Glorious Revolution Documentary

[Crazy4TheWeekend]

Well there were a lot of errors in that.... so that won't be helping my essay much

[heytherefellah]

& i hate ap euro lol..

[heytherefellah]

this helped me a lot. ty.

[NattligMelodi]

Who cares? To hell with England. There's a reason we revolted against them.

[MightyPopzilla]

Elizabeth took the throne in 1558, not 1600. I am glad that you have an interest in history, but you should always double check your facts first because that is a major error.

[Earthlinggb]

I'm just very pleased to see teenagers actually putting something together which covers such an important topic which effects the United Kingdom even today. It is vitally important that our children gain as insightful a knowledge of our history as is possible because this country is currently going through framatic changes which, if our kids have no interest in our history and law, they will end up literal slaves. So my thanks to these girls and please continue the study. Pls ignore the ignorant

[cattybritt92lynn]

Great Job Girls!

[mango2005]

Several mistakes:

- Elizabeth became Queen in 1558 - not 1600!

- Charles II was Protestant until on his deathbed in 1685. He did not persecute Protestants unless they were dissenters. The Anglican Protestants wanted to persecute Catholics and dissenters.

- The "ridiculous" Declaration of Indulgence didn't persecute anyone. It just ended religious persecution for everyone.

[JediMasterCheryl]

So where was King Edward - he may have died young but you completely left out his succession between Henry VIII and Mary.

Get your facts straight.

[bicyclethief2nd]

OK a little superficial and colouredby 'American' values but quite a good quick intro from its roots in 1509 to James II ... pity it cuts off at the end

[unassumption]

Possibly stretches back a little too far but background is always useful. Until the heir was born William would have become monarch on Jame's death, given his old age predicted imminent; the impact of revolution returned things to the position they had been prior to Mary giving a male heir. Jame's preference for freedom of conscience may have been more revolutionary if it had been given a chance to be enacted. Absolute monarchy was unlikely at this point, the effect of revolution not SO great.

[HaiLsKuNkY]

Glorious Revolution was about the merger of the British east India company and the dominant Dutch east India company. that why William was invited to invade by the Tories . without the Dutch teaching us their financial skills the British empire wouldn't of had India the biggest economy of the time.

[alexthemod1]

the first thing any historian, or teacher, will tell you about this period of British history is that religion and politics were completely intertwined. The question your trying to answer is a little superfluous, but you did a good job anyway.

[mrfrostynova]

Fuckin amateurish and entirely wrong conclusion. Good thing history is written by educated scholars not by ignorants posting factually incorrect youtube videos.

[sjfleming91]

@mrfrostynova Good thing history isn't written by those who spend their time criticizing a high school project and the biggest word in their vocabulary is the f word.

[Sigolet]

@mrfrostynova

Instead of berating the teenagers who made this video, why don't you point out the errors and set the record straight.

Calling these kids "ignorant' or tossing around the "f" word says more about the state of your education, I think, than any innocent errors made in good faith by a couple of high school students living on another continent.

How about a sample of your splendid knowledge, mrfrostynova? Eh?

[666xurxo]

@Sigolet Errors are understandable.Blatant lies are not

-Cromwell was a blood stained Dictator more prone to absolute power than Charles I.Not a Democratic Leader

-Charles II was a Protestant.Not a protestans Slayer.

-James II never vowed to RESTORE Catholicism

-The Declaration of Indulgence was actually an attempt to provide the people with Religious Freedom in a Protestant country

-Then followed a Dutch invasion of GB to avoid it and ensure ONLY Protestantism

[mscocorosie]

@mrfrostynova

Yeah. Fuck you. We all have to do school projects. gosh. She probably worked really hard on it to get an A not to impress you and the rest of the historical community.

[davetomhyland]

Without doubt the most inaccurate video I have ever seen. Please do research before you make a video. Also to state that it was ridiculous for catholics to get rights is a disgrace. I am sorry but American self indulgence came in here also where your professor talks about how U.S.A have a democracy. You had a lot of bloodshed to achieve that and lets face it none of you are native Americans. My advice research before you make up stuff.

[wrecklessnewt]

Congratulations. Nice, focused study. A few notes: Puritan/Parliamentarian army was not smaller than the Royalist one; Charles I was executed in Jan. 1649, not 1647; Charles II was not hated for persecuting opponents of his Father, but distrusted for trying to ease religious persecution (Parliament was responsible for most persecution); James's Declarations of Indulgence (there were two) might have been foolish to issue through the existing Anglican churches, but it was hardly ridiculous.

[nashalomblay]

i like the narnia music in the background :)

[mackenziecarlton]

What about Edward VI ? He was not even mentioned... Wasnt he King before Mary was queen?

[Vladivostok41]

Yeah, that RIDICULOUS law that gave Catholics rights. lol

[dmax631]

@Vladivostok41 the quebec act of 1774, which gave catholics rights, is one of the things that started the american revolution

[bayyoumi]

Who said Charles I is catholic? Any evidence?

Though I'm not surprised that he might be so.

[GoldenQuiet]

Try going in chronological order when telling history, starting with the Cavaliers and the Roundheads in the 1640's and the beheading of Cromwell, and onward through the periods of Restoration in 1660, the actual Glorious Revolution in 1688, and the English Bill Of Rights signed by Mary and William. Remember, history is a story not just facts. (:

[juultjuh99]

You hardly call the Dutch in your documentary while it was because of them that England did not become Catholic and became prosperous. Give the Dutch some credit I know its hard to admit that an other nation had a great impact of your nations succes but in it is the truth.

[Rotebuehl1]

This is incorrect! Catherine of Aragon gave Henry VIII a son and a daughter, omly the daughter surviving

[DavidCameronPM]

Raaaaaa.... England is NOT Britain! Scots were just as crucial to the Protestant reformation!

[michaelbyrnes2012]

This documentary is excellent in giving an lucid overview of a period of English history which had far-reaching effects, all in a mere ten minutes. Well done.

[Woodlander65]

It was a bloodless coup, and the people of England welcomed it all with open arms.

[TenderTrap86]

The "Glorious Revolution" was funded by London and Amsterdam financiers who came to the conclusion that the Stuarts would never charter a private central bank. So, three years after the Jacobite's crushing loss at the Boyne in 1691, the Bank of England was created. The BoE is the most powerful force in the UK since it controls the line of credit for the nation. How else could have Britain became the mighty power it was without massive debts incurred to fund their international endeavors?

[Camouflage16]

ok so when you talked about James the VII why did you show a picture of James the II of Scotland???

[frenchmotorbike]

This is not History. This is propaganda! Was the revolution a fight between king and a democratic Parliament? Lol! That parliament was the House of Lords (a small body of highest nobles and bishops) and the House of Commons (the richest men elected among the country gentry and the towns burgesses), i.e. 5% of the english people. Where is democracy? In the 95% powerless people. Actually this revolution was between king and aristocracy, between catholics and protestants.

[Hkepfer]

Why no mention of the people QEI, KJI & Cromwell put to death?

[MrNicks86]

mickey mouse history

[MrKilroi]

Elizabeth I 1558-1603 James I 1603-1625

Kinda hard to have to Monarchs at the same time..

fact checking is a wonderful thing...

[AntiquityCentury21]

How did I guess there would be attacks against this stupid "Yank" documentary. It looks like a couple of students did it to me, so give them a break.

[ryko26]

Another dumbed down yank version of history

[tyso7540]

Overly simplistic and full of holes. One star.

[vanderbilt887]

Why is it on nearly every video I watch that even remotely relates vis-a-vis history, I must encounter at least one nationalist sprawling his own side of history - always in favour, I needn't mention, of his own "glorious nation".

[mango2005]

From an Irish perspective, the removal of James meant 140 years of anti-Catholic Penal Laws including: banned from having an education, buying land, entering many professions, inheriting an undivided estate. If your cousin was a Protestant he could take all your land from you. If all the children were Catholic the land had to be subdivided. This contributed to the Famine in the 1840's.

[Talbot6832]

@mango2005 Shit happens.

[eltuyllio]

This documentary is a huge fail. The Dutch Republic planned, financed and executed the invasion of England.

Why? Because the threat of England and France ganging up on the Republic (like in 1672) was too big. The whole "invitation" was propaganda spread by the Dutch.

[Talbot6832]

@eltuyllio But what a way to shoot yourself in the foot. The change in foreign policy that occurred as a result of William of Orange coming to the throne meant Britain rapidly developed into a major power eclipsing the Dutch completely both military and economically. Saying that, had William III not secured England's men and resources to fight Louis XIV, Blenheim may not have happened so fortuitously and Europe could be under a mutated Bourbon yoke.

[HappyDragonite]

THANKS!

[bethanmuffintop]

Thank you so much for this! it is so imformative without unnessicsary crap! Im doing an essay on the glorious revolution in my second year at univeristy and this has helped me get my head arooun it. CHEERS! x

[tyso7540]

@bethanmuffintop Wow, you're in university and need to turn to YouTube to make sense of the Glorious Revolution?

Get back to high school you idiot.

[1963gecko]

@bethanmuffintop, as you are very intelligent, I would ask you to search out the bill of right 1689

[Nicollie1062]

@bethanmuffintop i know you wrote this a year ago,..but you do realize that doing your university essay based on a high school students' youtube video is ridiculous!! They made several key mistakes in this video (mistakes that could have been avoided with fact-checking)..and you're going to "get your head around it"??

[Beroean30]

Actually by the time of the house of Hanover, the monarchy was a figurehead. Especially since George 1st couldnt speak english and this gave rise to the office of Prime Minister. Even the taxes and laws levied on the colonies which not all colonies rebelled, most of the greviances were based on acts of Parliament. George was more of a symbol than actually ruler.

[DonMeaker]

And George III spent much of his time thought mad, (probably suffering from poryphria)

[Beroean30]

missionaries that killed or stole souls

[kakashiknives]

i cant believe i had to watch this for homework

[yupsta441]

Thanks! You just did my homework! :D

hahaha, alright!

[willcobbett]

Crap. Try the hot pokers and the Iron maiden of the Jesuits if you want absolutism.

Georgians were defending the Reformation from the Vatican inspired communist French Revolution.

[Asskicker32294]

Good work...

[kayte64]

This is really well made. We watched this video in a History lesson at school. Yeah, your video has "crossed the pond". Lmao :)

[mcgrathpat]

Ya it was 1649, the civil war ended then and he was put to trial, obviously he lost......therefor lost his head in 1649. Where the fuck do these yanks get their information from? That the second video thats said 1647. Fuckin idiots.

[windingstad]

Well done, girls:)

[Todesengelxx3]

This is SO SO SO made for the National History Day project

[iufreak18]

AWESOME DOCUMENTARY

[JediMasterCheryl]

Girls girls girls...Charles I was beheaded in 1649 NOT 1647.

Not having such a widely known date correct discredits your production no matter how good it appears.

A- from me but then you probably won't have me as a history professor will you?

[seansemple]

bias much?

[metocman]

excellent documentary guys, well done!

[RandlesBear]

Would have been good to hear about the problems caused by the exiled Stuart line, ie the Jacobite rebellions which saw very bloody conflicts on British soil (most notably the battles of Boyne and Culldonian). The Glorious revolution was not bloodless. Despite this i thought this was really good, i think it was done very well, plus im glas you picked up on how repressive Cronwell actually was. Which many overlook. 5 stars i think.

[ArtsyFartsyGal]

Well, blame the traitors in England who couldn't tolerate fairness for all.

James II wouldn't have involved England in a very costly war with France, which is just what William did.

[RandlesBear]

"fairness for all" what are you talking about try telling that to the Catholics of the time.

[ArtsyFartsyGal]

Read my posting again.

The traitors were those who "invited" William of Orange to invade their country.

They couldn't tolerate Catholics.

[willcobbett]

The Catholics of the time acted as foreign agents of the Jesuits - killers appointed by the Pope.

[RandlesBear]

Jesuits were not killers but missionaries

[willcobbett]

Bwahahahahahahahahaha - o wait - your serious... fail... eipc fail.

papist dog James II lost his throne for his reprobate nature and his adherence to the papal Antichrist throne. Scum