absd
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2021
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Korean
- Home Country
- South Korea
- Current Location
- South Korea
From a book named History of King Charles The First of England, by Jacob Abbott
"He repented, however, as soon as the consent was given, and when Charles and Buckingham came next to see him, he said it must be given up. One great source of his anxiety was a fear that his son might be taken and kept a prisoner, either in France or Spain, and detained a long time in captivity. Such a captive was always, in those days, a very tempting prize to a rival power. Personages of very high rank may be detained as captives, while all the time those who detain them may pretend not to confine them at all, (1)the guards and sentinels being only marks of regal state, and indications of the desire of the power into whose hands they have fallen to treat them in a manner comporting with their rank. Then there were always, in those days, questions and disputes pending between the rival courts of England, France, and Spain, out of which it was easy to get a pretext for detaining any strolling prince who might cross the frontier, as security for the fulfillment of some stipulation, (2)or for doing some act of justice claimed. (3)James, knowing well how much faith and honor were to be expected of kings and courts, was afraid to trust his son in French or Spanish dominions. He said he certainly could not consent to his going, without first sending to France, at least, for a safe-conduct—that is, a paper from the government, pledging the honor of the king not to molest or interrupt him in his journey through his dominions."
The underlined parts of the paragraph are making me confusing.
In the phrase (1), it says the guards are only marks of regal state, but what exactly the term "regal state" means here?
Does it mean the guards and sentinels are just there to show the state of the palace?
or they want to show that the prisoner is treated like a loyalty?
And in the pharse (2), I'm not sure whether the term "act of justice claimed" means
(a) an act that is truly somewhat righteous
(b) an act that has nothing to do with justice, but would benefit the power who is keeping the prisoner
In the phrase (3), lastly, how "knowing well how much faith and honor were to be expected of kings and courts" and "being afraid of sending his son to rival's dominion" are connected? I guess I don't get the exact meaning of the part saying "faith and honor were to be expected of kings and courts".
Does it mean James knew that it's going to cost a lot to get a king or a member of court back when they are captured by their rival power?
You can read the full text via the link below if you need
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/64344/64344-h/64344-h.htm
"He repented, however, as soon as the consent was given, and when Charles and Buckingham came next to see him, he said it must be given up. One great source of his anxiety was a fear that his son might be taken and kept a prisoner, either in France or Spain, and detained a long time in captivity. Such a captive was always, in those days, a very tempting prize to a rival power. Personages of very high rank may be detained as captives, while all the time those who detain them may pretend not to confine them at all, (1)the guards and sentinels being only marks of regal state, and indications of the desire of the power into whose hands they have fallen to treat them in a manner comporting with their rank. Then there were always, in those days, questions and disputes pending between the rival courts of England, France, and Spain, out of which it was easy to get a pretext for detaining any strolling prince who might cross the frontier, as security for the fulfillment of some stipulation, (2)or for doing some act of justice claimed. (3)James, knowing well how much faith and honor were to be expected of kings and courts, was afraid to trust his son in French or Spanish dominions. He said he certainly could not consent to his going, without first sending to France, at least, for a safe-conduct—that is, a paper from the government, pledging the honor of the king not to molest or interrupt him in his journey through his dominions."
The underlined parts of the paragraph are making me confusing.
In the phrase (1), it says the guards are only marks of regal state, but what exactly the term "regal state" means here?
Does it mean the guards and sentinels are just there to show the state of the palace?
or they want to show that the prisoner is treated like a loyalty?
And in the pharse (2), I'm not sure whether the term "act of justice claimed" means
(a) an act that is truly somewhat righteous
(b) an act that has nothing to do with justice, but would benefit the power who is keeping the prisoner
In the phrase (3), lastly, how "knowing well how much faith and honor were to be expected of kings and courts" and "being afraid of sending his son to rival's dominion" are connected? I guess I don't get the exact meaning of the part saying "faith and honor were to be expected of kings and courts".
Does it mean James knew that it's going to cost a lot to get a king or a member of court back when they are captured by their rival power?
You can read the full text via the link below if you need
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/64344/64344-h/64344-h.htm
Last edited:
