Old racist geezer is irrelvant.

Isn’t it great!? The only documentary I have ever watched repeatedly.

He's an atheist though. I thought god disliked is atheists.

@@DS9TREK He seems to dislike their going on trying to be atheists, judging by some of the interesting atheists he converted.

Politics? And have to toe the party line, it didn’t go well for Andrew Bridgen First he lost the tory whip and was expelled from the party

​@@lesterbeedell9725 Starkey would never utter something so stupid

Politics? We need him to hang around for a good bit longer as a teacher. And some of the twits that we vote for (and us the voters - so who are the numpties really?) should pay attention.

@@oliverapex7924 Hope your comment follows you.

@@oliverapex7924 What is this drivel? Follow his ways? "Worth begets in base minds, envy; in great souls, emulation." DS is talented. Your probably not. Deal with your mediocrity!

BOLLOCKS! [for Brits] BULLSHIT! [for Americans]

@@kinorspielmann4649 since I am an American I don't know what Bollocks mean I hope you weren't being disrespectful to the greatest historian who ever 😡 lived if this is so shame on you!

BBC won't have him because he slaughtered the Left's sacred cow! He said what a lot of people think, but are afraid to say it!

Like a military cadence, interesting question.

He didn't dismiss the battle cry - he said the language of peasants was - grunting...

@@christopherbingham8722 Professor J.R.R. Tolkien articulately and wittily disagreed in his day (see his lectures "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics" and "Beowulf and the Critics" and his published letters for good examples).

I live next to a road called Gurkha Road :) And there is a statue of a Gurkha soldier in his British Army uniform stood to attention in the park. God bless Nepal and our brother Gurkhas. Nothing says British like the Gurkha Soldier say it! Those guys are our toughest guys.

@@DailyCorvid 👍

1308, dear heart.

He released the Q & A of the last one, I expect so this one.

He never does ...

Even kings deserve forgiveness by his subjects. Camilla was Charles’ true love.

@@pfranks75 how do you know that ?

She’s not my queen.. should have been Diana.. she should still be Parker Bowles. Disgusting woman. Much worse than Wallace

@@pfranks75 she was his replacement mummy and lover

You probably think that _every word that doesn't agree_ with you is abuse. It's such a crap attitude, really poisonous. Have you ever been abused, outside of people just talking normally on the internet? You may view abuse slightly more sincerely if you saw what it actually is. Making a video about historical events, which you did not agree with is not abusive. Abusive would have been making a video called "Your Monarchy sucks" and comparing our great and powerful leader to somebody elses short fat useless ugly poverty stricken one legged Donkey king. For example lol see that would be abusive, but he did not do that. He just spoke with dignity about our history, if you find our history offensive and abusive I would suggest that you get therapy.

Serjeant at Arms, dear Madam.

@@stevewatson6839 Okay this is the second time that I have been corrected on the spelling. Give me an example of your correct spelling as opposed to the other persons correct spelling.

@Moonraker I did some searching around on my own and am aware that his is an alternate spelling of the term. Either spelling is correct, they are interchangeable. Thanks for your interest in this discussion of arcane and archaic word usage, not many people are interested in this topic of discussion much less give a damn.

@Moonraker You are correct, "of arms" is incorrect, "at arms" is the correct term. However "Serjeant" or "Sergeant" is an acceptable spelling. I'm aware that most people roll their eyes at the suggestion to "look it up on Wikipedia", but I have found it to be a reliable source for most things. I apologize for not getting back to you sooner, I have no excuse other than a bout of laziness. Good day and best wishes.

@Moonraker I do not mind in the least your pointing out my misspelling of a word, especially one that is so arcane and archaic. I am just very thrilled to have a civil conversation on-line. So many of these conversations end with the other party insulting me without presenting a cogent argument for their point of view. Then when I point this out to them they never reply back with any facts to support their argument. So thanks again for such a pleasant exchange of words. Best wishes to you sir.

Yes, it is a coincidence.

Yes. And yes He could not be Roman Catholic and king. And it was a coincidence

No it wasn't a coincidence, and no it's not some odd sounding conspiracy. It's actually totally normal expected behaviour. The acting Monarch has to brings the news of the previous Monarch's death to Rome personally. The reason is that if there is no 'Defender Of The Faith' in place, then the Pope has temporary regency over the Church. It's actually in the Bible, if you have one handy you can read all about it in there. Not describing the current day arrangement but rather, explaining how the Holy authority travels between people so there is no unbroken chain of leadership. When you consider that "Protestants" were originally leading a protest against non Orthodox practices, aka heretics of the Catholics - it's not unusual at all. Ultimately they all bend the knee to Christ as the Son Of God, the schism is purely administrative only. The Pope is effectively the King of Rome, and therefore equally authorative to our King of Britain and they employ one another for various ritual worshipping tasks and such. Think of it like this : If you are one of only two dentists in town - you need the second dentist to sort out your teeth whilst you sort of everybody elses. The King goes to the Pope when he needs to confess sins, and likewise the Pope will confess only to the defender of the Faith (King Charles III currently).

I think it's more likely he is discreetly Orthodox. His dad was Orthodox and his grandmother was an Orthodox nun. Charles has been seen crossing himself in the Orthodox manner and for the first time a Byzantine hymn was included at his coronation. Now there's some material for the conspiracy theorists to get excited over!

I think Dr Starkey meant to be ironic about the concept of toxic masculinity, not to be negative about Zelensky. He made a really odd point though, indeed. In the times of peace, Zelensky projected kindly and compassionate persona (before going into politics he was an actor and, among other things, voiced Paddington Bear in the Ukrainian version). In the times of war, he never refrains from showing emotions. He is as remote from the stereotype of toxic masculinity as it gets, to be honest.

@@AntonBryl Yes indeed. Perhaps it's a contrarian streak that makes Starkey say these things -- as you've shown his point is patently false as well as offbeam.

He is poking fun

he's gotten away with it so far

What's oops? It is called West Minster, and that is because it's East of the City (St Paul's Cathedral being found to it's West and therefore is called East Minster. You do realise, that if you are in the middle, and something is to your East - then by definition you must be to it's West hence WestMinster is West of East Minster. Like if I point to the left, I am pointing FROM the right. Makes perfect sense to me anyway!

@@DailyCorvid his was a minor slip. Yours is simple stupidity. Westminster is not and has never been to the east of London. Yet you claim it is east of London. Starkey had a slip of the tongue. You have written that down with time to think about it and you have written down utter nonsense. Consider basic geography and physical reality before putting such utter twaddle in a comment again.

Why stop there, let's get rid of the lot. I'm sure we can put the many castles, properties and land to better use AND save some money in the process