Especially if you look at bharata (not the invader kings of course :) )
-
-
Replying to @i_contemplate_
Current state is very problematic but why did ancien regimes fall, if their rule was good?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LenteCurrite
Doesn't that assume that anything that is good will endure? Need I say more?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @i_contemplate_
They can't have been so good, if they fell to ghazis or nihilists. Maybe they were nowhere like caricatures
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LenteCurrite @i_contemplate_
in history books but surely there were reasons? France almost fell earlier but a commoner Jeanne d'Arc saved.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LenteCurrite
Depends on 'good' - whether good to common folk (most Indian kings were), or wise and strong enuf to defeat inv
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @i_contemplate_ @LenteCurrite
Then ponder the paradox of Louis during French Rev being the LENIENT, 'liberal' one relative to older.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @i_contemplate_ @LenteCurrite
It's no paradox at all - for the same destructive forces should have been crushed with an iron heel.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @i_contemplate_
If a dynasty's time to perish has come, it cannot be delayed for too long. Mughals perished even after all
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LenteCurrite
Cyclical view is one then, surely this cannot be held against the form of monarchy at all but merely dynasty
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Lots bharata kings defeated jihadis repeatedly. Their failure lay in not aggressively pursuing outside borders
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.