TV Home Forum

Whoops! - Fox News breaches Royal Injunction

but probably won't be noticed... (November 2003)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
RT
rts Founding member
A Major Setup posted:
Do we want a gay King?

You mean a Queen, right?
:-(
A former member
RTS posted:
A Major Setup posted:
Do we want a gay King?

You mean a Queen, right?


Err...

Well even if Charles is gay / bisexual / german, it shouldn't really matter. He's old now anyway, he wont be on the throne for more than about 20 years.
CO
Corin
Are there not English royal precedents?

William II

Richard I

Edward II

James I

William III

???
PE
Pete Founding member
Isn't Charles going to call himsefl George VII (?) as the name Charles is associated with beheading.
CO
Corin
Well Charles I is definitely associated with a monarch who lost his head in an argument with parliament.

But Charles II is associated with marital difficulties and scandalous improprietary.

It all started going badly wrong, right from the start.

From
<http://www.worldwideschool.ORG/library/books/hst/english/RoyaltyRestoredorLondonunderCharlesII/chap7.html><

Quote:
Back went the chancellor, with a heavy heart and a troubled face, to the king. He softened the queen's words as much as possible, and assured his majesty her resistance to his will proceeded "from the great passion of love she had for him, which transported her beyond the limits of reason." But this excuse, which should have rejoiced a husband's heart, only irritated his majesty's temper. That night a violent quarrel took place between the husband and wife, yet scarce more than bride and bridegroom. When they had retired, the king--being inflamed with the words of his courtiers, who assured him the dispute had now resolved itself into a question of who should govern--reproached the queen with stubbornness and want of duty; upon which she answered by charging him with tyranny and lack of affection. One word borrowed another, till, in his anger, he used threats when she declared she would leave the kingdom. "The passion and noise of the night reached too many ears to be a secret the next day," says the chancellor, "and the whole court was full of that which ought to have been known to nobody."

When the royal pair met next morning, they neither looked at nor spoke to each other. Days passed full of depression and gloom for the young wife, who spent most of her time in seclusion, whilst the king sought distraction in the society of his courtiers. The chancellor, after his second interview with the queen, absented himself from court, not wishing to be furthermore drawn into a quarrel which he saw himself powerless to heal.


His wife was Princess Catherine of Braganza of Portugal.

From <http://www.newsday.COM/extras/lihistory/3/hs321.htm>

Quote:
Though her dowry proved sound, her loyal and forgiving nature was tested many times over, as Charles' mistresses repeatedly bore him children -- 14 in all -- while Catherine miscarried twice and produced no heirs.


So maybe it is the image of Charles II being a bad husband with which he does not wish to be associated? <cough, cough>

Newer posts