The Tudors: England, Spain & The Habsburgs 

Please join the David Starkey Members' Club via Patreon www.patreon.com/davidstarkeytalks or Subscribestar www.subscribestar.com/david-starkey-talks and submit questions for members Q & A videos. Also visit www.davidstarkey.com to make a donation and visit the channel store shop.davidstarkey.com. Thank you for watching.

Dr Starkey, I am Emilio,the member that asked this question.Thank you so much for yout fascinating long answer.I found very surprising and interesting the financial aid of the Tudors to Philipp of Habsburg in his conflict with Fernando,the relation between Philipp and the lancaster house and the fall of Calais as a pivotal moment.Thank you so much

Please don't apologize for what you may think is a too lengthy talk. There is no perception of rambling. This talk in particular was so concentrated with information, that I had to "rewind" several times to assimilate it all. Your talks are a true feast for English history enthusiasts.

Thank you Dr Starkey. To think we, the audience, get this content for free is a privilege.

“…for his multi-faith coronation.” I’m dying here lol.

This is the most valuable channel on RU-vid by a country mile! Thank you David! 🙏👑⚔️🛡

Dr Starkey thank you again for more quality content. This is precisely what the inventors of the internet truly intended the Web to be used for!

These are some of the best history lectures on youtube.

Very enjoyable and informative, and I certainly don't think it went on too long. The good thing about this format is that the creator can make the videos as long as they need to be, and from what I see in the comments here, most people are eager for long-form content, as long as Dr. Starkey is willing to provide it.

In his alliance with the Habsburgs and the military training of his son, for future War with France, Henry 7th was planting a tree that he would never sit in the shade of.

This is like a personal university course 😀

I am never ready for one of Dr. Starkey's talks to end! I am thrilled to listen, sometimes to the same talk more than once. There is so much packed into them. I only worry that I will run out of talks. Keep going Dr. Starkey!

I really enjoyed this lecture,Dr Starkey and the detail of the machinations of the Tudors in their foreign policy and the motivations for it.Follow the money!Excellent historical work.I look forward to the next one.

Wonderful.......absolutely wonderful

40k subscribers! Onwards and upwards my good fellow. Another brilliant lecture. Thank you. 😁

Thank you you make this history so interesting. I have always loved history. Especially the British throne.

Absolutely brilliant! Best thing I have heard on this channel: literally in tears for most of it, the achieve of, the mastery of the thing.

Thank you for the interesting unpacking of this period and the diplomatic dance of the Tudors.

I am so happy Dr Starkey is back !! I love his documentaries and knowledge as a historian. Yes I know, he rubbed some people wrong in the recent past. But that does not lessen his knowledge and impact as a historian. I’m glad he found a new platform for his lectures and unmatched knowledge of medieval history.

Can’t sleep…..David Starkey uploads😊

Thoroughly enjoyed the lecture. Philip II being a Lancastrian was something new I’ve learned. Looking forward to your next talk.

Dr. Starkey, Thank you. I so appreciate your work. ~ Big Fan in California

I struggle to keep up at times and occasionally need to rewind but these videos are never too long. We can always hit the pause button and grab some refreshments. I watched this talk whilst having my lunch. and it went down a treat. Thank you for selecting Emilio's question of a rather overlooked subject area, Dr. Starkey, I admire your undying enthusiasm.

outstanding. incredible completely captivated by your work. Can’t wait for you to do an entire Elizabethan Piracy Drake and the rise to the Royal Navy.

Thank you, fantastic content. Could you please do a similar video on The Anglo-Portuguese Alliance (or Aliança Luso-Britânica), ratified at the Treaty of Windsor in 1386, between England (succeeded by the United Kingdom) and Portugal is the oldest alliance in the world that is still in force - with the earliest treaty dating back to the Anglo-Portuguese Treaty of 1373.

I can’t believe it took me so long to discover this channel! What a huge treat to have such direct teaching from David Starkey! What I would not give to have lunch with him and pick his brain about so many important historical and contemporary events…so glad I’ve found and subscribed.

Isabel Castile was one pretty cool lady and Queen…she had to be pretty cool customer and smart to keep her throne and work it out. She reminds me of Eleanor of Aquitaine. Another heiress with a ton of smarts.

Something I’ve never quite understood is how accepting the English were of Philip’s accession as King when he married Mary I. The primacy of men is one thing, but the ease with which he seemed to command the English nation as King always seemed so bizarre to me as I could never quite fathom why he seemed so accepted when he was a foreigner supplanting their Queen in authority. And then David explained it through his Lancaster ancestry, and it all made perfect sense. To be honest, I think everyone sometimes forgets just how recent the concept of a nation state is, and how long it took for that idea to be solidified in people’s minds as family trust and loyalty was the norm before that, and in many parts of the world still is, so of course Philip claiming that ancestry would make him more acceptable as a sovereign to the people with that claim. Even then though, I wouldn’t have thought the Lancaster aspect would have made _that_ much of a difference. Keep in mind, the period between the accession of Henry VII and Mary I is roughly 70 years, so even the youngest people alive would have virtually no memory of a time before the Tudor Dynasty were firmly in place, so would the claims of a descent from the Lancastrian line really have made that much of a difference to people? Apparently so, because this was a time so far from our own with the assumptions and beliefs of those so divorced from what we could consider rational ways to select leaders that we can’t help but place our own dimensions of “English” and “Spanish” onto people who saw themselves as subjects of royal houses first, if anything else at all.

happy new year David! what a treat for the weekend xx thank you sir

I think there is definitely credence to David’s argument that Henry understood the purpose of England better than those who criticised him then and now, namely to be the enemy of France, as that has least been what has united the country, what has driven it forward and what has cemented its place in the world, both within Europe and globally. However, I don’t think Henry particularly valued that aspect of his job criteria, if you will, later on in his reign. While he was certainly gung ho to conquer France in the early days, following the War of the League of Cambrai, he never seemed to seriously pursue this for a long time as other issues, his Great Matter among them, distracted his attention. Moreover, while the cash from the dissolution of the monasteries could have been used to bankroll a successful war, Henry also wasted the money on various new palaces across the country which may have been architectural marvels but was not conductive to the national aim that his father had schooled him in. Likewise, the fact of the matter was that Henry was simply not a good prosecutor of war or a great general as opposed to his forebear, Edward IV, and was a much better sportsman and artist than a warrior king, however much Henry VIII would have liked to be. While Henry may have seen the antagonism with France as a central goal of England, I would also point out that he was very much capable of setting that goal aside for other issues during his reign, many of which were much more self-interested and selfish on Henry’s part but nevertheless shaped England as a cultural, political and religious island in European politics.

There's an amazing book on this topic by Alexander Samson called 'Mary and Philip: The marriage of Tudor England and Habsburg Spain (Studies in Early Modern European History)' which I advice everyone read. 'Philip and Mary, by the Grace of God King and Queen of England, Spain, France, Jerusalem, both the Sicilies and Ireland, Defenders of the Faith, Archdukes of Austria, Dukes of Burgundy, Milan and Brabant, Counts of Habsburg, Flanders and Tirol'

Excellent, many thanks for this description of our history. Shame it is not taught in schools anymore.

Riveting, highly articulate and incisive. Starkey explains so much and outlines the germination of the British Empire, revealing the threads the Tudors wove.

So enjoyed having all of this information. Thank you!!

So interesting. I love these talks.

That was wonderful! It helps make sense of so much! Thank you, Sir.

love the detail of little known escapade ( to me) of Henry VIII and Archduke Philip in Winchester then Windsor.

Thanks David I've always been fascinated with Henry the seventh

I love all your videos!!!!

I love Dr. Starkey. I have seen all his documentary. He is one of the REALIST historians out...love him!!!🥰🥰

Speak on. Your lectures are fascinating, enlightening, and never too long.

Magnificent. Phillip II of Spain was a Lancastrian ? well, I did not know that.

Another wonderful lecture. You really don't have to make apologies about going on too long. I find these videos very informative and could listen for hours. I feel like I am getting a wonderful history education for very little. My sons and I have computer science backgrounds. Their mother is a mechanical engineer. One thing we all have in common is a love of history. We even lived in England, Winchester actually, at the beginning of the millennium. The wonderful thing there is the span of history. Once, while at the Great Hall you mention, we asked for directions to St. Giles Hill. The woman working there said, take the straight road, the Roman road... I could go on, as you often do (and don't stop), but I will leave it a that. I was very gratified when, while my younger son who was at university said to me, he enjoyed reading about math, computers and history. I felt so aligned with him at that time. My three vices are whiskey, cigars and books. Books are the biggest one, in many ways. When we moved from Philadelphia to Chicago the movers told us we had 3,000 pounds of books. That was 30 years ago, and I haven't stopped.

Facinating. Thank you.

Excellent.

I enjoyed the talk, very interesting

12:30 am in the morning, stumbling over the Tudors & the Habsburgs? Count me in, Sir! 😄👍🏻

You are simply wonderful Dr David Starkey. You leave me laughing with pleasure at the finale of your earthly descriptions of complex custom, morality, and politics. You're better than a boyfriend, and far more fun. Don't worry, I'm not in the market for a fella, but I just want you to realise how delightful it is to be back at work with a great teacher, after all these years.

Love your new series!

Fascinating, I had never appreciated all of this.

Enjoyed this so much

YES another fab DS video. Have on my lap a signed copy of your book from your visit to Greenwich age ahead of Brexit.

Interesting and informative. Dr Starkey you are magnificent!

Excellent 💫

Philip II was also descended from the Portugese crown who via his maternal grandfather Manuel I of Portugal was twice decended from the marriage of John I of Portugal and Philippa of Lancaster, the daughter of Henry IV of England. So Philip II of Spain is a Lancastrian through Catherine of Lancaster daughter of John Duke of Lancaster and Philippa of Lancaster daughter of Henry IV. Since Philip II was claiming the Kingdom of Portugal as the best heir of that kingdom and Philippa's descendents having the best claim for the Lancastrian line on the correct side of the bedsheets this would have been emphasised by Philip and his agents.

This was brilliant

1066 & All That quotes ! especially “uneasy lies the head that wears a throne”!

Thank you, Mr. Starkey. Utterly interesting, as always. I would also be interested in the view of the House of Hapsburg, so as to get a broader view, were it possible (either in English or Spanish - LOL)

Great lecture on an aspect rarely touched on in this way

Another fascinating talk. Full of facts that I am ashamed to say are new to me. As a request I would love to hear David's thoughts on the visual culture of the Tudors. A lecture on Tudor portraiture would be great.🙏

Dr Starkey, a conversation between you and John Anderson, who was once the vice prime minister of Australia, and is now a youtuber would be interesting.

Thank you

As ever - splendid.

The rose part of your lecture clears something up for me. In the TV series 'Reign' it is mentioned the Queen (meaning Mary I) styled her rose red and others styled it white. I couldn't understand that nor could I find anything about it so assumed it was artistic licence. Thank you for clearing that up, very interesting. It sort of also shows how much of Henry's daughter Elizabeth was... Henry was more York than Lancaster especially in his looks and mannerisms. Elizabeth very similar, I'd say Elizabeth also takes after Edward IV.

Duke of York married into Mohamed line!? So much to learn here

Oh, the thought of British Caliphate originating from a very unexpected source.

I honestly prefer longer content, especially with educational videos.

That was an exquisitely clear account of Henry VII's the highly questionable claim to be a legitimate heir of the house of Lancaster and worth watching for that alone. This is one of the more interesting episodes of only because it better synchronizes the events and personalities Tudor period with those in Continental Europe, which are too often simply left as footnotes in many accounts of the Tudors, yet this is period when great historic events were afoot right across the globe. Then of course there's Phillip II of Spain a gentleman who by all accounts made Henry at his absolute worst and most brutal seem almost like boy scout by comparison, doing, "god's work."

The financial link between Henry VII and the Hapsburgs is one of the most significant things in this period. I must dig in to studies on this. Thank you Dr. Starkey!

Very good

That was great.

Very interesting

So, it's back to England v France - again! I hadn't appreciated just how much cash HenryVll was prepared to tip into the coffers of the Holy Roman Emperor to further this end. Nor had I ever thought of Philip/Mary = catholic, Lancastrian, Elizabeth = protestant, Yorkist. Such a lot of new information to be absorbed - thank you David Starkey.

As a descendant of Edmund and Isabella, I assert my claim to the throne and I challenge Her Majesty to trial by combat! Well done as always, Dr. Starkey

Dear Dr Starkey, After hearing your description of the way that money was used to buy political influence in Tudor times, I was reminded of something I read about Edward lV bringing down the Medici banking dynasty by refusing to repay the huge debts he had incurred. Is there any truth to this story? Was this also political? It would be wonderful if you could include this in one of your future talks.

Thanks Starkey mate

There's no such thing as a talk that's, 'Too long', from David Starkey.

You didn't just drop in on the Habsburgs.

At 45:07 : “ what’s all this about ?”. I keep asking myself this question a lot in the context of the incessant petty wars of the Middle Ages. What purpose does it serve in fine : wealth, more taxable land ? The young Henry viii wanting war with France, what for really ? One could argue that investing these huge sums of money in creating wealth in England instead of waging war would be a better choice. “ There really isn’t another purpose of the State but war”, “the mere selfish interest of the monarchy”. Indeed a depressing thought.

Edward the 3rd's daughter Joan died from the plague en route to Spain to marry Peter of Castile a king so unpopular he needed the Black Prince's help in restoring his crown.

Genius

It'd be interesting to see a breakdown of remaining claimants to the British Throne and which is the most legitimate after the House of Windsor.

Pardon me while I attemot to get my head round this, feel free to correct me if I have misunderstood: For something like 20 years the Hapsburgs accumulated a debt to the English crown roughly equivalent to 80% of the yearly earnings of the king of England. France looses a battle to the Holy Roman Empire. It's king is captured and as part of the ransom settlement takes on that ENTIRE debt? So what does Henry VIII do with that leverage over an enemy, and huge revenue stream? He blows the lot just to get in to bed with some woman! Worse, he made an enemy of the most powerful man and family in Europe, a man he and his father had been bankrolling for years, a man who owed him a huge financial and personal debt. It's not even as if he 'bought' an alliance with France as he almost immediately went back to war while trying to rebuild his relationship with the Hapsburgs once again. That temporary alliance didn't even help him to persuade the Pope, hence the whole split with Rome and Church of England thing. Good God! Henry could have had any woman in England and stuck two fingers up at the Pope. Us English are damn lucky we have a country at all if arguably our most famous king was prepared to mismanage things that badly, and for so little reason - as he ended up cutting her head off I presume not even he thought she was worth it, and in so doing rather proved he could do what he liked without the support of 'foreign powers'.

good joke at 8:14!

Why was Henry VIII so enamored of Philip the Fair of Burgundy (grandfather and namesake of Mary's husband Philip II)? Could it be because the elder Philip was a handsome, spoiled fashion plate, in thrall to courtiers and flatterers? A case of like calling to like, perhaps?

42:15 - minor point about jousting.... the weight never comes around and clobbers anyone, ever, except in Hollywood movies, wherein it is a visual gag to show how the character supposedly hasn't learned proper technique yet.

Really interesting but it all went a bit wrong at around 1.01 with the rambling about Philip's legitimate descent from Constance of Castille and Mary's via the illegitimate line and Philip having a superior claim to the English throne. Yes, Mary was a descendant via the illegitimate descendants of the third marriage of John of Gaunt but like Philip, Mary was also a legitimate descendant of John of Gaunt's second marriage, Constance of Castille and John of Gaunt. Constance and John were the ancestors of the sisters Juana of Castille (Philip's grandmother) and Catherine of Aragon (she was even named Catherine allegedly for Constance's and John of Gaunt's daughter Catherine, who became Queen of Castille). Mary's right to the English throne was determined through an Act of Parliament. The idea of superior claims based on a modern idea of primogeniture is highly dubious in this era of history both in England and Spain, as shown by the steps taken by Catherine's mother to secure the throne of Castille by displacing the rightful heiress and of course the yo-yoing between the Lancastrians and Yorkists in England, the reality was the throne was determined as to who was the strongest in battle. In terms of primogeniture in 1553, surely the rightful King would have been John III of Portugal, who was the senior male line descendant of Philippa of Lancaster, the eldest daughter of John of Gaunt and Blanche of Lancaster.

What of Mary Boleyn?

Can we talk about incest. How all these people are related to each other

Was Anne of Cleves so ugly that King Henry could not consumate his marriage or was he having problems himself,and love your commentaries,thank you I n advance,x

At 42:43, makes Henry sound hot! Didn't he do parallel bars?

One Hundred and Eight Thousand Pounds of SILVER!"

Barcelona was never the capital of Aragon. The capital was ever Zaragoza. Barcelona may be an important town now but not in the time of Fernando de Aragon.

So, at the end of the day, did making all those payments to the Hapsburgs pay off for England? Did we get our moneysworth?

When will we be able to see DS on Odysee?

I thought Ghent was in Belgium

Mary died! Wasn't she beheaded?

Here we go again. Kings and queen's. No mention of the population. That is not history.

Dear Dr.Starkey you keep placing things in time relative to the death of Mohamed. You cannot do this. There is absolutely no contemporary evidence whatsoever regarding the death of Mohamed, or anything else regarding Mohamed for that matter. What we know about Mohamed, his biographies are written around two hundred years after his death, probably. It's actually very difficult /impossible to find any conclusive information about him at all concerning the period in which he was supposed to have lived. Considering this was the sixth century when everyone was writing everything down there ought to be written evidence of his life and all the weird and wonderful stuff he got up to. However there is not. So either whoever wrote his biography completely destroyed all and any information about him when they were done, or he never existed. Not a trace. Not too mention there is absolutely no way Islam has its origins in Saudi Arabia, it' s base was Judeo-Christian and obviously started in the Levant. There are so many other tell that so easily contradic the basic story of Islam and do not make the slightest sense. So please Dr. Starkey don't give credence to something that makes absolutely no sense. People need to think. And apparently that means you too Dr.Starkey, with all due respect.

Starkey is one of the sad royalists who thinks good old England is the greatest country in the World. What a sad old man he is.