Is HRH Prince Charles infallible?

In the 16th century, few people questioned the concept of monarchy. There had been some minor and abortive attempts at republicanism in Europe over the centuries, but for the most part, monarchy was accepted as the standard and normal form of government. The people of the era certainly did NOT think of monarchs as "gods" -- that idea would have been considered blasphemous -- but the concept of "divine right" did prevail, and fundamentally meant that if someone was a monarch, this was owed to God's will.

By the same token, if someone was a ditch digger, that, too, was owed to God's will. This attitude played an important role in matters of social class, as you can imagine, in a long-held view that no one should aspire to rise above his station, because God himself had dictated everyone's "place" and put the monarch at the top of the heap. Mind you, the monarch supposedly ruled only at God's discretion and was ultimately responsible to God, a belief that was supposed to keep the monarch on the straight and narrow, but as you can imagine, this notion was more idealistic than realistic.

It's also fair to say that the 16th-century, for a variety of reasons, represented the beginning of the end of the concept of "divine right," as the next two centuries would demonstrate.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.