I think that the implication of King's assassination has not been fully appreciated.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
After the French Revolution, it was not the treason of the king that was in question; it was the existence of the king. You have to be very careful when you judge and execute somebody for being a symbol.
'The Return Of The King' has a conclusion.
I thought 'The King's Speech' was great.
A king without power is an absurdity.
It is not a sign of arrogance for the king to rule. That is what he is there for.
It is to be remedied that the false traitors will suffer no man to come into the king's presence for no cause without bribes where none ought to be had. Any man might have his coming to him to ask him grace or judgment in such case as the king may give.
I remember having an argument with Alan, I said the Queen's not just going to call the guy up and send him out to do it. And Alan says, well, how would a monarch give orders to her assassin.
So much of the deep lingering sadness over President Kennedy's assassination is about the unfinished promise: unspoken speeches, unfulfilled hopes, the wondering about what might have been.
In my opinion it is less shameful for a king to be overcome by force of arms than by bribery.
In political and social analysis, we still have not cut off the head of the king.