This is sad, but funny. French Royalists have determined that a relic of a heart was indeed that of Louis XVII, so of Louis XVI and Marie "Let-them-Eat-Cake" Antoinette. So they have pressed their case with the Republic to hold a funeral for the late King. A little late, but better late than never, I guess.
Historian Philippe Delorme, who wrote a book about Louis XVII and organized the genetic tests, lists the facts of the boy's brief but grim life as follows:Then they go on to draw a long bow comparing the late heir to the throne to present day victims of child abuse. Excuse me, but the Bourbons did preside over a France that produces Giles DeRay and the Marquis DeSade. 'One Hundred Days of Sodom' wasn't a fantasy, it was a catalogue of evil-ass-mother-f*cker-shit aristocrats used to get up to in France. However, that is beside the point.
Louis XVII lost his parents to the guillotine in 1793. He was locked in Paris' Temple prison for three years. The boy was brainwashed, with captors forcing him to sing revolutionary songs and curse his mother's memory. He also spent months alone in a dark tower, with nobody to wash him or clean his cell.
What's truly funny is that there is some guy who claims descent through the House of Anjou which disputed the throne with the Bourbons, and he was there. This is plain silly. If you don't think the Bourbons are the rightful Kings, then why turn up to the funeral? Oh well, so much for the logic of it all. A few weeks back, Tony Robinson (a.k.a. Bladrick) appeared in an interesting documentary that disputed the right of succession to the Windsors. In that documentary, Robinson found out that there was a much better claimant to the throne than Henry VII (no big surprise there), and followed that family to the present, only to find out the man (Michael Hastings) lived in Australia and voted for a Republic. It was a corker of a programme and threw a dirty big rock at the House of Windsor. So much for succession and the 'Divine Right of Kings'.
- Art Neuro
1 comment:
I don't hold there to be a moral equivalence between the French Revolutionaries and their upper class. Only an ideologue would condone either, but to defend Louis, it was all a bit rude.
I also don't blame the child of Louis and Marie for their inactions and wrongs.
I think a student of history would point out that the revolution was necessary for more reasons than the depravity of the upper class. Some other things might involve the necessity to clear out the old industrial model, or a need for political reform.
Similarly I don't think we need to find the heir preceding Henry Vii for the throne of England. Personally, I hope the current queen is the last monarch.
Post a Comment