The idea that 'history was written by the victors' is an ultrasimplification of history It is a very lazy and ultimately harmful way to introduce the concept of bias. There isn't really a perfectly pithy way to cover such a complex topic, but much better than winners writing history is writers writing history. This is more useful than it initially seems because until fairly recently the literate were a minority, and those with enough literary training to actually write historical narratives formed an even smaller and more distinct class within that. To give a few examples, Genghis Khan must surely go down as one of the great victors in all history, but he is generally viewed quite unfavorably in practically all sources, because his conquests tended to harm the literary classes. Or the senatorial elite can be argued to have "lost" the struggle at the end of the Republic that eventually produced Augustus, but the Roman literary classes were fairly ensconced within (or at least sympathetic towards) that order, and thus we often see the fall of the Republic presented negatively. Or the fact much of western literature regarding the Eastern Front was primarily from german officers until the collapse of the USSR
Fun fact... The former arch bishop of Canterbury who died during the peasants revolt (Simon of sudbury) was one of the first people I saw after signing the wedding register! His mummified head is behind a small door in the vestry of St Gregorys Church in sudbury, suffolk, and the vicar asked if we would like to meet him. 😁
DeAD Taco EU4 and CK2 require a huge investment in a ton of DLCs before they’re really playable. Victoria 2 has one DLC and it’s a great game but very different.
"Hey look the english are dying of a horrible plague. Let's go attack them! I'm sure this can't back fire in any way!" Someone who was previously Scottish
Omg... Lmfao, I almost spit out my tea when I saw him holding up "I took your stuff". The little quotes "Ya didnae learn". ( Just like last time ). "Stop asking for more". "They got a bit murderery". I absolutely LOVE the little signs they hold up, too damn funny! Don't ever change that, so many channels get popular and then start changing the very aspects of their videos, etc that made them in demand to begin w..., rookie mistake and I hope History Matters doesn't fall into that category.
"Hey, I hear the English are having a massive plague." "Really? Hey, let's go rampage around over there, take their stuff, and bring it back home!" "Brilliant! Couldn't possibly go wrong."
Serfdom has always been in that weird category of "slavery and not slavery" at the same time. Serfdom was a form of forced labor, but Serfs weren't property (albeit a low class member of society). If I'm not mistaken, you were tied to the land in Serfdom whereas a slave was tied to his or her owner. Make no mistake, both were forms of forced labor, but being a Serf was a little bit ahead of being a slave.
being a serf is a degradation of ancient plebian status, the common folk being punished into land based zones-of-security for survival, whereas being a slave has always been an expression of massive wealth
I just noticed for the past 4 months, you've been focusing only on this series, and damn I did not know it would surpass 10 let alone 14, cool to know months passed by as we enjoy your videos.
Henry was not Richard II's heir - Edmund Mortimer was through his grandfather Lionel Duke of Clarence, who was Edward III's second surviving son, John of Gaunt was Edward III's third surviving son. The issue was set aside by citing Edmund was still a child and would require a regency (which no one wanted) and that Henry was the rightful heir under salic law (inheritance through the male line.) This would come back to haunt the Crown in the Wars of the Roses. Henry IV's mother tongue was French like all Plantagenet's and it's open to debate which English King was the first to speak English since the Conquest, though English had been used in parliament since the 1360's.
Marcus Drake But still Henry iv was the only King since the Norman conquest to speak English plus he encouraged his nobles to speak it and also he was also King Richard II cousin
There is evidence that Edward III was fluent in English as well as french, though in trying to secure his claim to the French throne, he often stuck with his mother tongue french. Also during the Peasants Revolt of 1381 after Wat Tyler's death, Richard II made his famous "I shall be your captain, follow me!" to the peasants army, who probably all only spoke middle english, with the exception of the few nobles and knights who were apart of the rebel army.
Right. Edmund Mortimer was the next in line, and later on his line married into the York line (which was junior to John of Gaunt’s descendants, the Lancasters) which is what gave the York claim during the Wars of the Roses some legitimacy.
0:38 "And his wife Isabella betrayed him"... After years of neglect, sidelining, adultery; and terrible rule of the country. Isabella made many sacrifices to advance Edward's plans, even putting her life at risk; begging for mercy, pleading for the lives of some rebels in order to prevent Edward from looking like a tyrant. Not to mention she was a loyal and obediant wife to a man who loved his male courtiers more than her; she went through the rigors of childbirth several times, giving him an heir - putting her life at risk each time. These children were ripped away from her and she suffered tremendous disgraces and abuses under Hugh Dispenser - Edward's new favourite; something that couldn't happen without the king's consent... Isabella, for the most part, was a loyal and obediant wife; she only "betrayed" her husband after years of neglect and infidelity. At their joint coronation; Isabella was shunned; her royal robes and jewelry being given to Piers Gaveston... That would make anyone angry. I feel that Isabella is demonised by historians - even today; she did what she did, not without reason; Edward was a bad and feeble king - as well as a terrible husband; her invasion and deposition of him was actually welcomed by the English barons. When men depose other men; it is often seen to be just or reasonable; when women depose men for the same reasons; it's seen as unnatural and villainous.
The prejudice maybe due to her French ethnicity, although technically the Plantagenets were French too & spoke Anglo Norman the lingua franca of English court.
The attention to detail that I find in these videos is often remarkable. The one impelling me to comment now is the tabard worn by John of Gaunt. While the details therein would be too fine to convey in this medium ("insert lions here"?), the colors are well chosen: the quartered red and white demonstrate John's claim through his wife to the throne of Castile and Leon, while the quartered blue and red show that the wearer is an English royal prince, the three tabs of that white label at the top indicating the son of a king. Bravo!
Kind of. The differences are slight but can be significant. An unfree serf signs a contract with his lord where the lord is supposed to provide a plot of land, housing, justice, and maintenance for his serf, in exchange the serf must pay for his stay in whatever labour the lord wants and cannot be married or leave the land without permission. When the lord sells his land the buyer also gets the serfs. However, you sign no contract with a slave, slave cannot be married only bred, you owe a slave nothing and a slave has no access to justice. A slave is property. Not legally a human. Slaves can also be sold to another land and moved around as property, a serf is legally tied to the land he signed a contract for, you can only sell a serf if you sell the land he works on, you cannot sell him to lord on a different persons land. How closely these distinctions were respected is another thing though, this is how it was legally meant to be
Thank you. Your many short videos are both entertaining and historically detailed. I dearly love European history and your to-the-point approach in the videos I've seen thus far, out of sequence every one, fills in gaps which invariably lead me to a renewed compulsion to deeper level research. So, my American in every way background is energized to step into the multi-European history, not of my own ancestors but rather the world in which they lived era to era. It's sort of a dot connecting trip through the Old World for the pleasure of it. So, again, thanks. Peace
Henry might’ve burned the Lollards, but Wycliffe’s writing were able to reach Bohemia where a man by the name of Jan Hus who gained such notoriety that he was condemned and burned at the Council of Constanze. At the same time, Wycliffe’s bones were exhumed and also burned. 102 years later, a man by the name of Martin Luther followed Hus’s example and began to teach the plain truth of Scripture in opposition to the one that he and his predecessors called the antichrist.
Evidence points strongly to Edward II being homosexual or at least bisexual. His assumed lover was a Gascon called Piers Gaveston and because he was the king's favourite he's enemies had him murdered in 1312.
@@calebtimes453 What is shameful about it. For King Eddy part 2 being gay was the least of his vast stretches of incompetence. Buggering stableboys on the DL was SOP for gay nobles of the time. Not placing your "favorite" in important positions. Saying his wife betrayed him is a bit of a stretch considering that she had twice already bailed his ass out of the fire and he locks her and her children up at the behest of his new "favorite". He was weak willed and foolish. I don't know how he wasn't murdered much earlier. The more I learn about European history the more I understand revolutionary France's "Kill them all" policy. Marat had a point.
*Name changes* 1: The Black Death and the Peasants Revolt 2: The Black Death and the Peasants' Revolt 3: Richard II, The Black Death and the Peasants' Revolt 4: Richard II, The Black Death, the Peasants' Revolt and Henry IV's Chaperon
Great work once again. I always get excited when I see one of your videos up. I think I have a decent knowledge of history but you always teach me something new as well as putting it in an easily understandable context. 10/10
Ok. Ok. I found the pattern: be born King with jealous peers. Provoke jealousies, wars, heirs and suppression to create enough friends (enemies of enemies) to keep doing that for long enough for enough friends of enemies to support your heir. Repeat for 800 years.
There's a miniseries I can recommend about this topic "World without End". It follows medieval England under the rule of Edward III and the outbreak of the plague and the Hundred Years' War.
Really interesting research regarding the point @0:25: the Great Famine saw people across the economic spectrum similarly impacted with increased rates of mortality. While you might assume people with a higher standard of living would be better off, in fact many of the deaths are believed to be caused by disease (pandemics that began because poor diets caused a weakened immune system in the peasantry). Peasants who left their homes looking for food, like following rumors of 50 German ships landing in London with grain, then acted as vectors spreading those diseased across the English population. Check out: Morgan Kelly, 'Living Standards and Mortality Since the Middle Ages' Bruce M. S. Campbell, 'Harvest Shortfalls, Grain Prices, and Famines in Preindustrial England' and 'Global Climates, the 1257 Mega-Eruption of Samalas Volcano...' (that one includes general points of migration during famine)
I was told at age 6 that Edward 2nd was allegedly murdered with a red hot iron; being 6, I remember thinking, "painful way to die,being hit on the head with a red hot iron"........................It took me 10 years to figure it out.
2 questions: 1) How much research goes into each episode? 2) Besides book recommendations that are in the description, are there any other major sources in each video? These videos are great, and I hope this channel gets more appreciation in the future.
I just watched the new netflix (November 2019) movie "The King". It is about Henry V and his win at Agincourt although not really historical, it was based on Shakespeare's plays regarding that time period. Of course the guy who played king henry V has a french name.
John Wycliffe understood the need for the separation of church and state.The Iran rulers should learn this if and after the war with US.I admire a religious leader who deeply understands this issue!
Wonderful video! Although the Black Death was seen as the main title yet only mentioned for around a minute and a half. Other than that, an amazing historical video and I can't wait for the wars. War solves all.
