Speaker 1: Happy Saturday, everybody. This week on the show, we talked
Speaker 1: about the fifteen seventeen Evil May Day Riots and we
Speaker 1: mentioned at the end of the episode that riots among
Speaker 1: London's apprentices became something of a tradition in early modern London.
Speaker 1: And here's the episode where we've talked a little bit
Speaker 1: more about that. It is our February episode on the
Speaker 1: Body House Riots of sixty eight and Joy Welcome to
Speaker 1: Stuff you missed in History Class, the production of I
Speaker 1: Heart Radios How Stuff Works. Hello, and welcome to the podcast.
Speaker 1: I'm Tracy V. Wilson and I'm Holly Fry. Uh. Possibly
Speaker 1: the weirdest thing that I've ever learned on this podcast,
Speaker 1: and that includes having done a podcast about people who
Speaker 1: turned into soap after they died. In early modern London,
Speaker 1: when apprentices had a holiday, the thing to do was
Speaker 1: to go knock over some brothels like that's not right now.
Speaker 1: And I don't mean knock over like uh like slang
Speaker 1: for robbing them. I mean knock over like literally pull
Speaker 1: them down. And today we're going to talk about one
Speaker 1: such riot, and it took place during Easter Week of
Speaker 1: sixteen sixty eight. Although this particular riot was a lot
Speaker 1: bigger and a lot more complicated than just the normal
Speaker 1: apprentices having a day off tearing down some brothels, which
Speaker 1: was a thing that they like to do. So heads up,
Speaker 1: today's podcast is not explicit and we are not going
Speaker 1: to talk about what goes on in a body house.
Speaker 1: But yes, parents and teachers, body house means what you
Speaker 1: think it means. So today's show is maybe not for
Speaker 1: the youngest of the listeners. So, as Tracy just suggested,
Speaker 1: lots of people rioted at London's brothels in sixteen sixty eight,
Speaker 1: not just apprentices, but apprentices are sited again and again
Speaker 1: is making up the bulk of the crowd in this story.
Speaker 1: So we're going to take a moment to shed some
Speaker 1: light on who these young people, nearly all of them
Speaker 1: young men were. For a few hundred years in England,
Speaker 1: apprenticeship was a seven year indenture that combined both work
Speaker 1: and instruction, and originally people had been apprenticed to the
Speaker 1: master of a guild. Came quite a bit of prestige
Speaker 1: and was kind of a systematized organization for apprenticeship. But
Speaker 1: by the seventeenth century, when we're talking about today, London's
Speaker 1: guild system was really in decline, and that meant that
Speaker 1: the apprentice system was showing some strain as well. What
Speaker 1: had been a really prestigious appointment directly with the master
Speaker 1: of a guild was instead moving closer and closer to
Speaker 1: just flat out unpaid servitude that did not come with
Speaker 1: many advantages, and this is probably why by the mid
Speaker 1: sixteen hundreds a lot of people were quitting were quitting
Speaker 1: their apprenticeships after two or three years, even though they
Speaker 1: hadn't really finished. You can look at charts of the
Speaker 1: average of how long people stayed in their posts, and
Speaker 1: there's a precipitous decline between year three and four. If
Speaker 1: people had the opportunity to get out of their apprenticeship,
Speaker 1: they did. Although people came from all over England to
Speaker 1: apprentice in London, most of London's apprentices were from the
Speaker 1: surrounding area. The farther away you got from London, the
Speaker 1: fewer people went to London to be apprenticed, and most
Speaker 1: of the apprentices were from relatively affluent families, at least
Speaker 1: ones who either had or could borrow enough money to
Speaker 1: make an initial payment to a master in exchange for
Speaker 1: taking their son on as an apprentice. Once that money
Speaker 1: was paid and the apprenticeship actually began. Though apprentices usually
Speaker 1: did not make any money of their own because they
Speaker 1: were being paid in instruction and experience, not in wages,
Speaker 1: sort of an extreme version of the unpaid internship. They
Speaker 1: also had very few freedoms. They needed their master's permission
Speaker 1: to marry, to socialized, to go to the theater, to
Speaker 1: go to a tavern, basically anything fun. In sixteen sixty
Speaker 1: the average age of an apprentice was seventeen or eighteen,
Speaker 1: So with all that in mind, it may be a
Speaker 1: little less surprising than A popular pastime among London's seventeenth
Speaker 1: century apprentices was the brothel riot. On holidays, particularly Shrove Tuesday,
Speaker 1: which is the last Tuesday before lent. Apprentices frequently wrecked
Speaker 1: London's brothels. Between sixteen o six and sixteen forty one,
Speaker 1: there were twenty four Shrove Tuesday brothel riots that we
Speaker 1: know about. That's twenty four full scale riots in thirty
Speaker 1: five years. And in case the name Shrove Tuesday doesn't
Speaker 1: ring a bell, folks might know it better as Fat
Speaker 1: Tuesday or Marty gras Is. It's observed or celebrated in
Speaker 1: a lot of different ways all over the world, but
Speaker 1: Shrove Tuesday is what people were mostly calling it in
Speaker 1: in England at this time. During a brothel riot, rioters
Speaker 1: would use tools like staves and bars to literally pull
Speaker 1: down building and this naturally caused a lot of property
Speaker 1: damage and it displaced anybody who had been living or
Speaker 1: working inside the damaged or destroyed structures. And regardless of
Speaker 1: what your personal feelings are about brothels, a lot of
Speaker 1: times these are people who did not have any other
Speaker 1: option for supporting themselves, so they would be out of
Speaker 1: work in homeless after the riot. And in spite of
Speaker 1: their popularity in terms of having a pretty consistent customer base,
Speaker 1: brothels were not popular from a religious or social standpoint.
Speaker 1: Plenty of people visited brothels, but plenty of people thought
Speaker 1: brothels were a sinful scourge on London. Sometimes these worked
Speaker 1: out to be the exact same people. Because brothels, in
Speaker 1: spite of their popularity, were viewed as cd and immoral,
Speaker 1: the apprentices who tore them down didn't usually get a
Speaker 1: lot of harsh punishment. They would see a small fine
Speaker 1: and a short imprisonment if anything. The general consensus was
Speaker 1: that apprentices were doing a a thing by destroying the
Speaker 1: city's brothels. So when it came to the Shrove Tuesday
Speaker 1: rioting tradition, English political writer James Harrington called it an
Speaker 1: quote ancient administration of justice at Shrovetide. The sixty eight ryant,
Speaker 1: on the other hand, was exceptional. It was much much bigger,
Speaker 1: and instead of happening at Shrove Tuesday before Lent, it
Speaker 1: happened on Easter Monday, after Lent was over, and it
Speaker 1: lasted for three days. The property damage is much greater,
Speaker 1: and the perpetrators faced much much harsher punishments, even harsher
Speaker 1: than might be expected by the increase in the size
Speaker 1: of the riot. And we're going to talk about the
Speaker 1: sixty eight riot with more specificity after we paused for
Speaker 1: a brief word from one of our fantastic sponsors. On
Speaker 1: Easter Monday, which fell on March that year, rioters armed
Speaker 1: with simple weapons like pole axes, staves and iron bars
Speaker 1: started pulling down the brothels and poplar in London's East End.
Speaker 1: And yes, fans of Call the mid The Midwife, that's
Speaker 1: the same poplar where that show is set. According to
Speaker 1: historical accounts these rioters were apprentices. They probably included other
Speaker 1: people too, though Poplar was home to lots of sailors,
Speaker 1: and many of them were currently at home without a
Speaker 1: lot to occupy their time, having been recently released from
Speaker 1: service after the end of the Second Anglo Dutch War,
Speaker 1: which went on from sixteen sixty five to sixteen sixty seven.
Speaker 1: The first brothel to be struck belonged to Demeris Page,
Speaker 1: who was known as quote the great bod of the seamen,
Speaker 1: by which we mean men who work on the sea
Speaker 1: or sailors, not the other possible interpretation. Regardless, these rioters
Speaker 1: organized themselves into regiments. Each one had its own captain
Speaker 1: and its its own colors. Green was particularly popular. One
Speaker 1: of those captains was named Peter Messenger, which is why
Speaker 1: sometimes these riots are referred to as the Messenger Riots.
Speaker 1: On Tuesday, similarly, armed rioters spread through London, targeting the
Speaker 1: districts where the city's highest concentrations of body houses were located.
Speaker 1: At least five hundred people were involved in this second
Speaker 1: day of rioting and pulling down buildings. This is when
Speaker 1: the Crown got involved to try to maintain order. A
Speaker 1: letter to the Lord Mayor and Lieutenancy of the city
Speaker 1: was sent in the name of King Charles the Second,
Speaker 1: ordering the watch to be doubled and for two companies
Speaker 1: of militia to be mustered to suppress the riot. Famed
Speaker 1: London diarist Samuel Peeps wrote about it in his Diary
Speaker 1: for the Day of Marchy f at Whitehall. He said,
Speaker 1: there was quote great talk of the tumult on the
Speaker 1: other end of the town, about more fields among the
Speaker 1: apprentices taking the liberty of these holy days to pull
Speaker 1: down body houses, and Lord to see the apprehensions which
Speaker 1: this did give to all people at court that presently
Speaker 1: order was given for all the soldiers horse and foot
Speaker 1: to be in arms, and forthwith alarms were beat by
Speaker 1: drum and trumpet through Westminster, and all to their colors
Speaker 1: and to horse, as if the French were coming into town.
Speaker 1: I remember reading a lot of Peep's diary in like
Speaker 1: a literature class. I feel like they left out all
Speaker 1: the funny parts. I do too, because I did the same,
Speaker 1: and it wasn't until much later in life where I
Speaker 1: was like, there's good stuff in there that's really entertaining.
Speaker 1: This bit in particular made me laugh every the whole
Speaker 1: time I was typing it in there. Tuesday's riots led
Speaker 1: to arrests, and some of the rioters laid siege to
Speaker 1: Finsbury Jail, where they believed their compatriots were being held.
Speaker 1: They did not actually find any other Rioters in the jail, though,
Speaker 1: but for unrelated persons did manage to escape in all
Speaker 1: the chaos. The rioters were more successful in their goals
Speaker 1: at the new prison in Clerkenwell, which did have some
Speaker 1: of the arrested Rioters being held there, and they were
Speaker 1: broken out. Peeps also went out with his friends to
Speaker 1: see the riots in action on Tuesday, but they mostly
Speaker 1: found lots and lots of soldiers and people who were
Speaker 1: vexed that the soldiers were going after the apprentices. He
Speaker 1: repeats a couple of times in his Tuesday diary entry
Speaker 1: overhearing people say quote it was only for pulling down
Speaker 1: the body houses. He also notes that this whole event
Speaker 1: apparently perplexed King Charles the Second. If the body houses
Speaker 1: were such a scourge on London so much so that
Speaker 1: people supported pulling them down, then again from the Peep's diary,
Speaker 1: the question quote why why do they go to them? Then?
Speaker 1: As a side note, Uh. I mean, we established earlier
Speaker 1: in the podcast that this Strove Tuesday brothel riot was
Speaker 1: a kind of a tradition. So why would King Charles
Speaker 1: the secing to be so perplexed. A lot of those
Speaker 1: riots had happened either before he was born or while
Speaker 1: he was in exile in France after the beheading of
Speaker 1: his father Childs the First, so it's possible that he
Speaker 1: this was the first time he had really experienced firsthand
Speaker 1: or heard in more detail about this idea of the
Speaker 1: London body house riot. I like that he um can't
Speaker 1: see and grasp the two faced nature of humanity in
Speaker 1: many cases. I'm like, oh, Chuck, come on, you have
Speaker 1: a conversation with Charles the Second about the duality of mankind. Uh.
Speaker 1: Then on Wednesday, a very large group of rioters the
Speaker 1: exact numbers are unclear, but it was probably in the
Speaker 1: thousands continued to attack brothels around more fields. The rioters
Speaker 1: started threatening to pull the Palace at Whitehall down and
Speaker 1: chanted things like quote, we've been the servants, now will
Speaker 1: be the masters, and another rallying cry was reformation and reducement.
Speaker 1: All of this rioting continued to vex the crown and
Speaker 1: the court at Whitehall. Peeps rode about Wednesday's riots in
Speaker 1: his diary as well, and here's what he wrote. Quote
Speaker 1: the Duke of York and all with him this morning
Speaker 1: we're full of talk of the prentices who are not
Speaker 1: yet put down, though the guards and militia of the
Speaker 1: town and have been in arms all night and the
Speaker 1: night before, and the prentices have made fools of them,
Speaker 1: sometimes by running from them and flinging stones at them.
Speaker 1: Some blood hath been spilt, but a great many houses
Speaker 1: pulled down, and among others, the Duke of York was
Speaker 1: mighty Mary at that of Demaris Pages, the great Baud
Speaker 1: of the Seamen, and the Duke of York complained merrily
Speaker 1: that he hath lost two tenants by their houses being
Speaker 1: pulled down, who paid him for their wine licenses fifteen
Speaker 1: pounds of a year. So, just to recap, the Duke
Speaker 1: of York is upset that his tenants, the Bauds who
Speaker 1: pay him for wine licenses, have been displaced by the rioting,
Speaker 1: but not really concerned about them, just his income. Uh uh.
Speaker 1: It was on the inconvenience and loss of income to himself. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it was on Wednesday that the militia guards and even
Speaker 1: the King's Lifeguard dispersed the rioters and arrested many of
Speaker 1: the apparent ringleaders. Happening concurrently with the last two days
Speaker 1: of this riot were the publications of a couple of
Speaker 1: pieces of satirical writing. We don't actually know who wrote them,
Speaker 1: or whether they were the work of the rioters or not.
Speaker 1: We don't really have a sense of whether the people
Speaker 1: writing these satirical things were working with the rioters, are
Speaker 1: opposed to them, or exactly what, in terms of the
Speaker 1: writers themselves, uh was going on. We can't accurately say
Speaker 1: whether these particular writings reflected the views of the rioters,
Speaker 1: but they definitely were reflecting the views of some people
Speaker 1: alive at the time who were involved in all of this,
Speaker 1: so they shed some light on sort of what people
Speaker 1: were thinking out in London. The first, which is presented
Speaker 1: in the form of a petition, was known as the
Speaker 1: Poor Horse Petition. It was purportedly drafted by the displaced
Speaker 1: bods whose brothels had been pulled down, and it came
Speaker 1: out on March which was the Wednesday of the riot.
Speaker 1: It lampooned both the women who worked in the body
Speaker 1: houses and Lady Castlemaine, or more properly Barbara Villiers, Duchess
Speaker 1: of Cleveland, who was the notorious and married mistress of
Speaker 1: Charles the Second. This faux petition was highly critical of
Speaker 1: both the king and his mistress, but it also contained
Speaker 1: a plea to Lady Castlemaine that she would try to
Speaker 1: protect all these displaced women from the body houses. After all,
Speaker 1: goes the logic of this writing, you are one of us,
Speaker 1: Lady Castlemaine. The two satirical writings that followed were both
Speaker 1: in the form of a letter from Lady Castlemaine back
Speaker 1: to the displaced Bouds. They're identical except for the first paragraph,
Speaker 1: and they go on to lampoon both Lady Castlemaine and
Speaker 1: the Anglican Church. There's a lot of criticism who woven
Speaker 1: into both the petition and the response. They criticized Charles
Speaker 1: the Second for keeping the mistress. They criticized Lady Castlemaine
Speaker 1: for being Catholic, They criticized the Catholic Church for earning
Speaker 1: an income from taxes is on brothels. And they criticized
Speaker 1: the Archbishop of Canterbury for purportedly keeping a mistress of
Speaker 1: his own. And it's these same themes of religion and
Speaker 1: hypocrisy that may help to explain why this particular riot
Speaker 1: got so very big and why the response to it
Speaker 1: was so much bigger. And we're going to talk about
Speaker 1: all that after we pause for a brief word from
Speaker 1: one of our fantastic sponsors. While London's previous Strove Tuesday
Speaker 1: brothel riots had been punished with which was basically a
Speaker 1: slap on the wrist, the sixteen sixty eight riots ended
Speaker 1: with a great many people being brought to trial. It's
Speaker 1: unclear exactly how many people were prosecuted for participating in
Speaker 1: the riot. Only seventy seven of those who wound up
Speaker 1: in court were actually identified by name, either in the
Speaker 1: records or historians having put all the pieces together since then,
Speaker 1: but very little is known even about them. Fifteen. Ultimately,
Speaker 1: we're guided for high treason. Demeri's page turned state's witness
Speaker 1: during the trial, with the court being very careful to
Speaker 1: avoid mentioning precisely what her job was so that she
Speaker 1: would appear credible in the account she gave of destruction
Speaker 1: of her property. And many of the other women who
Speaker 1: had worked in the destroyed body houses, on the other hand,
Speaker 1: wound up being prosecuted in the aftermath of the riot,
Speaker 1: in a punishment that was acknowledged by the High Court
Speaker 1: and other people surrounding the case as just incongruously harsh.
Speaker 1: Four of the men who were convicted of high treason
Speaker 1: were hanged, drawn and quartered. This was by far the
Speaker 1: most extreme punishment allowed under the most severe interpretation of
Speaker 1: the law. It was far far greater than how body
Speaker 1: house riots had typically been handled in England. There are
Speaker 1: lots of possible explanations for exactly why the crackdown on
Speaker 1: this specific riot was so extreme. One described in the
Speaker 1: nine paper on in the Historical Journal is by Dr
Speaker 1: Tim Arists, then at Emmanuel College, Cambridge and now at
Speaker 1: Brown and his interpretation basically is that the riot itself
Speaker 1: was more about dissatisfaction with the Restoration than it really
Speaker 1: was about the brothels, and that the rioters were so
Speaker 1: harshly treated because of that political and religious undertone. So
Speaker 1: an extraordinarily brief recap of the Restoration. When Charles the
Speaker 1: Second's father was executed in sixteen forty nine, Oliver Cromwell
Speaker 1: came to power, at which point England became a republic.
Speaker 1: Charles the Second fled to the continent, and Cromwell remained
Speaker 1: in power until his death in sixteen fifty eight. Then
Speaker 1: in sixteen sixty Charles the Second ascended to the throne,
Speaker 1: at which point the monarchy was restored. That's the restoration.
Speaker 1: There are entire books about the restoration, and there was
Speaker 1: a whole lot more that went on behind the scenes
Speaker 1: and what we just said, so that is an extremely
Speaker 1: quick summary for those of you who don't remember or
Speaker 1: never learned that. In a lot of historical accounts, the
Speaker 1: general description of the restoration was that London was really
Speaker 1: really in favor of Charles the second's return. There had
Speaker 1: been demonstrations against the army and in favor of Charles
Speaker 1: as the monarch in the years before the restoration actually
Speaker 1: took place. Some of that agitation was as much about
Speaker 1: religion as it was about the monarch. Some of the
Speaker 1: people who were pressing for Charles the Second's return to
Speaker 1: England we're hoping that he would allow a greater degree
Speaker 1: of freedom of religion. The religions that diverged in some
Speaker 1: way from Anglican teachings, like Presbyterians, Quakers, Baptists, Methodists, and Unitarians,
Speaker 1: among others. We're all branded as dissenting or nonconformist religions.
Speaker 1: Many of London's apprentices were adherents to one of these
Speaker 1: non conforming denominations instead. In sixteen sixty, Charles the Second,
Speaker 1: still in exile, issued the Declaration of Breda, which was
Speaker 1: one of the last steps before he was restored to
Speaker 1: the throne. He wrote this statement, quote, and because the
Speaker 1: passion and uncharitable nous of the times have produced several
Speaker 1: opinions in religion by which men are engaged in parties
Speaker 1: and animosities against each other, which, when they shall hereafter
Speaker 1: unite in a freedom of conversation, will be composed or
Speaker 1: better understood. We do declare a liberty to tender consciences,
Speaker 1: and that no man shall be disquieted or called in
Speaker 1: question for differences of opinion in matters of religion which
Speaker 1: do not disturb the peace of the Kingdom, And that
Speaker 1: we shall be ready to consent to such an act
Speaker 1: of Parliament as upon mature deliberation shall be offered to
Speaker 1: us for the full granting that indulgence. In other words,
Speaker 1: people would have freedom of religion provided that their opinions
Speaker 1: did not quote disturb the peace of the Kingdom, and
Speaker 1: Among those opinions apparently disturbing the peace of the Kingdom
Speaker 1: were various nonconformists. Quakers and Baptists in particular, frequently wound
Speaker 1: up in court on charges of quote attendance at a
Speaker 1: nonconformist compensicle. Harris also cites this as the reason why
Speaker 1: this huge riot took place after Easter instead of on
Speaker 1: Shrove Tuesday, as had been so common in p or years.
Speaker 1: Even though the Declaration of Breda hadn't really allowed the
Speaker 1: nonconformist the practice of their religion uh freely, at least
Speaker 1: there had been a period of relative laxity in terms
Speaker 1: of the enforcement of religious conformity. The Great Plague of
Speaker 1: London in sixteen sixty five and the Great Fire of
Speaker 1: London in sixteen sixty six had both given Parliament plenty
Speaker 1: of other things to worry about, and some of the
Speaker 1: laws governing religion had lapsed, but in sixteen sixty seven.
Speaker 1: In sixteen sixty eight, bills that would have allowed Presbyterians
Speaker 1: religious freedom started circulating in Parliament. The House of Commons
Speaker 1: was really deeply opposed to these, though, and the Proclamation
Speaker 1: on the matter that Charles the Second ultimately signed on
Speaker 1: March tenth, sixteen sixty eight, during lent, less than two
Speaker 1: weeks before the riot began, was instead about enforcing obedience
Speaker 1: to the existing laws, not about allowing greater religious freedom.
Speaker 1: This also circles back around to those satirical petitions and
Speaker 1: letters that we talked about before the break. One of
Speaker 1: their themes England was willing to tolerate brothels but not
Speaker 1: religious nonconformity, which seems awfully hypocritical. Some of the chance
Speaker 1: and rallying cries that they used during the riot, like
Speaker 1: the ones that were about reformation, also have a lot
Speaker 1: more religious tone to them than being about wanting to
Speaker 1: strike down the sinfulness of a brothel. Running parallel to
Speaker 1: this crackdown on religious nonconformity was also a crackdown on
Speaker 1: theaters in London, and a running theme in this increasing
Speaker 1: criticism of theater was that theaters were no better than brothels,
Speaker 1: and there was a lot of just hateful rhetoric that
Speaker 1: was used in all of this. So this stoked dislike
Speaker 1: in disdain for both the brothels and the theaters, And
Speaker 1: as we said at the top of the show, London
Speaker 1: was full of sailors that were recently released from service,
Speaker 1: as well as overworked and mostly pennelous apprentices whose system
Speaker 1: of apprenticeship was quickly disintegrating. So there's some degree of
Speaker 1: supposition and draw ying of conclusions and all of this, uh,
Speaker 1: some degree of interpretation of what people's motives might have been. Men,
Speaker 1: there's no smoking gun. None of the rioters left a
Speaker 1: journal saying I'm really upset about my religious freedoms, and
Speaker 1: so how about in the guise of a brothel riot,
Speaker 1: I make that demonstration Like there's nothing documenting any kind
Speaker 1: of thought presses like that, and there are also no
Speaker 1: court documents. It's explicitly saying that the rioters are being
Speaker 1: persecuted because of religious nonconformity, although it does seem like
Speaker 1: there was some fear that people who were dissenting in
Speaker 1: some way, we're also going to work with Cromwell's existing
Speaker 1: supporters who were still around to try to overthrow the monarchy. So,
Speaker 1: like a lot of events in history, this one was
Speaker 1: definitely a confluence of a ton of different factors and
Speaker 1: influences without one clear, single explanation that just explains the
Speaker 1: motives of everyone involved at the same time. Oh, history,
Speaker 1: you're never simple, Yeah, I wish I could remember where.
Speaker 1: I wish I could remember where I stumbled across just
Speaker 1: the words, uh, the Brothel Ride of sixteen sixty eight,
Speaker 1: Like I was doing work on something completely unrelated last week,
Speaker 1: and then the that's that series of words was on
Speaker 1: my screen somewhere and I went, well, okay, we gotta
Speaker 1: talk about that. And then I fortunately was able to
Speaker 1: find enough information to talk about that. And then when
Speaker 1: I tried to restep retrace my steps to figure out
Speaker 1: where I had originally seen reference to it, I could
Speaker 1: not find it. So I don't remember. But that's the
Speaker 1: Ruthel Riot. Thank you so much for joining us on
Speaker 1: this Saturday. If you have heard an email address or
Speaker 1: a Facebook you are l or something similar over the
Speaker 1: course of today's episode, since it is from the archive
Speaker 1: that might be out of date now, you can email
Speaker 1: us at history podcast at how Stuff Work stock Com,
Speaker 1: and you can find us all over social media at
Speaker 1: missed in History, and you can subscribe to our show
Speaker 1: on Apple podcasts, Google podcasts, the I Heart Radio app,
Speaker 1: and wherever else you listen to podcasts. Stuff You Missed
Speaker 1: in History Class is a production of I Heart Radio's
Speaker 1: How Stuff Works. For more podcasts. For my heart Radio,
Speaker 1: visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you
Speaker 1: listen to your favorite shows.