Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
GHScorpiosRule

The Royals: All the People Who Unironically Wear Robes and Crowns

Recommended Posts


“Harry Roper-Curzon, the grandson of the current Baron Teynham, is engaged to Mexican-American celebrity Hanna Jaff, descendant of a chief of the Kurds and a wealthy Mexican family.“

Nothing royal about either of them, no?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know why but this quote popped into my head which somehow may be more relevant and poignant.

 

 It seems some months after George VI's death, one of their longtime mutual acquaintances remarked to his widow how remarkably quickly she had recovered from his death.

  The new Queen Mum replied: "Only in public, my dear. In private, it's a very different story!"

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

Prince Andrew Reportedly Won’t Be Invited to Prince Philip’s 100th Birthday Celebrations

Quote

There is a warning from up high to play down Andrew. He will be included as little as possible,” the insider said. “It’s not whitewashing history because you can’t leave him out entirely. But it will not make a big deal of his relationship with the Duke of Edinburgh over the years. This is obviously proving difficult because he is his son and it’s playing down his role in the family.” 

 

  • Like 2
  • Useful 6

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Blergh said:

I don't know why but this quote popped into my head which somehow may be more relevant and poignant.

 

 It seems some months after George VI's death, one of their longtime mutual acquaintances remarked to his widow how remarkably quickly she had recovered from his death.

  The new Queen Mum replied: "Only in public, my dear. In private, it's a very different story!"

What was the Queen Mum supposed to do? Hide out forever and not enjoy life? Not assist her daughter in being queen? I doubt she got over it “quickly” but like most of us she had a life to live, which probably helped with her grief. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

3 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

What was the Queen Mum supposed to do? Hide out forever and not enjoy life? Not assist her daughter in being queen? I doubt she got over it “quickly” but like most of us she had a life to live, which probably helped with her grief. 

Since Vic's perpetual mourning of Albert (complete with with 1 decade and a half of secluding herself in her homes) was still within living memory in the early 1950's, I'm sure the acquaintance might have thought that this was a possibility for the Queen Mum. It should be noted that she was somewhat spurred to go back to doing public works shortly after the then-Prime Minister Churchill had a talk with her- evidently encouraging her to resume doing those to help her cope with her grief! 

Edited by Blergh
  • Like 5
  • Useful 4

Share this post


Link to post

Some fans of Harry and Meghan's created an initiative to raise money for CAMFED in celebration of both their birthdays. Harry and Meghan matched the final total they raised, in a donation to the organization. 

 

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Like 21

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

Some fans of Harry and Meghan's created an initiative to raise money for CAMFED in celebration of both their birthdays. Harry and Meghan matched the final total they raised, in a donation to the organization. 

This was a wonderful birthday charity initiative and I'm glad it was so successful.  Kudos to the fans who put it together and Harry and Meghan for matching the donations.  Love CAMFED's mission, so happy for them.  

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, Anduin said:

Good stuff. That means they're leaving the Commonwealth, doesn't it?

Yes. This is how I understand it.  It will be interesting to see if there's an impact on other Commonwealth members, specifically in the Caribbean, who may decide to remove the Queen as head of state as well. 

 

  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure it means they will leave the Commonwealth.   Plenty of other countries have a different head of state than the Queen but are part of the Commonwealth.   For some members of the Commonwealth, she is the head of state, for others she is only head of the Commonwealth, which really is about trade.   That's why the Queen was making a big deal out of Charles becoming head of the Commonwealth.   If the members only had the Monarch as the head of State, then there would be no question that Charles would be the Head of the Commonwealth when he succeeded to the throne.

  • Like 2
  • Useful 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Enero said:

Yes. This is how I understand it.  It will be interesting to see if there's an impact on other Commonwealth members, specifically in the Caribbean, who may decide to remove the Queen as head of state as well. 

 

Well I know Jamaica for sure been wanting out for quite awhile. Actually surprised Barbados made this move before them. All I'll say, is as a person of West Indian descent..,good. And all the other independent islands need to follow suit. Because there isn't fuck all having that continued influence of the Crown does for these islands. Not economically, socially, etc. Nothing. 

 

3 hours ago, MissAlmond said:

"The time has come to fully leave our colonial past behind," the Caribbean island nation's government said.

Ain't that the truth. Oh but I forgot, we're not allowed to acknowledge such messy things like the whole colonialism thing. 

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Like 10
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

One has to wonder why Barbados felt that there was an urgent need to remove Her Majesty as its Head of State instead of considering simply to let enough time pass for her to not longer be in this world- and then installing someone else instead of her successor to that position.  Of course, the BIG question is whether not only other nations will wait out her mortality to do so and do that AND how many more will opt out of Commonwealth altogether upon her death! 

Edited by Blergh

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, Blergh said:

One has to wonder why Barbados felt that there was an urgent need to remove Her Majesty as its Head of State instead of considering simply to let enough time pass for her to not longer be in this world- and then installing someone else instead of her successor to that position. 

Because it's not Elizabeth per se they want out, but The Crown itself; as in the BRF institution, of which Elizabeth is still currently head. They don't want The Crown as Head of State period. Not someone else other than Elizabeth, but none of them. Because they want to finally be fully self-governing, considering they've been an independent state since the 60s.

  • Like 15
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I find the whole thing a little confusing. This article helped - Which countries recognise Queen Elizabeth as head of state?

There are 54 commonwealth countries but only 16 that have her as the head of state. I’m mostly surprised that this change didn’t happen sooner. 

2 minutes ago, Blergh said:

One has to wonder why Barbados felt that there was an urgent need to remove Her Majesty as its Head of State instead of considering simply to let enough time pass for her to not longer be in this world- and then installing someone else instead of her successor to that position.  Of course, the BIG question is whether not only other nations will wait out her mortality to do so and do that AND how many more will opt out of Commonwealth altogether upon her death! 

Not that urgent since the change doesn’t go into effect until Nov 2021. Given how healthy the Queen appears to be they could easily have to wait 5+ years.


There have been Black Lives Matter protests in Barbados so that’s probably a big factor in the timing. I wonder how much the current events within the royal family plays an indirect role. The backlash over Prince Harry daring to acknowledge colonialism cannot go over well in countries like Barbados. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Blergh said:

One has to wonder why Barbados felt that there was an urgent need to remove Her Majesty as its Head of State instead of considering simply to let enough time pass for her to not longer be in this world

🎵 Barbados eyes were watching you

They've seen your every move . . .🎵

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Good for Barbados.  It’s about time.  I have sure former British colonies will have diplomatic relations with Britain but it’s more than enough time to move on.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

While it's been well-known that the eventuality of Her Majesty's passing will drastically affect the ranks and statuses of her eldest son the Prince of Wales and his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall as well as Charles's elder son the Duke of Cambridge, his wife and their children, it should be noted that upon the passing of Her Majesty's near-centenarian longtime spouse, the Duke of Edinburgh, will have some effect on the ranks and statuses of their youngest son, Edward, Earl of Wessex and his wife and son. How so? Well, evidently, not only will Edward inherit his father's title of   Duke of Edinburgh but Sophie will become the  new Duchess of Edinburgh(which, technically the Queen currently is but she's not used that since her father's death and only rarely was referred to that before) while their son James, the current Viscount Severn will become the new Earl of Wessex. It seems Jame's elder sister Lady Louise[ Mountbatten-]Windsor will retain her current title regardless (and NOT become Princess Louise of Edinburgh whereas the current Duke's elder two children   born before George VI's death were  HRH Prince Charles and Princess Anne of Edinburgh before Her Majesty's Accession ).

 

https://www.womanandhome.com/life/royal-news/sophie-wessex-son-james-royal-change-377110/

Edited by Blergh
  • Useful 5

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Blergh said:

While it's been well-known that the eventuality of Her Majesty's passing will drastically affect the ranks and statuses of her eldest son the Prince of Wales and his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall as well as Charles's elder son the Duke of Cambridge, his wife and their children, it should be noted that upon the passing of Her Majesty's near-centenarian longtime spouse, the Duke of Edinburgh, will have some effect on the ranks and statuses of their youngest son, Edward, Earl of Wessex and his wife and son. How so? Well, evidently, not only will Edward inherit his father's title of   Duke of Edinburgh but Sophie will become the  new Duchess of Edinburgh(which, technically the Queen currently is but she's not used that since her father's death and only rarely was referred to that before) while their son James, the current Viscount Severn will become the new Earl of Wessex. It seems Jame's elder sister Lady Louise[ Mountbatten-]Windsor will retain her current title regardless (and NOT become Princess Louise of Edinburgh whereas the current Duke's elder two children   born before George VI's death were  HRH Prince Charles and Princess Anne of Edinburgh before Her Majesty's Accession ).

 

https://www.womanandhome.com/life/royal-news/sophie-wessex-son-james-royal-change-377110/

That article isn’t completely accurate. Edward can’t inherit the title from his father because he’s not the first born son. The next Duke of Edinburgh will be Charles. Most believe that once Charles is King and the title merges with the crown it will be created again and given to Edward.

  • Like 2
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, Dani said:

That article isn’t completely accurate. Edward can’t inherit the title from his father because he’s not the first born son. The next Duke of Edinburgh will be Charles. Most believe that once Charles is King and the title merges with the crown it will be created again and given to Edward.

Well, it seems that the Duke of Edinburgh, Her Majesty and the Prince of Wales have all worked it out in advance that the title will pass to the Earl of Wessex upon the Duke of Edinburgh's death inasmuch as the Prince  of Wales seems to not want to be the next of Edinburgh and ALREADY has a good number of titles even without yet being the monarch! 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Blergh said:

Well, it seems that the Duke of Edinburgh, Her Majesty and the Prince of Wales have all worked it out in advance that the title will pass to the Earl of Wessex upon the Duke of Edinburgh's death inasmuch as the Prince  of Wales seems to not want to be the next of Edinburgh and ALREADY has a good number of titles even without yet being the monarch! 

It’s not something that can be worked out in advance. Inheritance of the title was laid out when it was created and it was the standard male heir inheritance. 

The Queen can’t just decide to give the title to Edward when the current Duke of Edinburgh dies. They have to wait for the current title to merge with the crown for it to be created again and given to someone else. Charles can’t disavow the title because that would just have it sit dormant until it can be given to William (and other ramifications that would create a ton of chaos).

The only way the title can go to Edward when his father dies is if Charles is already King and even then there is a step in between.

The system is much more complicated that royal reporters would have you believe. Most of the stuff they write about titles and succession is completely wrong. 
 

ETA a useful blog that explains in more detail the probable future of the current royal Dukedoms (except Sussex)

The Next Duke of Edinburgh

Edited by Dani
  • Like 1
  • Useful 6

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Dani said:

It’s not something that can be worked out in advance. Inheritance of the title was laid out when it was created and it was the standard male heir inheritance. 

The Queen can’t just decide to give the title to Edward when the current Duke of Edinburgh dies. They have to wait for the current title to merge with the crown for it to be created again and given to someone else. Charles can’t disavow the title because that would just have it sit dormant until it can be given to William (and other ramifications that would create a ton of chaos).

The only way the title can go to Edward when his father dies is if Charles is already King and even then there is a step in between.

The system is much more complicated that royal reporters would have you believe. Most of the stuff they write about titles and succession is completely wrong. 
 

ETA a useful blog that explains in more detail the probable future of the current royal Dukedoms (except Sussex)

The Next Duke of Edinburgh

Titles are so fascinating. I have a few questions:

1. Perish the thought, but what would happen to the Duke of Edinburgh title if Charles predeceases both of his parents?

2. Since dukedoms are currently male-only but the British royal succession now uses absolute primogeniture, if in about 50-60 years George becomes King and his first child is a daughter, would she be unable to inherit the titles of Duke of Cornwall and Rothsay unless a new letters of patent is written?

  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post

9 hours ago, Domenicholas said:

1. Perish the thought, but what would happen to the Duke of Edinburgh title if Charles predeceases both of his parents?

William would be first in line for both the Crown and Duke of Edinburgh. Eventually the title would merge with the Crown and be available for Edward. 

9 hours ago, Domenicholas said:

2. Since dukedoms are currently male-only but the British royal succession now uses absolute primogeniture, if in about 50-60 years George becomes King and his first child is a daughter, would she be unable to inherit the titles of Duke of Cornwall and Rothsay unless a new letters of patent is written?

Yes, but I’m not sure if letters patent would be enough to make that change. It may require an act of parliament. There have been attempts to get parliament to pass a female succession bill but they have all stalled.  

Edited by Dani
  • Like 3
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Dani said:

It may require an act of parliament. There have been attempts to get parliament to pass a female succession bill but they have all stalled. 

Mostly because a lot of current title holders have older sisters.   They don't want to suddenly get dispossessed of the stuff and have their sisters take over.   When the change has come to the succession, in England and other places, the people affected were either not born yet (William and Kate's kids) or too young to care (CP Victoria of Sweden and her younger brother, he was about a year old when the change came).   

  • Useful 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, merylinkid said:

Mostly because a lot of current title holders have older sisters.   They don't want to suddenly get dispossessed of the stuff and have their sisters take over.   When the change has come to the succession, in England and other places, the people affected were either not born yet (William and Kate's kids) or too young to care (CP Victoria of Sweden and her younger brother, he was about a year old when the change came).   

Wouldn't that be easily fixed? Just specify that it's going forward, no retroactive title and stuff shuffling.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Mostly because a lot of current title holders have older sisters.   They don't want to suddenly get dispossessed of the stuff and have their sisters take over.   When the change has come to the succession, in England and other places, the people affected were either not born yet (William and Kate's kids) or too young to care (CP Victoria of Sweden and her younger brother, he was about a year old when the change came).   

It’s probably more sexism than selfishness. The most recent bill to fail only applied to future births just like the Succession Act of 2013. So it’s probably not fear of losing their titles but fear of having more woman in the House of Lords. Fortunately there is growing support for the idea. 

Edited by Dani
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/20/2020 at 4:36 PM, supposebly said:

And then, they would have to call it the House of Ladies. The Horror!

That reminds me of what happened when the first woman became a judge in England. As you probably know, English High Court judges are addressed as "My Lord." A controversy arose over what to call a woman judge. Research showed that the reason judges are called My Lord is that they stand in place of the Sovereign. And the Sovereign was (and is) a woman, so technically all the judges should be called "My Lady." That didn't go over well, so it was decided male judges would be My Lord and female judges would be My Lady regardless of the gender of the Sovereign.

  • Like 6
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post

Well, there will be no debate that Princess Eugenie of York's baby's impending baby's surname will be Brooksbank! I only hope the baby gets to know his/her paternal-paternal great-grandparents better than the paternal grandparents! 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, Blergh said:

Well, there will be no debate that Princess Eugenie of York's baby's impending baby's surname will be Brooksbank! I only hope the baby gets to know his/her paternal-paternal great-grandparents better than the paternal grandparents! 

I don't quite follow. Jack's grandparents are still alive? Is there something up with Jack's parents being a bad influence on the baby? Thanks.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Blergh said:

Well, there will be no debate that Princess Eugenie of York's baby's impending baby's surname will be Brooksbank! I only hope the baby gets to know his/her paternal-paternal great-grandparents better than the paternal grandparents! 

Do you mean “maternal/paternal great-grandparents”? And what, if anything that we know of, is wrong with the baby’s paternal grandparents? It’s his/her maternal (Royal) grandparents who have all the issues. Or at least I thought it was.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, BW Manilowe said:

Do you mean “maternal/paternal great-grandparents”? And what, if anything that we know of, is wrong with the baby’s paternal grandparents? It’s his/her maternal (Royal) grandparents who have all the issues. Or at least I thought it was.

YOIKS!! 

 

Yes, that's whom I meant!

 

I know nothing about Mr. Brookshanks's own parents or paternal grandparents. 

I hope that the future Master/Miss Brookshanks get to know their maternal-paternal great-grandparents (the Duke of Edinburgh and Her Majesty) more than his/her maternal grandparents (the Duke and Duchess of York).

 

That's what I get for dashing off a post   when I'm in a hurry on the way to be out of the house for an extended period of time!  Sorry!

Edited by Blergh
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Blergh said:

YOIKS!! 

 

Yes, that's whom I meant!

 

I know nothing about Mr. Brookshanks's own parents or paternal grandparents. 

I hope that the future Master/Miss Brookshanks get to know their maternal-paternal great-grandparents (the Duke of Edinburgh and Her Majesty) more than his/her maternal grandparents (the Duke and Duchess of York).

 

That's what I get for dashing off a post   when I'm in a hurry on the way to be out of the house for an extended period of time!  Sorry!

Princess Eugenie’s husband’s last name is Brooksbank, not Brookshanks as in your post. Posting in a hurry again?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe one time I'll get both Mr. Brooksbank's surname AND his impending baby's Royal grandparent and great-grandparent links right! Oh, well. 

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 10

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, Blergh said:

Maybe one time I'll get both Mr. Brooksbank's surname AND his impending baby's Royal grandparent and great-grandparent links right! Oh, well. 

If it makes you feel any better, I initially saw the ring in the pic, got super fixated on it to the exclusion of the rest of the photo, and was like, "aren't they already married? Why are they posting a ring picture again?" Took me awhile to figure out the news. Lol

  • Laugh 5

Share this post


Link to post

I never really cared that much about Charles and Diana, but I liked that they compared and contrasted different perspectives on the relationship and Diana's early life.  I also liked that the writer guy actually read the transcripts of Diana's interview and then looked at what the author actually said and found where it didn't exactly match up.  I am a sucker for good research.  Obviously it's not like he went and interviewed people himself, it's just for a small podcast, but he really did put work into it.

  • Like 3
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post

Disney+ has a new movie "The Secret Society of Second Born Royals"  (yes they know its a mouthful).    Fine it's fiction, but now I am fanwanking that Charlotte is NOT escaping her to secret lab, she is in training with her super powers to protect the throne.   Shen and Prince Oskar correspond regularly about what they will do when they are full members of the Society.    Harry didn't leave England because of the treatment of his wife (which was horrid, let's not go there, this is FANFIC).   A plot was discovered to destroy all the world's monarchies so Hollywood Actresses (especially of a certain group, you know the ones I mean) can be the ONLY royalty.    Harry is using his wife's connections to go undercover and break up the plot (yeah it needs work but go with it folks).   Meghan is totally in on it and helping because she knows what real royality does for the world.   

  • Like 5
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post
OtterMommy

Everyone has stated their views on the Sussexes and no one is going to change anyone's mind.  Any further excessive bickering may lead to a temporary suspension of this thread.  If you do not agree with someone's opinion, please scroll to the next post.  If you feel the need to take a stronger action, please use the ignore function.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size