[ SECRET POST #2897 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2897 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 041 secrets from Secret Submission Post #414.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

His own tutor complained of his laziness and lack of progress, but okay.

"We'll never know what Eddy would have done, but if he had saved the Romanovs, we could be living in a different world right now."

This is pointless speculation. Prince Eddy could've also found the cure for cancer, just like everyone who dies before their time has limitless potential... only not really. Not if you look at things realistically. Do you have an actual reason for why Eddy would've acted against the advice of his government to "save the Romanovs", or are you simply romanticizing a historical figure who died and is therefore a blank slate for a whole host of groundless "what ifs" and "maybes"? So far, I see no reason (even if the testimony of his tutor was "baseless slander") to think that he would've acted with integrity above and beyond anyone else in the royal family at the time.

[(Anonymous)]

His tutor is hardly a reliable source, the man was well known to be extremely strict, overly critical, and humorless. He said much the same about George.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, obviously you know Prince Eddy's true capabilities and temperament than his own personal tutor so all your assertions seem 100% legit.

[(Anonymous)]

*eye roll*

Here's the documentary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUOnX2IDBk8

[(Anonymous)]

Oh well, if a documentary says so then that debate's over. In other exciting news, werewolves are real:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBojyMYHwbM&index=10&list=WL

And if werewolves had ruled England, they probably would've saved the Romanovs, too.

[(Anonymous)]

And I suppose the testimony of Eddy's Cambridge tutor citing how he barely knew what the meaning of "to read" was, is also suspect? Weird how both his childhood and his university instructors had such negative reports to make of his abilities.

So far, I'm not seeing the leap between "unfairly criticized" ---> "would've saved the Romanovs". That's not a logical progression at all, and everyone but you seems to grasp this. Even that documentary you cite is more about absolving Eddy of the Cleveland Street Scandal and the Jack the Ripper killings, two reasons nobody in this thread has brought up (except for your own strawmen arguments) as a reason why he wouldn't have been a great king.

[tabaqui]

I don't have a dog in this fight but - 'lack of progress' and 'laziness' don't = unintelligent. They could mean he had ADHD, dyslexia, or a piss-poor tutor.

[(Anonymous)]

They could, certainly. Nevertheless, there's still quite a lot of testimony from his contemporaries that Prince Eddy was not a man who demonstrated great intellectual gifts or discipline. Even if he was, there's still no reason to believe the previous anon's assertion that he would've saved the Romanovs. That's far too simplistic an understanding of history and the politics of the time.