Henry VIII's Sisters 

Don't forget elizabeth and Richard

And catherine

Still do with the Royals.

@@laurenhealy8907 And Jane. Also, it seems as if every third man was called Thomas. I wonder why no King Thomas!

Don’t forget James

He did that later. Lack of sons changed his mind

Believe it of not but Henry the Eighth was a feminist. A new age man, it was Henry who did all the housework and washing up in his marriages. He was often heard to complain to the court...I wish someone would invent a vacuum cleaner, this carpet is absolutely filthy

Men!

I feel like "the audacity" basically sums up Henry VIII as a whole ngl

He was in the process of divorce #1 at the time.

Ovi lol

@Kelly Sanders ok but Edward ruled for 6 years still which is longer than Mary’s reign yet Mary’s legacy (Bloody Mary) still is remembered to this day - not that she did a good thing

That's cool and all but why do people forget that my reign was way better than Mary's and could have compared to Elizabeth if I lived slightly longer? Common I deserve some credit for being the only child monarch of England other than Edward III who didn't screw up his reign

Move on its been years

@@edwardviofengland8048 .

@Christopher Vergara As well from what I could tell by my speculations Henry was someone who was ruled by his sense of want, lust and ego. Which did not help any.

He was very susceptible to the influence of the Inquisition though, very paranoid about witches and any female of power

He also had tons of illegitimate children.

@@michellewheatley2007do you have the right James?

@@michellewheatley2007I think you're confusing James IV of Scotland with his great grandson, James VI of Scotland and I of England. The latter's queen was Anne of Denmark. Their daughter Elizabeth was the progenitor of the Hanover dynasty.

Well, to be fair He had around 5 illegitimate children that were conceived before and after His marriage to Margaret.. So He didnt wait out those 3 year's in a chaste manner

@@TheOnlyElle. lmao this is so funny

@@ilikeapples1824 lol I'm glad You see My sense of humour! :) I suppose, (for the time period) James did treat Margaret very well. A lot of Men would of kept "consummating" their marriages to child brides- consequences be damned! To be fair to Margaret, I believe She kept the younger "illegitimate" children in the royal nursery with Her own children, or at least made sure the "illegitimate" children were educated..which speaks volumes on Her character. Definitely a different time with a different view on life! :)

@@aleasyah3032 oh

@@TheOnlyElle. Marriages were not often consummated. Girls could be married young but usually it was agreed between the families that the girl had to be at least 14 to 16 when having sex. Still not ideal, however at least she ain't 9. Margaret Beaufort was considered too young even for her own time to be pregnant.

I was thinking the same thing. Henry VII genuinely loved Elizabeth and was faithful to her their entire marriage (which is extraordinary for the time and his position) and gave their children as well adjusted a life that could be given during the his reign. And yet Henry VIII grew up to discard women like garbage on a whim, when in reality he was the real trash. Smh 🤦🏻‍♀️

Wasn't Henry VIII a decent husband for Katherine of Aragon for most of their marriage? For more than 20 years. But it's unfortunate how he turned out when he became desperate and then tyrannical.

@@lizg2153 Well he cheated on her throughout those 20 years, had his son (Henry FitzRoy), and apparently would undermine her in public

@@lizg2153 I think they had a decent marriage but I think the whole divorce thing and how he treated Mary kinda outweighs the good

@@areiaaphrodite I mean as far as medieval royal marriages go, especially Henry’s marriages, getting cheated on and being undermined in public by your husband seems like a pretty good deal. I’d let my husband cheat on me and bully me in public if he didn’t execute me, my children and my family and just left me alone. No doubt it was a horrible situation but frankly the other Catherine and Anna got the worse end of the stick. At least she was married to him while he was still young, handsome and not entirely mad

Actually it was not Henry that got into that battle it was catharine that did that and she caused James to be killed Henry had a part in it yea by starting the war but he didn't do the actual killing

@@theresaschuebel5151 Yeah I got your point but Henry still started the war against her sister's husband.

@@Pythonfan3 Yes he did

Sister wives

@@Pythonfan3 huh?? if i remember correctly James the one who got a big head and continuously threatened the English-Scottish border, which was outrageous and galling given his wife was an English princess _and_ the sister of the reigning English sovereign. Henry VIII is a lot of things but during that time he wasn't nearly the big unstable bad guy that he turned out to be later in his life. you'll be shocked to learn other sovereigns do idiotic things too.

How could he? He was busy changing domestic religion so he could divorce and then execute his wives as much as possible.

@@LS-dp2gs That was King Henry VIII, not the VII

I bet he would had liked it as much as any other monarch of the time but his own rebellion and the subsequent Yorkish attempts to recover the throne left the crown short of funds and with the dire need of consolidation of the power of his own family, some of the people executed under his son were just guilty of having a claim to the throne due having a close connection to the Plantagenets.

He became king by going to war

@@Oldie699 Right? And he was in the thick of it, not hanging back at a safe distance.

That's what I thought, too. I forget where I read it, though. Thanks.

The Scottish king supposedly replied to this worry by assuring his English in-laws-to-be that he was already much occupied with mistreses and would not bother Margarate for quite a while.

@@charlottekey8856 They still didn't send Margaret until she was 14.....and the Scottish king did indeed have plenty of time for her. Many kings promised not to meddle with underage brides but most broke that promise, except in households where the young bride would reside with her mother in law and other ladies who kept her separate from her groom until she was deemed old enough.

Yes, but I have read that James did assure them he was otherwise amorously occupied. Perhaps he put Margaret in the nursery with his mistresses' children for a few years.

@@charlottekey8856 He may have told them that but he had asked for her to be sent at age 12........after they had a proxy marriage and Henry Vlll was going to send her but his mother talked him out of it, and one person he listened to was his mother.

A film was made about Mary many years ago

Exactly! It's Margaret's descendants still sitting on the throne not Henry's

@@pedanticradiator1491 Interrsting I didn't know that. Thanks for telling me.

lady jane is a movie about mary's granddaughter, jane grey, being queen for 9 days. its from the 80s with helena bonham carter and one of my favorites.

@Christopher Reynolds also called The Sword and The Rose

Same, I was curiously about his sisters, they sure have damn interesting lives. Btw, I love history and a history nerd.

Right their bloodline carried till this day

@@nayannacoleman absolutely, indeed.

I agree!

.🤔😑.

You'd have a laugh at James II, king of Scots, then. He died at the height of his power, when he was killed by an exploding cannon. Not an *enemy* cannon, mind you, his own cannon. This was around the time of the War of the Roses, BTW, so it left his widow Mary of Guelders in an awkward position. She actually ran a pretty solid regency for the children she had with James.

​@@jeandehuit5385 You'd think after all the bad shit that happened to them they'd stop naming Scottish kings James!

@@Replicaate Well, James II was rather well-liked b/f he got his head blown off. Plus his son had already been born & named James by this point in time, so James III is lock-in, as it were.

@@jeandehuit5385 yes it seems it was a cursed name for that family, the first king James was killed in a conspiracy by his own Stewart kin, this one with the cannon, another was killed during the course of a rebellion of his own son, another was killed in battle against the english and the last one exiled and ousted from the thrones of his kingdoms.

@@g.sergiusfidenas6650 Well, you could easy apply the 'curse' to other Scottish monarchs as well: Alexander III: failed to provide an heir other than his 8 y/old granddaughter, who subsequently died. John de Balliol: awarded the kingdom as rightful heir. Subsequently undermined by the English king & forced to abdicate. David II: held captive in England & nearly forced to abdicate. Faces rebellion by his older half-nephew, & fails to father any heirs. Robert II: becomes king at advanced age & so surrenders rule to his sons, the eldest of whom was already lame. His powerbase slowly crumbles & magnates act like kings. Robert III: purportedly self-described as "the worst of kings and the most miserable of men" he also becomes king at advanced age (w/ a head injury to boot). His eldest son David is murdered, prob. by the king's brother, Albany. His younger son (the aforementioned James I) flees for his safety, only to be captured by the English. Mary, queen of Scots: was raised in Catholic France w/ the expectation of a French marriage; is forced back to (now-Protestant) Scotland when her spouse prematurely dies. Lacking an heir, she must marry, but her choice ends up being the most repugnant of men imaginable. She ends up murdering him & as a consequence she loses her throne. Exiled to England, she ends up executed due to a plot she had very little involvement in. Charles I: do we really need to go over it? I'm sure we're all familiar enough w/ the English Civil War... As you can see, Scotland didn't produce very many 'successful' monarchs: David I, Robert the Bruce, James II, & James IV are the only clear standouts. Even James VI (who had the longest reign out of any of these ppl.) was purportedly the 'wisest fool in Christendom,' since despite his extensive Calvinist education he wasn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed, believing himself smarter than he actually was. While Scotland would have monarchs after James (I count up to Queen Anne), England had by that point effectively 'stolen' the monarchy; they stayed in England, spoke English, & looked almost exclusively after their English subjects. I don't think any monarch post-merging of the Crowns monarchs attempted governing Scotland at all, frankly. As for curses, I don't put much stock in them; the problems faced by Scottish monarchs have more to do w/ Scotland being a very difficult land to govern effectively w/ the tools available at the time. It was poor, decentralized, & had a very niche (yet indispensable) position within European geopolitics, vis-à-vis England & France (see: the Ault Alliance), as well as various Scandinavian powers.

Margaret asked for a divorce while Henry was still married to his first wife, so he wasn't a hypocrite yet.

Henry VIII : "You can't... only I can!"

Henry had brain worms.

Henry injured and became jerk as hell

She was - in fact, she was once casted in the role of 'Beauty' during a court pageant Henry hosted during Lent.

@@Lionstar16 well deserved, she is very beautiful Margaret is too.

And James IV of Scotland was so ugly

@@ElizaFromYesteryear i can’t disagree, but you never know (just trying to cut him slack even tho he was butt ugly.)

Yes, she was very beautiful even by the today’s standarts

Royal and noble families were certainly like this - even to this day - but the lower classes used a greater variety of names.

What about Robert?

Basically, yeah. You forgot Edward.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 exactly!!! 😆👌🏻

which names would you like chuck buster troy!!

That's the one by Phillipa Gregory right? Also is the Spanish princess series loosely based on that?

You’re an actual nerd I am marry you I wish I was even smart enough to read those type of books and I’m in six grade ;-;

Awesome story!!

I also have just finished that book. Margaret comes off as a real twit.

Now I wanna read that

it's in a book I think, an illuminated sxriqt.

Ì know it from a video. I think it was something like death in medieval times, no medicine. Something like that.

I have Claire ridgeway's has shown it on her channel here on RU-vid the Anne Boylne files and Tudor society

He was handsome as a young man

Henry was known to be quite handsome when he was young

That's what I'm like

@@pedanticradiator1491 handsome and athletic Henry loved food too much and became obese

Henry was only fat!!! But by all accounts he was very good looking

There are so many comedy gold nuggets in this video lmao the one about Henry VII doing the unthinkable of not going to war is another.

😂😂😂😂

PERIODDDDDD

LMAO

Lol

Lol

But just for you tonight we are divorced, beheaded, live

Divorced

Then you would love Henry viii song

I like how Anne and her cousin were the only ones who were beheaded. Says something about the family.

@@areiaaphrodite It doesn't actually. Just because they happened to be related doesn't automatically make a correlation. Henry VIII should've just been less of a misogynistic power hungry religious hypocrite. I said what I said.

She and her husband when they were king and queen of Bohemia for a year used to bathe naked in the river Vltava in Prague so I have read!

Or Margaret Beaufort

are u a margaret descendant?

Oh, how cool.

People keep forgetting he was married to Catherine of Aragon for 20 years. I think he did genuinely love her on some level. Trouble is... HE NEEDED A SON so, yeah, divorce for a younger woman so he could try again? Absolutely.

He indirectly indicating that women have no rights to divorce.

He was a narcissist. One rule for me, one for everyone else. Plus I think Margaret asked while he was still married to Katherine. She may have put the idea in his head

@@MsJubjubbird Yeah, the whole trouble with Margaret happened during Henry's good years w/ Katherine. While I firmly believe Henry made himself believe what he needed to believe at any given moment, you have to remember that what Henry wanted was an *annulment,* not a divorce. An annulment was like the marriage never happened. So any children produced by an annulled marriage were treated as if their parents had never been married, hence why Elizabeth I was called a bastard (legally that's what she was, as Henry annulled his marriage to Anne Boleyn b/f executing her. Even though Katherine Parr convinced Henry to include her & the future Mary I back into the line of succession, that didn't reverse the annulment). Granted, you can get a certain kind of annulment wherein the children aren't seen as illegitimate (Eleanor of Aquitaine got one of these), they were rare & I don't think it was the kind that Henry VIII wanted. I don't know if Margaret asked her brother to support an annulment or a divorce. If it was a divorce then it makes sense why he would be against it (since he considered himself a staunch Catholic his entire life, even after he stopped being a Papist). Even if Margaret asked for an annulment he may have thought she didn't have a good enough reason. Henry had the 'excuse' that Katherine of Aragon had 'known' his brother, which he believe lent ecclesiastical support for his annulment. It didn't, but those were his reason. I don't think Margaret had any other than 'we don't love each other anymore & he's using my money.' To be clear, I don't like Henry VIII very much, but he *did* try to rationalize his actions, even if said rationalizations only made sense to him.

Yep..what an a hole 🕳

ooo interesting

So interesting, thanks!

Lol all started with Elizabeth Woodville

@@nayannacoleman LOL!

Called stupidity. Inbred relations so I can say that

they did

Correct

Read Josephine Tey's excellent book for the strong argument that Richard III did not murder the boys.

Good points!

That is why she usually states “it’s LIKELY” he killed them. But she did manage to fix that Margaret Beaufort mistake in another video.

Yep. Henry 8 looked fat at 18, and James 4 looked anorexic.

@@ChibiProwl Oh, I wasn’t even referring to weight. This was lesser directed at Henry, just some of their faces how they were painted look like they might’ve had some genetic issues.

@@kiarimarie Well yes. Henry 8 was gorgeous compared to Charles II of Spain.

Inbreeding creates all kind of genetic issues that mainstream likes to keep hidden.

Lol infamous interbred Habsburg jaw you referring to?

Hello 👋👋👋 nice to meet you

Hi Mary! It’s been a while!

Catherine of Aragon omg it's Queen Catherine and Queen Marry :0

I believe the Queens of England video includes her. :)

Oh hey Mary. What's good? Still executing heretics? You're looking great btw.

@@ianbat7092It has been a while, huh? Like 600 years!

What African twin sisters???

@@veronicamcniff9500 7:40

Love English Norfolk feeling fine

@@christinecolgate7884 your comment makes no sense. And I am not from Norfolk.

Henry's older sister Margaret kept the Monarchy going as it was her descendants that took over the crown when Elizabeth I died, King James VI of Scotland was her great-grandson and all future monarchs were his, thus Margaret's descendants.

I always refer to Mary as Duchess of Suffolk rather than the Queen of France. It respects the marriage she chose rather than the one she was forced into, even though it’s not entirely accurate as she was never termed the Duchess of Suffolk during her lifetime.

@@kate_cooper True, I just called her Mary Tudor. But in life she was known as The Dowager Queen of France because it's a higher title than Duchess of Suffolk.

So, James V, Margaret Douglas, Frances Brandon & Eleanor Brandon? I think these are the only ones who lived to adulthood.

I love pet dog names of that era, they were so funny

Good idea!

Hello 👋 nice to meet you how are you doing today 💞

Or A spin off title (...) The Stuarts.

The only Tudor to have a happy love-life was Henry VII (at least until his wife died). Margaret Beaufort was married 4 times Margaret Tudor was married 3 times Henry VIII was married 6 times Mary Tudor was married twice (but the 1st one was a *real* clunker) Mary I was married to a man who didn't love her (although she loved him) Elizabeth I refused to be married Bonus points to Arthur & Ed for dying virgins; apparently poor Arthur bragged to his mates that 'having a wife is a good pastime' so that none of them knew he blew it in the bedroom. Then he died :(

@@jeandehuit5385 What about that line that he "spent the night in Spain?" So that no one knows if he was a virgin.

@@LS-ei7xk He was 15, and would never admit to his friends he was a no-show. It's the same thing as the boast about 'having a wife is the best pastime.' Both were comments from a self-conscious boy desperate to hide his failure. It's quite sad, really

Lady Jane Grey, the Anglican, was the designated heir by her brother, King Edward VI, also an Anglican. Bloody Mary, the Catholic, usurped the throne from Lady Jane, the opposite of how you characterized it. Religion and its supporters, played the major role back then as to who was going to win.

@@hifinsword yeah no. Via Henry’s will Mary was in the line of succession after Edward. Edward and his advisors used Jane as a ploy. Mary had closer proximity to Edward and Henry 8. Jane was edward’s cousin but still with separation. She had no claim. She was a pawn and a usurper. She even knew she shouldn’t have been queen

@@extraterresrtial3086 also Jane’s mother, who was also bypassed by Jane, had a closer/better claim than Jane. All were women - including Elizabeth - in line

@@hifinsword Lady Jane Grey was a pawn. She really didn't want to be queen. She just wanted to be left alone.

17.35pm in Great Britain 🇬🇧🇬🇧

@@kanyebreast6072 now it’s 18:07

@@graceesmi now 9

vid ni recommended kt aku pukul 1am..

Yes, that's exactly what the video said. Listen carefully.

Yes I still feel guilty for her death, I should have just declared Elizabeth my heir.. I mean I love my sister Mary and all but she went through a lot of trauma and was emotionally unstable to rule. Yes skipping her prolly wasn't the best choice to keep her mentally healthy but it was better for the subjects who would be murdered by her later on. Maybe..just maybe Elizabeth would have been able to stop Mary during that period.

Except Margaret Tudor how are they important?

@@cinnow Key figures in determining the new kings. Example, George the first enthroned because of her grandmother Elizabeth Stuart being the King James's daughter...

@@zaraohara5826 in that case Catherine Swynford is very significant. Mistress and third wife of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, the Tudors' claim to the throne is through the Beauforts who are her descendants. Other descendants are the Yorks and Nevilles. All significant players in the wars of the roses.

If we're naming important ladies, I'll offer my list: Empress Matilda (the Anarchy's important y'all) Eleanor of Aquitaine (both Richard the Lionheart & John relied on her) Isabella of France (can't have a Hundred Years War if you can't claim France) Margaret of Anjou (someone needs to prop up the wet stump that is Henry VI) Elizabeth Woodville (can't depose Richard III w/out an angry mum) Margaret Beaufort (b/c Elizabeth Woodville can't do it alone) There are countless more, but these are my Medieval 'greatest hits'

@@jeandehuit5385 Margaret Beaufort is Henry Tudor's mother. As a descendant of Edward III through John of Gaunt and Catherine Swynford, she's in effect the last Lancastrian after all the Lancastrian males die in the battle of Tewkesbury. She immediately sends her son to France for his safety. I don't see Elizabeth Woodeville contributing anything by way of bloodline. Only Philippa Gregory lionises this woman.

@@aleasyah3032 ahhh but did you not consider that his mother was in England, and was obsessive that her son from his birth was heir 🤔😀

You imply Richard III's claim wasn't *also* on very shaky grounds. He'd bastardized his nephews based on rather flimsy evidence; rebellions were already being staged in their name. Clearly some Yorkists did not believe his claims that they were illegitimate. So long as they were alive, his throne was not secure. The last time the boys were seen alive was August 1483, after which a rebellion that was supposed to be staged in their name *suddenly* becomes a rebellion to support Henry of Richmond (this later becomes known as Buckingham's rebellion). Why would Yorkists support the Lancastrian claimant if they truly believed Yorkist princes were alive? Why would the boy's mother, Elizabeth Woodville, ally with Margaret Beaufort of all ppl. if she believed her sons were still alive. Margaret's husband Lord Stanley doesn't get control of the Tower of London until October 1483, *after* Buckingham's rebellion, so he couldn't have done it, as the boys were already assumed to be dead. Margaret was rich, but she wasn't rich enough to bribe gaolers loyal to the king. If anyone killed the King's nephews on his property, under his *protection,* without his permission there would have been HELL to pay. Heck, Richard didn't blame anyone else for the crime even though doing so would greatly increase his reputation! He didn't even produce the boys alive once rumors circulated that they were dead. If they were still alive he could have brought them out (as Henry VII did Edward earl of Warwick), but he didn't. If Richard was willing to go through w/ usurpation, he probably wasn't opposed to murder. What avenue for life would the boys have had anyway after he declared them bastards? Richard didn't have to accept Parliament's offer of the crown (necessitating the breaking of his oath to protect his brother's children); he could have refused. But Richard believed he would have been painted as the villain either way (either for the incompetence of the boy king's reign, or for disposing of his nephews). He chose the one that would at least benefit him if it succeeded.

Henry Tudor was no stranger to killing Plantagenet males. Edward Clarence, anyone?

Interesting! "How the mighty have fallen...". But it's nice that you know so much about them.

I’m a descendant of that family. Are you a descendant too or just interested in them because you’re from Ashby de la Zouche?

@@andrewhaywood3853 I’m not a descendant. Common as muck as my dad would say. I just have an amateur interest in local and obscure history. I haven’t lived in Ashby for years but I grew up there and read a lot about it’s former residents, some of it also stuck from what I learned at school and local hearsay.

That's cool

Yeah lol

Good for you! And I caught the typos...

She discusses this at 3:11.

Sorry

I’d give you one if I lived up there, cause that’s one HELL of a coincidence.

I live in Redlion I can give you a cookie!!

@@actualitychicken4738 😝

@@ChibiProwl wish you lived here then lol

The Tudors were succeeded by the Stuarts descendants of Margaret Tudor. So she not Henry VIII is the progenitor of the present ruling family.

@@cinnow oh yeah, thanks for the information

@@jessicamorton9316 she did not need to. Her kids did it for her. 😊

Lol same

@@Jack-yf9bc as an aspiring politician, it’s best to know about others countries histories.

@@brettlarch8050 why?

@@ilikeapples1824 to my status or my comment?

My Aunt does House tours she's been asked by Americans why a 16th century Manor house was built on a flight path good to know there are intelligent Americans out there but I also hear finding Starbucks in Nottingham impressed Americans.

Except the rule change doesn't affect previous generations. If it did the royal line would be impossible to figure out. How do you decide which king to start deriving absolute primogeniture? The first Anglo-Saxon king? The first Norman king? We don't know which of William the Conqueror's children was born the eldest, only that Robert Curthose was the eldest son. Of the surviving children who had surviving offspring, we don't know if Henry Beauclerc is older than his sister Adela or if Adela is older than Henry. Even if you backdated it as recently as Queen Victoria, the royal line would be Kaiser Wilhelm's descendants, as Willie's mother happened to be Queen Victoria's eldest child.

@@jeandehuit5385 bro I just showed my pov, if that rule was valid at that time, then "James I" would be the king and that happened also that's it.

Except the Windsors are not Elizabeth Stuart's most senior descendants.