home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!gatech!mailer.cc.fsu.edu!sun13!ibms7.scri.fsu.edu!quelch
- From: quelch@ibms7.scri.fsu.edu (Geoffrey Quelch)
- Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
- Subject: Re: Charles's DNA tested to prove not illigitimate
- Message-ID: <11821@sun13.scri.fsu.edu>
- Date: 26 Jan 93 15:07:27 GMT
- References: <1993Jan22.154824.550@nuscc.nus.sg> <1jpg6eINN1p7@early-bird.think.com> <1js0trINNlhb@clover.csv.warwick.ac.uk> <1993Jan25.211333.15955@ttinews.tti.com>
- Sender: news@sun13.scri.fsu.edu
- Reply-To: quelch@ibms7.scri.fsu.edu (Geoffrey Quelch)
- Organization: SCRI, Florida State University
- Lines: 21
-
- In article <1993Jan25.211333.15955@ttinews.tti.com> jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson) writes:
- >
- >Apparently the kings and would-be kings did lead their
- >gangs/armies into battle and take the chance of being slit up. Question:
- >who was the first English monarch not to lead the English army in person?
- >
- >Dick
-
- The last King to lead his troops in battle was George II at Dettingen
- (1743). Of course this isn't a direct answer to the question because
- presumably some earlier Kings may not have had any battles to lead troops
- in. My vote therefore goes to George III as the first King not to lead
- his troops in battle.
- GEQ
-
-
- --
- Geoffrey E. Quelch | Internet quelch@hartree.chem.wfu.edu
- Department of Chemistry | quelch@hbar.phy.wfu.edu
- Wake Forest University | Voice: +1 (919) 759 4717
- Winston-Salem, NC 27109 | Fax: +1 (919) 759 4656
-