3 ms·
Yes, but it's wrong. Kings kill(-ed) kings all the time. For instance check out what the Saudis are doing these months. That makes it a big question, why it's
by erikb 8y ago
Yes, but it's wrong. Kings kill(-ed) kings all the time. For instance check out what the Saudis are doing these months.
That makes it a big question, why it's not happening more often then they can reproduce. And it's not like they are writing on their own wikipedia page "hey, I, prince Saudi XYZ don't kill Saddam Hussein's nephew because <reason>". So of course it's some guessing involved.
And I have yet to see a more convincing one than that they have dirt on each other. It makes a lot of sense. And while you might think that getting killed is worse than getting bad press or going to jail, for them it means losing power, and that's all they have.
So let's not get too romantic here and try to discuss the facts. If you have a really good reason they don't kill each other more often, then let's hear it. But morals or an "understanding" can't be it.
- hodgesrm 8y agoIt really depends on the era and the type of nobility. Most of the European royal families were related in the 18th and 19th centuries--I can't think of too many instances of them killing each other with the gusto of, say, the leaders of the French Revolution. Exceptions like the killing of the Duke of Enghien blackened the reputations of the perpetrators, in this case Napoleon and Talleyrand. The more interesting counter-examples are cases like the succession struggles in the Ottoman Empire, which after a couple of generations ran on the Highlander principle. The last brother standing became the Sultan.