Welcome to the Historical Fiction Online forums: a friendly place to discuss, review and discover historical fiction.
If this is your first visit, please be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You will have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing posts, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The Raucous Royals

User avatar
Rowan
Bibliophile
Posts: 1462
Joined: August 2008
Interest in HF: I love history, but it's boring in school. Historical fiction brings it alive for me.
Preferred HF: Iron-Age Britain, Roman Britain, Medieval Britain
Location: New Orleans
Contact:

Post by Rowan » Thu August 4th, 2011, 1:38 pm

I'm watching all that YouTube has to offer on Horrible Histories. I love that book series!!

User avatar
Leyland
Bibliophile
Posts: 1042
Joined: August 2008
Location: Travelers Rest SC

Post by Leyland » Thu August 4th, 2011, 3:05 pm

[quote=""MLE""]The later Hapsburg monarchs were pretty thorough idiots, too. They are the poster children on why inbreeding isn't a good idea.[/quote]
Hmmm, a thought for ancient Egyptian royalty fans: could the Hapsburgs have learned something from the Pharoah Dynastic Breeding Program? I can't remember how that turned out for the pharoah lines ...
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams ~ Arthur O'Shaughnessy, Ode

SGM
Compulsive Reader
Posts: 699
Joined: March 2010

Post by SGM » Thu August 4th, 2011, 5:46 pm

[quote=""Susan""]I think you mean Charles II! Only two Charleses so far. The third one would be the current Prince of Wales if he chooses to reign using his first name...he can choose any name.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2kyNbZc7oc[/quote]

Charles III - I had a horrible feeling that we had started to refer to BPC as Charles III, hence my question. I understand the current Charles is going to be George VII in honour of his grandfather -- if he gets there.
Last edited by SGM on Thu August 4th, 2011, 5:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Currently reading - Emergence of a Nation State by Alan Smith

User avatar
LoveHistory
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 3751
Joined: September 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Contact:

Post by LoveHistory » Thu August 4th, 2011, 6:33 pm

[quote=""Susan""]I think you mean Charles II! Only two Charleses so far. The third one would be the current Prince of Wales if he chooses to reign using his first name...he can choose any name.

Horrible Histories - Charles II: King of Bling Video...I love it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2kyNbZc7oc[/quote]

Indeed I do. I can't keep the numbers straight. Though some might argue his behavior would have counted for two kings. :D

User avatar
Susan
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 3746
Joined: August 2008
Location: New Jersey, USA

Post by Susan » Thu August 4th, 2011, 7:14 pm

[quote=""SGM""]Charles III - I had a horrible feeling that we had started to refer to BPC as Charles III, hence my question. I understand the current Charles is going to be George VII in honour of his grandfather -- if he gets there.[/quote]

That would be speculation. No name has been released yet and will not be released until (and if) Charles becomes king.
~Susan~
~Unofficial Royalty~
Royal news updated daily, information and discussion about royalty past and present
http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/

SGM
Compulsive Reader
Posts: 699
Joined: March 2010

Post by SGM » Thu August 4th, 2011, 7:53 pm

Naturally, because it has to be agreed by whoever forms the Privy Council at the time of the accession (and who knows what the balance there is likely to be) but the strong odds are on George. Mind you there are equally strong odds on him not being the next monarch.

Of course, this is all just fun and not considered of huge importance -- pver here anyway.
Currently reading - Emergence of a Nation State by Alan Smith

Jeanne
Scribbler
Posts: 21
Joined: July 2011

Post by Jeanne » Thu August 4th, 2011, 9:13 pm

[quote=""Rowan""]According to Merriam-Webster raucous means:

1. disagreeably harsh or strident
2. boisterously disorderly

I'll leave it to you to decide if amourous falls into that definition as well.

Susan... I love that video!!!
[/quote]

Based on the above defintion - which is closer, in my mind, that randy - I'm going with Caroline of Brunswick. A couple of the other Hanoverians probably also qualify.

And, lest we forget, Edward IV, whose court in his later days was known for all the drinking to insensibility and passing of women between himself and his cronies, including his oldest stepson, Thomas Grey.

Jeanne

User avatar
DianeL
Bibliophile
Posts: 1029
Joined: May 2011
Location: Midatlantic east coast, United States
Contact:

Post by DianeL » Sun August 14th, 2011, 4:26 pm

Childeric of the Salian Franks was so badly behaved with the women of his domains he was exiled for eight years.

While out of town, he stole the wife of the king who gave him sanctuary - a piece of work in her own right.
"To be the queen, she agreed to be the widow!"

***

The pre-modern world was willing to attribute charisma to women well before it was willing to attribute sustained rationality to them.
---Medieval Kingship, Henry A. Myers

***

http://dianelmajor.blogspot.com/
I'm a Twit: @DianeLMajor

Post Reply

Return to “Chat”