 |
Reply
| | | From: ForeverAmber (Original Message) | Sent: 6/20/2002 2:24 AM |
Anybody else struck by the striking parallels between what happened to Charles I of England & Louis XVI of France? Both kings inherited a throne already in trouble from disagreements of the previous monarch with the government ruling body, ie. Parliament & the Estates General. Both subscribed firmly to the divine right of kings & exacerbated the tense situation further. Both would rather, as Charles I said from the scaffold, "...go from a corruptible to an uncorruptible Crown...", wholly convinced it was better to die for that divine right than to compromise it in any way, shape, or form. |
|
Reply
| |
We can only hope that Wills will follow in the footsteps of his mother as it seems lil Harry has the common sense of blind gnat. Again...another fine example of what happens when we marry our cousins...we lose common sense and our IQs go right down the toilet. The question is...how would things have been different had Diana lived? One can only imagine. |
|
Reply
| |
I hope I will never live long enough to see the day that there was no more king or queen of England. I believe William will make a truly excellent King when the Queen retires. Long Live the English Monarchy! God Save The Queen! Rhiannon  |
|
Reply
| |
Eddy seems like the only holdout to keeping the monarchy so I guess if something happens to it he would be a prime suspect. |
|
Reply
| | | From: Eddy | Sent: 7/18/2002 7:13 PM |
I don't wish to speak ill of the dead, but Diana was a rather vacuous Sloane Ranger who was used by the Windsors as a brood mare and then dumped. (Rather Medieval behaviour by the way!). Her behavior later on was nothing to be proud about - her various crusades were pr episodes and did little or nothing to alleviate real suffering. Anyone heard the rumour about Harry and Charles not being Father and Son?  |
|
Reply
| |
No, hadn't heard THAT one! Of the two boys, though, Harry is the one who looks more like Charles than Diana (looks A LOT like Charles)...Wills is definately Diana's son. But do tell about the rumor! |
|
Reply
| | | From: Eddy | Sent: 7/19/2002 4:03 PM |
Are you sure that Harry looks like Charles? Get a picture of Harry and put it next to a picture of James Hewitt... |
|
Reply
| | | From: Eddy | Sent: 8/1/2002 3:12 PM |
Anyone seen the proposed memorial for Diana in Hyde Park? A kind of circular water feature which one unkind critic said looks like a public drain. That will be entirely appropriate then!  |
|
Reply
| |
What, no candle in the wind incorporated into the design???  Is there a UK news site where we can go have a look at said drain? |
|
Reply
| | | From: Eddy | Sent: 8/2/2002 2:59 PM |
I'm not computer literate enough to know about these things but I imagine if you put "Absolute bloody waste of money" into a search engine, you'll come up with the goods... |
|
Reply
| |
But let's remember that through BLOOD, Diana was actually a bit more royal than the Windsors, being a direct decendant of our frisky Charles II (and Barbara Castlemaine). |
|
Reply
| |
Agreed, but really, that could be said of half the bluebloods in England, considering how very frisky Charles II was! |
|
Reply
| |
okay, its a purely american point of view, and having none of the traditions and culture of england in me, this is purely opinion. on one hand, my americanism sees the monarchy as unecessary and on the other, as unecessary and nicely decorative. but all that aside, i think most americans think of diana in a very positive light because of the "softening" effect she had in terms of the monarchy. over here we tend to see the monarchy as a very far away institution with relative unimportance (not my opinion, by the way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) whether diana's charitible activities were pr stunts, as eddy alleges, or a good way to keep herself occupied living in a family that largely despised her, almost all americans have a very markedly improved image of the english monarchy because of her. i think that no matter what your personal opinion of her, she sure did a good turn for the image of the monarchy! autumn |
|
Reply
| | | From: simon | Sent: 1/24/2004 6:38 AM |
You are probably right about the royals. However, the sooner we become a republic, the better!!!!!! |
|
Reply
| |
Hi Simon,
The royal family maybe a pain in the royal proverbial for many, but I for one believe they bring revenue via tourism into England. As a Brit, I am all for the royals being kept on, though I do believe only the immediate family should be paid for out of taxes; not the entire brood. The hangers-on should get a day job like the rest of us. I recently visited London with my sons, and did the ususal haunts: Buckingham Palace, The Queen's Guard, Tower of London etc...along with tourists from around the world. I am a travel agent, and acknowledge that many people come to England, and especially London - the first stop - because of the royal family and England's colourful heritage. You maybe ready for a revolution, but I think it will be a while in coming. Vive a la Royals!
Jane-Belinda >From: "simon" < [email protected]>>Reply-To: "ALL MY TUDORS...history chat" < [email protected]>>To: "ALL MY TUDORS...history chat" < [email protected]>>Subject: Re: Vive la Revolution >Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 08:31:54 -0800 >
MSN 8 helps ELIMINATE E-MAIL VIRUSES. Get 2 months FREE*. |
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
First
Return to The Stuarts
