On the other hand, I had to listen VERY closely to the speaker to even be able to tell what he was saying. Concentration is not an adequate replacement for decent audio. Implying that it is is also ableist.
Unfortunately, I had to stop watching this video because it was so hard for me to understand what was said. I have a central auditory processing disorder, and the background music is simply too loud to be able to easily distinguish it from the narration.
The Cocktail Party Effect. This - however - is not a freaking cocktail party, or a music video, or even a bad corporate promotional film, it's a historical documentary on a serious subject. Not really complaining, because It's free, which I like, and the price is about right.
@@FreedomForever2010 They just laid some tinkling whale yoga massage music over the entire thing, with no rhyme or reason to it. Absolutely the worst example of this problem I've ever seen. He's a good presenter and it is an interesting subject, too bad. Less is more.
Gisela Tr. Tony Robinson obviously did not produce this video or the balance would be better. He is a producer and actor and does historical narratives but the sound is generally much better than this.
It breaks my heart, the dissolution of the monasteries. 😩. Not because of religion, but destroying those beautiful buildings. Those were old even in Henry Tudors’ age. And then his sons’ reign, if you can call it that, finished them off, putting the icing on the cake, destroying wonderful old stained glass windows, roods. So sad. But it still happens today. The new trying to obliterate the old, they don’t care how old it is.😢
As symbols, they were ambivalent. Effectively the civil administration, social security and education regimes of the day, but also the symbol of avarice beyond belief. Without them, the church had to revert to its proper purpose of proclaiming the Gospel - frankly, that was worth a whole lot more than the destruction of a few baubles.
I wouldn't so lightly dismiss Edward... He may have been short lived, but the boy was astonishingly intelligent, driven and had a clear vision of where he wanted to take the country and how he'd do it. Had he lived longer, he'd have been one of the more significant monarchs in our history... For better and for worse.
EnglishTMTB I have no doubt he was precocious, he seems like he was very smart. But he wasn’t really in charge, so he wasn’t really a monarch so say. But he seemed pretty cold blooded and frankly emotionally flat to me from his diaries. But we’ll never know. It’s all conjecture at this point, eh?
@@mangot589 indeed, we'll never truly *know* but it's interesting to delve into. Edward's diaries at times give the impression of an autistic coldness/aloofness - of course that tentative hypothesis could never be proven, but it would explain a few things... It's such a short reign and much of it under guardianship that you're indeed correct to point out that it's very difficult to judge how well he would actually have accomplished his intended plans - many kings have had much the right ideas and failed in implementing them successfully, suffering in reputation in perpetuity as a result (John, for example, had many flaws but with a little luck on his side could easily have gone down as a great)
Maybe you dont know but Haralds daughter Gita deserted to denmark where she met russian prince Vladimir Monomach.. she became his wifein1074 and went to my hometown of Smolensk where she died in1107
@Anthony Tsatsis o no she was never brought to England.. her husband then became king of russia.. as well as her beloved son Mstislav whome she called Harald.. besides Smolensk where she died its western russia
@@АндрейМарченко-х9ч she is also the reason that the Kings of England descend from Harold. Her granddaughter married the king of Hungary (Geza ii) from there Harold's descendants sat the thrones of Hungary, France, Aragon and, of course, England.
The last Anglo-Saxon king of England was Edgar Aetheling, grandson of King Edmund Ironside, who was elected by the Witenagemot after Harold's death. He ruled from Oct. 15, 1066 - Dec. 17, 1066.
This documentary completely ignores or fails to mention that in 1014 or 1015 (?) A large Danish, Viking invasion force led by Viking king Canute the Great, probably one of the greatest of all Viking kings, chieftains, Jarls in Scandinavia throughout the entire Viking Age, conquered England, and large areas of Scotland and Ireland, too. Sure, they needed the remaining Anglo-Saxon nobility, leadership and didn't uproot or dispossess them of their lands, castles, titles, and honors but Canute's Danish Viking conquerors could have done what William the Conqueror eventually did, for centuries, Viking or Scandinavian influence was deeply-entrenched in northern England, Scotland, and Ireland with Swedish, Danish and Norwegian ex-pat settlements scattered all over British Isles and that influence remained strong well until the modern era, past the Tudor and Stuart eras. England in 1066 had a very strong Scandinavian influence culturally, politically, and even economically. During the Viking Age, England remained one of Scandinavian Norse Vikings explorers, raiders, and conquerors most favorite targets as well as being as their first. It was the Vikings who founded Edinburgh, Glasgow, Erie, Dublin, Belfast, Carrie, and Cork in Ireland, and it was arguably under their control during the Danelaw, that Viking rulers of York and Bath turned both cities into major commercial and mercantile centers. Most individual Vikings, if you'd ask them the right way, would describe themselves as traders, merchants, and explorers as much as marauding raiders pillaging, looting, and decimating villages, cities, towns, churches, monasteries, Abbeys. So, the whole linguistic, cultural influences of 1066 England and most of British Isles wasn't predominantly of Anglo-Saxon influence or descent as it had been maybe 5 centuries earlier when Saxons invaded and conquered what was left of once-prosperous, late antiquity, now-abandoned Roman Britain,,who themselves, seemingly on a whim, had managed to finish under Claudius in 43 C.E. What Julius Ceaser failed to achieve nearly a century earlier-conquer Britain, which they systematically and ruthlessly did, albeit in a piecemeal fashion after Boudicca's Revolt by the end of the 1st century C.E and would control until leaving Britannia in 410 C.E. In some respects, the ruling Anglo-Saxon dukes, lords, and gentry were being gradually replaced, or possibly faced being overwhelmed by Scandinavian culture and traditions as they'd replaced the Romans 6 centuries earlier until William the Conqueror's Normans (Viking descendants themselves) came along and upturned England in one of its biggest cultural, political paradigm shifts in its recorded history. Far more consequential then even Henry VIII's break with the Catholic Church, if you examine the actual reasons for Henry's dissolution and confiscation of monasteries, Abbeys, and churches it was far more complex than what some historians present it as now. England had been a hotbed of anticlericalism for centuries by John Wycliffe and the Lollards movement, in the Middle Ages, so Henry took advantage of that intense dislike or perceived hatred towards clerical corruption, abuse, and cronyism that was widely shared by English nobles in early 16th century. England was also where the Investiture Crisis in late 11th century began when William I (same William the Conqueror), disputed that the Vatican and only them had to right to nominate their picks to be bishops, priests, or abbots in monasteries, William believed that since England was one of his domains, he should have the right to nominate his own bishops and priests for high-ranking clerical positions, most notably, the Bishop of Canterbury.
Harold Godwinson was actually Harold II of England, Harold Harefoot was Harold I of England, 1035 - 1040. This documentary fails to call Godwinson Harold II.
we`re not here for the music but it overpowers his voice and the result is not a pleasant experience ...we`re here for the kwnoledge but had to stop watching. Please just try to fix it next time
I have always been partial to Harald. Maybe because he was such a badass or maybe because he had a shit of an older brother (makes him seem so...human somehow) or maybe because my dad had the same name. Or maybe because how he died seems sooooo painful....yikes. Whatever it is, it's weird, as I'm of Norman descent lol.
Found out the other day that a lot of leading Anglo-Saxons had been displaced by the earlier invasion of Canute and his Scandinavians -one family had to take refuge in Byzantium and Hungary and eventually returned when Anglo-saxons got back in power -Edward Atheling or someone like that.
The battle of hastings is to me one of those awful occasions when evil men made the world take a wrong turn a bit like the assasination of John F Kennedy
You really think the Normans had nothing but bad things to offer England? What about their organizational genius? Their building prowess? Their patronage of the arts? The French language and all it has contributed to our modern speech?
@@Vesnicie The Normans offered the English nothing beyond oppression brutality and hunger I'll give them the chimmney, but you only need a castle if someone is attacking you or as in this case you are oppressing someone else like f'instance putting out a mans eyes for taking a rabbit to feed his hungry family The Normans were a bunch of greedy bastards who stole England then stole Wales then Ireland , A lot of Scotland .Went on to try to steal France (Eventually had to spit that one out) Left very little but a wide wake of war death and misery accross northern Europe.The world would have been much better if William the Bastard had died in that battle rather than Harold.
chitlika funny you say that as the last few Anglo-Saxon kings (excluding the danish periods) were notorious for being some of the worst rulers of the age; they took a powerhouse of the 10th century under the first king of England to a kingdom which couldn’t even muster an army to meet the Danes when they arrived (Cnut the great for example). These Anglo-Saxon kings you seem to love so much are no better than the other kings from the birth of kingdoms till the 20th century; kings have always worked for their own and their close circles interest. It’s funny you’re likely a common peasant with a common lineage (as are almost all modern Englishmen) but you cling to ‘royalty’ that in all likelihood never game a damn about any of your ancestors
@@sheryaarahmed3109 Who says I love the Saxon kings so much? Hardicanute Harold harefoot and Aethelred were bad and ineffective rulers. Edmund Ironside would probably have been a good king but twas not to be. I certainly think that Harold Godwinson would have been a better king than William the bastard as far the average Englishman was concerned , Possibly one of the best kings of England I hate the Normans for their arrogance their brutality and their unshakeable belief in their entitlement to the lands property and even the lives and bodies of other peoples
chitlika In truth for the truly average person (not the low tier baron rather the farmers/peasants/even minor merchant men) I doubt life changed very much, most just had a new lord of a lord of a lord. The only commoners who might’ve been affected are the fjords men as they might’ve provided resistance to the early rule via rebellions/manpower. Arrogance by definition is something a person clinging to ‘royalty/nobility’ has far more of than any commoner & well brutality is nothing new of a king even for the normans & I know William and his Norman’s had a lot more of it than some. In reality the only reason people may claim he was more brutal than most is cause they can easily identify and explain this type of brutality, I mean would actively killing the people you rule over by having them pay strangling food (/other forms of )taxes multiple times just so you can divy the spoils between your friends not count as particularly brutal? You can claim that of all rulers, Norman or not.
very nice pinned remark, but the background music is to strong to hear the speaker. sorry to say, but it is a bad job from your sound mixer. the documentary I like very much !
King Harrold's bravery and valor had ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with nationalism or even a nation because people didn't start thinking in those terms until about the protestant revolution in the 16th century. What allowed him to perform amazing feats of bravery and valor was his unbending Faith in Jesus Christ and His Ancient Apostolic Catholic Church not deifying your country. It's difficult for a modern secular materialist to understand the ontological path of knowing objective Truth when you see It, then live life accordingly....
Catastrophic failure of judgement by the English elite. They did not need to offer battle. Do what Fabius Maximus did to defeat Hannibal. Keep him bottled up in Kent while you gather your strength. They could have put three armies into the field of the same size as William's if they hadn't been in such a hurry to march south. But the Stamford Bridge victory gave them Dutch courage. They thought they were invincible. Tragedy.
At the very end, I heard something I've never heard Brits say before. An admission that they've pretty much been lackeys to the Normans for 1,000 years and maybe it's time to take a little pride in the Anglo Saxons. You could start by getting rid of the hereditary Norman aristocracy that you've been bowing and scraping and forelock tugging to for so long. Dieu et mon droit, indeed.
Not all Brits are of Anglo Saxon origin. There are Celts, Vikings, Normans etc. Britain is also Scotland, Wales and Ireland. England is not Great Britain as a whole. And I'm a very proud to be English.
@@salanwuduhus6529 Of course, but the Brits don't speak of being conquered by the Normans, They speak of the Norman conquering. They identify with the conquerors, even though the conquerors brutally suppressed the Anglo Saxons and pushed them, as a group, out of power. The Brits have more Anglo Saxon than Norman genetics but they think it's great that they've had a Norman aristocracy ruling over them for the last 1,000 years. (Not that the monarchy itself, of course, is anything other than German).
I've been binge watching this excellent channel which I've recently discovered and all the videos I've watched so far have been brilliantly produced. What the heck happened to this one and how was it allowed to be posted when the narrator is basically inaudible whenever there's music playing in the background? I stopped watching after a few minutes...
Music and some other background sounds make it difficult for me to hear, much less understand what the primary narrator is saying. He's much too soft-spoken for such noise.
Smart Mom. You will thank her in 20 years when you are at a cocktail party, and some historians are chatting about the Battle of Hastings, and you can just drop all this knowledge on them. Plus you know why our world is so insane, our rulers have been looting and pillaging for thousands of years.
Fun Fact: Harold was also the last Orthodox King of England. Did you know Alfred the Great is recognized in Holy Orthodoxy as a Saint? Along with Patrick, Fergus, Columba, Briget and all the other Anglo-Saxon and Celtic Saints. Never, ever let anyone tell you that in order to be Orthodox you must be Eastern. The West was fully Orthodox for a thousand years and her venerable liturgy is far older than any of her heresies. Saint John Maximovich The Wonderworker, Archbishop of Shanghai and SanFrancisco.
Bishop Heahmund the Anglo-Saxon made famous by the TV show Vikings is also a saint in Eastern Orthodoxy. Anglo-Saxons have history and a small genetic population in the east too. After 1066 they sailed, raided and fought heathens around the Mediterranean before heading to the Byzantine Empire and pledging themselves to the Emperor after they helped him win a battle at sea and fight invaders outside Constantinople's walls. He offered them land in Crimea he had just lost if they could win it back for him which they did and they called it New England. They were the majority of the Varangian Guard from 1066 until it’s end.
Excellent biography but ruined by an imbalance in the audio. I used the weird youtube subtitles to help me follow the commentary. Saxons for ever and down with the Norman invaders!
It is shocking how many British kings and queens were totally dominated by someone outside the royal family. In this case, the Archbishop of Canterbury heavily influenced Edward the Confessor.
This is an icredible important account of the history of the British isles. Still one regrets the most unlucky mishmash of the narrators' voices and the background noise. Sigh.
Not all of us have young ears and great hearing anymore. I would have enjoyed this much, much more without the annoying music washing out the dialog. The sections without any music were great.
I could never understand why William only allowed men with the same Christian name into his army . Talk about picky ! I'm amazed that he won at all ....
Deathbed Prophecy Of King Edward The Confessor “Just now two monks stood before me, whom I had once known very well when I was a young man in Normandy, men of great sanctity, and for many years now relieved of earthly cares. And they addressed me with a message from God. ‘Since,’ they said, ‘those who have climbed to the highest offices in the kingdom of England, the earls, the bishops and abbots, and all those in holy orders, are not what they seem to be, but, on the contrary, are servants of the devil, on a year and one day after the day of your death God has delivered all this kingdom, cursed by Him, into the hands of the enemy, and devils shall come through all this land with fire and sword and the havoc of war. ’ Then I said to them, ‘I will show God’s design to the people, and the forgiveness of God shall have mercy upon the penitents. For He had mercy on the people of Nineveh, when they repented on hearing the Divine indignation. ’ But they said, ‘These will not repent, nor will the forgiveness of God come to pass for them.’ ‘And what,’ I asked, ‘shall happen? And when can a remission of this great indignation be hoped for?’ ‘At that time,’ they answered, ‘when a green tree, if cut down in the middle of its trunk, and the part cut off carried the space of three furlongs from the stock, shall be joined again to the trunk, by itself and without the hand of man or any sort of stake, and begin once more to push leaves and bear fruit from the old love of its uniting sap, then first can a remission of these great ills be hoped for'' King Edward died on January 5, 1066. One year and one day after his death, on January 6, 1067, the Roman Catholic William the Conqueror was crowned king of England in Westminster Abbey. Then began a terrible campaign of pillage and bloodshed by the Conqueror against the English people, which culminated in the pseudo-council of Winchester in 1070, when papal legates deposed the Orthodox Archbishop Stigand, who had refused to crown William, and placed the Roman Catholic Lanfranc in his place. On October 15, 1072, the last English Orthodox bishop, Ethelric of Durham, after anathematizing the Pope, died in prison at Westminster, and the grace of the priesthood left the English land, in accordance with King Edward’s prophecy. The last part of this prophecy remains to be fulfilled. History of King Edward..... St. Edward The Confessor, King Of England Source: s33939bc9149089cf.jimcontent.com/download/version/1506323274/module/5529994050/name/A%20Deathbed%20Prophecy%20Of%20King%20Edward%20The%20Confessor.pdf
Same old story as with Jim Al-Khalili his wonderful knowledge gets drowned out by an over exuberant musician. The background music (haha!) has destroyed this program well done mate!
The terrible audio overlay is probably designed to hide the fact that the video isn't owned by this mob. Channel 4 originally broadcast it in 2002 as Fact or Fiction: King Harold (which is why Tony looks so young). You can watch the real version and all others in the series on the Channel 4 website.
I shall stop watching this truly fascinating programmes until I find that unnecessary music has been lowered or removed altogether. And I do listen not just hear!!! I am here to learning something I don't fully know, having studied it many years ago at school.
The music was drowning the speaker for me. English is not my first language and I am sensitive to sounds, I can't finish this episode because of the music.
Anglo-Saxon kings did not inherit the title, they were chosen by vote from a council of Ealdorman called the "Witan" (which translates roughly to "wise men") where they would choose the most capable ruler from any man who had a claim to the title. They regularly held meetings called the "Witenagemot", where the king would also often defer to them in matters of administration of his realm.
Love The Tony but I don't know who mixed the sound for these videos. Saw another one with him about Robin Hood that also were really badly mixed. The sound/ music is always appreciated but it's way too loud. Struggling to hear what he's saying.
But Harold Godwinson got the last laugh as his descendant (Queen Elizabeth II) currently occupies the British throne and his descendants have occupied the throne since the 14th century via Edward III through his Mom, Isabella of France aka the She-Wolf of France....
