POV: You are tryna make notes and your still half way through writing the first one and she's already said 200 different thing and you're gonna have to watch it like 20 times.
Cheers! Thank u from across the pond. As a citizen of thecUS, I enjoyed your history chat. I aldo lived 6 months in the UK many years ago. History is something we all need to learn and appreciate.
Thank you for this. It is very interesting. I feel the main underlying cause of the civil wars, was that much of England especially in the south east, were no longer 'feudal' in structure, but had become much more complex with merchants, businesses, tradesmen, couriers, deliverymen and the like. Many failed to see the need for an absolute monarch, which no longer could effectively rule such a complex society, and thus in practice became less connected if not irrelevant. Parliament with all its committees could address the nations needs more effectively, but as you stated Parliament was denied that voice during the so called 11 years personal rule. What you say of course happened, but the resulting clashes were symptoms of this deeper underlying cause of inability to govern effectively. On another note, the number of men who died in the war is nearly as much as British people who died in the second World War. It is sad, that this bloody period of English history is not taught in our schools, even because of its relevance to the rise of Parliamentary democracy.
Charles wanted an autocracy and free reign to do as he saw fit. He truly believed that god bestowed leadership upon him and Parliament was the hinderance to him ruling as such. William Prynne recognised the king acting in such manner and overstepping his statutory bounds and John Hampden, who was MP for Buckinghamshire (if you don't know where it is please look it up - we're nowhere near the sea) rightly, stood up to him by refusing to raise the tax from his constituents. Charles had options available to him and chose to imprison and martyr John Hampden to save his own pride in the short term, which added to Hampdens later fame and lore once he died at the ambush at Chalgrove. Thomas Jefferson cites Hampden as one of his influences, amongst many other dissenters who've challenged authority since. The civil war was taught when I went to school at least (I hope it still is) and coming from a place where John Hampden lived, makes it all the more salient and important. And evermore relevant in todays social and political landscape. What we have lost is holding truth to power (irrespective of what side of the political fence you sit on, it's the same whether right or left) exacerbated by the indifference our elected officials value of our opinions and concerns, vs that of businesses and their lobbyists and the general malaise, apathy and disinterest most of us display in how we are now governed.
Excellent summary - technically, there were 3 English civil wars but they often get referred to in the singular, probably because they occurred within a relatively short period of time (
You are mistaken; Britain did exist, as did Great Britain. They are geographical features, not countries. The name 'English' Civil War also isn't much accurate, though it is the popular name; Scotland and Ireland were each heavily involved in the three wars, particularly Scotland. That's why a lot of modern historians prefer the name 'Wars of the Three Kingdoms' or 'British Civil Wars' over the more inaccurate, if more popular, 'English Civil War'.
King: "The Bible says that God puts kings on the thrown." Not The King: "The Bible also says God removes kings from the thrown." King: "And?" Not The King: *Full cocks flintlock* "Sometimes the hand of God gives an order to the duty of men."
Well articulated. One thing that might be added was that Cromwell's personal animosity toward the Crown was a result of the presumed bastardization of the Crown long before Charles I was crowned. "If the King desires to be regarded as King by Parliament, asserting the Divine Right of Privilege, then the King must be the Divine King!" I can almost hear Cromwell yelling over objection. In short, the problem was that Charles I asserted "the divine right of Kings" but was not the divine king -- the Bastard was. And the Bastard was in the New World and had been the host of the "First Thanksgiving" no matter what Honest Abe Lincoln's influence on history books has claimed when creating the covering holiday to commemorate a perverted explanation of what happened. What Charles did by chartering the New England Company to John Winthrop in 1629 was to violate a long established treaty with the New World by pretending the treaty did not exist -- in exchange for cash. Oops. Cromwell objected. John Winthrop, in the new world, did not object. For obvious reasons.
To those unhappy the young lady and the speed she's talking at your question is in the title 🙄 it's 5 minutes not 10 thought she did remarkably well in the time she was allotted
Great videos but too fast speech. Some pauses and stresses, expressive intonation and emotions instead of coldness would go along way. Also The music in the background needs to rise and fall with the story line. The content though, is great!
It would have been better a more professional person to give this information. The woman speaking gives a monotonous rendition of events and it gets tiring just listening to her blabber on. I later put the subtitles and turned off her monotonous voice and just read it. Worked much better.
What good for a Monarchy if the sovereignty is to be shared with people representatives ( Subjects to the King and Crown if I may add ) ? Does this not the rule and principle of Monarchy ?
That was the big question.Along with whether England was Catholic or Protestant. Finally settled with William and Mary. We also have the Protestant succession written into law. Don't ignore the impact of the Reformation.
This is very eerie to hear in 2020. Especially the part about long term economic causes, (not mentioned rise in price of foods and inflation, iconoclasm) the reintroduction of kneeling.
I have to watch this for history homework T-T Also her voice is so soothing. Ok but like can someone plz summarise this in 6 points in like the next hour?
John Pym along with other followers of Cromwell had been massacred and thrown into a pit. John Pym was named King John after he had died, for the great influence that he had had on Parliament. John Pym was a famous politician and the leader of the popular party in Long Parliament and had died at Derby House in Westminster on 8th December 1643. His magnificent funeral was held a few days later and both Houses of Parliament followed the coffin. He was buried under the gravestone of Sir John Wyndsore in the north ambulatory of Westminster Abbey. His body/remains were disinterred when Charles II was restored to the throne. This was done with many other followers of Cromwell; their remains were thrown in a pit of St. Margaret’s churchyard.
This is very good, is there a KS3-friendly version, with particular emphasis on the language and pacing. It would be amazing if there was a version for EAL students.
Mam also cover some aspect of Indian history ,why Britisher came India as trader under EIC but later capture Whole India ...and rule India for 200 yrs ....plz do cover some aspects ....😂😂😂😂🤗😜
Shame about the awful distracting music which distracts from a very clear presentation. I had to rewind many times because it’s too loud and completely unnecessary.
Check out Charles the first on BBC iPlayer Charles I: Downfall of a King, Series 1: 1. Two Worlds Collide: www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0006pbh via @bbciplayer
