So what's changed ? Now we have the 'Devine Right' Of Corperate & Central Bank Share-holders who are eroding our civil liberties with their puppet army of tax-fiddling law-makers they funded & media promoted into power positions that are answerable to 27 publicly un-elected members of the EU & a President very few have even heard of who is answerable to .... ??? ;-)
I am happy that we have the Monarchy, I would never want England to become a Republic, but I am happy the civil war took place. I don't believe the King or Queen should have absolute power which is basically what it was before all of this. The system we have today is a good system which is why it has been there for 500 yrs.
@xxMrFablexx Good question, its that in a republic there is a president that is the head of state whereas in a Monarchy the King/Queen is head of state and in modern times has a government to govern for them.
Thanks so much! History Exam this afternoon and the causes of the English Civil War is a potential essay question. First place I've seen all the relevant information in one place like this, instead of having to sift through pages and pages! It's really helped!
your a blind naive fool if you think the civil was was over something as simple as religion. as with most things most the time, its about power and wealth... not god. those who say religion is the cause of war are naive at best... take note of the adage- "So long as there are men there will be wars"
@grobo11 the crusades too were about land and power. the average man may of thought he was fighting for God that's true however, they were just tools of those people who mattered at the time whom were striving for power, influence and wealth.
this is a very, very innovative method of teaching!!! for me anyway. thank you so much for taking the time to put this together and posting! they don't teach english history to us 'yanks', which is tragic because it is so essential to our own as well as the rest of the planet.
Yes, but we all tried to invade during the Crusades, didn't we dear boy?
We're all the same, evil. England's less evil, as we didn't invade during the crusades. Some of them may have been british, but there was no true British army.
Video:
More people died in the English civil wars than any war recorded in Europe.
this is quite good however it is VERY biased towards the parliamentary side an several key factors are missing or are incorrect. i'm currently studying it so i know x
The causes of the british civil war one hundred years later are quite interesting though. I see the toff band the clash played a gig in new jersey. I wonder if they also played in new hampshire and new england.
The Important reason really, as opposed to Charles's personality, was the rise of Capitalism. More and more MP's were members of this new rising class as home and world trade expanded. As prices inflated the King became 'poor' in relation to 'his' MP's. He depended on ancient Tithes that could not ( morally ) be raised. When he finally did raise taxes, war was the only outcome as a ruling elite will never hand over power without a struggle. This conflict marked the end of ancient times
One of Ollie Cromwell's first acts of 'Boss of Britain' was to invade Ireland and flogg-off the land to his rich Protestant mates.
It became Britains first colony. The Irish were dispossesed and this really pissed them off. They eventually formed the IRA to drive the Brits out. Later versions of Ollie along with their Western mates did the same in the East, and pissed the Arabs off. Ollie to deal with Sinn Fein & Al Qaeda ?
@johnashley61 you mean englnad coloney Britain was not formed untill 1707 which included ireland as a full founding member of the UK with equal powers to the other 3 nations
@aeonbrit I wouldn't say they had equal powers to us it was mostly England who dominated Britain in reality the Irish had very little say. Scotland and Wales had more power than Ireland, but England still dominated. It's all a little complex though, technically the English are just slaves to the Norman Kings dating back to William I, but even he could claim relation to the English throne so its all very complex in terms of who really rules who.
@TwelthApostle not at all yes he was ruthless but he changed the country and perhaps the world for the better by showing the world that leaders work in service of their people not the other way around
In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living.
Charles cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist. Therefore advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with arrangements for procuring an assassin, though willing to help in his escape.
cThe grip of the moneylender was now complete The danger was members of the new Parliament would sooner or later,, challenge this. To provide against this, the party system was brought into being, frustrating true national reaction enabling the wire-pullers to divide and rule; using their newly-established financial power to ensure their own men and policies secure support from their newspapers, pamphlets, and banking accounts to carry the day
it wasnt about religion it was about parliament thinking they were better than the monarchy and beleived that they should rule the country not the king their social better u think of the covenanters who were protestants who beleived themselves superior beings
No, not religion. That's a red herring.The lust for political power was the cause of the English Civil War, just like in every other coup against a corrupt stagnated status quo. Religion was just a convenient, insidious, ideological stick with which to beat (mercilessly) die-hard loyalists, refuseniks, counter-revolutionaries, dissidents and an uncertain population. Dictators don't tolerate that kind of thing. Twas ever thus even in Cromwell's time - and still is to this day.
No chance. The real reason I believe was Enclosure of the Commons which Charles 1st prohibited in the 1630s. He even went so far as to prosecute people who'd enclosed land RETROSPECTIVELY. That REALLY got the Merchant Classes' backs up and they needed Land Privatisation to get the ol' Agricultural Revolution and then Industrial Revolution going.
They weren't going to let that one slip away. So the regicides chopped off the king's head.
Thankfully Pym died in 1643, but into his void stepped the English version fo Adolf Hitler, Olver Cromwell. He took the credit for victories which belonged to others, forced Parliament to abide his laws by threatening them with the Army, an Army which he had turned into a religiously fanatical force more akin to the SS than anything else. No wonder three years after he died the people dug his body up, chopped his head off and stuck it on a pole outside Westminster.
No worries... I must say i'm neither a Royalist nor a Parliamentarian, more of an Anarchist than anything else, but the English Civil War has so many myths about it (Victorian pro-parliament propaganda which people today take as gospel) that I find it hard to think that in another hundred years many people will even know the truth about the Civil War... for example almost everyone refers to Royalists as Cavaliers and Parliamentarians as Roundheads...
... and as for my "spin" on things it is my opinion based on the facts, my opinion is something I hold dear. Why is Charles' statue not outside the houses of parliament... do I have to answer that one or can you work it out for yourself?... why is Cromwells? because it was placed there in the mid 1800's, Historians didn't know Hisotry back then, they prefered to make it up. Cromwell after all used the Army to disband Parliament and take power did he not? So why is his statue there anyway?
I don't know what history books you have read and frankly I care not but your "spin" on the events are frankly nonsence. I will take the last one that "the people dug up his body" etc. Myth! Charles Catholic widow was the architect of this outrage. Its worth noting that its Cromwell's statue and not Charles that stands outside Parliament.
Then why didn't she have Pyms body dug up if it was her choice? Henrietta Maria had no power in England after the Restoration, this is evident that she did not want the Duke of York to marry Anne Hyde, yet he did...
Needless to say, Isaac Dorislaus was exactly the same sort of alien as Carvajal and Manasseh Ben Israel and the other financiers who paid the "Protector" his blood money.
The Jews were once again permitted to land freely in England in spite of strong protests by the sub-committee of the Council of State, which declared that they would be a menace to the State and the Christian religion. the actual act of banishment has never been repealed.
Pym then told the King that he would be little more than a puppet King, if he had agreed to Parliaments final demands he would not be able to control basic things such as who his friends were, who his Children were allowed to marry or how they should be raised.
I think anyone put in Charles I position would have turned round and confronted Parliament in the way any man should confront a bullying agressive power.
When the King gathered an army he agreed but included strict restrictions on how much money the army got, this led to a poorly trained and equipped army being battered at Newburn in 1640.
He then forced the King into relaxing every tax law against the landowners, the basic public he was not bothered about. The King acquiesed to each and every whim of Parliament, even signing the death warrant of his friend Stafford.
The real reason behind the Civil War was because of the work of one man. John Pym.
While he told the King that the Common Book of Prayer was a good idea he also plotted with the Scots by telling them that they would have English support if they defied the King. Setting boths sides upon one another to better suite his own political ambitions.
this dude has simply copied what is written on history learning site!
herridgeboy21 2 months ago
what is the name of the first song?
alexgarci97 2 months ago
So what's changed ? Now we have the 'Devine Right' Of Corperate & Central Bank Share-holders who are eroding our civil liberties with their puppet army of tax-fiddling law-makers they funded & media promoted into power positions that are answerable to 27 publicly un-elected members of the EU & a President very few have even heard of who is answerable to .... ??? ;-)
MrCriminalwatch 3 months ago
THank you. You gave me the info i needed without all of that emotional nonsense and cheesy acting in the Learning Zone version (see related videos).
Smael64 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOD SAVE THE KING!
mmysama 3 months ago
I am happy that we have the Monarchy, I would never want England to become a Republic, but I am happy the civil war took place. I don't believe the King or Queen should have absolute power which is basically what it was before all of this. The system we have today is a good system which is why it has been there for 500 yrs.
God save the Queen
salazar55555 9 months ago
@salazar55555 How is having a Monarchy with absolutely no power any different then a republic?
xxMrFablexx 2 months ago
@xxMrFablexx Good question, its that in a republic there is a president that is the head of state whereas in a Monarchy the King/Queen is head of state and in modern times has a government to govern for them.
shaunyboy1000 1 month ago
Thanks it really had helped my revision! xx
Georgina123455 9 months ago
thx for the vid helped with a test i knew nothing about :)
SeddonGuy1 10 months ago
copy and paste
Rockon680 11 months ago
It seems when we English don't have anyone to fight,
We just have to have some pointless stupid civil war and fight each other
1MagicAndMayhem1 1 year ago
@1MagicAndMayhem1 Every nation has had a civil war France Russia Spain USA ......
ADZ01982 10 months ago
@ADZ01982 no some nations did not have a civil war
redrooster241 10 months ago
Thanks so much! History Exam this afternoon and the causes of the English Civil War is a potential essay question. First place I've seen all the relevant information in one place like this, instead of having to sift through pages and pages! It's really helped!
prettywildgurl 1 year ago
Dude thanks so much for this video.
gerberlove 1 year ago
your a blind naive fool if you think the civil was was over something as simple as religion. as with most things most the time, its about power and wealth... not god. those who say religion is the cause of war are naive at best... take note of the adage- "So long as there are men there will be wars"
tisFrancesfault 1 year ago
@tisFrancesfault The crusades?
grobo11 1 year ago
@grobo11 the crusades too were about land and power. the average man may of thought he was fighting for God that's true however, they were just tools of those people who mattered at the time whom were striving for power, influence and wealth.
tisFrancesfault 1 year ago
@tisFrancesfault
Exactly!
ludocrat 11 months ago
I'm waiting for the New Civil War in Britain, it can't be far away.
kinkaid25 1 year ago
What the hell is Adam Smith, a Scotsman doing on English money?!
Drummerkins 1 year ago
@Drummerkins It's British money. The Scottish are British.
grobo11 1 year ago
@Drummerkins retard
rday18 1 year ago
this is a very, very innovative method of teaching!!! for me anyway. thank you so much for taking the time to put this together and posting! they don't teach english history to us 'yanks', which is tragic because it is so essential to our own as well as the rest of the planet.
dictionar1 1 year ago
PrinceofPersia:
Yes, but we all tried to invade during the Crusades, didn't we dear boy?
We're all the same, evil. England's less evil, as we didn't invade during the crusades. Some of them may have been british, but there was no true British army.
Video:
More people died in the English civil wars than any war recorded in Europe.
WolfytheWolf5667 1 year ago
in my head i see you all over me in my head you fufill my fantasy in my head you'l be screaming more in my head its goin in down i my head !!!
gogibuur 1 year ago
this is quite good however it is VERY biased towards the parliamentary side an several key factors are missing or are incorrect. i'm currently studying it so i know x
Jessnpirates 1 year ago
I thinks it was A mass farce,Now we think we are free!Ptff
ANTISLAVEBOY 1 year ago
From this we can conclude that the English took religion WAY TOO FUCKING SERIOUSLY.
PrinceOfPersia1996 1 year ago
Lol we watched this in history class one day.
Liamwitz 2 years ago
Comment removed
FreddieJamesCorson09 2 years ago
Who cares ?
The causes of the british civil war one hundred years later are quite interesting though. I see the toff band the clash played a gig in new jersey. I wonder if they also played in new hampshire and new england.
DublinaThe 2 years ago
@DublinaThe you mean English civil war the British have never had a civil war
saying you from ireland you know nothing about your own brothers and sisters
aeonbrit 1 year ago
@DublinaThe the Jacobite rebellion of 1745 is sometimes, and quite rightly , called the 'british civil war'
DublinaThe 1 year ago
The Important reason really, as opposed to Charles's personality, was the rise of Capitalism. More and more MP's were members of this new rising class as home and world trade expanded. As prices inflated the King became 'poor' in relation to 'his' MP's. He depended on ancient Tithes that could not ( morally ) be raised. When he finally did raise taxes, war was the only outcome as a ruling elite will never hand over power without a struggle. This conflict marked the end of ancient times
johnashley61 2 years ago
Pity Ollie Cromwell was not around today to deal with Sinn Fein or Al Qaeda!
lisburn30 2 years ago
One of Ollie Cromwell's first acts of 'Boss of Britain' was to invade Ireland and flogg-off the land to his rich Protestant mates.
It became Britains first colony. The Irish were dispossesed and this really pissed them off. They eventually formed the IRA to drive the Brits out. Later versions of Ollie along with their Western mates did the same in the East, and pissed the Arabs off. Ollie to deal with Sinn Fein & Al Qaeda ?
HE CREATED EM!
johnashley61 2 years ago
@johnashley61 you mean englnad coloney Britain was not formed untill 1707 which included ireland as a full founding member of the UK with equal powers to the other 3 nations
aeonbrit 1 year ago
@aeonbrit I wouldn't say they had equal powers to us it was mostly England who dominated Britain in reality the Irish had very little say. Scotland and Wales had more power than Ireland, but England still dominated. It's all a little complex though, technically the English are just slaves to the Norman Kings dating back to William I, but even he could claim relation to the English throne so its all very complex in terms of who really rules who.
RandomSam189 1 year ago
cromwells was a prick, worst man ever to walk the land
TwelthApostle 2 years ago
@TwelthApostle not at all yes he was ruthless but he changed the country and perhaps the world for the better by showing the world that leaders work in service of their people not the other way around
aeonbrit 1 year ago
16th June, 1647
From (i.e. Oliver Cromwell), by Ebenezer Pratt.
In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living.
Charles cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist. Therefore advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with arrangements for procuring an assassin, though willing to help in his escape.
xtiml 1 year ago
cThe grip of the moneylender was now complete The danger was members of the new Parliament would sooner or later,, challenge this. To provide against this, the party system was brought into being, frustrating true national reaction enabling the wire-pullers to divide and rule; using their newly-established financial power to ensure their own men and policies secure support from their newspapers, pamphlets, and banking accounts to carry the day
xtiml 1 year ago
1:45....you mean like czars? (hint hint)
TheFeralFury 2 years ago
At that time, the french flag was White with Fleur de lys, not the tricolor flag
gipcambero 2 years ago
Why did the English Civil War start?
The reason is always the same: RELIGION!!!!!!
That's why it must end
luarionte 2 years ago
it wasnt about religion it was about parliament thinking they were better than the monarchy and beleived that they should rule the country not the king their social better u think of the covenanters who were protestants who beleived themselves superior beings
witchhunter32 2 years ago
@luarionte Well there's soem other reason as well like Power and Money.
Nobermission971 1 year ago
@luarionte Religion is merely one evil of many. Don't be so focused on one that you lose sight of all others.
CelticKraut 1 year ago
@luarionte
No, not religion. That's a red herring.The lust for political power was the cause of the English Civil War, just like in every other coup against a corrupt stagnated status quo. Religion was just a convenient, insidious, ideological stick with which to beat (mercilessly) die-hard loyalists, refuseniks, counter-revolutionaries, dissidents and an uncertain population. Dictators don't tolerate that kind of thing. Twas ever thus even in Cromwell's time - and still is to this day.
ludocrat 11 months ago
Good video. And not at all biased unlike many english civil war videos.(And books)
whikless 2 years ago
why does that song sound weird... my version of that song is from MCR... weird... anyways... thx...
that really helped... compared to loadsa other videos... thx
Inkywet 2 years ago
Great song, great video, great help.
solomonkain 2 years ago
Buckingham was shit!!!
maniacs11111 2 years ago
this has really helped with my history exam thanks
i got an A!!!!!
prawncocktailness 2 years ago 15
@prawncocktailness Well done!!!! xxxxx
Georgina123455 9 months ago
The real reason is because parliamentarians are corrupt bastards and we don't want them!
Yorkshire will rise again and knock the ten bells of shit out of Parliament this time !!
wankmyhorseplz 2 years ago
god save the king !
witchhunter32 2 years ago
For the monarchy?
RackJacket 2 years ago
No chance. The real reason I believe was Enclosure of the Commons which Charles 1st prohibited in the 1630s. He even went so far as to prosecute people who'd enclosed land RETROSPECTIVELY. That REALLY got the Merchant Classes' backs up and they needed Land Privatisation to get the ol' Agricultural Revolution and then Industrial Revolution going.
They weren't going to let that one slip away. So the regicides chopped off the king's head.
PublicEnquiry 2 years ago
That was an easy to understand video. Thank you. Knowing what happened before the civil war, made it a lot easier to understand why it all started.
chris19001 2 years ago
I like the music you picked for this video- Under Pressure and I Want It All. It fits well with the subject.
kevincxd 2 years ago
sound lol- am doing a project on this- ty for guide.
Icehammerproductions 3 years ago
Great stuff their wiil be a new civil war soon
RICH1066 3 years ago
great video!!!
jinkyfc 3 years ago
Thankfully Pym died in 1643, but into his void stepped the English version fo Adolf Hitler, Olver Cromwell. He took the credit for victories which belonged to others, forced Parliament to abide his laws by threatening them with the Army, an Army which he had turned into a religiously fanatical force more akin to the SS than anything else. No wonder three years after he died the people dug his body up, chopped his head off and stuck it on a pole outside Westminster.
CJLinton 3 years ago 7
Thanks for the comment!
worcesterjonny 3 years ago
No worries... I must say i'm neither a Royalist nor a Parliamentarian, more of an Anarchist than anything else, but the English Civil War has so many myths about it (Victorian pro-parliament propaganda which people today take as gospel) that I find it hard to think that in another hundred years many people will even know the truth about the Civil War... for example almost everyone refers to Royalists as Cavaliers and Parliamentarians as Roundheads...
CJLinton 3 years ago
... and as for my "spin" on things it is my opinion based on the facts, my opinion is something I hold dear. Why is Charles' statue not outside the houses of parliament... do I have to answer that one or can you work it out for yourself?... why is Cromwells? because it was placed there in the mid 1800's, Historians didn't know Hisotry back then, they prefered to make it up. Cromwell after all used the Army to disband Parliament and take power did he not? So why is his statue there anyway?
CJLinton 3 years ago
I don't know what history books you have read and frankly I care not but your "spin" on the events are frankly nonsence. I will take the last one that "the people dug up his body" etc. Myth! Charles Catholic widow was the architect of this outrage. Its worth noting that its Cromwell's statue and not Charles that stands outside Parliament.
Mauricebear 3 years ago
Then why didn't she have Pyms body dug up if it was her choice? Henrietta Maria had no power in England after the Restoration, this is evident that she did not want the Duke of York to marry Anne Hyde, yet he did...
CJLinton 3 years ago
Well, Pym's body was dug up anyway, after the restoration.
333amigops 3 years ago
Actually, Cromwell couldn't be the English version of Adolf Hitler since he let the Jews come back to England.
333amigops 3 years ago
, Isaac Dorislaus."
Needless to say, Isaac Dorislaus was exactly the same sort of alien as Carvajal and Manasseh Ben Israel and the other financiers who paid the "Protector" his blood money.
The Jews were once again permitted to land freely in England in spite of strong protests by the sub-committee of the Council of State, which declared that they would be a menace to the State and the Christian religion. the actual act of banishment has never been repealed.
xtiml 1 year ago
@CJLinton Rubbish.
Quaddrator 1 year ago
Pym then told the King that he would be little more than a puppet King, if he had agreed to Parliaments final demands he would not be able to control basic things such as who his friends were, who his Children were allowed to marry or how they should be raised.
I think anyone put in Charles I position would have turned round and confronted Parliament in the way any man should confront a bullying agressive power.
CJLinton 3 years ago
When the King gathered an army he agreed but included strict restrictions on how much money the army got, this led to a poorly trained and equipped army being battered at Newburn in 1640.
He then forced the King into relaxing every tax law against the landowners, the basic public he was not bothered about. The King acquiesed to each and every whim of Parliament, even signing the death warrant of his friend Stafford.
CJLinton 3 years ago
The real reason behind the Civil War was because of the work of one man. John Pym.
While he told the King that the Common Book of Prayer was a good idea he also plotted with the Scots by telling them that they would have English support if they defied the King. Setting boths sides upon one another to better suite his own political ambitions.
CJLinton 3 years ago
Thanks, this vid really helped!!!! I got LOTS of notes so thanks!!
2Funnies 3 years ago
I believe James I closed Parliament on 31st December, 1610, and it was not opened until 1621.
mrsdaisyben 3 years ago
She was a French princess and they did get married in 1625!
paige1531 3 years ago
nice one mr hemphill copied this for da test u gave us wag1 ibrar
fasilb10 3 years ago
wag1 hemphil ur da mannn bro
safe iab
Rud3b0iii 3 years ago
elo mr hemphill nyc vid
Sonyb10 3 years ago
excellent video we watched this in history today:p
kunglao68 3 years ago
lol today we watched this in our history lesson.
its a very good and cool vid :]
snowywhitewolf 3 years ago