RANKING THE TUDORS | Who was the best Tudor? Who was the worst Tudor? Royal history documentary 

Hi there long time subscriber here. I was wondering if you have covered or will cover "a discovery of witches" I absolutely love when they travel back to the Elizabethan time.

I would rank them in the same order as you, for the same reasons.

Thanks for showing us your ranking. I thought your explanations were feasible and undestandable. However, I would rank them a bit differently, as follows: 5: Edward VI; because he, like his father and sister Mary, was extremely zealous, and I agree that had he lived longer, he would have been as violent and tyrannical as Mary. Only, his religious zeal had no reason that I find understandable. He spent the first nine years of his short life as the Prince of Wales and his father's favorite child (Henry Fitzroy was dead by 1537), and the remaining six as King of England. He lived a very privileged life, and no doubt felt very entitled because of the position he was born into. I don't blame him for the Seymour brothers' actions, though, as he was still a child whose kingdom was being run by a regency. 4: Mary I; because her reign was very violent, and she was just as zealous as her little brother. But, like you, I place her higher than him because her zeal comes with a very understandable reason. She was treated terribly by her father, and spent most of her adult life feeling rather lonely in my opinion, especially after her mother and she were separated, and even more so after Catherine of Aragon died in 1536. Even Phillip, by all accounts, didn't seem to love her as much as she loved him, and rarely was in England. I do feel sorry for Mary, but, like many people, I find her zeal and violence hard to overlook. 3: Henry VIII; only because of the importance his reign had on England's religious life and policy for the next few centuries. The religious movement he introduced to England set the ball rolling for England to become a Protestant nation, and the fight between Catholicism and Protestantism in England produced the Civil War, Oliver Cromwell, the Glorious Revolution, and the Act of Settlement of 1701, which basically made the British monarch a symbolic figurehead, when other Catholic--and even some Protestant--monarchs at the time wielded absolute power. England's foreign policy in those days was influenced by Henry's triggering of the Reformation in England, setting the country against France and Spain and allying it with Protestant German nations like Prussia. The House of Windsor would not hold the English throne had it not been for the religious conficts of the later Tudor and Stuart eras. I do agree though, that Henry VIII was absolutely tyrannical, and if I may say, extremely entitled, often behaving like a spoiled child even though he was a grown man in his late 30s and 40s. The only possible psychological explanation I can think of for his behavior aside from his quite obvious desire for a legitimate son, would be the death of his mother, with whom he was very close, when he was 11. But her death also touched his sisters, too, and while they both had their exploits, neither of them were as childish as Henry. 2: Elizabeth I; because of how very skilled she was at negotiation and diplomacy. She knew how to appease people on both sides of the conflicts of her time, a quality that would be very helpful in our divided world of today. I believe it was her ability to negotiate that stayed her hand when it came to executing people. She showed a very large degree of restraint when executing the Duke of Norfolk, and Mary Queen of Scots. She did suffer much of the same abuses as her sister did, but unlike Mary I, Elizabeth seems to have learned a different lesson from those experiences, a lesson which allowed her to ease the major conflicts of the time, rather than exacerbate them. I agree that her use of privateers is morally corrupt. But, no one is perfect and I'd say her supposed lapses in judgement are minor compared to her father and sister's, as unlike both of them, she didn't go around beheading her subjects on trumped-up charges of treason or burn them at the stake for disagreeing with her about religion. Her decision not to marry is tougher, because a husband would have taken much of her power for himself. Elizabeth saw how well that had gone down when the Queen regnant's husband was a foreign prince, and had he been an Englishman, the entire concept of royalty would have been called into question; a commoner basically ruling the country as a king. If any commoner can be a de facto king, why have a royal dynasty at all? Elizabeth was no doubt aware of these consequences, which would have caused more problems than they would have solved. Not naming a successor was probably one small step too far though, especially given her bout with smallpox. But even that is conflicted, because Henry VIII's will provided for a successor should all of his children die without heirs. 1: Henry VII; because English history from 1485 onward would be unrecognizable to us had he not taken the throne from Richard III. His actions to secure the throne for himself and his successors, by marrying Elizabeth of York, and by neutralizing the pretenders he faced, shaped the entire legacy of the Tudor dynasty. Henry VIII's desire for a legitimate son was at least part of why he dumped Catherine of Aragon to marry Anne Boleyn, which he did by starting the spread of Protestantism in England. Henry VIII would have known very well why he needed a son, as he witnessed the dangers Henry VII faced in trying to keep the throne, so I'm sure Henry VIII was heavily influenced by his father's need to secure the dynasty. And I agree that while Henry VII does have a deserved reputation for being miserly, it's understandable because of how perpetually fearful he was of losing everything dear to him. And, he certainly wasn't bloodthirsty. He was in the most danger of any Tudor monarch, but let all three major pretenders--and alternative claimants in Warwick's case--live for years, never executing Lambert Simnel, and only executing Warwick and Perkin Warbeck when they didn't stop plotting against him, after he had given each of them more than one chance to submit. Henry VII was also completely faithful to his wife, and never even remarried after her death, which is far more than can be said for his infamously infidel son. My main reason for placing Henry VII as number one is because of his reproductive success. His decision to marry his daughter Margaret to the King of Scotland produced James V of Scotland, father of Mary Queen of Scots, and grandfather of James VI of Scotland, and I of England. Every monarch of England and Britain since 1509 has been descended from Henry VII and Elizabeth of York, while Henry VIII has had no verified living descendants since 1603. All in all, I would probably say Numbers 3, 4, and 5 on my ranking are classifiable as generally bad monarchs, despite the religious upheaval Henry VIII's reign produced, and Numbers 1 and 2 are classifiable as generally good monarchs.

Hmm, it's tricky to know how much manipulation went on but Edward did change his Device for the Succession in his own hand. I think he was doing what he wanted in the end.

Couldn’t have said it better myself. 101% agree

Agree completely … worst husband, but not the worst monarch … definitely would have ranked both his daughter (Mary), and his son below him … I understand Mary’s life was quite tragic, but I can’t really think of one positive thing she did for the country … her brother didn’t do much, either, not that he really had the chance - but it was his attempt to change the line of succession that directly led to Lady Jane Grey’s death … both he and Mary were too focused on religion, and not the overall good of the country.

He wasn't a tyrant, though. He actually gave Parliament more powers, and started the road to democracy!

Correct on all counts.

Yes, he was really pretty good at the job. I wish people knew more about him. He suffers from having a super famous son and granddaughter.

And he was Welsh

@@andreamiles9325 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

I understand Henry VII was miserly but understood the English crown needed fiscal integrity and you don’t read anything about him quarreling with nobles only them plotting against him (-:

I suppose, if you compare Henry VII’s usurpation with those of Henry IV and Edward IV, then legitimacy is possibly an issue as he did spring from an illegitimate line. However, I agree, he won by right of conquest and always acknowledged that. To me he is the most successful Tudor because it’s his blood which flows in the British Royal Family today. Henry VIII ultimately failed the first duty of a king, which is to produce heirs who can continue his line.

Yes, I wish people paid him more attention as his story is so interesting. It's a shame he's overshadowed by his son and granddaughter. I don't think his blood claim (or lack thereof) really mattered in the end either. Richard III didn't have the best blood claim around either (his nephews the Princes and Lord Warwick did) and no one really claims that he wasn't a King.

Most underrated Monarch. Exiled had to win a battle to be King. As stated, he was a good husband. He is the ancestor of the modern Royals via his daughter Margaret. Always find it funny that Henry VIII's legitimate line died out.

@@HistoryCalling a blood claim only matters as long as its convenient for everyone involved what truly matters is who can win the throne and keep it Hnery Bolingbroke is another good example

​@@countofdownable And Henry VIII's Illegitimate Iine also Died Out,His Illegitimate Son,Henry Fitzroy,Who Died Without Producing An Heir,There Was Also Rumors That A Marriage Was Proposed Between He And His Half Sister Mary I,Sibling Marriage,EWWWW!!! 😒😒😒😒😒🤯🤪🤪🤪🥴🥴🥴🥴🥴

I feel like the fact that he is slept on makes in #1. His reign , after it's bloody behind was peaceful.

Throne

Agree 100%

Yes, I like him too. Had he reigned longer he might even be number 1. It's hard to beat Elizabeth and her 44+ years.

Same here, underestimated. Plus, his line rules today. Charles III descended from him via his daughter Margaret Tudor. That would have annoyed Henry VIII.

I like Henry VII too and there's certainly an argument there to put him in first position. :-)

I think without his mom it would have been much different

Yes, I agree. She was working with limited options a lot of the time and navigated a very difficult situation as best as she probably could.

Agreed. Henry did it all and understood the importance of securing the succession.

Disagree. The gangsta queen presided over the birth of England's greatness. Defeating the scary armada launched the sea dogs and naval supremacy. Financed pirates played their part charting new routes to the spice islands opening doors to oppurtunity and generational riches. Almost offensive other contenders are touted. Securing succession?!? Her death sees England increased with the union of Scotland. Nobody touches the bestest majesty.

Er, did I? That doesn't seem like me, if only because I'm such a stickler about not swearing because YT doesn't like it (you have to declare it on a form before the video is released and it can affect ad revenue).

@@HistoryCallingI could have sworn it was you (my fav creator) but now you have me doubting …. Hmmm ….

Doesn't matter to be honest, as whether I said it or not, I do kinda think it :-)

Whether she did or not, it’s definitely a true fact lol

Did you call Ed6 "a little prig"? He was certainly that too

Yes, I think so too. He could have been a lot more bloodthirsty but he wasn't. It's a pity he didn't pass more of that restraint to his second son.

I think Edward IV loved his wife, but he was also used to being adored and getting his own way. He was attractive, rich, related to the king, his father claimed to be king and he was the heir to a powerful Dukedom. Plus he had Warwick pumping up his ego telling him everything could be his for so long and was. He was 18 when they married and she was nearly thirty, so basically a playboy prince used to getting whatever he wanted with a wife not able to keep up. Unlike Henry,, I don't think he intended to put her aside or execute her, even if she had not produced a son.

Oh, I totally agree Edward IV was a better man and king than his grandson. I think he's underrated as a monarch as well. For all intents and purposes, the Yorkists had won the Wars of the Roses by 1471 thanks to Edward IV. The conflict only began again at his sudden, premature death and Richard III's usurpation. I was just pointing out that he (like his grandson Henry VIII) was a total womanizer, though I don't think he had the cruel streak that H8 did.

@@sagenoelle4439 agree. Had he died 10 years later there would be no Tudor dynasty. Edward IV I think became such a good monarch because he was quite fair and not cruel, even if he was cunning and was prepared to throw the rules to the wind to get what he needed. He could have executed Anne Neville but did not and he gave Warwick and his brother more than enough chances. His one failing was not realising he couldn't get what he wanted all the time. Letting his wife's relatives take over the court completely, without any thought of throwing a bone to Warwick or reconciling at least one of his brothers with his wife, ended up ending the dynasty for good.

Absolutely spot on about Henry and Elizabeth. He adored her - when she died, he almost died as well because his grief was so profound, and he refused to remarry unless his advisors could find him what amounted to her carbon copy.

@@LauraFromMarkerQuest They are one of my favorite historical couples of all time. I truly wish they could have reigned as joint monarchs as they both were the heirs to two branches of the Plantagenet dynasty. Elizabeth of York deserved to be queen in her own right. She's such an important yet underrated figure in British history!

Very clever! 😊

This is very clever. I can see the fat narcissist, sitting on a recliner, with his giant turkey leg and a flagon of ale, smelling like diseased leg. Cheers to you, Surfer Joe.

I think I would have been in Henry's bad books long before this video to be honest :-) I don't have any lands or titles to forfeit though (apart from my Dr title and that was earned, rather than granted or inherited so he couldn't take it). Er, I think I'd rather avoid writing a scaffold speech. Feels a bit weird! :-)

@@HistoryCalling I think mine would be a thoughtful blend of sobbing, begging, and last-minute offers to flip on all my friends, relatives, and colleagues.

Precisely. He was lucky he had better men (and women) to lean on throughout so much of his life.

Not giving away anything over here :-)

Put princess instead of Queen but definitely Elizabeth the 1st.

@@HistoryCalling Not seen #1 yet. Just my opinion. 🤓

Are you forgettg she beheaded mary q o s her cousin a tudor thru and thru !!

​@@chrisbanks6659Henry VII didn't have a strong claim to the throne Henry's Mother Margaret Beaufort was a Descendant of John of Gaunt and Kathryn Swinford... because they had children before they were married when they finally did marry John's Brother The king did legitimize their children but with the stimpultion that John and Kathryn 's couldn't be in the line of Session to the throne.. Margaret Beaufort was part of this line .. Elizabeth of York had a stronger claim..But when Henry VII and Elizabeth of York got married his claim was a little stronger .. because his mother and Elizabeth's mother made a pact if Henry won the Battle of Bosworth Henry would Marry Elizabeth there for uniting the house of Lancaster and York

Yes, I have a lot of pity for Mary. Had she died within months of coming to the throne I think history would remember her with a lot more pity and compassion.

I think Elizabeth had more time, being 15 years younger. Mary was in her thirties when she took to the throne, married and tried to have kids. She was also told her whole life she was descended from monarchs and would marry, have royal kids and maybe be queen of either England or another country. She was very aware when that was removed from her and separated from her mother and that left more room for emotional damage and more desire for vengeance. Elizabeth was a toddler. She didn't really know her mother and had very limited knowledge of her role and destiny as a Princess when it was removed. No one needed to threaten her to convince her she wasn't the heir. I also think Elizabeth was ignored, but still had Kat Ashley and the like to look after her. Whereas Mary was threatened and abused.

@@HistoryCalling I do too. Before Anne died she expressed guilt for the way she treated Mary to Lady Kingston. Too bad she couldn’t forgive Anne. It was Henry’s bad doing than Anne’s. He was the king. He could’ve shown more love towards her. I think if Mary would’ve lived longer she would’ve sent more people to their deaths. That makes me so sad. Henry’s cruelty had no bounds.

You’re right. Henry’s cruelty had no bounds.

@@leticiagarcia9025 the children really seemed to respect and admire their father though. They would not let AoC leave England, for fear she might badmouth their father. But children were brought up to honour their father as the head of the household, put there by almighty God, amplified when he is the highest ranking man in the kingdom. Plus Mary had a happy childhood with him, and apparently he doted on her

Great minds think alike :-)

Thanks Stephen. Yes, his bio of Jane is excellent, as was all his work. His bio of Anne is top notch too.

Good evening chum. Hoping you are well?

@@chrisbanks6659 Fighting fit, young man! Good news - we have a new puppy. His name's Louie; we may call him King Louie as he has an authoritarian bark despite his small size. 😊 Hope all is well with you!

@@stephencarrillo5905 Am ok thanks. And great that you found a new wee friend. Not named after the Motorhead song, I trust (Louie Louie). LOL

Eric Ives, RIP. 😢

Yes, I could understand flipping those two. Had Mary reigned longer and had a chance to do more damage, perhaps I'd have reversed them too.

I have a whole video on her death actually, but in the interests of time I couldn't get into it in great detail here. I think what ultimately matters though is that she didn't spare her, though she absolutely could have.

@@HistoryCalling As long as Jane lived, she would have been a rallying point for anyone opposed to Mary. I don't believe Mary had much choice in doing what she could to secure her throne.

​@@VA-zr6xwThere's a lot of similarities here between Jane and Mary Queen of Scots. Elizabeth was reluctant to execute her but ultimately had to due to the threat she posed to her reign and her involvement (indirect and direct) in numerous plots to overthrow Elizabeth

@@HistoryCallingI don’t think Mary had a choice. A threat like that, with uprisings risking her throne and her life would almost always been eliminated at the time, and later

​​@@Chipoo88 Jane wanted nothing to do with the throne. There was at least some evidence that Mary was actively plotting to get it. Jane was a helpless teenager entirely unequipped to handle the situation she was suddenly put in. Mary was a fully grown adult and a former queen twice over. Jane was executed after less than a year in captivity. Mary was in the Tower for 14 years. There are substantial differences.

Yeah, he was a bit of a stinker, wasn't he (though if he'd died in about 1528 I wouldn't have much bad to say about him)?

yes!!! how different the rankings would be then 😮

Reading this, I think you'll be happy enough with my rankings :-)

@@HistoryCalling just finished and yes very similar! Right down to shared speculation of what Edward could have been had he reigned for a long time.

Yes, it's tough to know what would have been worse - five more years of Edward or the five years England got with Mary.

They do indeed :-)

I agree, my immediate thought was Elizabeth as Nr. 1 as well.

Why wud you put h7th with any credibilty he was a coward and a usurper!!

​@@robynwalker3742 You're a Ricardian, aren't you?

Yes, Henry VII is very interesting. I can totally understand putting him at no. 1.

Haha, yes that's a good way of putting it with regards to Edward.

You are so welcome :-)

Thanks Vernon. Yes, had Mary lived longer and had more time to do additional damage I might have considered her worse than Henry. I mean I think she was on her way to having Elizabeth executed had she not died first.

Absolutely. It totally depends on who you ask and there are reasons for almost every ranking.

Thanks Elisabeth :-) Yes, it's interesting to speculate what would have happened had Elizabeth I married, especially if she'd died and left a minor heir.

Haha, I understand what you mean. Even Elizabeth could be ferocious and she's my number one. I think we have to see them in the context of the times in which they lived though and for me, Henry VII was actually pretty decent within those parameters.

Yes, I agree. Henry VII does deserve a bit more love from historians. He had a fascinating story and was actually a pretty decent King for the times in which he lived.

@@HistoryCalling yes. sadly he was squeez between his son and grandaugther. And more general public are more into tudor for private life /romance and battels. Henry as we know is not into wars. Also Hollywood last time give is Henry( at first his regin)as weak himbo and rxpist(i look at you twp) wish you had remake of the shadows of the tower time to listen " I am oryginalll tu tu dorr " Song

Ah, yes, the White Princess. It did take some liberties with history to be sure, though not as many as Reign.

@@HistoryCalling like people back then said at least Henry look hot so history liberty were okish🙊ah that teen drama with promo school dress waiting for someone pull out smathphone and xoxo gossip girl 😏

Thanks Lee :-)

Thank you. I actually have a short ranking of the Windsors over on my Patreon. It just came out last week.

Thanks Missyme. I think by her later years she probably had a very good idea that James would get the throne. It made the most sense and allowed the two kingdoms to combine, plus he already had multiple sons. In her earlier years she might have thought Katherine Grey would likely get it.

Thanks Claire. You might just get your wish, but you'll have to watch and see. Have a lovely week too :-)

Woohoo! 🤭 I have to say after listening to you talk about Henry VII, I definitely agree with his placement, he definitely fought the hardest for all he had, and seems like he had the welfare of the country on his mind more than his personal wants

You're welcome :-)

Yes, I think he was a twit to let her go for many reasons, though of course it gave us Elizabeth I in the end, so I'm afraid I wouldn't undo it.

Excellent point. It never occurred to me about Katherine being with Henry during his successful years.👍🏻

​@@HistoryCalling but would Mary have been a much better ruler had all that likely very damaging stuff not happened, let alone the reformation. She might have married younger and been able to continue the dynasty to the next generation. And maybe married someone better suited to the role of consort, or even a co-monarch like William and Mary.

Glad you enjoyed it :-)

Thanks Gabriella. You can let me know what you think of my rankings after :-)

@@HistoryCallingI agree on Elizabeth you can just tell she was one of the best monarchs from the results of what the people said

There's going to be a poll on my Community Tab in a few minutes too and it'll be interesting to see the results of that as well.

Absolutely. It's sad that they were destined to be such rivals. I wonder what their relationship would have been like if they'd both been the same religion?

Its a question we will sadly never know the answer too.​@HistoryCalling

@Historycalling I have to say Henry VII BECAUSE what he went through and to boot and how hard he fought ...I agree about the worst is He ry the VIII

I have, but there are already videos from other history channels on her. Also I'm not sure a video on her would do that well actually. I struggle to get people to look at anything non-royal and even some of the royal stuff falls flat on its face.

@@HistoryCalling That's immensely frustrating, as everything you choose is worth my time. I wish you were completely free to follow the muse.

Ah well, we agree on the top two at least :-)

Yes, he blended together his red rose and his wife's York white rose. One of the best PR stunts in English history, I agree, as we're still using it today.

Happy Victoria Day weekend to you too. I actually have a video about Empress Matilda which covers Stephen quite a bit too if you want to check it out. Weather here is good, but due to get a bit colder and wetter over the next few days. Give Benjamin a tickle behind the ears from me :-)

Thank you so much. All likes (and comments for that matter) help with the algorithm, so I appreciate them all :-)

You're welcome Lynda and thanks for supporting by watching, especially right as the video comes out too. :-)

I actually was getting ready to do a video on her once and then one of the other British YT channels did it first and I didn't want to look like a copycat (although so many channels, that one included, steal from me that I really think I must be stupid to not deliberately copy their content as well).

@HistoryCalling Ooof, I'll never understand all the plagiarism that goes on. :( Hopefully you'll cover her one day. I'm not motivated to go looking for the other video because I know you'll do it best. 😉 There were a couple other history channels i tried watching, but I kept coming across blatantly incorrect information and photos that didn't come close to matching the period/materials being discussed, and comment sections full of people saying it was "just entertainment" and that it didn't matter if it was accurate if anyone tried to point it out. 🙄 I mostly stick to you and Dr Janega these days.

Thanks Shelby :-)

Hi Bea. Let me know how'd you rank them if you get the chance :-)

​@@HistoryCallingiareagee with you

Thanks Bea :-)

Excellent ranking and reasoning. I know it's not perfectly aligned with mine, but you make great points as to why you've flipped Mary and H8.

Thanks Lydia :-)

Hi friend. Who is your favorite Hapsburg Monarch ?

Ah, let's see what you think. You can tell me after you've had a chance to watch. I look forward to hearing your own list.

@@DarthDread-oh2ne hello, interesting one! Idk much abt them but probably Charles V? Personally I rly hate him, and his reign could be seen as a failure in some ways (he certainly thought so himself) but the others managed to he worse imo

@@HistoryCalling I just did, in reply to your question in the comments :)

@@HistoryCallingI also commented it on your instagram post though- istg I am chased- they wouldn’t let me post the comment at first bc it clashed with their policies??😭 I swear it was only a list💀

Roxelana???

@@HistoryCalling Roxelana was a Polish/Ukranian woman kidnapped by Tartars and sold into slavery in the Ottoman Empire. She rose from being a harem slave to be the legal wife of Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent. She died in 1558, the year Elizabeth became queen. I always thought they would have made great penpals for each other, and I would love to know their thoughts on so many aspects of history.

I think a lot of people would feel the same way :-)

I use the exact same term :-)

He was devoted to Catherine of Aragon for most of their long marriage.

They were indeed so different. I think had Henry VIII had to work for the throne and gained it a bit later in life, it would have been much better.

Oh yes, absolutely. If he and Catherine's New Year's boy of 1511 had lived, the ranking would be totally different. Three of the people on it might never have been born and even if Mary had existed, she'd probably have been married off to some foreign Prince or King. Henry VIII probably would have had just one wife (or maybe two if Catherine of Aragon had still died in 1536 and he'd remarried) and we'd probably all say what a nice chap he was on the whole, right before everyone heads out to mass as the Reformation likely wouldn't have happened. :-) I feel like there's an historical fiction novel in there somewhere :-)

I don't get it :-( Sorry :-(

@@HistoryCalling two door (Tudor)

That has got to be the oldest and worst Dad joke ever - and I've heard and told a few. LOLOLOLOL 🤣

Ah, I see. Ok, I should have got that! :-)

Thank you. Enjoy :-)

@@HistoryCalling always!!

Thanks Lisa and just as much back to you ♥️ :-)

Oh, Henry VIII is in at number 3. Potentially controversial 😊 Poor little Edward VI isn't getting much love over on my community tab poll either.

@@HistoryCalling I think it’s because he got poor Lady Jane beheaded and tried to usurp his sisters. It was a short reign anyways, I’m sure he’ll understand that :)

@@HistoryCalling Henry VIII did kinda establish the Tudor reign, and who knows, if Mary or Gloriana had kids, maybe they’d still be ruling

It's interesting to think actually what Henry VII would have made of his second son and H8's children. As a Catholic himself he might well have been more sympathetic to Mary, but we'll never know.

I have a video all about how Matilda lost the throne which is quite similar to what you're asking for. It didn't do as well as I would have liked though, so I don't know if I'd revisit the topic.

@@HistoryCalling I must have missed that one somehow. I’ll go back & look! ❤

@@HistoryCalling It's too bad, given cousin marriage was accepted, that they couldn't marry and unite their claims. Although being of a rather obstinate nature and having been an empress, Matilda might have been a difficult bride.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE DONATION GILL. Yes, it has turned out to be a good name. I wonder if there will ever be an Elizabeth III (or a Victoria II)?

@@HistoryCalling Charlotte may well be Monarch so she may decide to use Elizabeth.

I assume you mean in case of an abdication? I don't know how likely that is though. It's only ever happened once in English history after all and the former King didn't go on to have a great life afterwards, expelled from his family and his country. I can't see George ever going for that.

@@HistoryCalling God forbid but something might happen to George before he inherits. Nobody can predict the future.

That's true, but let's hope for George VII :-)

Ah, now if we're doing most to least interesting that does change things. I'd have Ed VI at the bottom due to his youth, but it's very tough to choose who's at the top.

Well, they were both Catholic and Henry VII didn't cheat on his wives or blow a lot of money on unnecessary wars, so it's tough to imagine they would have been pleased with a lot of his decisions. I think there would be a lot of yelling if the Tudors were able to have a family reunion in the afterlife! :-)

History Calling, that would be quite the family reunion/confrontation! It would certainly make an interesting historical “fantasy” book or miniseries. BTW I didn’t realize that the “chip off the old block” comment could be taken in two ways considering who we’re talking about. Mea culpa!

Thanks Mary. Glad I brightened up your Monday :-) It's interesting to speculate what would have happened if Henry remained with AB with Elizabeth as heir. She would have become Queen at 13, so I wonder if her big sister might have made a bid for the throne? There would have been a messy minority at the very least I think.

@@HistoryCalling Excellent point I didn't really think about (maybe because I have my Anne B/Elizabeth goggles on). Although perhaps Anne would have solidified her legitimacy, had she lived, and bolstered support for Elizabeth enough that Mary might not have wanted to challenge her half-sister's support. On the other hand, public opinion may have remained against Anne and Elizabeth, which again would have resulted in conflict. Regardless, as complicated as representative democracies can be...at least we no longer have situations where kids are literally put in charge of entire friggin' countries just because they happen to be born to the right parents, which is quite a relief!

Yeah, gotta love Queen Bess :-)

Yes, I agree that Edward was certainly not his own man (or boy) and a lot of what happened in his reign was the fault of his Protectors and advisors. I still think he was probably on his way to becoming a tyrant mind you.

Thank you :-)

Thank you very much :-)

Same here actually. Elizabeth benefits from having had a much longer reign, but it doesn't necessarily make her better I'll admit.