The BRUTAL Execution Of King Charles I
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 сен 2024
- One of the most notorious events in British History was the execution of the King of England and Scotland Charles I. He was the only King to have ever been executed and killed by his own people and by the order of Parliament. Charles himself was a rather poor king who had a number of different flaws which drove England into Civil War, the bloodiest conflict ever seen in England.
Charles I for a number of reasons was a terrible king, he spent large amounts of money and taxed people unfairly. He also dissolved and banned Parliament whenever he attracted criticism, one time even for 11 years. But most of all he believed in the 'Divine Right of Kings,' that he was appointed by God and instead was above the law. With all these criticisms, the Civil War began and Charles initially would win a number of battles but as the years went on, he ended up losing heavily and was captured.
Following this he was placed on trial and although refusing to co-operate he was judged to have been found guilty of treason against his subjects and people, and for this was sentenced to death. On the 30th January 1649 outside the Banqueting House in Whitehall, London on a freezing cold day the sentence of death was carried out. Charles would be beheaded with one clean strike of the axe by an anonymous executioner, and as the axe fell a sigh was let out by the huge crowd. For many the death of this tyrant ruler was a good thing, but for others the belief that they had killed a man appointed by God was too much.
So join us today as we look at 'The BRUTAL Execution Of King Charles I.'
Thanks for watching! Support the channel by subscribing, liking, and sharing.
Follow me on Twitter: / theuntoldpast
Follow me on Instagram: theuntoldpast
Disclaimer: All opinions and comment stated below in the Comments section do not represent the opinion of TheUntoldPast. All opinions and comments and dialogue should discuss the video above in a historical manner.
TheUntoldPast does not accept any racism, profanity, insults, sexism or any negative discussion aimed at an individual. TheUntoldPast has the right to delete any comment with this content inside it and also ban the user from the channel.
Music - I Am A Man Who Will Fight For Your Honour - Chris Zabriskie.
When Charles told his daughter, Elizabeth that she "will forget this," he didn't mean that she would forget the pain of their final meeting, but rather his fear was that, with her hysterical crying, she would forget what he was telling her to do. That poor girl died sad and deprived of comfort shortly after on the Isle of Wight and didn't even have a proper tombstone until much later when Queen Victoria commissioned a statue in her likeness for her memory.
Respectfully - and I realize vernacular changes with time - how are you certain about this? Thank you.
History has always been my favorite subject. Thank you for sharing.
Thanks for your comment mate!
Raven 666 999 I love history aswell just bothers me that the history we know was written by the winner and we're probably getting 10% of the actual truth my opinion ofcourse
@@drakesp9479 Agreed totally 👌
History is a fascinating subject indeed!!!👍😷
The fact that Cromwell’s inexperienced son Richard succeeded him as lord protector makes them not so much different to monarchy
Cromwell was just a power hungry hypocrite.
@@Elyseon where was THIS Cromwell when Henry viii was king.
@@lyndsaycrawford He wasn't freaking even born when Henry VIII was king.
@@zenodotusofathens2122 I’m aware of that, it was a joke Cos THOMAS Cromwell was henry viii chief minister then & Charles I was a saint compared to Henry VIII (that’s a bit of exaggeration but he was extremely tyrannical)
@@lyndsaycrawford Yes you are correct about Thomas Cromwell and Oliver being relatives. Nice to see you know your history.
Charles II actually had to flee for his life, not long after Charles I was executed. He narrowly escaped being captured and possibly losing his own head. He spent nine years in exile, until Cromwell's death and the chaos that followed, which ended with him being invited to claim the throne in 1660.
Oddish43. When Charles II came to the throne and Cromwell was exhumed and beheaded. Petty or what ?
@@stephengibson4823 Yes. But several of the men who signed Charles I's death warrant were also executed by torture. A number of others were imprisoned for life. While the Restoration was far less bloody than it could have been, it was still a nasty business for some.
@@oddish4352 Without being disrespectful what has this to do with my comment? I am well aware of these people and maybe, who knows, they got their just desserts. Don't you think exhuming bodies to "execute" them not totally absurd? I say bodies because Blake, Bradshaw and Ireton also received the same treatment. What possible message could this send out? I think the executions and imprisonments of the living conspirators would have sufficed don't you?
Should we exhume everyone who escaped a legal execution by dying of "natural causes" and treat them the same. We don't have the death penalty here in the UK. If we did and the likes of Fred West and Harold Shipman were duly sentenced before committing suicide do you think we should still have dragged their bodies out and hung them/ They hanged Cromwell, threw him into a pit and THEN cut his head off. This was three years AFTER his death! A bit messy and totally over the top, even for a corpse . It was an unnecessary petty whim instructed to be justified by law by Charles II
Ever heard of "The Wilmslow Boy"? An old film but illustrates the absurdity of the "law" sometimes.
Sorry for the long reply.
@@stephengibson4823 It's a symbolic gesture, obviously. Means you cannot escape execution for killing a King even after you're dead. Petty? Maybe. But what if it was YOUR father those men had killed? Perhaps you would understand then the motivation behind such actions.
@@JcRabbit Ok, Lets imagine it was my father. My answer would be still the same. I wouldn't order an exhumation of a virtually rotted corpse to execute. The symbolic gesture would probably have been a hollow one in the eyes of what was probably a hugely ignorant and illiterate populace already from post civil war hardship. Did hundreds turn out to watch these executions? (serious question because I have no idea) and did it REALLY act as a deterrent for the future? The live executions showed that they couldn't escape killing even years later but the corpses? As I said Petty.
Excellent video thank you.
I've been to Cromwell's house a few times and seen his death mask, very interesting... Also got a civil war battlefield a stone's throw from my home, played there as a kid- maybe why history fascinates me now.
Cheers 👍🏻👍🏻
"His shyness made him come across as arrogant." I felt that one.
Years after leaving high school, it was brought to my attention that I was considered snotty and aloof by other students...that I wasn't friendly because I thought I was better than other people. 😳
Nope...I was just debilitatingly, soul-crushingly shy. 😕
Me too!
@@Terri_MacKay You're not alone.
Yup
I feel it too. Add to that I have poor facial recognition (Prosopagnosia) and sometimes fail to recognize people out of the environment I was accustomed to seeing them. I can visibly see they take offense if I admit I don’t recognize them.
I felt so bad for his daughter I had to find out what happened to her. Did she forget? Did she live happily eventually?
She died shortly after from pneumonia, resting on her bible that was given to her by her dad before his death. Very sad.
“In his first 4 years he dissolved parliament 3 times ... one of which was for 11 years” that doesn’t even add up for fucks sake
It does if its the last time
Parliaments were only called by the King when needed. He dissolved parliament in 1629 for 11 years and it became his Personal Rule period. Because of the Bishops Wars from 1638 to 1640/41, Charles called the Short Parliament to raise money for his war against the Covenanters. This failed so he dissolved the Short Parliament and recalled it again which became the Long Parliament in 1640. Charles's government failed because of Scotland and Ireland. Parliament blamed the King's advisors especially Strafford who was executed by attainder in 1641. The Root and Branch Bill was designed to reform the Laudian church and the bishops were abolished in 1641. There was then the Protestation and the Grand Remonstrance which strained relations between the two sides. Charles left London for York and so started the Paper Wars. Defensive measures by both sides through Parliament's Militia Ordinance and Charles's Commision of Array meant the country drifted into war. In 1643 parliament and the Scots signed the Solemn League and Covenant and the Scots entered the first civil war in 1644 which proved decisive for parliament. The advent of the New Model Army in Feb, 1645 sealed the fate of Charles. Meanwhile he agrred the Irish Cessation so he could bring troops over to help him. The first civil war finished in 1646 with mopping up actions against the royalists. Charles played for time from 1646 to raise another army even though he had surrendered to the Scots who handed him over to the English. Risings in 1648 turned into the second civil war which finished with the end of the siege of Pontefract in 1649 after Charles had been killed. The third civil war lasted to 1651 with the destruction of the Irish army and massacres, and the defeat of the Scots.
An extra shirt so he wouldn't shiver and appear weak before death...
Damn
That poor girl. How traumatic must that meeting have been.
I thought I read on wiki how Charles daughter was moved from one place to the other, fell sick and died, full of melancholy? Legend has it they found her dead, with her head on her open bible, which her father gave when they said farewell. She had been reading her last moments her dad's bible. Don't know if this is right but it was so heartwrenching even if it's a tale
Elizabeth died at Carisbrooke Castle, which is a twenty-minute walk from where I live, she was secretly buried within Newport Minster church which fell into ruin, but in Victoria's reign it was renovated and they found her grave near the alter. Victoria and Albert then had a statue made of her with her lying down on her pillow with the bible beside her, which is how they found her, it's a fitting memorial for the poor little heartbroken girl.
A made up story.
@Falhawk73 10% kind of correct and 90% fresh steamy bullcrap is how the British monarchy try to write their history. The royals are like purebred dogs at dog shows. Inbreeding is acceptable, their usefulness is always in question, they are strutted around for public viewing and are judged soley on visual perception only, and the only thing they do well is to primp and pose and show off their rosettas and trophies.
And just like the history of royals and purebred dogs, it is either grossly embellished or an outright fib.
Does anyone else think melancholy is such a strange word? I know it's essentially the deepest sadness one can feel, but it sounds like such a jolly word. Makes me think of puppies and sunshine.
@@anthonyquantrill119
And even so, if YOU were a monarch you wouldn't really act much different...
Imagine walking to chopping block, knowing you had impunity over everyone present as King not long before?!
unbelievable
Now if only Elizabeth can be dragged to the block for her part.
"Sweet heart you will forget this" ;_; that sounds like something my father would say to me under similar circumstances.
Damn you ain’t had to get that dark
@@vihockeyguy1 Made me think of my pops:( I will go hug him now.
@@mayettaxtriger436 oh nvm I went a much different route in my head
@@vihockeyguy1 Not sure what you mean but ok lol xD
1641:
Courtier, "Your Majesty the Irish are revolting!"
Charles I, "The Irish have always been revolting"
Now we know why Harry and Meagan got the hell out of England .
🤣
The only thing Boris Johnson & Oliver Cromwell have got in common is a bad haircut
Meh, she's a gold digging hag and he's a model beta
Brilliant I had a feeling you would be doing him. Nice 1 untoldpast 👍😃
Thanks for your support as always Simon! He's certainly an interesting chap! Another one coming up soon, Rasputin!
@@TheUntoldPast YEAHHHH fantastic. Can't wait for that.
Beautiful portraits . Great video.
Not nearly as brutal as the deaths of those he and his predecessors and successors foisted on the common people.
Agreed, it has been settled before us, no person is above God or the law.
@@violent_bebop9687 or against the power of humanity!
Hear, hear.
Unless we agree that ALL executions are brutal, this one seems pretty tame.
Being conscious after being beheaded is brutal af it’s like 10 seconds before you actually die
@@The_Dodge_Meister Agreed. I think I'd still choose that over breaking on the wheel, gibbeting, crucifixion, stoning, death by 1000 cuts, burning, boiling, impalement, disembowelment, being sewn into a sack with a bunch of animals and thrown into a body of water, or many other cruel historical inventions.
I really liked the Banqueting House, well worth a visit, The ceiling is beautiful. Cant wait to visit again
Imagine being a 'hangman' for a job..
Man, those were some tough times..
Read a book called ''The Faithful Executioner'' It's brilliant
@@Gallowglass7great recommendation. It is a really good book.
@@TheSaltyBitch Yeah, it's one of my favourites! Great book
Executioner : " CHOP ! ....there now...how do you feel ? "
Prisoner : " Not so good .....sore throat you know..."
Some other videos said the execution block was so low because it was one used to behead people’s bodies if they died before their sentence was carried out (which they apparently did), and someone picked it as a final insult.
Nice. I'm currently reading "A coffin for King Charles"
Ty I've been looking forward to this one
I think he thought he had Divine Right, and that was his downfall.🌹
Thanks for your comment Elizabeth, I agree. His faith in the Divine Right placed him in his eyes higher than the law. He was a flawed King, but maybe the execution was un-necessary.
Yes he believed in divine rule but he also knew that he ruled by the good tidings of the English people. While he was seen as a a tyrant (11 years of personal rule) it took two English Civil wars to actually get enough people on side to sign the death warrant.
But lutherans thought the same though? The divinity of kings in lutheran thought is even greater maybe as they saw princes as final vicars on earth while the pope was above kings on earth for catholics? Maybe it is not the same completely but many German princes were swayed into luteranism because they would have greater acknowledged power, it also convinced Henry viii info reformation... how is it bad for Charles to have thought in that time to believe in kingly divinity but not for protestants
If you are any branch of Christianity, and believe in the institution of Monarchy. It is then logical to believe God has raised them up to that station in life. With that they are the law and as Rivers flow to the sea; they are above the law, as their word is the law. They only needed Parliament for taxes to prevent riots and Civil War.
I don't care for that form of Monarchy, myself but Charles I logic makes perfect sense to me. Given the beliefs at the time and Cromwell set his self up as King except in name Lord Protector instead
@@kirkmorrison6131 totally agree. He ruled with the same logic as every other king back then. He wasn’t perfect but I’m not aware of any monarch who was & Cromwell was a total nightmare who became king in everything but name. All for the monarchy to be restored & his son to succeed him anyway. I don’t believe his execution was necessary or truly for the good of the people.
Thank you for such a shocking slice of our bloody history.
Slice... 😆
Okay, how did he dissolve parliament 3 times, once for 11 years, in a 4 year period?
Maybe he dissolved the parliament 2x early in his reign + then 1 more time before 4 years of his reign and then had no parliament for 11 years.
Because an order and the following act are two entirely different things.
Charles had an older brother Henry who would have made a good king but he unfortunately died young.
Barbaric? It only took one blow of the axe. I don't know of a more humane way to do it. The war that precipitated his execution was entirely preventable by him. He had only to agree to a limit of his powers and share it. The deaths he caused by war were barbaric. Compromise is required for good governance.
Yep, had he recognized the court that was trying him and compromised rather than trying to prolong the war, he would have lived. The judges in his trial were ready to negotiate right up until the end.
I have tried over the years to understand the time of history you make so many videos of. The truth needs to come from someone like yourself and I am very grateful for it. Keep up the good work, it is beyond interesting to watch and learn.
Thank you for all you do!
Moonpie
Cromwell actually at first was against charles's execution
What good is 'at first'.
@@Accelerate55 better than after the fact
@@1150Mikes did he ever express regret or condemnation?
Cromwell did all he could to avoid the execution and offered the King a number of ways to keep the crown while sharing power with parliament and Charles insisted he and he alone had the right rule with absolute power. So he chopped his own head off because he was a moron.
@@oleeb how did it turn out for Englandistan?
“Col. Frances Hacker” told him it was time to lose his head. Am I the only one greatly amused by this?
Francis Hacker, King Charles I and Oliver Cromwell all belonged to the same Freemasonic Lodge.
@@takohamoolsen2432 That makes it all the more messed up.
@@amberswafford9305 Obviously Charles was getting too big for his boots and the Lodge decided it was time for him to go.
If Cromwell had lost the war it would be his head rolling, i think it was fair
Definitely!
He did eventually lose his head when dead as his body was dug up and his head put on a spike.
@@permaveg who cares , on dead people hurts a lot
So should end the life of all traitors
@Lance Night Yes I know, see my earlier comment, although how that hurts an already dead man I don't know.
So he was Mary Queen of Scots grandson. I see there were some similarities between their personalities and their reasoning as far as divinity r concerned.
Good point!
My ancestor, Hugh Peter, was arguably the priest on the platform and a conspirator. I have an editorial cartoon from the day. He died badly.
@RexWave
That, if true is an incredible piece of historical information !
Have you or anyone else ever approached/been approached by Media of any kind ?
@@BrodyLuv2 , never. My grandfather had the cartoon, a woodcut, told me part of the story and later bequeathed me the cartoon because I was one of only two grandkids that were interested. I filled in the details by modern reading. Wikipedia has an article about him. My grandfather had a storied life himself.
I heard that he told the executioner to wait until he spread his arms before killing him. 😭😭😭
They say the best thing he ever accomplished was the manner in which he met his Death - he died like a King anyway....
Beheading was seen as a 'merciful' end due to its swiftness, the usual execution method was slow hanging or for traitors, hung, drawn and quartered.
I am a firm believer in the death penalty especially if one's crimes are particularly cruel in nature. I see some on here saying "no matter the crime..." that is because they have never seen what a truly heinous crime looks like first hand. They have never dealt with the fallout or had to explain to a family member their loved one was sadistically raped, tortured, mutilated, and killed for no reason.
Another great video. Why dont you podcast
Really enjoyed the attention to detail👍🏻I definitely found myself thinking “poor bastard” when giving the account of his last night on earth. I’ve always really respected the fact that he wore that extra shirt. Saying that, with Scottish blood he should’ve been able to handle a wee chill without shaking
He wore the extra shirt because he didn't want his enemies to think he was trembling on the scaffold out of fear.
@@permaveg I know that, that’s why I’ve always respected him, it’s brave. I was only joking about the Scottish blood thing.
I believe that Charles spent copious amounts of money on his warship Sovereign of the Seas which didn't exactly go unnoticed. Probably a contributory cause for getting the people a bit cross too! Great video!
Thanks for your comment mate!
Ironic as the Navy went over to Parliament.
I don’t believe he did anything that any other monarch wasn’t guilty off. Bad timing for him that there was consequences for acting like a king chose by God.
your videos make me think like im still in on the spot witnessing all events hats off to you mate.
Thanks for this video!
12:10 Interesting, the text on the portrait is written in Swedish!
Would you please tell what it said, if you know? Thank you
@@laurakuhn8743 Well it's a Swedish spelling(even his name) a direct translate is, and it's row by row from left to right and not by column(as you should read it)!
Charles I Stuart - King of
England, Scotland - and Ireland.
Born 1600 the 29 Nov- decapitated 1649 the 9 February
Note that "halsh". is a shortened for "halshuggen" that mean decapitated/beheaded!
Hope this will help you understand!
@@Fred-ck1gh Thank you very much. It did help me.
History judged it to be a mistake as after Cromwell's death his body was exhumed and he was posthumously executed (one of the strangest sentences in history) and his head put on display as a traitor as the monarchy was restored.
Yes! My daily dose of brutality. And no, I don't want to be friends with any dictators.
😂
Parliment had to rebuke Charles 2 and with the Glorious Revolution Charles 2 was deposed.
If anyone wants to see a movie that gives a good feel for the issues surrounding the Civil War and the execution of Charles I try "Cromwell" starring Richard Harris (in one of his best roles as Oliver Cromwell) and Alec Guiness (Charles I). 2h and 19m is not long enough for full historical accuracy but the issues are portrayed accurately - and its a damn good film!
Superb performances. Harris's' best I think. Guiness's superiority, haughtiness and dumbfoundedness at his sentencing is spot on.
The film is inaccurate in many ways, for one it portrays Cromwell fighting at the first major battle at Edgehill, but in reality, he arrived at Edgehill when the battle had finished.
@@permaveg Yes, but the major issues are presented well.
@@scottgoodman8993 Perhaps, but some of the major players in the run-up to, and during the war, aren't even mentioned, and Cromwells part in the war is greatly exaggerated and numerous quotes are attributed to the wrong people, its a good film for beginners to the Civil war though.
@@permaveg Please do read comments carefully. I'm well aware that the film is not entirely accurate and said so. The Civil War was a very fraught period often setting brother against brother and it is this atmosphere that the film captured so well.
Bishop: “Wait, what was that middle thing again”?
Fantastic content. Subscribed.
Thanks for the great video :) so interesting!
The brutal and horrific deaths of the regicides would be the perfect follow up to this.
I fear injections and this guy was afraid of looking like a coward for fearing an execution!
If only the Restoration hadn't taken place with Charles ll 🤔 .
Poor guy never got to live to see the epic 1650's :(
😂😂😂 the good auld days
@@lyndsaycrawford 😂
The execution of Charles I was far from barbaric or brutal for those ages. The punishment meted out to the regicides that were still alive some 12 years later was brutal.
Of the regicides who were executed, their executions were undoubtedly more brutal than Charles I although many regicides got off lightly by being imprisoned for life.
One thing I found interesting is that those who plotted to have him executed ended up being executed themselves when the monarchy was re-established. Cromwell himself and one of his hated generals were posthumously hung, drawn and quartered, his head placed on a spike. I've seen very few write ups about the fate of the parliamentarians that Cromwell lead. Maybe you could do an episode on that?
I’d recommend Charles Spencer’s book Killers of the King - it’s all about Charles II’s quest for vengeance against those who executed his father and what their fates were. His book To Catch a King is also a very good read about Charles II’s six weeks on the run as the most wanted man in England.
@@JJDoggett Thanks a lot, DJK: I will order both those books: I'd been looking for a book on the fate of those who had condemned the king for a while, now. Very much appreciated - have a great Christmas and New Year.
@@jackspring7709 no worries at all, hope you enjoy them I certainly found them very interesting and entertainingly written. You could also try The Tyrannicide Brief by Geoffrey Robertson, which has a focus on John Cooke who led the prosecution of Charles.
Thanks, you too!
@@JJDoggett Just reading the Kings Killers now, and I'm going to check out the Geoffrey Robertson book next. Thanks again for the suggestions: Happy New year!
Cromwell's severed head was on display for decades before becoming a bit of a sideshow curiosity. There is an interesting video somewhere here on RUclips about it and where his head might be today.
Clare ridway does tudor england .you and her would be great podcast
Yessss I love untold history and Claire together 💕💕💕💕
6:41: How do you come UP with moustaches like that??🤣🤦♂️
brilliant video thank you
I think he didn't stand a chance because of who his father was, the English were probably fed up with the whole family thus his downfall...so sad😢
He was a bloody tyrant. Cruelest of the cruel, and he let his men do awful things to the people. He got what he deserved.
Quality videos!!!!!!!!
Charles I looks alot like Alec Guinness to me.
Alec Guinness played Charles I in the 1970 film Cromwell.
Yeah I can see what you mean z spooky
Great, now i can't unsee Obi-wan Kenobi
Which is why they cast Alec Guinness as Charles I in 1970's 'Cromwell', with Richard Harris.
They should have played in the background Beherit - Bardo Exist, at his exeution.
For anyone interested in further reading I'd recommend "The Tyrannicide Brief" by Geoffrey Robertson QC, a leading human rights lawyer and UN war-crimes judge.
So, who's for leading the shambolic Windsors to the block then, eh?
Brilliant video Charles shares the Same birthday as me and died on my auntie Andreas birthday
Brutal? Nothing "brutal" about a single axe blow.
When Charles II returned from exile, many former Roundheads were hung, drawn and quartered.
That's brutal.
Not more barbaric than death sentence as such. And how barbaric was it to wage war against his own people just to ensure his absolute power?
Who knew Daniel Radcliffe looked like Charles I?
You can’t put a crown on a clown and expect a king
I love your videos
Charles stubbornly clung to the concept of an unchangeable Autocrat, something England had outgrown in the public mind. There were at least enough who believed in a Parliamentary, representative government that the Civil War went against him. Never again was there to be an absolute monarch on the English Throne. Much of the dissatisfaction was due to Charles ever increasing need for money to support a lavish court and his Catholic wife. There wasn't enough opposition against the king to make the certain, but sufficient numbers of Lords and Gentry as well as the common people sided with the Parlimentarians to cause the defeat of the Royalists. After the defeat of the kings forces there was no turning back. Reinstatement of the king would result in the death of the Parliamentarians or at least threatened it. The ever increasing search for more money for the kings armies to oppose the Irish and the Scottish armies threatening the realm and the need to support a lavish court and his Catholic wife, encouraged the Enclosure Laws and other abrogations of the rights of the common man that created the opposition required for a successful Civil war against the King. If Charles had been less inept and sensitive to his opposition perhaps the Civil war could have been avoided, but it was not to be. Once entered into, the Parliamentarians would have had tu be extraordinarily skillful to avoid Royal retribution if they did not successfully prosecute the war to its almost unavoidable end in the execution of their king. If Charles had been less strongly committed to the Divine Rights of Kings, and his Autocratic viewpoints, perhaps even Cromwell and his New Model Army would have been more amenable to some settlement, but the King remained unmovable and in a very real way sealed his own fate.
He is a martyr. He died for God and Country. Blessed King Charles I, pray for us. ✝️🏴
I see this as no more savage or barbaric then any other execution in England up to the 19th century , he was a king only by accident of birth and believed that accident was a message from god
I live near so many places associated with the Civil War, Im fascinared by it. Was the execution a necessary evil? Charles was given so many chances to work with parliament but refused to do so. Would our nation be so stable now had it not been for the trauma of the civil war?
Considering the utter failures of parliament following his execution I think Charles I was vindicated. 🤷♂️💯
The Scorpio King ♏👽
Ah! The good old days.💔
I've attended full-blown raves at his Sons old gaff, Elizabeth Castle, Jersey, don't know how happy he'd be about that, lol 🤝
Well this coated the evening with a layer of melancholy.
It was no more savage and barbaric than the punishments meted out to Charles' subjects when he was in charge, and he was a despot who betrayed his people. The purpose of such punishments was to scare the shit out of people generally, and this one served as an example to subsequent kings of England not to mess us about. It was a salutary lesson which seems to have worked. No one should be above the law, not even the monarch.
Guy Fawkes' crew would have envied the execution method of Charles I.
That was brilliant. Well done.
@12:20 - Wow I didn’t know that. Our King, His Majesty King David Kalākaua was also known as “The Merrie Monarch” because he brought the hula back from kapu.
Strange that Chuck I was one of the shortest monarchs (even shorter after his bonce was removed) and Chuck II was one of the tallest, yet their statues in Worcester, UK are the same height.
Charles I was beheaded. Charlie II ran a jolly show with plague, failed wars, fires, intrigues and mistresses. Now we have a strange new Charles III coming up to bat soon. Ready to tilt his shaft at the Windmill of Climate Change and any other idea he takes a fancy to.
Charles was a king NOT a dictator . How dare Cromwell and Parliament behead their king
The king of England !
Times were changing and Parliament wanted to limit his powers.
Charles wasn't having that so they limited his Reign.
I don't think anyone was suggesting Charles l was a 'dictator'
He was given the opportunity to Rule England with Parliament.
Just as Elizabeth ll Rules Britain Today.
Poor man. He wasn't ready for this role, but it was thrusted upon him.
Charlie - boy was a bit -of -a-"rotter"! To be fair??
LESSON: Don't dissolve Parliament, especially for your own gains and machinations.
From the description "Charles I for a number of reasons was a terrible king, he spent large amounts of money and taxed people unfairly. He also dissolved and banned Parliament whenever he attracted criticism, one time even for 11 years. But most of all he believed in the 'Divine Right of Kings,' that he was appointed by God and instead was above the law. With all these criticisms, the Civil War began and Charles initially would win a number of battles but as the years went on, he ended up losing heavily and was captured." Just replace Charles I with Biden, Parliament with congress, Kings with democratic presidents, and you can see into the future.
England betrayed The True Faith as well as their true King. Smh
Good start. Should have kept it going.
Awesome breakdown
The only King who actually loves and loved by his children
Is he the only king in England that got executed? Don't know much about English kings.
Quite a few have been killed/murdered but not in public judicially. Edward II was imprisoned and said to have been killed by having a red hot poker inserted into his anus. Richard II was imprisoned and probably starved to death. Mary Queen of Scots was beheaded in private
Henry vi Edward v, a few 🥴
Only queens- Anne Boleyn, Katherine Howard, Queen Jane Grey & Mary Queen of Scots.
@@lyndsaycrawford Also William II. Then Scots kings- James I ofc, then I swear every king in the 11th century had killed their predecessor... then if you go back to the Saxon kings there was Edward the Martyr, Edmund I, Edmund II & Ethelred II.
King Charles , my Daddy
Lost his throne .
And Kings were banded
They chopped off his head
And Olly Cromwell ruled the land .
Old olly wasn't jolly
He was glum and he was proud
Miserable as sin but sinning is not allowed
@@Dryadkal When Olly died , the people said . Charlie me hearty ? Get rid of his dual rules ; come back we’d rather party !
@@PeterPan54167 this action is what they called the monarchy restoration!
Which was naturally followed by huge celebration!
All hail, the king lets sing, jing ,jing
My name is, my name is.....
@@lyndsaycrawford My Name is , Charles the II .
The death penalty is so abhorrent, no matter how heinous that one may deserve it. I wonder how much weight was placed on Charles marrying a Catholic contributed to the execution?
King’s are held in the tower and befall to “illness” or a “fall”, not executed. Tragic really.
He persisted in trying to restart the civil war allying with the Scots to invade England before losing the second civil war. At this stage 10% of the male population of the UK had died in the wars. Was their deaths any less tragic than his? A public execution underlined the supremacy of Parliament, a matter not disputed since (despite the restoration).