be a delight to your students, HC!
A teacher can make or break a subject for their students. I always liked history and was passionate, but my high school history teacher really ignited my passion for this subject even more. She had such way of teaching it.
As for the question, given than 18th century history is one of my favourite parts of history (although I found myself engrossed in Tudor history nowadays), I'm glad that Bonnie Prince Charlie and his father were mentioned. The Jacobite rebellion is such an interesting part of history.
I feel bad for the Scottish people, though. It seems like Scots and Irish (Northern Irish, I mean) are rather forced to stay in the Union with England
Thanks Anna (or maybe it's Ann? - apologies if I've read it the wrong way). Sadly I have no students now except for the YT ones of course, but I will say that you are all more engaged than most of the undergrads I dealt with. Hmm, tricky question regarding the Union. Lots of people want to stay and lots want to go, so there's no easy answer there I'm afraid.
Good evening to history calling from Bea 🇬🇧
Hi Bea. Hope you're in the mood for a look at several hundred years of history all at once :-)
Hope you enjoy your weekend history calling from Bea
Thank you. You too :-)
Looking forward to your video next Friday from Bea
I love how you research and explain what you have found and your view on the research. Most of all I absolutely love how soothing and refreshing your voice is. I love history and listening you talk about it is so calming for my PTSD and boost my knowledge. ❤❤❤❤
Thank you so much and I'm so glad to be of any help with your PTSD. :-)
@@HistoryCalling you have been a tremendous help to it. There are times when I go grocery shopping (one time for my bad anxiety times) I listen to you as I’m shopping and I feel much better.
Excellent voice for narration.
Aww, thank you very much. My friends always laugh though and say that I don't sound like that in the 'real' world. They call it my TH-cam voice :-) I think it's because I make an effort to ever so slightly moderate my accent on TH-cam. I try to enunciate more clearly and not drop my ings off the ends of words. Apparently that makes all the difference!
This video, like the others is perfectly presented! I love all your content!!
I’d love to see your interpretation of perkin warbec!
THANK YOU SO MUCH KASIE for so kindly donating to the channel. I think (it was a long time ago now so I'm struggling to remember a bit) that I discussed Perkin a bit in my video on the life of Henry VII, part 2. It'll be in my Tudor monarchs' playlist if you ever want to check.
@@HistoryCalling oh ok awesome, I’ll check it out again! ✌️
IAM all ready looking forward to your video next Friday from Bea
Thank you. It's something to do with art, but I shan't say more than that.
You are like that super cool world history teacher you always wanted. ❤️
I would be incredibly interested in seeing you do a deep dive on Princess Charlotte Augusta of Wales -- I think you'd do an extraordinary job of it, as you do with all of your videos, frankly. :-)
I don't plan a full bio. of her in the near future, but I do have something coming up which relates to her. You'll have to wait and see though :-)
@@HistoryCalling It's no issue; I just figured she would be a worthwhile figure for you to cover. But I'll watch whatever you do research and present on here. :-)
I think James Stuart does count as a Prince of Wales because he did briefly have the title before his father was overthrown. His son doesn’t because his father was never king, other than in the eyes of his supporters, and therefore Bonnie Prince Charlie really wasn’t a Prince of Wales but at least he got a memorable nickname instead.
Yes, that is quite a good nickname. Better than Aethelred the Unready at any rate. :-)
Cheers. Notification came on time this week 😂 . I had a feeling you would do this after the Princesses of Wales. .
Ah, I'm glad it's working better for you now. You know, I didn't originally plan to do this video. It was only after I saw the Princess one do well that I decided to do this. I had to bump the video originally planned for this week all the way back to December to slot this in! :-)
@@HistoryCalling I'm glad. It did well . Good idea.
Thank you. Yes, I was happy with it too. You just never know with YT if the video is going to have wings or fall flat.
@HistoryCalling yes I know a few people that are content creators . Not history. But the same thing happens. Some videos do much better than others. But the ones that don't are often as good or. Better. Or long afterwards start to do well . ( the algorithm is a mysterious beast ) 😆
Yes, I've had the odd one take off much later or have a resurgence and for no apparent reason. It's so odd. My one on Friday 13th is doing well today and I can see why that has happened, but the Jackie Kennedy one went through the roof a few months ago out of the blue (which was great of course and that one had already done very well, so it was extra nice).
Thank you for including both pretenders. Your summaries of their lives were very instructive! I find it sad that so many kings and their heirs had bad relationships. Their feuds make any differences Elizabeth II had with Charles III exceedingly trivial.
Thank you. Yes, it's always sad (not to mention very difficult politically) when the royal family has fallings out. The current issues with Prince Harry are a good modern example. It does all pale in comparison to how the medieval and early modern royals dealt with each other though.
Thanks
THANK YOU SO MUCH BABS for being so generous and donating to the channel.
Poor Frederick. Imagine being an intern for 22 years and still not getting the job.
This is a great partner video to your excellent Princesses of Wales (which I loved). Should the 2 Stuarts have been included? The step brother to Queen Anne probably should, but his son definitely shouldn't. No real claim to the throne there. I liked the way you put it HC, if they can't put one step in the country, or have access to Royal regalia etc - dead in the water, no chance. Is there any possibility of a video on Edward the 1st's wife Eleanor? She is a bit interesting. Thanks HC, another excellent video. 🙂
Thanks Elisabeth. Honestly, I'd love to get to all the Queens consort of England :-) I really must finish my women of the wars of the Roses series first though. Still got Elizabeth of York to go (and maybe one other woman who I wasn't going to include originally, but I think I will as she's been much requested).
At first I was anticipating an entry for Prince Albert Victor, but then remembered that his father was still Prince of Wales at the time of his death. One topic which might make for an interesting future video though, is all the instances where the Duke of York (or 'Spare'), has ascended to the Throne. When I looked into it more in-depth, I found that there were more cases than I had previously realized. The rest of your viewers would probably find it an interesting and enjoyable jaunt down English History’s memory lane.
If I'm not mistaken Lindsay has made a video about spares who became king!
She did, and as usual it's very good. I highly recommend!
I actually did a video on spares who became heirs a while back. I've read the comment underneath though from Katie and see that apparently Lindsay Holliday did that topic too. I didn't know that as I don't follow any other history TH-camrs so I don't know if she thought of that idea first, or got it from me. I never intentionally do the same thing as someone else though and frankly I'm not gonna beat myself up on this as one of my Patrons told me recently that she'd very obviously copied my most successful video ever on "Digging up Anne Boleyn and Others" (like literally copied the exact title and everything), which I think must have been intentional.
Thank you for another interesting video. I remained surprised what little information is known about the fate and burial of Richard III's son, Edward of Middleham. Again, well done 👏
I know, right? You'd think we'd have a better idea of what happened to the King's child. Mind you, I say that, but I actually managed to screw up in the video regarding what we do know by saying he died at Nottingham when that was where his parents were when heard the news. Quietly kicking myself over here :-(
@@HistoryCalling Don't stress over that minor detail....your videos are well produced informative and greatly appreciated by your fan base.
Fun Fact - 'The Princes in the Tower' remain World Hide & Seek Champions to this day 🏆.
I know I shouldn't, but my lips did twitch a little at that way of putting it. In all seriousness though, I think there's a good chance the bones in Westminster Abbey are them and I have my fingers crossed for DNA testing being allowed.
@@HistoryCalling Thanks, I do hope so too.
It certainly is a mystery that has endured for far too long, a page or 20 missing from our history texts.
Thank you so much for this video! It would be very nice to hear more from you on the prince Henry Stuart, Jacobites and prince Frederik.
Yes, they were all quite new territory for me so this was a good way to dip my toe into those periods of history here on the channel.
Hi HC, another great video. I actually like when you may add someone or something as it gives me a better perspective and understanding of what was happening at the time. Some may not understand or like it, it helps me so please don't stop doing that. I so look forward to hearing you on Friday and do miss the patreon page.
Thanks Vernon. Will do.
Don't sweat it about Patreon please. I'm happy to chat away to you here :-)
@@HistoryCalling The reason I would like to get back there is that I have liked the extra stuff you have on there, I will take my time because I know it will be there and I can always read or listen to it later.
Hi HC, yet again loved your presentation with all its detail. Goes well alongside the Princess’s of Wales that you gave us the other week.
Again you bring forth a topic that is rarely brought forth and discussed.
Thanks. 😉
Thanks James. I wasn't going to do this one until I saw the Princesses do well and then decided I'd better get one on the Princes out before someone else stole the idea. Mind you, the speed at which I then had to put it together has led to a few little errors in it which are really annoying. I absolutely hate it when I mess up like that :-\
History calling I love watching you. My history teacher never talked about Alfred the great when he was the first ever king of England
Thank you :-) Maybe it just wasn't on the curriculum your teacher was required to take you through? I never did any Tudor history at school for instance, even though it's so popular.
Alfred the Great wasn't King of England. He was King of Wessex, but never managed to join all the warring counties of what would eventually become England. It was his Grandson Athelstan who became the 1st King of England. He is worthy of a series from HC! 🙏
A wonderful and detailed summary. Thanks! I enjoyed it.
Glad you enjoyed it :-)
Can you do a video about the Dukes of York?
9 times out of 10 I drop my phone out of excitement when I see a new upload😂 trying to click on it super fast!!
Oh no, don't do that :-) You'll not be able to watch if you break it :-)
Your videos are always interesting and your narration style makes them so easy to listen to and understand. For my money if the country you claim the throne of doesn’t recognise you then you can’t hold any title from that country.
Yes, I think that's fair too. Of course if Bonnie Prince Charlie had won, no one would have dared to question that he'd been a Prince all along. History is written by the winners as they say.
I really enjoyed this one, thank you! There's a lot of information here so I'm going to watch it again
Thank you so much :-)
Very well done episode. Graphics as always. The Young Pretenders the rock band?? ♥
Yes, that's a good name for a band actually :-)
the bonnie Prince is a very fascinating part of this history, although i’m with you as far as not considering him a true Prince of Wales. excellent vid HC!!
Another great video. I remember seeing your video on the black prince. I didn’t realize he never became king. Have a great weekend
Thanks Delia. Yes, it was a pity in many ways that he didn't get to be monarch. It lead to a minority, a very sticky end for his son Richard and ultimately the Wars of the Roses.
Indepth and superb as always HC. I don't think the old pretender and the young pretender should be on the list, what I will say it's certainly a topic for debate, thank you as always.
Thanks Simon. Yes, I think Bonnie Prince Charlie in particular is on very thin ice to be included, but there would have been such a little storm in the comments if I hadn't mentioned him. :-)
@@HistoryCalling always a plesure HC, yes I agree I'm sure you would of caused a little storm by not including bonnie Prince Charlie in the list,
I Love your videos and look forward to watching every week. Thank you ❤🙂
Thank you so much for supporting the channel by watching and commenting. Tis much appreciated. :-)
Hello, HC. I was reading this alternative history wiki of Jacobite secession.
Ah, well then you're well primed for this video. Plenty of Jacobite history here :-)
@@HistoryCalling they had A King Henry 9th and Richard 4th .
Hmm, I can see how they got Henry IX, but not Richard IV.
@@HistoryCalling And there's also A Richard V in place of what should have been Queen Elizabeth ii.
Aww, now I liked EII. It would be a sad alternate reality if we hadn't had her in my opinion.
I think you’re correct in not adding them to the list. Just because I believe I’m a princess doesn’t make it true by any means.
It’s hard from a modern day secular view to imagine why monarchs were so staunch in their faith, choosing to be deposed instead of converting to Protestantism. But I imagine that when they took their eternal souls into consideration, it wasn’t worth it.
But I also wonder if people were more like Henry VIII, and the change was just in name, not in true beliefs.
It's hard to know. Bonnie Prince Charlie was raised Catholic and I struggle to believe that he meant it when he converted to Protestantism (not that that conversion did him any good as regards getting the throne).
Both Catholicism & Protestantism are based on a great many ancient pagan foundations, and the latter is an offshoot of the former anyhow.
Another stellar video! TY ❤
You are so welcome :-)
It is great that you are willing to share these stories of the historical PRINCES OF WALES. I 📚 ABOUT THE ANCESTORS OF ONE OF THESE PRINCE OF WALES THOUGH FORMER DIANA SPENCER SON (depends on health of the current leader of Britain) I.E., WILLIAM 🎉
Hi, interesting video. How are you doing? I'm doing well. Just enjoying the autumn 🍂 weather. Have a great day. See you next video 😊
Hi Michelle. All good thanks. Just looking forward to the weekend. It's very Autumnal here too :-)
Maybe I missed it, but could you tell me where the throne at 7:30 is? Doesn't look like the one in Westminster, but it's been a few years since I've visited England.
James Edward, the Old Pretender, who should have been king if he could not refused to renounce Roman Catholicism and become an Anglican in order to be designated Queen Anne's heir. So he should have been included on the list.However, Charles Stuart, the Young Pretender should not be on the list. He also had repudiated his tittle to British throne by Major Catholic powers. Another great video. Thank you very much.
I think the most tragic what-if was caused by the death of the potential Henry IX. As tyrannical as Charles I reputedly was, regicide was a shameful act. And Cromwell was no paragon of liberty.
Ah yes, Cromwell. We don't like him in my neck of the woods as he was pretty awful in Ireland (not that he was a picnic for the English to deal with either).
@@HistoryCalling I understand he was rabidly anti Catholic.
Happy birthday Edward of Westminster.
Oh yeah! I hadn't noticed that. I wonder if he was born on Friday 13th as well???
@@HistoryCalling would be tragically fitting
@@HistoryCalling It was a Thursday but that's not corrected from when the calendar shifted over to the Gregorian one I think.
It’s a great “what if”, that of “had Henry the would be IX” lived…
Yes, I get the impression he would have been quite a warlike King. I can't see him dealing any more successfully with Parliament than his little brother did though (unless he just killed them all).
@@HistoryCallingyeah… he might well have turned out like his father (very much pejorative)
@@lfgifu296 Hello, what did you think of the Spanish monarchs.
@@DarthDread-oh2neI liked it! Though the Russian Czars’ one was more to my taste, it felt more real (I have rewatched it already haha)
@@lfgifu296 There was A Habsburgs documentary series but that one isn't good. It doesn't focus on all of the Habsburgs and it is missing 2 and 3.
These historical figures offer such wonderful “What if…” possibilities. I think including the Jacobite pretenders, especially the elder who genuinely was Prince of Wales for a time, are valid inclusions. I don’t think the story of the title Prince of Wales could be complete without those who may have had valid claims to the title. I think it will be interesting to see if the British monarchy continues to bestow the contentious title on future heirs apparent.
Yes, we'll have to see if George gets it in due course. I'm more interested actually to see if there is every a Princess of Wales in her own right, but I may not live long enough to find out, as that would only happen if George has a girl first and also after he becomes King (which could easily be 50 years from now).
Great subject thanks for sharing.
Thanks Sally :-)
Thank you!
You're very welcome. :-)
Thank you.
Although I hate to say nice things about other people (😊), this video is EXCELLENT!
Thanks Pete :-)
I’m not sure you’ll be able to see this, but would you like to do a video on the mystery of the Sodder children? It’s a chilling mystery on which I have my opinions, but yours are always much better founded…
I'm vaguely familiar with that case, but it's so recent that I think it would be tough for me to do due to most of the images I'd need being still in copyright. It might also be difficult to get it around YT's aversion to 'distressing events'. I do remember watching a doc. on TV about it though and thinking that they probably died in the house fire.
Great info.
Thank you so much :-)
I think the old and young pretenders should have been included and I really enjoyed learning about them. I’m American so I didn’t really know a lot about either of them besides what I saw in The Outlander.
I love Outlander. That was actually my main intro. to Bonnie Prince Charlie too :-)
@@HistoryCalling wow what a coincidence? I felt stupid for even saying that and now I’m glad I did.
Was George V's older brother never Prince of Wales? I think of him as being referred to as the Duke of Clarence so perhaps not.
ETA; Even as I was writing that I recalled that his father, the future Edward VII, was still alive when he died and thus still Prince of Wales.
The Old Pretender absolutely belonged on the list, but the Young Pretender didn't.
But I woul LOVE to see videos devoted to each of them.
Yes, they are very interesting characters.
Sounds like Bonnie Prince Charlie would have been a nightmare of a king if he'd ascended the thrown.
Yeah, I don't think he was really cut out for the job either.
The old pretender lost his title when his sister and brother-in-law were crowned, so even though his father called him by this title he wasn’t a Prince of Wales!
He was a legitimate PoW long enough to be counted.
Commenting for the algorithm. ❤
Thanks Dorothy. Much obliged :-)
Having just finished a biography of Flora MacDonald, I’d like to point out that Bonnie Prince Charlie escaped Scotland being dressed as an Irish maid for part of the time (I thought you’d like that detail) 😊
Yes, I came across Flora during my research. If I ever do a video dedicated to Charles I'll talk about her there and get into more detail on his Scottish escapades. Sadly there wasn't space to do them justice here.
Flora & Bonnie Prince Charlie were included in the Highlander series.
Hi HC, for an American, there are a lot of confusing genealogical lines to follow! It was fascinating though and I enjoyed it as always. Yes to the old pretender and no to the younger. Bonnie Prince Charlie seems quite the character and probably best that he never became PoW or king. It also seems to me that as long as his father was alive and had been invested as PoW, Charles could not be PoW as long as his father lived and was not invested as king. Do I understand this right?
I’m enjoying your channel so much! ❤
Don't worry. Those family trees are awful for Brits to understand too. Regarding James and Charles. James claimed to be James III once his father died and so (if we accept him as a King for a moment, for this hypothetical scenario) he was able to create his son Prince of Wales. A coronation is not necessary to make a monarch a monarch, nor is an investiture ceremony required to make a Prince of Wales a PoW (the current Prince hasn't had one for instance). Bonnie Prince Charlie's title is dubious, not because his father hadn't been crowned and Charles hadn't been invested, but because his father wasn't the generally recognised King of Great Britain at all and there was even another Prince of Wales alive at the same time as Charles (Prince Frederick, also discussed in the video). It is rather confusing. I hope that's helped a bit though.
The Old Pretender, yes, should be a part of the list - but not the younger
What is the throne in the beginning of the video?
It's on display in the Tower of London.
I’m in agreement with you. The Old Pretender yes, he was made Prince of Wales while his father was king, and I believe his sister Anne did consider making him her heir, but he showed the same stubborn stupidity of his father and refused to renounce Catholicism, and that put paid to that claim. Had he shown a measure of sense and become Protestant, Anne and her ministers’ would still have had to go back to Parliament and revise the Act of Settlement, which in addition to barring Catholics and heirs married to Catholics, had established Sophia of the Palatinate (she was born a Wittelsbach) as the next in line after Anne to the throne.
It’s ironic that for those who like to dwell on pretenders, if the line of succession established by the Act of Settlement and the Bill of Rights of 1689, which denied Catholics from ascending the throne were abolished, and the previous rules of succession restored, the current Duke of Bavaria (a member of the Catholic branch of the house of Wittelsbach) would have the best claim to the British Crown.
Well, I suppose we have to admire his faith. It was so important to him that he was prepared to give up a throne for it when, as you say, the easier thing to do would have been to either convert or pretend to convert. I can respect that. If you truly believe something and think that your very soul is on the line, I don't think you can just change. Lots of people here in Ireland would have had an easier time of it too over the centuries if they'd changed faiths, but they wouldn't/couldn't do it. Anyways, I didn't know the Duke of Bavaria would be the best claimant now. That's very interesting. Thank you for sharing :-)
@@HistoryCalling that’s true, I’m an agnostic from a Protestant background. Also living in Ireland (two years at the end of this month after Britain’s incredibly stupid decision to leave the EU), but I love it here so I’m not complaining. I lived in London 24 years before that but I grew up in America.
I went from being a doubtful Christian to an atheist. Eventually I became agnostic when I realised atheists possess just as much certainty as convinced Christians. And as a committed rationalist I need evidence before I start making claims of certainty about anything. I have seen some evidence to persuade me that there could be a larger force in the Universe, the laws of physics have made that plausible to me.
One of my projects when I was in my twenties was to read the Bible cover to cover in a modern English version (I skipped the Apocrypha). I had stopped believing in the Judeo Christian God by my early teens. I love the history of religion, especially the reformation. I wanted to look into it afresh. I was told in church that God made man in his image, but reading the Bible made me realise that was completely turned around. Man made God in his image. When I read the Old Testament that became very clear to me. When he’s mentioned, and you put all the pieces together, he’s presented as a stern, often arbitrary, Hebrew patriarch. The kind of figure many men were thousands of years ago in the Middle East.
Why should God have a gender? He’s all powerful and immortal. When he wants to create beings somewhat like himself he can make them from clay.
Anyway I digress. I would say in response to your points about the Old Pretender, that Anne was every bit as much a devout Anglican as her brother was a Catholic. And both of them got about as much benefit from it. I guess that opens me to the charge of being too materialistic. Oh well.
You could argue that she suffered as much if not more than he did. Not just her children all dying, but the ugly fall out with her sister Mary of Orange when she moved back to England who was the only family she had at that point, aside from her husband Prince George of Denmark. This after her wrenching decision to put her faith over her father. When she became Queen she, a woman little schooled in a political system undergoing rapid institutional change, where her ministers were constantly trying to undermine and sideline her in her role as the prime executive, had to constantly try and keep their power grabs in check. All while badly suffering from a host of ailments that would eventually kill her.
The Stuarts were in many ways a more interesting family than the Tudors to me. They were also a more exasperating yet tragic family. They’re much easier for me to sympathise with than the Tudors. Charles I and his fall, his zealously Catholic wife, which created some dreadful divisions with some of her children, notably Mary and her third son Richard, and young Elizabeth taken from her parents to live neglected with a bunch of sanctimonious Puritans, who were also religious zealots, until she died.
Then there was Charles I’s elder sister Elizabeth the Winter Queen, and her many children exiled with little money to an old Palace in The Hague when her beloved husband Frederick died.
Even James II learned nothing from his family’s experiences with his father deposed and executed and then the rest exiled. And the same happening to him exiled to the cold draughty old palace of St Germain with his wife Mary of Modena having to repeatedly beg King Louis for money, after he was optimistic enough to believe his subjects would accept his attempt to re-establish Catholicism in England, when they executed his father just for trying to create a high church version of the Anglican religion. Heaven knows he received enough for warning during his brother’s reign with the Popish Plot and the Exclusion Crisis.
The Duke of Bavaria is descended from Charles I’s youngest child Henriette Anne, who was Louis XIV’s sister-in-law and bore her husband the Duc d’Orleans two daughters, one, Marie Louise, who became Queen of Spain. The younger, Anne Marie, who married the Duke of Savoy, and became Queen of Sardinia when her husband became king. It is this line who would produce a descendant that would marry into the House of Bavaria. One of Anne Marie’s other daughters would also go on to marry the Petit Dauphin, a great grandson of Louis XIV. It is through this marriage that Louis XVI was descended from Charles I. Like his direct ancestor he lost his crown and his head in his country’s revolution.
Meanwhile, when Henriette Anne predeceased her husband, the Duc d’Orleans went on to marry as his second wife Elisabeth the daughter of Charles the Prince of the Palatinate, oldest surviving son of Elizabeth of Bohemia, and older brother of Prince Rupert and Princess Sophia of Hanover. Her niece Elisabeth produced a son for the Duc d’Orleans to carry on his line that would become the Orleanist line of French kings in the 19th century.
Charles was punished to be in his room without being able to go out by his father for threatething to kill his tutor until he apologised. He lasted for about a week inside his room before he gave up and apologised. His other behavioural problem was disliking studying he disliked academic stuff and liked more sports he hunted in forest around Rome and became very good at using weapons he trained a lot, but disliked academic stuff despite his father efforts to get him to focus more in academic matters. That is why his brother Henry was always the favorite of his Father almost always submissive towards his Father and interested in academic matters.
Charles also famously refused to kiss the pope feet wich caused panic for his Father and Mother.
His will/determination impressed some of his supporters who saw it has a good trait, but it caused headaches for his father who disliked his family members not being submissive towards him the head of the household.
What throne did you picture in this video
At the start there's a shot of a throne in the Tower of London and then I think I had a red velvet one later on didn't I? That's in Hampton Court Palace.
Richard, the first is said to have only been in England for about three months of his reign, perhaps we should take him off the roster🤪
I do agree with you, the Stewart line ended with queen anne, alas.
Ah yes, the old Lionheart. Not a great King to be honest. Like you say, he was hardly ever in England and then, if memory serves, he got captured and the country had to be nearly bankrupted to get him back.
@@HistoryCalling that’s how I remember it too! Also, he knew little or no English
@@HistoryCalling me and my son absolutely love your channel. He’s autistic and nonverbal and loves all things history; especially medieval history. We now thanks to you have differing opinions on what happened to the princes in the tower.😛 he agrees 100% with you!
@@romana34He most likely did know English, but he preferred Occitan which was the native language of his mother Eleanor of Aquitaine.
@@HistoryCalling And his poor wife Berengaria of Navarre never set foot in England as a queen. The only queen consort not to do so. (There are suggestions she visited after Richard's death, probably trying to get the income from her tin mines that dear brother-in-law John somehow kept failing to send.)
Edward, the black prince would’ve been a good king and sadly his young son became king and he was terrible
This is so sad 😔 history
Who would you say is your favourite and least favourite Plantagenet King and why? for me, favourite has to be Henry II (though as a person he def had his drawbacks) and least favourite, John, though Edward II was also very bad, just like Richard II😭
I actually don't think I know enough about all of them to have an opinion. My earlier medieval history (pre Wars of the Roses) is actually quite limited.
@@HistoryCallingoh, just from those you know about, then :)
I’ve always been more interested in the Plantagenets & Tudors than the Stuarts & following so it’s about time I learned more ;) ❤
I'll never understand why the raising and training of a "King in waiting" should be undertaken by people who were outranked by and subservient to their charge, who may fear being harshly judged by him when he eventually acceded to the throne. You alluded to this practice when you related the story of Anne of Denmark and Prince Henry. I was cheering Queen Anne's protest until the point when it ended so sadly, with her miscarrying, and his eventual death from typhoid, which may have been avoided if he'd not been with her. I have three sons, and I cannot imagine handing them off to live some place else, or leaving one of them behind for years at a time, while still claiming to "love" them. Even royals should have seen the problems with this practice! I can't help but feel the Brits would have benefitted from their Kings and Queens being better parents. I also think the Brits dodged a bullet when Prince Frederick died young, because of his estrangement from his family. Maybe he wouldn't have been "ze grrreatest ass etc." if he had been raised with his family.
I absolutely agree. If you want a family to feel and act like a family, then you have to keep that family together to make sure they're really bonded to one another. I'm even very much on the fence about the idea of modern boarding schools, although I have friends who boarded and loved it and are still very tight with their families, so I know it can work very effectively. I suppose it all depends on the individuals involved and the amount of time they still spend with their relations and how often they're in touch. It's much easier now of course to stay in contact remotely than it was 100s of years ago, so it's probably not a fair comparison.
Those who raised the heir to the Scottish throne were not particularly subservient. King James was soundly beaten by his governor as a boy. Perhaps that's in part what motivated his wife to retrieve their son.
That Fredrick probably died from a burst abscess in a lunch hit a little too close to home. I suffered from that very thing this past summer. I too thought I had recovered until suddenly I was so much worse. My lung collapsed and I required major surgery to remove essentially jello from the space between my lung and the lining covering it. Even now it’s a dangerous condition and dicey procedure. Frederick didn’t have a chance.
I am not sure they should. I believe an arguement could be made for the Old Pretender, but not the Younger. It is good to hear about them, and to be addressed in that manner as special conditions so they were not really Princes of Wales.
Yes, it's a tricky question. Bonnie Prince Charlie in particular is really on thin ice when trying to call him the Prince of Wales.
What about Albert Victor, son of Edward VII and brother of George V? He died before he could inherit the Throne.
Albert Victor's father was still Prince of Wales himself when Albert Victor died.
@@edithengel2284 O.K.
I heard "Cousin and Brother" and briefly thought England decided to pull a Habsburg for a minute 😔
Haha, no, thankfully not. I always think when people complain that the British royals are inbred they should really take a look at the Hapsburgs and the ancient Egyptians. The British royals are honestly no worse than I'm sure a lot of people whose families came from remote villages in the countryside were in the past. We're probably all a little bit inbred.
@HistoryCalling While I think the average person (of the 1600s-1700s) was less inbred than a royal I do think you are correct. The royal genepool was about as big as a small village(?) with a few families. The habsburgs and Egyptians definitely overdid it and it certainly didnt turn out great
I'm a Jacobite sympathiser, so I guess I want the Old Pretender to count. But if the Young Pretender was never even declared to be heir, I can't really count him. It's hard to get worked up about who ought to have been king 300 years ago, in any case.
I think we focus on leaders and kings/Queens and overlook the fact that no leader can be in that roll without strong followers who really give them their power. A interesting history would be of all the king makers in British history. A King is probably one of the few offices one can steal and keep until you lose the power to maintain control and support of supporters. Lose support and you will lose the crown regardless of legitimacy. Thanks.. a big topic handled well. Prince Charlie's plaid seems a little odd.. maybe the French version. ; }
Yes, you've gotta have the support, no doubt about it. The Jacobites learnt that the heard way. Saying you're a King doesn't make it so if you don't have a lot of powerful people behind you.
I actually know nearly nothing about plaid, so I'll have to take your word for it :-)
Given Richard II's parents and grandparents on his father's side were cousins, I wonder if his mental state as he got older could be attributed either to the lack of a father figure growing up to keep in him line or inbreeding. Edward of Woodstock, Arthur Tudor and Henry Frederick Stuart are interesting historical "What if's" had they survived to become king.
Cousin marriage does not necessarily result in defects. Recent historians have somewhat moderated the view of Richard's mental state toward the end of his reign. His policies were not in themselves unusual, but his manner of implementing them disturbed the nobility. Very hard to make an analysis at this distance.
I think it wasn't so much the lack of a father figure, as perhaps feeling a bit resourceless during the regency, and feeling over controlled. He does seem to have had a fundamental desire for control
I consider Princess Charlotte of Wales and honorary member of this group. Her father was Prince of Wales when she died and she probably wouldn’t have been made Princess of Wales since she was technically heiress presumptive but she was 100% expected to become Queen one day before her tragic death.
Unfortunately Prince(ss) of Wales can only ever be given to the heir _apparent,_ which before 2015 could never be a woman. It wasn’t completely out of the question that George may have gotten rid of or otherwise divorced queen Caroline and remarried and had a son, at which point Charlotte would have been out of the line of succession
@@emilybarclay8831 Dropped down, but not out, really.
@@emilybarclay8831
Actually, due to the nature of William & Mary’s joint monarch, Anne was the heiress apparent after Mary died. That’s the only case the British monarch has ever had an heiress apparent.
@@graceneilitz7661 officially any children William and Mary would have would outrank Anne. No one expected there to be any children, but legally Anne was heir presumptive because there was still some hypothetical person who could supersede her. The Bill of Rights 1689 that invested Mary and William as monarchs stated that the succession was to Mary and William’s heirs, and then to Anne.
@@emilybarclay8831
Anne became heiress apparent to William after her sister Mary died.
(If I’m remembering correctly).
Any children born to William with a second wife would go in the succession after Anne.
I believe Frederick, PoW died at the age of 44, not 47!
Oh poo! You're right. *Sigh* There's always some silly little thing like that that slips through. I never have time to do the kind of proofreading and checking that I'd like :-(
I've put a little correction in the pinned comment which is all I can really do at this stage of things.
@@HistoryCalling Well it was just a small detail, not of much significance considering the overall video, which was superb btw. I was reading about him last weekend and somehow remembered the age when he died, as it was an untimely demise, so I pointed out 😅
@HistoryCalling Prince Frederick almost married a woman who was named Lady Diana Spencer, granddaughter of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough. Sarah offered a dowry to Frederick for his debts. The Prime Minister Robert Walpole found out about this and thwarted the marriage. His idea of a bride for Frederick was Princess Augusta of Saxe Gotha whom as you said in your video, Frederick did marry. Lady Diana went on to marry lord John Russell, who became the Duke of Bedford after he married Lady Diana. She tragically died at age 25 of Tuberculosis.
@@karenseward6405 She was also called "Di" like her later descendant, and also like the Princess of Wales, was much mourned.
There Was Actually An Unofficial Princess Of Wales,Princess Charlotte,The Daughter Of King George IV. I Would Like To See A Video About Her!!! After Her Death When She Gave Birth To Her Son,Who Also Died,A Race Between The King's Younger Brothers To Find An Appropriate Protestant Princess, Marry And Produce A Legitimate Heir Led To Edward Duke Of Kent Marrying Victoria Of Saxe-Coburg Saafield,A Widow With Two Children. She Gave Birth To Queen Victoria.
She was never the Princess of Wales as she died before her father became King before her marriage she was known as Princess Charlotte of Wales the same style by whivh Prince William's daughter is known today
It'd be interesting to see something about the actual princes of Wales.
I always feel bad for the ones who die as lads.
Those Princes of Wales who didn't die before they became monarchs presumably ... became King no? So aren't you just asking for a chronological history of the Kings, or at least those who had previously been PoW?
@@lilymarinovic1644 Medieval Wales was not unified except for a few years under a particular king. Though apparently the kings of Gwynedd (in the north of Wales) would sometimes style themselves "Prince of Wales" to try, falsely, to convince the world they were actually ruling over the rest of Wales.
@eliscanfield3913 oh I see, you mean those who ruled Wales before Edward I took over and claimed the PoW title for his son. My mistake.
Those dear, darling boys.
I feel like its fine to include the pretenders because some genuinely recognized them as Princes of Wales but as they never even sat on the throne officially that would mean they were never really King
Yes, it was a tricky one to decide on. It would have been less work for me to skip them of course, but I thought it would lead to trouble in the comments and I find them interesting anyway, so I wanted to have them :-)
Did she mention prince Arthur, Queen Victoria's son, or did I miss it? Was he not yet invested as prince of wales?
Queen Victoria's eldest son was made Prince of Wales, however he acceded to the throne as Edward VII and so did not feature on this list.
Arthur was Victoria's 2nd son he was created Duke of Edinburgh. Her eldest son Albert Edwsrd was Prince of Wales and became King Edward VII. Only 3 Princes of Walez have had an actual investiture
Arthur son of Queen Victoria was her third son and was not duke of Edinburgh. Her second son was Prince Afred duke of Edinburgh.
@@petaleseberg424 really? Thanks! I thought Arthur was the original heir and died before he could succeed his mother. Thanks for correcting me.
22:22 that is a mighty nose and weird forehead 😂. Profile was not his best look 😂
Yes, it was an unfortunate angle. Still, it could have been worse. He could have had the Habsburg jaw.
@@HistoryCallingvery true. Imagine if it was a combination through the royalty mixing
James legitimizing his daughter Charlotte is no different than Henry VIII's divorcing Katherine of Aragon. If James couldn't legitimize his daughter, then Henry couldn't divorce his wife. Either they both had the authority to do their respective deeds, or they did not. The creation of the English Catholic Church by Henry VIII did not change the fact that the new church only held jurisdiction over marriages created under its authority. Side-stepping the issue of Katherine's specious claim of non-consummation of her marriage to Authur - after all, it is entirely believable that two 15-year-olds who were madly in love were said to be totally hot for each other, and were married to boot, would not take a tumble or two at the first opportunity sounds perfectly reasonable to nobody with a brain - this invalidates the reigns of Edward VI and Elizabeth which brings up the question of who would be the legitimate ruler when Mary died? That would make a good episode.
I must admit this topic does interest me a bit more than the Princess of Wales one since this would affect history more severely than the Princess of Wales. I mean the death of one prince helped kickstart a full blown war
Yes, they are arguably more important in that respect (plus I also like to do videos that aren't on women's history sometimes, for the sake of better variety).
❤
My kitty, one of your nephews was run over.
Oh no! I'm so sorry to hear that :-(
@@HistoryCalling I told him multiple times, to not follow me into the street.
Oh no I'm sorry. My he rest in peace
🥲Oh, no! So sorry.
😢
George II and his wife were absolute jerks! I've read many things about this relationship and the parents were incredibly hateful to this son, something that obviously started when he was just a child.
Poor George II also had a very unhappy relationship with his father George I, who had divorced and locked up his (George II's) mother. He probably didn't know how to have a normal father/son relationship.
Yes, the Hanoverians were notoriously poor at parenting. I'm not surprised they had a tough relationship when the child was left behind in Hanover at such a young age (though that was the decision of George I).
@@HistoryCallingWhich partially explains why George III went way too far the other way and smothered his kids way too much.
@@gabrielleschiavo9078 well hus daughters not sure how much he smothered his sons