The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #101713   Message #2054420
Posted By: MikeofNorthumbria
17-May-07 - 05:38 AM
Thread Name: BS: Prince Harry - Royals can't be shot at
Subject: RE: BS: Prince Harry - Royals can't be shot at
Karlo (the "lost" Marx Brother) said that when history repeats itself, the first time round is a tragedy, the second time a farce. I think he was referring to the careers of Napoleon I and Napoleon III, but similar factors may be operating here.

During the 1914-18 war, the then Prince of Wales (the future Edward VIII) requested permission to go to the front and take his chances with the rest of his generation. When reminded of his constitutional responsibilities, he replied "My father has four sons". However, his request was refused by the Army high command. Field-Marshal Haig put it something like this - "I don't mind him being killed, but it would be damned embarrasing if he were taken prisoner."

Clearly, the army big-wigs who decided that Harry shouldn't go made the same calculation as Haig. And given the immense political value of Harry as a prisoner, it was certainly the correct one. But the young man himself may have to pay a considerable price - just as his great-grandfather's brother did.

It seems likely that the hangover of "survivor's guilt" which followed his rejection made a significant contribution to Edward VIII's subsequent misfortunes. As to the impact on Harry's future - time alone will tell. But he has my sympathy.

Speaking as someone who hasn't been in the military, it's hard for me to assess the impact of such a refusal on the mind of a young officer. But one might recall here the words of Shakespeare's King Harry on the eve of Agincourt:

"And gentlemen in England now abed
Shall count themselves accursed they were not here
And hold their manhoods cheap while any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's Day!"

Meanwhile, the dying goes on ... when will they ever learn?

Wassail!