My goodness it's amazing how much Alec Guinness actually looked like Charles!

@l33tsamurai

2 жыл бұрын

My thoughts exactly sir! Richard Harris and Timothy Dalton look pretty close to their characters as well...

@420JackG

2 жыл бұрын

I think they made him up to look like that

@pencilpauli9442

Жыл бұрын

The force wasn't with Charles

@iagoporto5522

Жыл бұрын

They both have an ovine look about them.

@matthewsatalic2751

Жыл бұрын

77

Big important gap between Marston Moore and Nasby conclusion

@q-tuber7034

2 жыл бұрын

Marston Moor here: kzread.info/dash/bejne/iHWEqpNxlZaedps.html

The King should have been an MP as he was as trustworthy as the ones we’ve got now.

@wessexfox5197

Жыл бұрын

Charles was a good honest man who loved his realm, his people and tradition. Those who rebelled against him were uppity Puritan rebels, the worst sort of people who inhabited England at this time. People who arrogantly believed their own religious ideas were correct and should be foisted upon the people, rather than following the traditional English Protestant Church laid out by Henry VIII.

Great docs really loved them, but like some else said what's with the big jump between Marston Moore and Naseby? missed out the new model army which i was looking forward too, so did Essex and Manchester get kicked out of Parliaments army? ill have to do some digging

@PeacockRhino

Жыл бұрын

Yes they had a vote and removed them in favour of Cromwell and the Fairfaxes. They were the ones who created a ‘new model’ army.

Charles' speech to the court reminds me of Catherine of Aragon's speech to the court that were ruling on her marriage to Henry VIII, when she made much the same point about their lack of authority to try her. I think she said, "This is no indifferent court for me", as of course it would rule in Henry's favour; & as with Charles, it's been called one of the finest moments of her life.

@23sunderland

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah the same as Prince Andrew he feels the same . I am too honourable that's my only mistake someone had to get the pizza

@23sunderland

3 жыл бұрын

By the way I am a republican . Come from a stone's throw from Cromwell s birth place

@jennyisle6646

3 жыл бұрын

@@23sunderland Shame on you, traitor to your country!

Great video. Thank you.

Outstanding!

Brilliant documentary

Don't forget, Charles I's frailty in decision-making, resulted in his Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud going to block. His 1st Earl of Stratford, Thomas Wentworth met the same fate, in having his head cut off; and Charles 1 himself had to face the torment of the executioner's axe, before suffering the indigaty of having his own illustrious head lopped off publically.

No credit to the makeup artist who did Charles in this series. The obviously phony black mustache and beard and huge wig look nothing like the contemporary portraits of Charles.

@23sunderland

3 жыл бұрын

Poetic license

@MothaLuva

3 жыл бұрын

He looks a bit like Buffalo Bill though.

I am getting the sense we are not seeing the full series. Part 2 ending sets up the battle of Marsden Moor and here at 3 we are already past Naseby. I stopped watching here out of frustration.

@alexeltroll

3 жыл бұрын

I felt it too

@DAEDRICDUKE1

3 жыл бұрын

Lol chill out

@winter14282

3 жыл бұрын

It seems strange but audio in this documentary has been taken from the one I will provide the link to which it clearly originates from. Also, this other documentary feels complete in a way this one does not. kzread.info/dash/bejne/qWlsp66KfdayiLQ.html

Humiliating disposal is the scientific way of removing spoiled brats who refuse to go down!

Wait - is there an episode missing? 2 ended with the start of Marston Moor...

@Perceval777

3 жыл бұрын

There are two other documentaries about the battle of Marston Moor itself, one is uploaded by this channel (Documentary Base). I don't know if it's somehow related to this series but it fills the gap.

@TheLoyalOfficer

3 жыл бұрын

@@Perceval777 Ah ok, thank you.

@jimmeryellis

3 жыл бұрын

So where is all the buildup to the Battle of Naseby? A fascinating history involving the city of Leicester.

A Shame that you missed the Second Battle of Newbury October 1644 Fought at Speen, Donnington Castle and Shaw House.

@snarkynader9400

Жыл бұрын

Well go on good boy, do tell!

grr nice

Basing House sounds like some kind of typical Elizabethan country mansion. In fact it was a fortress of considerable size, second only to Windsor castle in strength of its fortifications. No small wonder then that it withstood a siege lasting years before it was finally taken in bloody storm, a fact which maddened the soldiers of Parliament who lost so many comrades in arms taking the fortress. Charles' dismissal of Prince Rupert sealed his fate militarily - the culmination of his questionable actions throughout the war. Without Rupert he had no hope at all of continueing the fight for his now lost country. After betraying Montrose in Scotland, he now sent his best soldier away from England in disgrace - what more proof does one need of Charles' inherent foolishness?

@abatesnz

3 жыл бұрын

"he had no hope at all of continueing the fight" "Continueing"? Our correspondent from the mid-17th Century writes...

@jennyisle6646

3 жыл бұрын

Charles never betrayed Montrose you idiot! He saved Rupert's life by sending him away, it was one of the conditions parliament offered the king that for peace he had to have Rupert and others killed by parliament! Now you think why the hell he refused parliament's offers!

@SNP-1999

3 жыл бұрын

@@jennyisle6646 Read your history, before you call somebody you do not know an idiot. Only morons with a sad lack of knowledge stoop so low. And WTF has Rupert got to do with the Scot's General Montrose anyway ?

This man was a bad King, but did he deserve his fate? and when he surrendered he still didn't accept it, he was a vain and arrogant man whos only concern was for himself, they gave him the chance to change but he refused it and then proclaimed himself a martyr, all the Stuarts where the same hence the reason they lost the throne in the end.

Ads volume much louder than content

The whole idea with a sovereign and subjects are equally flawed today as it has always been

46:13 "I would argue it was the death he deserved" Lmao, legend.

It was Walpole.

So this is how monarchy dies; with thunderous groaning.

We should all find a huge gamble at some point in our lives.

Amazing beard and mustache on King Charles. They look like they are made of construction paper.

@ihavesoul4real

2 жыл бұрын

I worked on this masterpiece and indeed that's what we used.

@jeanw2018

2 жыл бұрын

@@ihavesoul4realOh my goodness thank for replying! I’m sure you all were on a limited budget so you did what you could with what you had.

I very much doubt that before the purge 500 MPs say in the Commons, less than 200 methinks.

It was outrageous that Charles was denied the right to speak during his trial. But the representation of it in this documentary is unfair. The trial lasted many days. Many witnesses were brought to give testimony and in effect provide evidence of the king's guilt in ordering what we would now call war crimes.

@Oprey22

3 жыл бұрын

Was he guilty of treachery? Yes. Is the king above the law? No.

@jennyisle6646

3 жыл бұрын

@@Oprey22 You mean NO and Yes .

@jennyisle6646

3 жыл бұрын

Charles did what any right thinking person would, refuse to acknowledge this "court"since it had no legal basis to exist, let alone try him.

Parts 2 and 4 missing

I'm here because of Brexit.

@RobertK1993

3 жыл бұрын

Really what side the Brexiteers are Roundheads and the Royalists are Europhiles the traitors are the roundheads .

So between Marston Moor and Naseby??

I think that they didn't upload episode 2 of this documentary.

@mauzki-

3 жыл бұрын

they did, check the channel.

@q-tuber7034

2 жыл бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/iJmM29Oafbreoqg.html

Because even if princes fail they can always go back to just being princes, especially in their own minds.

When your rulers are no longer for you, the people, then they should be removed, by the people, how I wish it were still so

@keithfrost9471

3 жыл бұрын

It is still so and will always be so and just has to be bad enough for the people to act or for a leader to come along and encourage the people to act.

@nickjung7394

3 жыл бұрын

That is why we have elections, unless you wish for a violent alternative.

@mfarruco7426

3 жыл бұрын

Parliament was not the people. The people were for the king.

@bobbyunavailable

3 жыл бұрын

I hear that. I don’t know where this current madness all ends but I think it is nowhere good.

You got some elements of Prides Purge wrong. Its family history and if you want the real skinny search for Joseph Pride and Prides Purge

Now there's a fresh Charles...

As I said on Episode 1, Charles I deserved his fate most richly but though Cromwell had the right idea and intentions to rid England of the monarchy, he needed to ensure that Charles II was to be barred from ascending to the throne so that the monarchy, an anachronism even in the 17th century, let alone in this 21st century, would be at an end and England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales would be independent democratic countries in their own rights. And should that Australia have been discovered and settled when it was, the road to democracy and self determination as a republic in our own right would've been a goal achieved at the beginning of the previous century, 1st January, 1901 and we'd be celebrating 120 years as a republic on 1st January, 2021.

@jordochappers7430

3 жыл бұрын

How does Australia play into it?

@neilforbes416

3 жыл бұрын

@@jordochappers7430 Australia would've been discovered eventually, but a republican England would've allowed Australia to rule itself as a republic once the settlement grew to a respectable level of population and population centres(cities, towns, villages). We wouldn't have been tied to England by that fetid, rotting umbiliacal chord of empire/commonwealth that we have now.

@jordochappers7430

3 жыл бұрын

@@neilforbes416 What evidence do you have that this would be so? Most empires in history, republics or not tended to keep their overseas possessions for as long as it was feasible to do so. The best example I can think of would be the Roman empire. It went through several transitions from Kingdom to republic throughout its long life but in both systems of governance it fought tooth and nail to keep its empire as large and for as long as possible. Or what about the US? In terms of its economic and military activities, it is essentially an empire-it has military bases and personnel throughout the world and at one point for nearly 50 years, it ran the Philippines as an American colony which it seized from the Spanish at the very end of the 1800's.

@neilforbes416

3 жыл бұрын

@@jordochappers7430 I can express an opinion without need of evidence. I have a strong desire for Australia to be a republic. England DID achieve republic status, albeit briefly, but at least they DID achieve it.

@jordochappers7430

3 жыл бұрын

@@neilforbes416 I never claimed the contrary; I was just pointing out that your opinion doesn't stand up to historical facts.

Charles died because he was seem truly as That Man of Blood.

@karlfulton4854

3 жыл бұрын

He was Executed for many reasons. But the main one was the Charge of Treason For seeking the aid of foreign Armies including French; to fight and kill his own peoples to whom his Oath at anointing was, as is the Crown of England today, still.. ' To defend and protect the Subjects and all peoples of the : U K. .. The purpose of of the English Crown.. As ALL Kingships are.. Is to lead the peoples of the Realm to the feet of the most High in the most High Heaven.

@jennyisle6646

3 жыл бұрын

He died because they murdered him, because he stood up for himself and wouldn't bow down to his enemies.

@jennyisle6646

3 жыл бұрын

@@karlfulton4854 Treason is a crime against the monarch, Parliament was guilty of treason for murdering their lawful king, and indeed rebelling against him in the first place.

The adds are a pain!

A king who lost his head is a king without a head to begin with.

@Celticcross688

3 жыл бұрын

C Y Very TRUE

The historians levy much of the blame on Charles. I would say that the merchants set the wheel in motion. The tyranny and greed of the merchant middle class which saw itself as above the aristocracy and the King himself. Greed and a desire for wealth was put above the ancient hierarchy of the kingdoms

@Oprey22

3 жыл бұрын

The merchant class and the aristocracy were in many cases one and the same. Then as now, money talks and bullshit walks. "The ancient hierearchy of the kingdom" is based on "I've got a big sword so this is my land".

@patrickfleming253

3 жыл бұрын

@@Oprey22 as a descendant of Protestant aristocrats in Ireland I must disagree with you. My family like many ascendancy families gained our lands and titles for our military service to the English crown and for or defence and championing of the Anglican faith in Ireland. We didn’t get our wealth from business and that’s the key difference. In fact my family were constantly under threat by an emerging catholic middle class of merchants. They undercut many of the landed gentry and nobility with their use of business once they were emancipated. The aristocrat rules to maintain a hierarchy and sort of stable order, a state of being. The merchant thrives on flux and things like growth. They are constantly seeking to better their lot through business at the expense of the greater social order. Many aristocrats in the modern world barely manage to maintain that ancient way of life. We are forced to conform to a capitalistic middle class ethos and provide either some sort of commodity or become a professional of some sort. The closest thing to a traditional role for the aristocrat now would be an officer position in the military or something like that

@davidroberts7282

3 жыл бұрын

@@patrickfleming253 You do realize the French Revolution and its radical ideas of an enlightened bourgeoisie politicians and leaders who worked for the greater public good and eliminated the perceived enemies of reason, progress, and liberty--tyrannical, unelected kings who's claims to rule were based on centuries of divine right, gilded highly stratified, strict hierarchical socio-economic order where their decisions, whether good, bad, or unreasonable, were unchallengable. Same social hierarchical order provided the same privileges to nobles or notables who didn't earn money but were awarded it or gifted it based on their family's ennobled history dating back centuries to Middle Ages. This was the prevailing Estates socio-political class structure that existed in Ancien France pre-1789 for nearly 800 years with some modifications and minor structural changes. If you were a Huguenot, you'd better practice your beliefs quietly and to one's self because you could either be fined, killed, or put in Bastille where some might be coerced to renounce their faith and convert to Roman Catholicism. 17th and 18th English or British socio-political society and its offshoots in Ireland, American colonies, to a lesser extent early on British North America(Canada) instituted or legislated strict, rigid class barriers and restrictions but it was never officially made the binding, legal law of the Crown and Empire that there would be ______ distinct types of classes and laws, rules, and rituals would treat them different enshrined and passed by Parliament. It was more a wide range of customs that began, were accepted, grew and morphed into areas of different segments of English/British society and later the main Dominion and Commonwealth colonies that sometimes had the appearance of semi-legal or quasi-legal common law backing. I do know also that as British Empire furthered its conquests into the 19th century and began administering areas like South Africa and Rhodesia, countries with large non-English speaking Dutch Afrikaners and native black SA tribal customs, both of whom despised the British presence in their own unique reasons, that strict, hierarchical customs and legal statutes weren't going to be adhered to by the majority economic and political leaders who outnumber you and looking for any number of reasons, a badly-mismanaged, planned attempted covert invasion, British companies trying to swoop in and monopolize Dutch Boer gold mines in the Transvaal and Orange Free State and the dual bungling led to one of UK's bloodiest, nastiest, most vicious protracted guerrilla wars--Second Anglo-Boer War. That conflict was the last colonial war in the 19th century for UK and even 120 years later, it still leaves some nasty, bitter memories and grudges, not just from descendants of displaced white Dutch-speaking Afrkaners but the large, vast majority of black South Africans who suffered even more and died in much larger numbers in Kitchener's hastily built, poorly-run concentration camps. The only other major protracted conflicts UK was involved in that reached similar levels of extreme savagery, nasty reprisals on both sides would either be Malaya Emergency(1948-1960) or Kenya's Mau Mau revolt of the mid-late 1950s.,

Did the makeup artist get Charles wig and mustache out of a Cracker Jacks box? Awful.

If this was the first English civil war then what was the War of the Roses???

@winnienguyen4420

Жыл бұрын

I've always pondered that question myself.

@johnneville403

6 ай бұрын

It was fighting among aristocratic families, helped by their retainers, to be king.

King Charles I brought his death on himself. Was it tragic? maybe. But then he caused the Wars and wasn't able to compromise. He was by no means a victim. Parliament's decision was understandable at that point - considering how Charles was and how he governed.

@RobertK1993

4 жыл бұрын

Charles I at least achieved more then Cromwell he wasn’t a lunatic

@athelstanfounder759

4 жыл бұрын

@@RobertK1993 I disagree. Cromwell expanded the English colonial empire, won wars overseas, reintroduced the Jews, and did more in five years as Lord Protector than Charles I did in his entire reign.

@RobertK1993

4 жыл бұрын

Historia Nobis He was still a lunatic though.

@Trecesolotienesdos

3 жыл бұрын

@Marlin Williams And the Roundheads were his subjects and he was making negotiations with them and they went behind his back. He was King of England and Scots, and had betrayed his English subjects during negotations ins supposed "good faith".

@Oprey22

3 жыл бұрын

He constantly negotiated in bad faith, while secretly intriguing to land an Irish army. They really had no choice but to execute him.

C1 got what he deserved. OC deserves a medal.

I think Sir Charles Fleetwood was involved in this war.

Jesus there's 4 of these things?😝

Horribly miscalculate all that

"Tyrant, traitor, murderer"

When you consider history of over thrown monarchs before and after this Parliament was generous in giving him a trial. They could have said we won you lost by-by, exiled him to the new world but he never got there.

@jennyisle6646

3 жыл бұрын

That's a dopey assessment if ever I saw one! It was a kangaroo court, illegal, immoral and unjust!

@dominiccourtois4415

3 жыл бұрын

@@jennyisle6646 well the comment above is still true I mean they gave Charles a kings execution just look at what Henry IV did to Richard the 2nd after Henry usurped him.

Unwatchable. This is 480p? Don't think so.

@jasperhaworth6367

4 жыл бұрын

init g the quality is dawg

@marcusagrippa8078

4 жыл бұрын

Ah isn’t capitalism great. This fool would have yearned for 480p in the age of 📼 VHS

@carmenlottner297

3 жыл бұрын

@Tilly Divine twunty 😄😄😄😄!

@nickjung7394

3 жыл бұрын

Quality not brilliant but unwatchable? Don't be ridiculous. Watch it on an appropriate device and there is no problem.

@TheRuralpoet

3 жыл бұрын

Oh wub wub... Why don't you upload your own vid then ...

Although Cromwell was not liked by the Irish& Scots, he protected England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 for many years, he guided 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 to some sort of order.. Cromwell was treated badly post his death, exumed from his resting place, OLIVER CROMWELL deserves a state burial.. He stood organised in Parliament, a Puritan Family Man, a warrior leader., having dealt with a slippery dim monarch, who was against the the people .. Parliament plots, which is still is apparent today.. Tyranny and Plots against the People.Todays Government is made up of Mongrel MP's. Not many English 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 in the House..

@anthonymatthews7193

3 жыл бұрын

18 thousand scots deported to the Indies to die, Ireland ravaged mmm Cromwell = Bin Laden

@Hilts931

3 жыл бұрын

He was a murderous tyrant if not as guilty than worse than Charles.

The King, The King, and The King, this whole series is related from the Monarchical anti democratic viewpoint, even not as the unfortunate, irrational, unhistorical, Shakespearean ten years tragedy we were promised in the first chapter. Even the proven plot and treason with brethren foreign kings to come and slaughter Brits, doesn't change the viewpoint . Why are these bunch of historians so biased against the people? Has Parliament and Democracy become a left-wing incendiary concept?

@jennyisle6646

3 жыл бұрын

The King was right, he was murdered by a bunch of power hungry thugs who cared nothing for the people! Why do you think parliament was killing Brits then? They were killing people for standing up to them and supporting their lawful king! The vast majority of the people did NOT want their king murdered! You might also consider that parliament did not extend the franchise to anyone, and they actively persecuted the Levellers who were after the vote for the common man! Charles was never guilty of treason, as he couldn't commit a crime against himself, and why shouldn't he seek help from abroad? That's exactly what parliament did when they teamed up with the Scots! And that act was EXACTLY treason! King Charles was a decent man, and you'd do yourself a massive favour by picking up a history book once in a while before you start using terms like Left Wing and Democracy that you obviously don't understand.

@billsmith5109

Жыл бұрын

@@jennyisle6646 Charles was just the dressed up progeny of the war lords, a stereotype of who is William the Bastard. Once warlords seized power they declared themselves king. There’s nothing lawful about monarchy. Lawful just meant they had had the power to enforce their will. Too bad the Levelers were shunted aside, and didn’t seize the reins.

power to the people, trump 2020!!!!

@chucku.farley3927

3 жыл бұрын

@The Geek Is Strong trump and Charles 1 are nothing alike, its not even a remote comparison. and I suspect that you are not American therefore your opinion means nothing, good day sir.

@chucku.farley3927

3 жыл бұрын

@The Geek Is Strong monarch you got nerve to talk about monarchs you people have been bowing down to kiss the same family's ass for how long now, and don't even get me started on education, remember we saved you people from the germans twice.

@chucku.farley3927

3 жыл бұрын

@The Geek Is Strong that flag ran you British off twice

@chucku.farley3927

3 жыл бұрын

@The Geek Is Strong that flag defeated you British twice

@chucku.farley3927

3 жыл бұрын

@The Geek Is Strong your history books lie

Gayest facial hair style of all time other than the mutton chop.

I'm sorry - just a question ! ...so ...during the Civil War the Scotts fought FOR Charles or AGAINST him??...PS. Wasn't he Scottish himself and King of Scotland ?