When he was President? The Revolution had been over for 6-7 years at that point. Besides, political assassinations were a late 19th century anarchist thing. Assassinating the President would be that sort of thing that Just Wasn’t Done.
Yeah, we’re talking about the period where they didn’t try to shoot the officers in the middle of battle.
Trying to assassinate the president would be like trying to win a chess tournament by shooting your opponent in the face in modern times. He’d be gone, but you would lose all the support you ever had. (And this was exactly why the other monarchs were none too pleased when France’s nobility lost its head.) Now dueling the Vice President on the other hand… :smack:
Valete,
Vox Imperatoris
Early in his reign, the emperor Nero would often go out of the palace at night in disguise and perform petty acts of vandalism:
One could argue this story is nothing more than gossip, but Tacitus is usually pretty reliable, and in other passages dismisses similar lurid rumors about Nero (e.g. Tacitus does not believe Nero set the Great Fire nor played his fiddle while Rome burned).
Finally, I’m not sure if this fits as a “dramatic reveal”, but check out this bit about an unlucky senator who failed to recognize the emperor in time:
I’m sure Vox Imperatoris would approve 
Maybe this is the same thing Shodan meant by “pageantry”, but I was always under the impression that recognition of nobility was a major point of heraldry. A commoner might not know what the King looks like, but he darn well recognized the Royal insignia.
Also, nitpick: by “local royalty”, I think some of you actually meant “local nobility”. I’m pretty sure “royalty” refers specifically to the King, Queen, Prince(s) and Princess(es).
Yes it does. The King and his family would be the Royal Family.
As others have said, this simply doesn’t appear in the historic record. The concept of honor would have prohibited anybody even thinking of doing so. Remember that the British were incensed when some of the irregular American forces protected themselves during battle rather than meeting face to face on an open battleground. That someone would try to murder an individual would have horrified the entire nation and probably lost the colonies without any war.
It can’t even be said that the British thought of the colonists as terrorists. Why would they? Most of the leading Americans were well known to the upper classes in Britain. They read the same books, drank the same wines, ordered the same furniture from the same companies. The Americans had huge amounts of support all over the UK.
And what would it have gotten them? Washington wasn’t Osama bin Laden, running and financing a terror network. There was no one head to a revolutionary movement that was the preoccupation of much of the country. Doing it later when he was president would have been even more pointless than pointless.
So I guess the response is, why do you think that anyone would have done this? Is there any place or time in history when sympathizers of foreign powers cleansing political leaders as terrorists was an actual practice? Assassinating leaders because they were leaders happened. But as terrorists?
1.) Louis XVI of France attempted to escape the Revolutionaries in 1791, but he was recognized from his appearance on the French coins. I’ve heard this story pretty frequently, and you can find it on the internet:
So royalty wasn’t invariably so familiar to everyone that they’d be known at sight. And apparently you could be recognized from your appearance on a coin.
2.) British wouldn’t necessarily know what Washington looked like. There were Staffordshire figures made that were sold as both “Washington” and “Franklin”. The examples I’ve found on the internet date from the mid-19th century, but I’ve seen contemporary figures labeled the same way:
http://www.artemisantiques.com/A644.html
So yiou couldn’t count on your average British citizen to be able to pick out Washington (or Franklin, for that matter). Considering how badly people do on “Jaywalking” with Nancy Pelosi even today, I’m not terribly surprised.
My part of Cameroon still have a somewhat feudal system going on. Land was allocated and controlled by the local semi-hereditary chiefs. People returned a portion of their harvest to the nobility, and the nobility taxed the local markets for revenue.
In exchange, neighborhood chiefs (lawans) settled disputes in community courts. They also did what they could to ensure the safety of their neighborhood. If you had a problem you’d go to the lawan first. The lawan usually had a normal job, owned fields and was a very well respected man in his community.
Village chiefs (Lamidos) played a very important role. First off, they allocated land. Pretty much anyone could claim an open piece of land, but you had to go through the Lamido to do it. They provided some community support and disaster relief when it was needed. They hosted visiting dignitaries of all types (I was usually expected to check in with the Lamido when working or staying in a new village) and officiated on holidays and ceremonies. They also played a religious role, which I don’t know much about. Cameroonian royal courts strongly parallel our idea of royal courts, complete with musicians, jesters, a retinue of advisors, thrones, etc.
Lamidos came in different degrees. The Lamido of a small village would probably be known to all- he’d have grown up with everyone else in the village, after all. The highest degree Lamidos lived in recognizable palaces- sometimes spectacular ones. They had a huge amount of power, along the lines of a governor. I remember talking to one who was in the process of putting together a private army to fight the local road bandit problem.
Although they had some perks (didn’t have to work the fields, have tons of wives, etc.) most people did not want to be lamido and many young women did not want to marry them. The job came with a lot of restrictions and you couldn’t marry, divorce, and move around doing whatever you want like a common person could.
Anyway, I thought it was interesting. West Africa had it’s period of medieval feudal empires just like Europe did, but never had the industrialization that brought that system down. So you can see a lot there that is a glimpse into a familiar past.
I suspect this one The Prince and the Pauper (1937) - IMDb or its more modern equivalents?
It’s also used in Kenneth Branagh’s Henry V, while the king is walking through the camp on the eve of the battle of Agincourt (“a touch of Harry in the night”). Although he is cloaked and partially hooded, he speaks to many people who could have been expected to see his face. Indeed, a man challenges him to a duel by slapping him with a glove after they exchange words about the king’s actions.
Harry keeps the glove, and gives it back to the man after the next day’s battle- the guy almost has a heart attack…
Sadly the guesses about which movie inspired the question are all wrong. Though I have to fight the urge every time I post to quote some Python. You see it in lots of movies, the most recent encounter with the device I had was in “A Knight’s Tale.” It just reminded me of how often you see it used and made me think I’d really like to see a movie where the prince throw back his cowl and someone says “I thought I told you to bugger off” – then punches him in the mouth.
Once again, not a golden coin but an assignat, the paper currency of the time, which bore a portrait of the monarch.
As stated in my post upthread, we have Jean-Baptiste Drouet’s own statement for this.
Wikipedia, not for the first or last time, has its facts wrong.
Interesting (sorry I missed your post upstream) – butthe misconception didn’t start with Wikipedia. It seems to be widespread. I first learned the story as a kid in the Classics Illustrated History of the French Revolution, wjhich depicted the king being recognized from his appearance on a coin, not a bill. Classics Illustrated wasn’t always the best at depicting things (in one of theor issues on Prehistoric Animals, their “coelacanth” looks suspiciously like an ichthyosaur, and not at all like a coelacanth. You’d think they’d trouble to look it up.), but I’ll bet they got the story from somewhere that said the king was recognized from a coin.
I was thinking http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120631/
(Ever After, for those who don’t want to click.)