by "ElBob-O" <robertjarmstrong@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Mar 5, 2007 at 05:07 PM
Tim Bruening wrote:
>> Now I would like to know why Arthur wasn't asking why his wife has been
> >accused and convicted of treason, or asking what she did to warrant a
>> treason charge, or demanding to review the evidence to make sure its
>> valid. I find it unbelievable that Arthur wouldn't be curious as to
why
>> his wife has suddenly been convicted of treason and sentenced to death!
>A) Adultery by a consort is treason, by definition.
If a pregnancy occurred from the affair it would dilute the purity of
the royal lineage; the King/Queen "energy" was a very im****tant
commodity required by the people for leaders to show consistency and
continuity of rule -- and order. Another example was having a ruler
walk on a carpet in order to keep this energy from being drawn off
into the commonality of more earlthly beings.
