British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

Bits and pieces.

After he becomes king, can Charles kick all the Yorks out of their apartments?

As I mentioned on the Eugenie wedding thread, HM seemed so much older all of the sudden at the wedding. Or was it just me? Her coloring looked off, which I guess could have been the lighting, but she seemed so much smaller and her presence seemed "diminished" somehow. I am not ready to lose her.

I would think so R2, but it might be a bad look for him, one he won't really be able to afford.

The toll it took on HM's young family and the resultant strain on her marriage to Phil is indeed the reason I think William and Kate have not been obligated to carry a heavier workload than some believe they should. The Cambridges themselves do not seem in any hurry for William to ascend the throne. For now their focus is raising their children.

I know I have mentioned this before, but seriously, why no new snaps of wee Louis? People thinks perhaps at his 6 month mark something will be released. Still seems a bit odd. They can always Photoshop out any horns or whatever the issue may be.

Have any photos of Camilla at her school event showed up yet?

[quote]They can always Photoshop out any horns or whatever the issue may be.

LOL.

He lacked horns back in July, but I suppose he may have sprouted some since then.

Not a huge fan of Will or Kate, but they make some pretty fucking cute kids. Charlotte for the win, at least so far. She is a STAH!

They’re cute now, but if they are anything like Daddy, it won’t last long.

The royal frumpy genes are powerful.

I don't know. Diana injection seemed to hold them out until the onset of middle age.

I admire Kate, she gets the duty and tradition aspect of the job. Charlotte is definitely a fave.

R6 Louis is the great great grandson of the Queen Mother. Genetics rule. Look up "The Monster of Glamis".

R15 He’s also the great great grandchild of fifteen other people. Yes, genetics do rule.

All the BRF do is suck up tax payer $$$$ from the public, nothing more. Bunch of fucking freeloaders.

They contribute nothing meaningful to society. They get a free ride on the taxpayers back.

The whole monarchy institution needs to be done away with. People are poor and catching hell in london. And this family think they should live high off the hog at tax payer expense.

I hope they break up the monarchy after elizabeth is gone. It's the 21st century. It shouldn't exist anyway.

R6 - It has nothing to do with horns; rather, it has everything to do with the elliptically-shaped pupils and cloven hooves.

The senior "Royals" all eat babies, or so I heard.

Charles wants to be a tampon.

I’m pretty sure that was Kate I told to “fuck off” in London last May.

Prince Phil is a Paedo...

I do hope the lovely Duchess of Kent is not in very poor health and that's why she was a non attendee at Princess Eugenies wedding .

I'm cousins with Anthony Armstrong-Jones' mother and with him. The nasty portrait of her in The Crown was accurate. Social climbing bitch.

R6, baby is rumored to have physical disabilities.

At least the kardashians finance their own extravagance. The "Royals" just steal it from the public.

Fucking freeloaders.

I like the Queen. I will miss her when she kicks off.

Rumored where and by whom, R27?

They take a lot of money from the public and they don't even need it.

R27 More Datalounge invention.

Kicking out the Yorks is a bad idea. Who knows how much lower they'd stoop to raise money.

And, IIRC, the royal family generates income via tourism.

When they say that they do all this charity work what does that really mean? They cut ribbons? They go to fundraisers? They give a speech here and there? They donaye what to them is a very small amount of money? That doesn't seem like work to me.

At some point, the British public will wake up and collectively say, "Who needs this shit?" and demand a referendum on the dismantling of the monarchy. Life in Britain is not a bowl of cherries at the moment. Costs have gone up, quality of life has gone down, a lot. The weather remains the same - bad.

The royals are definitely in the departure lounge and it is just a matter of time before their plane takes off. When, not if...

They draw interest and publicity to causes and events by appearing at / endorsing them. This has been the case for at least the past century. Doesn’t mean that this will continue but their patronages wouldn’t continue if the organisations didn’t see any value in their continued patronage.

Hmmmm.....France, Italy and Germany all got rid of their ruling royalty and they all seem to have a thriving tourist trade.

Those stating, like R28, that “the "Royals" just steal it from the public” on one hand or other who’re saying that the monarchy is great for bringing in more tourists on the other, all seem to miss the real point of keeping it.

In all the rankings of the countries of the world - according to social indices, lack of corruption, etc. – placed at the top of these lists are Denmark, Sweden and Norway. The Netherlands can be found in a respectable place, as is Belgium, despite its demographic complexity. Even Spain, a young democracy with a recent past of dictatorship and a bloody civil war is not lagging that far behind. Among the countries in Asia (and in general), Japan leads in many indices.

Common to all these countries, as well as to the United Kingdom, is the adoption of a successful democratic government model which preserves the tradition of a royal house, but with virtually all powers taken away from, being a ceremonial institution only. The advantage of this combination, which ostensibly represents a built-in paradox, is the separation between secular nature, devoid of an inherent holiness, of the democratic idea and the mythological, romantic, divine splendor embodied in the "eternal" succession of the royal family. A king or a queen embodies in their form all the theatrical fantasies which appeal to a large portion of the public, but in these constitutional monarchies, this yearning strengthens an institution that is devoid of any real power. Facing them are politicians, who have real power, but, by definition, are devoid of glory and majesty. They are leaders for a moment, successful/ popular to a certain degree, but hardly anyone mistake them for monarchs. Unlike kings, they do not represent eternity and certainly do not embody the state.

In democratic countries where there is no king, there is always the danger that an elected leader will be seen as a substitute for a king. Putin in Russia, Erdoğan in Turkey, Berlusconi in Italy, Netanyahu in Israel, Trump in the US - all of them are leaders who seem to believe in full identification between them and their country and between their own personal interests and those of the public they are supposed to serve. They portray in their conduct Louis XIV's statement, "I am the state". Such a glorification of an elected prime minister is not possible in a country like Great Britain. In 1945, after the Nazi threat was over, it was George VI who represented the continuity of national existence, while the national hero, the revered Prime Minister of the nation, Winston Churchill, was deposed from office in that year's election. From Margaret Thatcher to Tony Blair to Teresa May - the premiership does not give the (temporary) elected official a lofty aura. This is reserved for the monarch, and because the monarch has no real power, so - too - does the pathos.

So, a monarchy of the kind used in the UK is a very sophisticated and effective tool for a democratic nation to preserve and defend its own democracy. Ostensibly despite - and in fact because - of the inherent irony of it.

Bang on a bit more r38. How tedious.

The monarchy could preserve its' mystique and therefore its' putative value before the 1980s. Charles/Diana/Camilla and Andrew:Fergie seriously diminished that, and it's been a shitshow ever since the internet has revealed everything. Now what we see is their very obvious feet of clay plus their outrageous lifestyle at public expense. There is almost universal recognition of the Queen's long service, despite her vast wealth, but Charles and Camilla are quite another story. And Britain is only one plane crash away from having Harry and his unworthy wife on the throne.

Interesting take r41. I still don't understand why the entire Cambridge clan insists on flying together. God forbid, but that is a tragedy in the making.

R40 Too many words for you?

No r43 If it is interesting, there can not be too may words for me. This was not an example.

I found your post to be interesting R38. Thank you.

Louis has a withered arm and a birthmark in the shape of a Pickelhaube.

R38 offers a rare option, here on DataLoung - one that is well explained and a keen point of view.

My nephew was raised on Fox tabloid TV and although he is a good man, he is an ignorant fool and complete tool of his corporate overloads. He’s jingoistic without bothering to look up the meaning of the word. A young Trump supporter. It’s impossible for me to understand how anyone could be so stupid as to support that vile man. But, R38 does explain part of it, I have no doubt. It saddens me to know that my nephew must eventually morph into an unredeamable asshole in a few years, if he doesn’t change wholesale before then.

Remember that after the Queen's seemingly heartfelt (as a mother and grandmother...) brief televised speech about the death of Diana the moment the camera went off she asked rhetorically 'Was that contrite enough?' In terms of public servants they are huge phonies but the queen is a genius and the others are all very bad actors and people are seeing they are paying too much for too many bad performances.

Also note that when there are huge public outpourings of support for the royal family with them on the balcony and the queen giving her small noncommittal wave the crowds waving their flags are entirely white. Rarely do you see people of color who are showing any enthusiasm and with their growing population especially in London the royal family means practically nothing(unless they can be used like dimwitted geezer Charles) to a rapidly increasing part of the population.

If Louis had any chance of having any sort of developmental disabilities...I don’t think the Firm would have continued things.

R48 OMG you were there when she recorded that speech! REAL INSIGHT!

Wait what, R48?

Or...perhaps the Queen felt humiliated. Publically humiliated. So, on completion of the deed, she needled the advisors who strong-armed her into making what she felt was a private, family matter into a public spectacle. Those that counseled her that her genuine self-restraint was not genuine enough. As if to say, “now you’ve had your pound of flesh, I hope you are happy with yourselves.”

At some point, I think we always have to appreciate that those 60+ years older than us were raised in different times. We might find them pathetic dinosaurs when we are very young, but once we become adults, some understanding and deference is due, as an act of humility and empathy.

I do find the two Princes with their sad-sack routine bemoaning their fate to be tiresome. It’s fine for a 10 year old Prince to wish to trade places with a Pauper, but they’re grown men who are luckier than most and ought to step up to their responsibilities, and stop being such crybabies.

My sister vomits every Sunday night in anticipation of going to work on Monday morning. And she has to make her own meals and do her own laundry. When the Princes start vomiting on the way to their ribbon cutting gigs, then I’ll make allowances. Until then, shaddup already!

R53, at least she’s thin.

If there were a referendum tomorrow and the public voted to end the monarchy after the Queen dies, probably only Charles and Andrew would have a problem with it. Judging by every rumor I've heard, Wills and Kate would do a happy dance: They could take all the family money that the Windsors have squirreled away over the centuries and live the life of private wealthy people whose only duty is to do fuck-all.

Well, Meghan Markle might be unhappy, since she would now be married to dimwitted Harry Windsor, with no title to show for it.

R55 William would leave her in a second if he didn't have to be King.

I predict great things for little Prinz Ludwig...

Quite possibly, R56, and Kate would then marry some other posh guy and enjoy her parents' millions. She'd still be rich and beautiful, even without Wills.

R27, the baby likely does not have disabilities. (It would probably be too early to tell at this stage anyway.) William craves his privacy and he's extending that to his kids. In George's first two years, I think the public only saw 2 or 3 photos of the boy.

R38 is right.

R37, France, Germany, nor Italy have pomp, ceremony, and pageantry as major attractions. Just the Horse Guards alone are worth a visit to London.

The castles, the stately homes, the cathedrals, the museums---everything quintessentially "British" is wrapped in history.

From Queen Boadecea to "King Lear" to Queen; from the Norman Conquest to the D-Day Invasions to the "British Invasion"; from Richard Lionheart to "The Lion in Winter" to football's Three Lions; and from the rallying cry at Agincourt of "Henry V" to the refusal to leave London in World War II; the British Royal Family has personified the spirit and resoluteness of the people.

The French overthrew an uncaring and even cruel aristocracy. Italy's royalty was more Frankish, from Charlemagne to Napoleon, than native. And Germany's so-called "Emperors" date only to the 19th Century, so their foundation was easily knocked out from under them in the 20th.

France celebrates with red, white, and blue jet contrails on Bastille Day . Italy celebrates its Medieval and Renaissance eras with town "battles." And Germany touts its picturesque "Romantische Strasse" with wine and beer fests.

Generalizations to be sure, but the UK has all that AND a living symbol of the ties that bind its people in a glorious and victorious history. And the people are in no hurry to sever those ties of national identity.

Excellent thought provoking post [R38]

Any news or gossip on the Duchess of Kent?

R61 Cut, paste from UK, French, Italian, and German Tourist Board websites and done.

If the monarchy ended today, these people would still be hounded by the press. The people watched them grow up and many will always be interested in them and their lives...a real soap opera. Even unpopular Charles.

I think a large part of Britain wants to do away with the royal family, particular because of the behavior of the younger members: the York girls' constant vacations, the American bride who refuses to wear clothing from British designers. However, I'd argue that the reason they're still here is not tourism, but rather tradition. Over the past several years, Britain has taken on a huge number of immigrants, particularly from the Middle East. The demographic shift is impacting the culture. Keeping the royal family in place will maintain some stability and link with the past.

R61-God save the Queen!

r38 has a lot of words in it but the monarchies in those countries serve a different purpose and have very different public roles. There's nothing that they all have in common, at all.

„Glorious and victorious history“, r61? You mean the one that revolved around centuries of genocide in Scotland and Ireland, and exploitation of oppressed peoples throughout Africa, Asia and the Caribbean, and complicity in the slave trade until it stopped being profitable? That glorious history?

And just for starters, if you believe that Germany’s emperors date only to the 19th century, you need to open a book on European history. Any such book will do.

Here's my fun BRF fact: did you know that the "Windsor" family is almost completely German? Her Majesty is of 50% German ancestry; Philip is 100% German, so Charles is 75% German. Diana upped the English quotient for William and Harry to above 50% for the first time in ages.

[QUOTE] I am not ready to lose her.

Mary!

She’s been reigning for 60-plus years, this kind of reign is an exception, not the rule. You don’t think you’re ready for the accession of a new monarch? Gather your knickers honey, it won’t be very long.

The royal penis bathers have been out of work for 60-plus years! We need change we can believe in!

[QUOTE] Her Majesty is of 50% German ancestry

I see where you’re going with this but I don’t think her paternal ancestry is really 50% German. Obviously she has small diluted slices of English, from her descent from Henry VII. Some additional paternal Scottish (besides her 50% maternal Scottish) from her descent from James IV of Scotland, some French from a Stuart marriage, and even some Hungarian from her grandmother Queen Mary’s own grandmother. Queen Elizabeth is a hodge-podge of different things, although because of her descent from Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, and the dominance of German culture in their court, everyone likes to consider her German. Philip is mostly German with a tiny slice of Russian and ‘Dane’, although it’s from that weird Danish/German border region that was historically contested between the two states. I tend to consider them Germans, especially the ducal family that ruled the state since they married Germans. As a descendant of The Electress Sophia, he’s got similiar Tudor and Stuart ancestry as Elizabeth. Little Prince George has the benefit of Diana and Catherine’s English blood. He’s got lots of it!

The Royal Mongrels of Europe. Don't forget the negro blood from George III's wife, Queen Charlotte

George is adorable.

I don't think the monarchy survives the death of HM. Charles will make an effort, but he doesn't have the personality for the job and the public will become more frustrated with the overwhelming laziness of William and Kate. Rumors were William isn't big on kids in general, but loves that he can use them as an excuse not to work.

William and Kate will be put to work once they've stopped having kids.

They'll have no excuse then.

R74 Something tells me they will find a new excuse. Unless she decides to become Duchess of Duggar. If they go for four, that is going to look vulgar. I know HM did, but it was a different time, and likely at least one of those was a surprise.

Why didn't William and Harry- but especially William- go for hair transplants? They've certainly got enough money to do it and they'd have access to all the best doctors to perform it. William was a lot cuter with hair.

[R74] I think they will have at least one more child perhaps two. They may well have twins as apparently there is the history in the Spencer and Middleton families to make that a possibility.

Kate has got two siblings. While I agree they might have another one, I think they might be about as fine with having three kids which would resemble Kate's family situation.

And speaking of the kids: I think there will be a new official pic at around Christmas / New Year, including Louis.

George is a petulant brat. Charlotte's the star. Let's see how that plays out over their lifetimes.

With year-round public engagements, there was prob no way for William and Harry to transition to a hair piece effectively.

William lost it fairly early on and fast too. Harry hung in there, but it went from barely noticeable to being able to see it from space seemingly overnight. Maybe all of the wedding stress, I don't know. But he had a small window where he could likely have had a successful procedure without drawing too much notice. This is a guy who walks around with holes in his shoes. Maybe he isn't much for vanity.

William could be more active, but Kate is probably smart to limit her appearances as they garner so much press attention to the point that they overshadow the activities of the other royals. Charles is notoriously jealous of the attention others in the family receive. William and Kate depend on his allowance to fund their lifestyle. She will stay in her lane for now. The real test will be when they assume the Duchy of Cornwall. They'll have their own funds and the kids will be older so there will be no excuses.

R76 probably because they recognised that hair transplants always look ridiculous, except to the transplantee.

R84 hair transplants look better now than they used to. I don't think it would have worked for Will, even if he had the down time. His balding started early and he lost a lot, you need something to work with.

R83 I disagree. That is one thing that Kate has always been rightly criticized for. Doing the fewest engagements possible. Now that she seems more confident these days, I'm hoping she will start showing up regularly, and really digging in.

The Meghan is pregnant rumour mill has kicked off again after people observed how she looked at Eugenie's wedding!

How much time do they need with the children? Don't they have nannies for each one? And maids and butlers and housekeepers and groundskeepers and chauffeurs and cooks to take care of all of them and clean up after them? I mean everything is done for them except for their bodily functions which take care of themselves.

R50 thinks that the queen's tv speech was heartfelt and genuine rather than believing she's the greatest pr agent for the British monarchy. And she had to be begged to come back to London by Tony Blair!

After the initial shock she probably said 'The answer to a Queen's prayers!' Then she did a jig.

And I like her. I think she's as good an actor as there ever was. I'm totally charmed by her. But remember under it all she's a saleswoman, the best.

Supposedly Charles is ready to move the family out of Buckingham Palace and into Windsor once the Queen dies. He will open BP and many of its rooms year-round for tourists to visit. I don't think he'll reign long. He'll be at least 70 when he takes the throne.

R46, My very close next-door neighbor in San Diego, DAR, always claimed to be a direct relation of the BRF as proven by her withered arm. Still she was a successful art professor. Would there be anything medically to be done for little Louis? A birthmark can be covered up or surgically fixed, right?

[quote] George is a petulant brat. Charlotte's the star.

Does he know he'll be king some day? Is that why it is he being just a boy?

The monarchy should be done away with. And Charles and Camilla become commoners and become servants for a wealthy family. Camilla will become known for doing a mean Charleston on tv.

R90 Charles is turning 70 next month.

He'll make a fine king for a few years. William will take over in his 50s. No batshit crazies near the throne after Diana. England will be ok with their kings. Not sure about Scotland though. We need a Mary! queen of scotch.

I like the lucky clan. Sure our British Treasury tosses them a few pounds, but our little country rakes in billions of pounds in return. They certainly present a likable family picture, and I'm definitely a fan of the Queen. Besides, I believe the Royals have a positive effect on many ordinary families in Britain and abroad. I know the anti Royals are in full disagreement, but this group is mostly comprised of professional complainers.

Um, r63? I don't know what you're saying, but, aside from the history dates (Wikipedia), I assure that entire post is original with me, who has both taught British history and travelled there and the other countries, such that I've seen the Changing of the Horse Guards; seen "Medieval" re-enactments; been in Paris on a Bastille Day to see the jets fly over; lived through the "British Invasion" and have seen both HM the Queen AND Queen; been to all the towns on the Romantische Strasse; etc., etc., etc.

I hardly think any "tourist board" would take pains with parallel structure, alliteration, and the like.

If the Queen lives as long as her mother did, Charles won't become king until he's 80 years old! Who would even want the job at that age?

r94 Now he knows how Edward VII must have felt. I wonder who was more bitter about having to wait so long to ascend the throne?

Charles has to become king no matter his age because he's announced Camilla will be crowned queen.

I guess he feels he owes her something.

I'm hoping we have a King George VII for an instant and he immediately abdicates in favor of William and Catherine. I personally like Prince Charles, and I doubt he will use his first name as King. My money is riding on him selecting one of his middle names, namely George and become George VII, it would be a cool nod to his grandparents.

But sooooo boring. I hope he mixes it up and goes with Arthur, it has old school Matter of Britain flair.

That would be hilarious, r102

He has made no such announcement, R100. Stop making stuff up.

William is in no rush to be King and has made that abundantly clear R101

Harry's real first name is Henry.

Harry created some raised eyebrows a year or two ago when he said in an interview that everyone in the family other than Charles dreads the possibility of becoming monarch and nobody else wants the job.

And the rumor has been around for years that Charles intends to take Arthur as his regnal name but it's never been more than rumor. I think at this point it will be Charles even if he once did consider Arthur.

So, do we think Bea is a lesbian, or just not lucky in the guy department? She doesn't really ping to me, but something seems off. I feel she is her mother's keeper as evidenced especially at Yuge's wedding, as well as other events, and god knows that is a psychological disaster in the making.

Is it going to be a Grey Gardens situation? Bea looked so lovely and put together at the wedding, but much of her actions involved monitoring her mother. Her father of all people was the one to sort out Yuge's train, etc. Thoughts?

I don't think Bea is a lesbian. I think she's just an idiot and extremely homely. Also, anyone who marries into that family inherits Fergie, so she would have to completely enchant some poor sap to make it worth it and I'm not sure she has the skills or the looks to do that.

I thought I posted this above but scrolling back I don't see it.

Didn't Bea have a years-long rich boyfriend who not all that long ago dumped her and ended up marrying an heiress? Open to correction, don't know at all. As I've posted elsewhere, I've never closely followed the Yorks. Too much melodrama yet boring.

R110 Yes, that is what I remember. They were together a really long time. Out of nowhere, he split and married some chick within a year. That had to hurt.

Could you even imagine having to put up with Fergie as your mother in law? JFC.

my friend used to show prince phillip around, incognito, to gay bars, jus cause he was a curious watcher...when he was in cali...

true

I don't remember the DoE hanging out in California (No one from California calls it Cali) It wasn't like he could swan around easily from country to country either. And that man could hardly in any way shape or form go incognito. Show your receipts.

R114, There's been lots of wild rumors about Prince Philip since Day-1. Even the high class Hollywood call girl who wrote, "You'll never eat lunch in this town again" talked abut his kinks. So did the woman who wrote a book about being a legal brothel manager in So NV.

By the way I was born in San Diego, graduated from UCLA, and I still occasionally call my home state "Cali." So do other natives I know.

Philip was a hound dog from day one and the story was always that Elizabeth was crushed when she realized a few years into their marriage that the rumors were true. She had loved him deeply. Her alleged revenge was to take lovers of her own which is which why Andrew looks so much like the late Lord Porchester and is her favorite son. Yet she and Philip worked out a satisfactory relationship in the long run.

France and Italy have at least one thing going for them - the climate. All Brits ever do is complain about the weather. Who in their right mind would be interesed in this beggarly land, where it is always cold, where fine weather is a fog, fog is rain, and rain a deluge; where the sun represents the moon and the moon a cream cheese, if not for this trashy reality show?

Sparkle hit Australia and announced she is preggers. She has no idea how the BRF is now going to shut her down.

I think Bea is an interesting character: I would like to know her better. I think she may be Lesbian. I don't think she's stupid. And I don't think she's homely: go to Youtube to watch an interview, and she's animated and articulate. And, for those of you who think she's fat, remember that she ran the London Marathon (as part of a team) for some charity. How many of us could do that?

R118, Yes, i just read that. Very interesting.. So much more drama to ensue.

Looks like MM is going to be in the picture indefinitely now, whether married to Ginger or not.

Has there been any more news on how Princess Alexandra is doing after her fall?

Someone posted on one of the wedding threads that Alexandra broke her arm. Still haven't seen any press reports about it. I adore Princess Alexandra. Doesn't everyone?

It was in The Sun [R122] but she is a low profile royal so doesn't always come on the presses radar.

Ogilvy was a swine! Alexandra was complicit!

Jk I love her. Hope she’s feeling better!

Pardon [R124] ??

R104 it is common knowledge Charles when he is in charge wants Camilla named queen. He can do what he wants.

The monarchy isn't going anywhere...

I present, per R15, The Monster of Glamis:

More on Lord Portchester, alleged baby daddy for HRM.

Aw, Porchie died on September 11, 2001

R129, this is true. In the link this image, I thought it was her son. This picture says it all. He's not Philip's son.

r117 being an island has its advantages. The last time a foreign power invaded Britain was in the year 1066.

I hope the BRF lives as long as English common sense prevails. The greatest threat to it came from princess di who was more American and celebrity conscious. Hope Meg steers clear of that.

I highly doubt the religious Queen who never considered marrying anyone but Philip would have child with another man. I just don't believe infidelity is part of her makeup. She's just not the type. Now, Philip is another story.

I will also add that the Queen is a bit of a snob so she would definitely want ALL of her children to be ROYAL (Prince Philip is also a descendant of Queen Victoria).

After Queen Elizabeth's death (and I hope it is a long way down the royal road), what secrets do you think will come out about her?

R137, nothing seismic. Elizabeth II is the last of a bygone era. She did her duty. She kept her discretion. The performances of Helen Mirren and Claire Foy are dan near close to what she is like.

Regarding Prince Andrew's parentage I don't believe for a second that the Queen had affair. She has never had eyes for anyone but Philip and allegedly she has old fashioned aristocratic view to marriage in which it's somewhat expected that husbands cheat but unacceptable for a woman to engage in the same behaviour. Andrew was named after Philip's father with whom Prince Andrew shares some facial features.

“HRM”, R129?

This is Prince Andrew of Greece and Denmark (Prince Philip's father). He has a very similar facial structure to the present Prince Andrew.

The HRM troll has returned.

I can only imagine what Princess Margaret would've thought of Sparkle.

Bea is not a lez. She’s just very dumpy and up till now tried punching above her weight (no pun intended). She needs to do what Zara did and get herself a real knuckle dragger who likes a full figured gall. Any effete, cute, “soft” guy she dates is either going to be a grifter like her last bf or gay.

Zara probably gets some GOOD dick R144

Go away R135, R136. How would you know anything?

At R134 andy doesn't have detatched earlobes. How are earlobe types inherited?

God I want Beatrice to be Queen.

She would be fabulous! If I was a conspiracy theorist, I would say her wearing purple a lot and being born '88 would mean she is being groomed to ascend.

All hail Queen Beatrice!

[quote]she has old fashioned aristocratic view to marriage in which it's somewhat expected that husbands cheat but unacceptable for a woman to engage in the same behaviour.

You're kidding R139. Aristocratic women have always had affairs. Most of them realize that their marriage is a business contract to produce a suitable heir to the estate. After that is done they can and do fuck whoever they want. The only requirement is discretion. BTW, the queen is not an aristo. She is royal. HUGE difference.

According to several biographies, the Queen had a very high sex drive. So much so that early on in the marriage, Phil actually took to hiding from her, complaining "she's always at me." He was greatly indiscreet about the issue, engaging in "locker room" talk with his pals. He caught a hell of a dressing down from Dickie Mountbatten for his breach of etiquette. Here is their mutual coat of arms which was established at the time of their marriage in 1947. That's the Queen on the right with Phil on the left. Hilarious!

TY R149. It's the petulant contrarian troll at it again. Poverty ridden know it all R139.

If Kate did have a special needs child, she'd tell everybody. The perfect excuse for never cutting another ribbon.

The MM pregnancy announcement today was yes kinda cunty. They could have waited a couple more days to let the Yorks bask in one of their last triumphs. I bet the directive can from Charles and his office, all peripheral royals are being edged out. Charles is also still fighting a PR/popularity war with Diana in a way. That MM, I don’t know. Her true undying love seems to the camera. Careful babe.

Well, for all the royalty haters out there, I believe that one of the first things Charles III will do is move as much of Buck House private contents to Windsor and abandon it as a royal residence. Buckingham Palace will remain a palace but Charles will not be responsible for the maintenance. Have at the upkeep UK and turn it into a museum and tourist trap year round. Win/win.

[quote]Also note that when there are huge public outpourings of support for the royal family with them on the balcony and the queen giving her small noncommittal wave the crowds waving their flags are entirely white. Rarely do you see people of color who are showing any enthusiasm and with their growing population especially in London the royal family means practically nothing.

Not even close to being true, though, more wishful thinking on your part. The relative indifference of Londoners might be a thing. I was one and still couldn't care less about the royal family. Support for the Queen and her litter cuts across ethnic, class and economic lines as do their detractors.

I could be more motivated to sneer at the freeloaders but as R38 rightly pointed out, the likelihood of ending up with a Trump, Putin or Erdoğan as head of state really doesn't bear thinking about. Better the devil you know and all that.

Royal adjacent if anyone cares, Pippa is in labor. Whatever happened to her hot ex Nico Jackson?

Nico and Pippa were too much alike, both middle class in need of a partner to elevate their status. I hope he did well for himself. Equally hot, titled, but more masc, Alex Loundon on the other hand dumped her due to the growing media circus. He went on to marry a much younger but way hotter brunette Kristina Vanderheyden from the US. I live dick more than anyone but that girl is gorgeous.

^Love dick - and live it too

When the Queen ascended the throne in 1952, she and her family had been ensconced in Clarence House just down the mall from Buckingham Palace. It was immediately proposed at Philip's behest that the family remain at their then present quarters, while going to Buckingham Palace daily to conduct affairs of State - essentially, they wanted to use Buckingham as an office building, going to work every day and coming home to Clarence at days end. Winston Churchill scoffed at the idea, demanding that they vacate Clarence House and move into Buckingham Palace as it is the official RESIDENCE of the British monarch. So then, they were actually MADE to move from their comfortable digs at Clarence. The chauffeur who carried them to Buckingham Palace that last time said "I can tell you that there was not a dry eye in that car. Not one." Once established in the Palace, the Queen Mother made it known that she had no intentions of moving out. A battle of wills occurred between Philip and her over her desire to stay. Finally, Philip had the maintenance men cut off all heating to her private rooms in the dead cold of winter. At that the Queen Mother packed up and left. She moved into Clarence House. They traded residences.

Charles lives there now does he not?

Charles moved to Clarence House when the Queen Mother PASSED ON.

R159 Most monarchs do not live in the main palace but in some place more manageable and comfortable.

Churchill was probably just overcompensating for his feelings of inadequacy and humiliation at losing her empire and no longer being #1 after the war.

R157- wow, she's had some pretty hot boyfriends. The husband is meh. It sounds like Alex did a runner and like Bea's ex married an American.

Bea should hook up with Jack's brother. She seems to aim too high like that Michael Hess. He's dating her friend now. These people are so connected. Misha's ex is hot, but he's dating Maria Sharpova. At least he left the same circle of people.

R155 so why when you see those 1,000s of people waving flags they are entirely white? You'd have to look hard to see people of color.

This primogeniture has got to stop. I'd like to see a Queen Beatrice, as someone suggested upthread, still dumpy, still unmarried, possibly lez.

^Primogeniture actually has been halted by the present Queen. This means that had DL's beloved Princess Charlotte been born before Prince George, then she would be next in line after William. As it stands now, she cannot be skipped over in favor of Louis in the unfortunate event of George's demise.

R165, she'll never be Queen; she's too far down the chain. She's not gay. Please try to keep up.

“Her Royal Majesty” is what stupid Americans think is the Queen’s style. It’s not. She is styled as “Her Majesty”, abbreviated to “HM”.

Expanding on my post from R166 - There actually was a future "Queen Charlotte" back in the early 1800s. She was the only child of George IV, and would have become Queen at his death. She died while in child birth and was married to King Leopold of Belgium. Her death is the event that made Victoria Queen. Perhaps Great Britain will see it's Queen Charlotte one day after all - anything is possible.

What R168 said. Please no more "HRM" on this thread! Thank you in advance!

The Queen is a very cold person. So cold that if she were sleeping in the nude and you stuck a thermometer up her ass the mercury would freeze.

Churchill and the Crown were able to bully into a very young Elizabeth into giving up the idea of using Buckingham Palace as an office.

Charles will be 70+ and stubborn. He might be able to pull it off by framing it as saving money.

BP is not "owned" by the monarch; it belongs to the Crown/the British State as does Windsor and its outlying residences and all the royal palaces in London (Kensington/Clarence House/etc).

The actual current reigning Windsor in power owns Balmoral and Sandringham...they are private property and passed down to the heir.

So what's the difference between "Royalty" and "Aristocracy." Because to me it's all the same. There all over-privileged entitled glorified society figures to me. AKA socialites.

That's all these people are. Screw it.

And yet you navigated to this thread and scrolled through 172 replies then felt the need to share the fact that you cannot spell, haven’t mastered the basics of English grammar and are proud of your lack of understanding of the social structure which you are criticising, R173.

R163 - jack’s brother is goofy(ier) looking but won’t go for Bea. He’ll just use the new connection to trade up himself. Pippa really wanted herself a titled guy and coast into a life of sublime gentility, not sure if she got that with the Matthews. I do think all in the men in that family are incredibly sexy. James and the dad included. All with gorgeous legs and BDF for days...I’d do lines off Spencer’s ass in a second. I don’t get all the hate for Pippa. Yes she’s an annoying snob but she could give any A-list gay a run for his money in pulling down quality dick.

Pippa's husband is rich as hell and has some title coming his way when his dad kicks it R175

R175 Jack’s brother is engaged - announced a month or so after Jack and Eugenie’s engagement.

R174 At least the Kardashians finance there own extravagant lifestyles. Unlike the free loading so called "Royals."

Why are you so offended by people you don't even know? They don't care about you huni.

Remember that.

The Queen had a gay BFF for a number of years.

Keep working on that spelling, R178 - it isn’t always easy for some people.

R175, Are you implying that the men in this elite social circle are all gay/bi?

R177- really? There was zero mention of an engagement in any of the news articles that profiled him.

R175 - not at all. All I’m saying is that Pippa has had quite a good run of 7-10 hot guys since university. A run that would stand up well against the record of a decent A-gay. Quantity - of course not, otherwise her vagina would look like the Holland Tunnel. Quality - yeah.

^ intended for R181

R182 There was an announcement in the Family Announcements section of The Times - just the usual couple of lines, a month or so after Jack and Eugenie’s. I’ll see if I can dig it out.

I wish she’d write an autobiography. She’s lived a long and fascinating life.

I love Her Royal Majesty the Queen of England

Marry me, R187!

Here you go, R182 - announcement of Jack Brooksbank’s brother’s engagement.

Nice find, R189. Thanks

The BRF wish they were as wealthy as the Kardashians. But there not.

Keep trying with the spelling, R180, R178 & R191!

The Brooksbank brother is actually two years younger than Jack. Sad to have a receding hairline at such a young age.

R191 I can’t say for certain but I rather doubt that the members of the British Royal Family devote much time to comparing their financial situation with that of a bunch of reality TV “personalities”/amateur porn stars.

It’s actually really sweet that you think that they do.

You’re obviously not particularly bright so I’m going to help you out with the spelling - in your most recent post, you should have used “they’re” not “there”. “They’re” is the correct contraction of “they are”.

Keep it up though, with the spelling! No problem is insurmountable, even for someone as special as yourself.

When was the last time there was a prominent and accepted mistress in the BRF?

Uh, Camilla.

But, then he married her and ruined it.

r195, Camilla's great-grandmother Alice Keppel.

Oh gosh. I forgot! Thanks r196

I think Harry and Sparkle's kids will be HRH'd.

They need future "stars" for down the road. You have to think 10 to 20 years ahead to come up with "plotlines" for the British Royals to keep us amused and to earn their keep.

As the grandkids age, (Will/Harry/Eugenie/Bea) they lose their appeal but they need to hang on to it long enough before the next generation is ready to take over. And, Harry & Sparkle need to be entertaining for the next 15 years before it's time to hand off the juicy plot lines to George and Charlotte.

I don't think the Wessex kids are going to provide much fodder....they seem a bit dull.

Harry’s kids will be HRH’d on the death of the Queen if they haven’t been already. All male line grandchildren of the Sovereign are HRH, which they will be once Charles is King.

Die in a grease fire R194. Totally useless and shite "information" What a waste of time.

You’re still here, R201, R178, R180 and R191? I thought that you weren’t interested in the British Royal Family.

R199 Zara is arguably more popular with the public than Bea and Eug and she doesn't have a title.

Someone posted on one of the MM or wedding threads that the Wessexes' son had "issues" and seldom appeared in public. What exactly are those issues? He looks very strange and out of touch in photos.

R202 Learn how to find multiple posters, and learn it well. You get a solid F

Hi R204 That was me. I don't like saying things I don't truly know about, but he has had a lot of issues behaving in public. Sophie and Edward keep him on the down low. He is a bit...ugh, I hate to say this... but he tends to be belligerent and not "all there" Hopefully he will grow out of it, or learn how to manage it.

I'm another poster who doesn't believe those stories about HM. She's the head of the Church of England!

"everyone in the family other than Charles dreads the possibility of becoming monarch and nobody else wants the job" (R107)

Ahem!

Wait your turn bitch.

R208 I think you meant Queen Charlotte! Just a matter of time. Princess George will have "other things" to do.

The Queen back in the late 40s and 50s gave up quite a few illegitimate babies to orphanages throughout England. She was quite the nympho. Many of the babies were black. The reason for so many visits to the colonies. Kind of when you've had black you don't go back. She was known as The British Open.

FF and block that racist (and even worse, unfunny) turd at R211

Pippa just gave birth to a boy. Her husband’s ass/thighs look scrumptious in those jeans.

Pic or those thighs didn't happen.

Pippa's husband always looks gaunt.

R215 He's a runner

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Are Sophie and Edward closely related or something? Or was it just that their old sperm and old eggs created defective children? First Louise with her wonky eye and now James is autistic or something.

I don't think facially he's attractive, but Pippa's husband has a nice body and wears clothes well. Same for William and Harry.

R180● -205 ●

Thank you very much! We're now able to know your sleep schedule. 'Cause face it, if you ain't a-napping then you're on here. Go do a household chore in that stye of yours.

Every post you threaten to FF and/or block, we automatically WW each other & ourselves. We never run out of WWs. Your moderator FF banning games of opinions you oppose are 🚫VER!

[quote] I’m pretty sure that was Kate I told to “fuck off” in London last May.

You really should try to control that tongue of yours, Camilla.

I don't think Alex Loudon's new wife is gorgeous. She looks like every anchor on Telemundo. Miami is full of women who look like her. Still, she is an improvement over leathery mini Carole, Pippa. Latinas are doing very well marrying into the UK aristo set. The trashy Peruvian from Real World Austin/The Challenge, Johanna Botta, moved to the UK and married one of Kate Middleton's ex boyfriends.

Surely I can’t be the only one on DL to find James Middleton really attractive?

You're not R223. He looks like Jude Law or the subject of a Renoir. He's very good looking IMO.

Is poor Beatrice headed for spinsterhood?

At what age does she become a spinster. Is she an old maid now.

I can see poor Beatrice and Fergie in a Royal Family version of "Grey Gardens" in the future.

Bea needs to find herself a lee-bra man!

BREAKING! I'm hearing rumors that Meghan is knocked up!

R222- similar looks, but neither one is Latina. One is Italian the other one has a Scandinavian name.

It was Eugenie that went through a Lez phase.

Sincerest apologies, R205! It hadn’t occurred to me that there could be more than one person with your level of stupidity on this thread. Just to clear this up - are you the fool who holds up the Kardashians as the epitome of class, style and wealth? Or the idiot who can neither spell nor construct a logical sentence?

Prince Philip had a biracial girlfriend from the Caribbean - Jamaica I think. She was a fashion designer or merchandiser. Father was English and mother native caribbean. Forgot the name therefore cannot find info.

Yet, R233, you still can find the time to post some half-assed "I think" you really dopn't seem to know muh about. Die in a grease fire, bitch.

R230 Johanna Botta is Peruvian-American, not Italian. The English press got confused because she worked in Italy as a journalist for a while. We shared mutual friends back in the day who knew Johanna when they were part of the same Latina organization in college.

Spelling, R234! Keep working on it!

R224, I gasped when I read your post. You are dead on, James Middleton would be the perfect Renoir subject. Brilliant analysis.

Does anyone in the BRF have BDF?

Interestingly, unmarried women used to known as spinsters. See the attached wedding certificate from a spinster named Elizabeth marrying a bachelor named Philip at a small ceremony in 1947.

Somebody worked reeeeeeally hard to fit her father’s profession on there 😂

So, both Phillip and Elizabeth were "HRH" when they married each other? Is it common for an HRH to marry another HRH?

Prior to the Abdication of her BIL David, QE,TQM was the first non royal marriage (she was commoner nobility). But Albert was never expected to be king. Eddie married HRH Alexandra of Denmark, Vicki married HRH Albert, Billy married HRH Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen, George 4 married HRH Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel and so on and so forth. Lesser German royalty but royalty none the less.

It was not only common, it was mandatory.

Charles changed that forever.

Not the first non-royal marriage to a commoner r241, some of Queen Victoria's daughters married brit aristos. One married the Duke of Argyll, who was actually a Marquess at the time of their wedding. It only became more common and accepted in the 20th century with George V's children.

True r242. I was going down the line of succession where the rule was more stringently applied.

R234 has all the personality of road kill. No, I take that back. Road kill is a bit more interesting. R234 - all the manners and good grace of a wart hog. No. I take that back.......

[QUOTE] old fashioned aristocratic view to marriage in which it's somewhat expected that husbands cheat but unacceptable for a woman to engage in the same behaviour.

I’d comment except my mouth is full of Paul Robeson’s big black cock.

Your mouth, a? I took it in BOTH holes!

How closely related were Elizabeth and Phillip when they married?

^^^ second cousins

Both great great grandchildren of Queen Victoria, Philip via his mother Princess Alice of Battenberg/Greece, Elizabeth via her father George VI.

R248 - third cousins.

They were third cousins in two separate and different ways, which is a lot closer than simply being third cousins once over.

I think that's why Prince Charles and Princess Anne look like so many of the American Amish kids.

Just a "normal" newlywed couple taking a stroll.

R245 - Don't forget Nehru's cock!

Charlotte and William.

Stop looking at the fucking camera.

Charlotte looks a lot like her great-grandmother the Queen. Those Windsor genes are strong!

R256 don't you have your own MM hate thread going? This is general royal thread. Don't ruin it with your tedious obsession.

[256] that's years of inbreeding for ya!

Thank god this board is anonymous! *258*

I'm honestly going to cry *257* maybe i was inbred... all along...

Chevalier

Oops ... that is supposed to be is there any truth to rumours Maurice Chevalier had a bit of a dabble with a BRF member?

R217 For some reason I always felt like James Middleton is gay despite the fact he's had girlfriends. Speaking of which, it's something of an open secret in London that James Ogilvy, Princess Alexandra's son, swings both ways.

Not too long ago, a male DLer wrote about his one-night stand with James Ogilvy. They met at some event in NYC and hooked up.

[quote] [R245] - Don't forget Nehru's cock!

I think she was a dominatrix with him.

[quote]I think she was a dominatrix with him.

You naughty, naughty little Indian. Who is your Empress? *smack* Who is your Empress? *smack*

I think Prince Philip has BDF r238 Reports were that HM couldn't keep off of him. No, not DL reports, actual biographies. She was a horny little thing.

He was very good looking. No wonder r268

Prince Philip was a hunk in his youth. Prince Harry inherited Philip's looks big time.

Victoria was a horny thing too. Albert had to lock himself away.

Prince Philip was a hottie!

R268 - True. Quite reliable biographies have reported Philip's rather coarse references in the early days of his marriage that he "couldn't keep the young princess out of his bed". His father-in-law, King George VI, is alleged to have taken Philip aside and told him to stuff it. In addition, at a gathering once, a guest expressed admiration for the Princess's beautiful skin (discussed elsewhere on other threads), and Philip is alleged to have responded cheerfully, "Yes, and she's like that all over!"

People forget that the Queen, first and foremost, is a countrywoman, accustomed to breeding horses and dogs. Country types usually have a, er, robust attitude toward sex.

R267 FTW!

George VI was never thrilled about Elizabeth's marriage to Phillip. He would have vastly preferred she marry a landed aristo like Lord Porchester.

As for Margaret, if her father had lived a few years longer, the Peter Townsend thing would never have happened, and neither would the marriage to Anthony Armstrong-Jones. She'd have married someone like Johnny Dalkeith, the Duke of Buccleuch, who was a dull country-sports type who owned half of Scotland and had something like a dozen subsidiary titles to his name (no need for the crown to give him a face-saving Earldom, like they did with the social-climbing photographer).

And however dull Dalkeith might have been, he would have treated Margaret better than Armstrong-Jones did.

I wonder when they stopped boning. They certainly can't at this point, but I wonder if they had an "official" last time.

"Hey, we're getting old and if we don't stop, we'll shatter something. One last roll, love?"

^One biography states that they were still getting it on in the late 1960s. As the staying guests of some English countryside couple, one of the staff of the manor house recalled seeing them pass by down the hall toward their guest bedroom as Phil continually felt and pinched the Queen's backside while she let out mock screams and repeatedly told him to stop. When they got to the room and closed the door there was nothing but silence.

^Phil's pet name for the Queen has always been "Cabbage" by the way

Well they were only 40 something in the late 60s so I certainly hope so R277

I assume they stopped sometime this millennium

Old folks puttin' the young folks to shame . . . Charles was so over Diana so soon that their sex life began collapsing after William was born. Diana later said, somewhat circumspectly, "Somehow, Harry was had . . . "

Whilst over at Buck House Philip and Betty were still humping like bunnies . . .

[quote]Victoria was a horny thing too. Albert had to lock himself away.

True. So weird to think of Queen Victoria, of all people, being crazy for cock.

I am baffled by the Camilla absence from the wedding. The gossip that actually explains it will be worth gold. It"s probably pretty simple - like she hates York or Fergie or whatever - but it was a massive power play by Camillla... not showing up is just big deal. Philip went and he's hated Fergie for 30 years.

That picture of Charlotte alongside William evokes a little Diana.

r264 and r265 that's weird about Oglivy, he seems to have the perfect family. His kids look near perfect, and his wife Julia just gradated from Harvard Divinity School last week, in fact he missed her graduation in Boston to attend Eugenie's wedding. He's her godfather so must have felt the need to fly back to attend.

R283 err...the son is not attractive. The daughter looks somewhat pretty.

Albert and Adelaide were not originally "HRH"'s. They were "HSH"'s -- His/Her Serene Highness. They were bumped up to HRH when they married their British royal spouses.

As was Mary of Teck as well, I believe.

The point is that they were ROYALTY. HRH, HSH, still royal.

Same with Princess May of Teck.

Daughter of her great royalness, Fat Mary.

Princess Mary Adelaide of Cambridge, aka Fat Mary, the current Queen's great-grandmother.

HSH is princely, not royal.

That's a mighty big Royal there.

r289, princely is royal. Principalities in their own right are royal.

HSH Grace of Monaco would disagree with you.

But could Fat Mary collect a tiara or two.

[quote]But could Fat Mary collect a tiara or two.

As did her daughter, to incredible ends. A large percentage of the current Royal jewel vault was filled by Queen Mary.

Is it true the stories that she bought tiaras and jewels off her fleeing royal relatives from Russia, for a pittance?

Yes, Queen Mary bought everything she could- especially Faberge.

Yes, it is true, The Grand Duchess Vladimir Tiara for starts.

Queen Mary was a notorious klepto with object d'art. She either took or politely requested.

Aristos were known to move to vacant rooms things of value before she visited.

The Princess Royal today at Investiture Ceremony.

R295 Doesn't the Queen usually do the honors?

R296 They rotate . I think it's the Queen, Prince Charles , Prince William and obviously Anne . I don't know if Andrew and Edward are doing it .

Anne looks great in that picture. The hardest working Royal.

I've always liked Princess Anne. No bullshit, no pretense, she's very real and just gets on with it.

Yes, Queen Mary would go to people's houses and "admire" some piece of art or jewelry or whatever and it would be expected that the owner immediately offer it to her as a gift. She got tons of loot this way. I love the image of aristos running through their houses to hide the valuable stuff before Queen Mary came calling.

The stories of how Queen Mary obtained her jewels are legion. Especially of how she obtained many of the Russian pieces. They are not nice stories.

I don't know the details, so don't ask. I wish I knew. Especially regarding the Russian pieces. The stories are related to how Mary and George refused to grant asylum to their Russian cousins before it was too late.

Wrong, R291.

Wrong

Wrong

Wrong. Princely is princely, and royal is royal. Even if it’s a Reigning prince of a principality, he’s still princely. Princess Grace was never royal, Charlene isn’t royal, Caroline wasn’t royal until she married one. Stephanie isn’t royal, and there are a huge brood of Liechtensteiner princes and princesses who bear the HSH, but they are princely not royals. They don’t pretend to be otherwise anyway, princely houses are a grand old throwback from the days of the Holy Roman Empire.

So why did George refuse to grant asylum to Nicholas and his family before it was too late? Did he not realize how serious the situation was? Were there unavoidable political considerations which forbade it? Nicholas was George's first cousin and supposed friend. Why was the Romanov family not welcome in England when it was still possible? I've read Nicholas asked, was declined, but still expected it to happen eventually.

All those pretty DEAD Grand Duchesses.

Thank you, R301. I’ve been trying to correct some of what passes for expertise on these threads but have given up.

HSH Prince Albert of Monaco himself has been quoted correcting interviewees referring to him as “Royal” by saying “Princely, actually”.

It’s this distinction which accounts for Queen Mary’s obsession with royal family trees and their members’ origins - as Princess Margaret was quoted by Gore Vidal (I’m paraphrasing): “Queen Mary hated us - we were royal and she was not”.

R304, Don't give up!

Queen Elizabeth's sons all have forked tongues. It skipped a generation but rumor has it that Louis was born with one.

May of Teck, later Queen Mary, was originally engaged to heir apparent Prince Albert Victor. He dies and, Voilà, six months later, she's engaged to his younger brother and next heir apparent Prince George. She was quite a nasty piece of work in many ways more than one.

And no, Albert Victor was not Jack the Ripper.

Queen Mary was like the Bar Bush of the Royal Family - she ran the whole damn show and it was her way or the highway.

R302, I believe he was going to, but then he saw all of the royal families of the different countries falling and realized his OWN family line (the more immediate one) was on the line. By harboring his cousin it put his own immediate family at risk.

I meant, it WOULD have put his family at risk had he done it.

The future Queen Mary with her mother, Fat Mary.

Oh, and maybe also the King wanted to make it clear that he was British, and that he was just focusing on British issues as King of the British people, so his British people didn't turn against him.

If he had taken in his foreign relatives it would have sent a signal that said, "This is who we are, we're all royals related to each other and these our our people and where our loyalties lie." So instead he focused on making it clear that he was British, just like his subjects.

And maybe this was around the time they changed their name to House of Windsor, in order to sound more English. (?)

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on any of this.

Queen Alexandra received some of her husband Edward VII's mistresses both formally at court and even socially in private. But she wanted nothing to do with her daughter-in-law Mary, whom she received only when formally necessary.

The family changed its name to Windsor during WWI when the Germans became their official enemies.

^ Right, so 1917, the same year Nicholas went into exile.

[quote]So why did George refuse to grant asylum to Nicholas and his family before it was too late? Did he not realize how serious the situation was? Were there unavoidable political considerations which forbade it?

A combination of your second and third questions. Serious political considerations and it was inconceivable at that time that an entire royal family would be deliberately slaughtered.

r301, r304, do you have a citation for that?

I have a few pages that list Albert of Monaco as a ruling monarch and royal.

R317 I’ll see if I can find it (R304 here). Just to be clear, though, I didn’t say that Albert isn’t the ruling Monarch - as such he doesn’t need to bow to Queen Elizabeth, for example, but he isn’t royal, he’s “princely”, like all the members of families who run principalities, including Liechtenstein, Monaco and Andorra.

Check out the link - I know, Wikipedia, but it’s accurate.

Queen Mary was always concious of the fact that she was a product of a morganatic marriage.

Check this out, R317:

Exactly as that presumptuous and above-her-station bitch should have been, r319!

Too fucking many MARY'S!

That said, some great info here.

The Queen Mum was a minor titled aristo but not a royal until her marriage. Queen Mary never let The Queen Mum forget it and The Queen Mum detested Mary for the way Mary treated her. They finally reached some rapport in their mutual feelings about Wallis Simpson and Edward but they were never close. At all. I expect the Queen Mum was quite happy when Mary finally died.

R302, all the Royal houses of Europe were on shaky ground at that time, and saw their dissolution after WWI. Great Britain's Royal house, of course, remained intact, It wasn't until after WWII that the British Empire was dissolved giving birth to the Commonwealth of Nations. George V initially agreed to provide asylum to the Russian Tsar and family, but was then strongly advised against it by Lord Stamfordham, his private secretary. Lord Stamdfordham was also responsible from the name change in 1917 from Sax Coburg-Gotha to Windsor. The British monarchy was already making major changes within itself to appease the people, and the Tsar was considered by most to be a tyrant. The denial of refuge to the Russian royals is seen by many historians as one of the key issues which saved the British monarchy.

Yes, changing the Royal Family's name from the very German Saxe-Coburg Gotha to the very English Windsor was a brilliant move.

BTW, here's a recording of King George V and Queen Mary speaking. Love the Queen Mary stories, she was definitely one bitch you did NOT want to cross.

R283 No one is saying Ogilvy and his wife are unhappy. Perhaps they have an arrangement, or she turns her head but his bisexuality isn't that much of a secret at this point.

R302 The reason George V eventually decided to deny Nicholas II asylum in the UK is basically because he became increasingly worried that the Tsar's presence could bring down the British Monarchy. The Tsar was very unpopular in the UK as many believe he was a tyrant and George feared that the Tsar's unpopularity could be an impetus for revolution in the UK. No one actually believed the Tsar and the whole Russian royal family would be executed. Had he known that was going to be the outcome, I think he would have let the Tsar come. I actually wonder why they did not just grant the Tsar asylum but ship them off to some corner of the Empire like Australia where they would be out of sight.

Queen Mary was hardcore and used her unassailable position to her own greatest personal advantage. Sir Steven Runciman explained her method for acquisition in the four part documentary "The Windsors (the BEST of the lot in my opinion)." He says that Queen Mary would invite herself to some titled subject's home to scope the place of it's contents. Once finding something of her liking, she would then making perfectly clear that she's like to be given it. His factual example: Queen Mary arrived for dinner with Lady Huntsman(sp?) to find a set of chairs designed by Angelica Kauffman. She let Lady Huntsman know that she had a table by Angelica Kauffman and the chairs would go very well with it. I'm quoting now "Poor Lady Huntseman held out for as long as she could, but it became obvious that Queen Mary would not leave without the chairs. Finally, at about half past nine, Queen Mary left with the chairs loaded into the Royal Daimler."

The story about the Cambridge Emeralds: Queen Mary's mother, Big Mary, actually won these exquisite emeralds in a raffle, or so the story is told. These are the emeralds used to make several grand pieces in the Queen's private jewelry collection, most notably the diamond circle tiara and the emerald and diamond necklace which Diana famously wore as a headband in the mid 1980s. Somehow, Queen Mary's older brother got hold of them when Big Mary passed on, giving them all to his mistress - there were a lot of them. Queen Mary waited until her brother passed on, then she immediately went to the mistress IN PERSON and demanded them on the spot. The woman had no choice but to acquiesce and hand them over.

^^^^

r327 thank you for mentioning the Windsors documentary, I'm going to look it up.

R329, in case you don't find it, here is the first part of the series "The Windsors: A Royal Family"

[quote]it was inconceivable at that time that an entire royal family would be deliberately slaughtered.

Right, because during the previous (French) revolution no royal had been harmed.

R327 - here's a whole blog post about those emeralds!

Thank you again, r330!

Queen Mary sizing up her latest victim while simultaneously spotting her next acquisition

That’s a great documentary r330! I just finished Part I. Thanks for sharing!

R253, Her shapeless legs ending in those unflattering flats make Meghan look like a weird hybrid child, like "Eloise Goes to Oz."

Wallis Simpson and Edward VIII were similarly perceived so slight and petite as to resemble children. Very thin-framed (sans the boxy middle) like the narcissistic Sparkle. Funny how in pictures they seemed quite tall to me before I learned Wallis was no taller than a generous 5'2". Sometimes the similarities are staggering when you start to think on it.

Years ago the Met Costume Exhibit had clothing from the Duke and Duchess of Windsor on display. I was shocked at how TINY they both had to have been, it looked like children's clothes. Most modern adolescents wouldn't be able to fit in the Duke and Duchess's clothes.

So hemophilia started with Queen Victoria passing it on? The young son of Czar Nicholas suffered from it. What other male Royals suffered from it and how long did it take for them to figure out how it was passed on? I think females can pass it on but males are who suffer from it?

Yeah, well you can never be too rich or thin.

R335, you are quite welcome, pal. Enjoy! Also, just in case you might have an interest, I submit part one of THE definitive documentary of the entire Kennedy family via PBS "The American Experience: The Kennedys"

The hemophilia which appears to have developed spontaneously when Queen Victoria was conceived, was passed on through several of her daughters to the Prussian, Russian, and Spanish royal families. Victoria's fourth son Leopold died of it and his daughter, Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone, was automatically a carrier and passed it to one of her sons, who died young. The hemophilia seems to have died out among Victoria's descendants, although there is still a slim chance it could reappear through the female line. Prince Philip is lucky to have missed it. His great-grandmother, Victoria's second daughter Alice, was a carrier, and Philip is a descendant of Victoria through an entirely female line.

View the future engagements of the members of the Royal Family.

The Princess Royal is making 4 stops in West Yorkshire tomorrow (that's Friday, Ocatober 19th).

The Queen is visiting The Lexicon, Bracknell.

And The Duke of Kent is attending a Lunch at Buckingham Palace.

On Monday, it's

The Earl of Wessex - 3 engagements Warwickshire

The Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall - 1 engagement (London Palladium)

The Princess Royal - 3 engagements in Scotland

And so on...

Here are George and Nicholas wearing each other’s military uniforms. I don’t know which are which.

I think that's George on the right, and Nicki on the left, R344.

Agreed, R345.

I understand Nicki was a moron.

George and Nicholas were cousins, but the looked like they could've been twin brothers. Gotta love all that royal inbreeding!

Strange that she felt that way, r323, since three of her children married non-royal aristos. Besides the Queen Mum there was the Duchess of Glocester (nee Montagu Douglas Scott) and Viscount Lascelles. Did she treat the other two with the same disdain? or treat Marina the Duchess of Kent with more integrity since she was born royal.

Was there any kind of reaction from the British Royals when the Czar and family were murdered? Did news of that happening get out right away?

Has Queen Mary replaced Mamie Eisenhower as DL's favorite Historical Bitch?

I think it took at least several months to lead out of Russia, and then not everyone believed it. I think it took a couple of years, when the family didn't re-surface, for those outside Russia to begin to believe the truth.

Remember all the imposters that ran around for years after WWI, all those Romanov pretenders. Many family members believed them, probably because they wanted to. There were no bodies found for decades so people held out hope they were still alive.

The skeletal remains of all the Romanovs (including Anastasia) were found buried in the woods somewhere in Russia in the 1990s.

The early find of the bodies did not include them all. The young son Alexei's body was not with the others. Nor was one of the daughters - either Maria or Anastasia.

It was not until some years later that the missing bodies were located.

To confirm that the bodies were in fact those of the Romanov family, DNA tests were done comparing their DNA to that of Prince Philip who was the relative with the closest blood connection.

There is a 3 part video on Youtube of the burial of the original 5 family member bodies along with their servants.

Here is the first of the 3.

R354 they’re all buried in Saints Peter and Paul Catherdral now in St. Petersburg. Pretty impressive monument inside the church. St. Petersburg is one of my favorite cities. (And no I’m not a Russian. It).

^bot

The Romanov's servants were also executed with them. Awful.

The video shows the coffins of the cook and the doctor as well. Members of the doctor's family were there as were members of the Romanov family.

Boris Yeltsin and his wife were there.

Yeltsin's speech...

[quote] Dear fellow citizens: It's a historic day for Russia. Eighty years have passed since the slaying of the last Russian emperor and his family. We have long been silent about this monstrous crime We must say the truth: The Yekaterinburg massacre has become one of the most shameful episodes in our history. By burying the remains of innocent victims, we want to atone for the sins of our ancestors. Those who committed this crime are as guilty as are those who approved of it for decades. We are all guilty. It is impossible to lie to ourselves by justifying senseless cruelty on political grounds. The shooting of the Romanov family is a result of an uncompromising split in Russia society into "us" and "them." The results of this split can be seen even now.

[quote]The burial of the remains of Yekaterinburg is, first of all, an act of human justice. It's a symbol of unity of the nation, an atonement of common guilt. We all bear responsibility for the historical memory of the nation. And that's why I could not fail to come here. I must be here as both an individual and the president. I bow my head before the victims of the merciless slaying. While building a new Russia, we must rely on its historical experience.

[quote] Many glorious pages of Russian history were connected with the Romanovs. But with this name is connected one of the most bitter lessons: Any attempts to change life by violence is condemned to failure. We must end the century, which has been an age of blood and violence in Russia, with repentance and peace, regardless of political views, ethnic or religious belonging. This is our historic chance. On the eve of the third millennium, we must do it for the sake of our generation and those to come. Let's remember those innocent victims who have fallen to hatred and violence. May they rest in peace.

I read that the Romanov women had hidden a lot of jewelry in their corsets. This made it take longer to kill them. The armor corsets stopped the bullets.

Nickcy was rendered stupid and detestable by his holy roller wife. Is there any chance he could have saved the family if he'd just told her to shut the fuck up?

I don’t need to provide a citation to you why an HSH is princely (even if a sovereign of a country) while an HRH is royal. That’s stupid, why are you challenging me on this point? Google it yourself, it’s not obscure knowledge.

There was also a footman and a chambermaid killed with them and buried with them.

Apparently the remains of the young son Alexei and his sister Maria were discovered in 2007.

DNA tests have determined that the bodies are those of the Romanovs but there are some who are still doubtful in spite of this and the last 2 children have yet to be buried with their parents.

They were killed on July 17, 1918 - over 100 years ago.

The children could have escaped with other relatives, but the parents decided to "keep the family together". Same mistake Marie Antoinette and Louis made.

4 servants were with them R362

Chef, footman, maid, doctor.

Yes, R364, I know.

I already mentioned the chef and the doctor.

Prince Philip’s grandmother’s other sister Grand Duchess Ella died in a separate massacre. She had given up imperial life and was living as a nun, they threw her down a mineshaft and then threw a grenade in after her. Witnesses said after the explosion she was heard singing hymns, and when they dug up the body she had torn pieces of her clothing to make a tourniquet or bandage for another victim who had been tossed in with her.

For all of Philip's old fashioned-ness and faults, he comes from very good stock. Especially in the female line: his mother, grandmother Victoria and great-Aunt Ella, as described in r366. People also forget that his maternal Aunt Louise was Queen Consort of Sweden and supported her husband Gustaf Adolf admirably, until her death.

His own immediate family saw so much tragedy and sorrow, yet he managed to carve out a good life for himself literally on his own in the UK and become one of the most steadfast long-serving consorts in UK history.

Actually R323 and R349, from what I have read, King George V and Queen Mary encouraged their children to marry into the English and Scottish aristocracy. For the same reason that the House name was changed from “Saxe-Coburg-Gotha” to “Windsor” and why they were reluctant to give asylum to the Russian Imperal Family: To reinforce that they were a British royal family and to de-emphasise their many links to their European royal cousins, many of whose thrones had toppled or were soon to topple.

They were pretty successful:

The Prince of Wales married an American - not a hugely successful outcome! Prince Albert married a Scottish aristocrat - Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon (the current Queen’s parents). The Princess Royal - Princess Mary - married the English Earl of Lascelles. The Duke of Gloucester married a Scottish aristocrat - Lady Alice Montagu Douglas Scott. The Duke of Kent married Princess Marina of Greece - pretty successful given his various proclivities! Prince John died as a child.

r361, I am not challenging you. YOU made a statement about princeliness not being royal.

I simply wanted to document what you said because plenty of dumb cunts on DL say plenty of dumb things.

I asked because I DID Google it in many different ways and could not find any documentation confirming your assertion.

If it is true, then not finding documentation is not a reason to disbelieve an assertion. It means that more research has to be done. This is why I asked.

But you are wrong in that it IS obscure knowledge.

I have to unpack an old copy of Debrett's for my next inquisition.

"It reminds one of the worst excesses of The French Revolution. And we all know what that unfortunate movement led to."

What's the deal with princess Anne and her husbands?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Hammer toes are caused by wearing cheap, .5 size too small heels on the reg?

R39 A+ Creative Writing 101 extra credit assignment.

J'adore

Lady Sarah Chatto was briefly mentioned in the Tendrils thread and was described as a very normal and kind person which is practically the exact opposite of her mother Princess Margaret who was an entitled uber-snob and more regal than the Queen herself. Lord Snowdon sounded like quite an egomaniac himself. Amazing how those two produced a child like Lady Sarah. Were the two actually good parents who put away their hatred for each other when it came to the children? Or can her outcome be attributed to being raised by nannies and governesses while her parents drank, drugged, and had numerous extramarital affairs through the '60s and '70s?

R337, did they get all of the emeralds? Because if she showed at my residence I'd cry a river claiming to have lost my favorite talisman of sorts. A gift is a gift.

Queen Fatsa< Me sucking balls deep

Queen Fattie < is lesser than < the syphilis your brother passed to me

I'd go to jail for it to prove that i lost it

Must have been quite a raffle ticket to purchase in order to WIN a box of priceless polished emeralds. And this was a ‘poor’ princess who had to duck her creditors. That just goes to show you that poor is a relative term, she was still spectacularly rich compared to us.

Like our own kelsey grammer, that Phil. r367

This picture of the Queen and Duke of Windsor was taken some time in the '60s when he visited London to receive medical treatment. The queen is quite petite (5' 3"?) and the Duke doesn't look much taller.

The Duke has a bad case of mumps as a child. It stunted his growth. His brothers were more robust, which angered Queen Mary and King George because they wanted their heir to be more substantial. The press fell for the dashing handsome Prince of Wales meme though, but in reality he was a small twisted little man who was emotionally immature and only attracted to domineering women. Supposedly he had micropenis too.

He was also a big fan of Hitler and loved the Nazis, which has been documented extensively. He would've been a disaster as king.

R382 - Didn't the DoW have a very mean, domineering governess? Queen Mary was a piece of work herself.

Mumps can damage the male genitalia and fertility, although that side effect is much more common in adult males than children. But if he did have a bad case, it could support all the rumors about his sexual dysfunction.

The governess (I forget her name) of the brothers was a tyrant. George VI had a lot of problems because of that.

From the Court Circular

October 17, 2018

Kensington Palace

[quote] The Duke of Gloucester, Patron, Habitat for Humanity Great Britain, today visited Habitat for Humanity Thailand, Bo Ploy, Thailand.

[quote] His Royal Highness, Colonel-in-Chief, The Royal Anglian Regiment, this afternoon attended a Ceremony at Chung Kai Cemetery, Kanachanaburi, for the Soldiers who died in the Second World War.

[quote] The Duke of Gloucester later visited the River Kwai Bridge, Kanchanaburi.

[quote] His Royal Highness afterwards visited the Thailand-Burma Railway Centre, Chao Khun Nen Road, Ban Nuea, Amphoe Mueang, Kanchanaburi.

[quote] The Duke of Gloucester, Royal Patron, the National Far East Prisoners of War Fellowship Welfare Remembrance Association, this evening attended a Ceremony at Kanchanaburi War Cemetery to mark the Seventy Fifth Anniversary of the Completion of the Thai-Burma Railway.

He's 74 years old.

And he's not sitting, holding hands on the beach.

There's a pic of HM beside a helicopter at Kensington Palace, presumably come to check out Prince Louis. She looks about the size of a garden gnome, and MAY come up to the level of her RPO's shoelaces. Was she always this mini?

One of the sadder aspects of the entire Markle debacle, IMO, is that, at the end of her life, instead of highlighting how stalwart and responsible a monarch QE II has been, Markle is highlighting how weak and enabling QE II has been with her family. She actually does not deal with them. There are no consequences. If they blunder, if they have made huge mistakes, she throws more titles and responsibilites at them to cover up. That habit only encourages family to misbehave. I know Charles is a godhelpus (quoting PG Wodehouse) to a mama who is married to a rakish one time hottie like Prince Phillip, but he IS responsible, he does care, blah blah, and what does it get him? She still loves Andy best.

Different web pages claim the queen forbids this, the queen forbids that. It's made up, because Markle comes along, ignores all of it, and ends up with a tour that puts money in her and Harry's pocket. Not only is she merching her ass off, but they are getting paid, as all royals do when they "work". I think given how appalling the two of them have been on this tour, some expect a rap on the knuckles when they return. Nonsense. They'll fail upwards. That's how QE II rolls, and she probably has set up the demise of the monarchy all on her own.

When Charles becomes King, r388, do you think he'll put the smack down and tell his kids and siblings to knock it off with certain behaviors?

They’ve failed on this tour? Australia is in love with both Meghan & Harry! The republican question will not be raised again while Harry and Wills are around charming the masses. Especially when our politicians are so disliked.

R388’s post confuses me because it both attacks The Duchess of Sussex yet also ascribes the same behaviors to the others royals, and the OP’s posit is that The Queen enables it.

So what is it? Is Sussex the villainess here, the rest of the royals, or The Queen?

If Meghan is so disliked, who is she merching to?

Celebrity royal family sycophants

So, there are that many that can afford a day dress for $3000? Plus accessories. Not buying it or the merching bullshit.

Considering the ill-fitting throwaways she gets from designers, it's hard to understand how this "merching" works, other than her getting over-priced freebies to wear that she would otherwise never get her paws on (with or without the Mulroney help). She's probably doing it for an ostensibly more "expensive" wardrobe than she would be allowed under Prince Charles' munificence, however ill-fitting the throwaways she gets might be. She can claim more "luxury" designers. While it looks bad, a designer, I guess, can claim to dress a Duchess who doesn't know what the fuck to do with their clothes. "We tried, but we can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear." It might be win, win for them to give her throwaways and let her hang herself with her poor understanding of taste or tailoring. Even though the fashions may look bad on her, lots of women, especially the nouveau riche don't understand jack shit beyond the designer name and base future purchases "because the Duchess." It's super cheap PR if luxury labels give her their throwaways, poorly manufactured, or otherwise defective garments.

You may not know of any R392, I know two. Young, urban, professional women. One just dropped serious coin on four sweaters from Barrie (the atelier used by Chanel for their cashmere). Her cheapest sweater/cardi was just shy of $2000. This person is 31, single, and fills the empty spaces in her heart with high fashion.

Oh, I know plenty that spend big money on clothes. They just don't give a shit what Meghan wears.

Oh yahhh one of the most photographed women in the world struggles to get good clothes from designers. Why would they want world coverage for their non-crappy designs. Makes perfect sense

How would you explain the crap fit, then, R398? Unless you think she wears nothing but the most flattering cuts with impeccably sewn seams.

We have MANY Markle threads.

Can we keep the focus here on the rest of the family?

Yes, let's get back to Queen Mary!

Did anyone else note what Sarah Chatto wore to Eugenie's wedding. She wears these mid-century looks which are very stylish. I think this one was a cashmere cardigan, pearls, full skirt, and a flat brimmed hat. She doesn't wear much makeup and does look like her mother though. Her sister-in-law has dressed similarly but more high fashion. I always check to see what they're wearing. They don't get the attention that the Yorkie (usual) disasters get and now there's MM to suck up the publicity even more.

I think the word for Sarah Chatto is unpretentious.

R402, most of Lady Sarah's public wardrobe is designed by Jasper Conran, son of British home design guru Sir Terance Conran. His work is understated, elegant and focused on high-quality construction. Sarah looks amazing in it.

Sarah Chatto was the Saffy to Princess Margaret's Edina.

It's pretty amazing that Princess Margaret has such an unassuming daughter.

Jasper Conran, I just checked out his fall collection. Amazing color. I love that it's not fussy at all. Thanks r404.

Trust, bitches. When my court comes into ascendance they will live to regret.

Lady Sarah Chatto Is rather homely, though.

No, she's got a terrible face. Another Chelsea Clinton and Princess Beatrice, all the worst features of both sides squeezed into one face.

But they do say she's lovely. Of course, with that mug, you'd need to be.

Apologies if already mentioned, there is a great new biography of Queen Mary out called The Quest for Queen Mary.

"The book tells the story of the writing of James Pope-Hennessy's famous biography of Queen Mary through a carefully presented look at his unpublished research notes. Hugo Vickers, a talented royal biographer himself, has compiled and contextualized Pope-Hennessy's accounts of interviews with the people from Queen Mary's world, including a whole lot of royals and aristocrats. The result is a picture not only of the biographer's craft but also of the royal family as it was in the late 1950s. (The Crown only wishes it were this interesting, honestly.)

We learn some truly fascinating pieces of royal information in the book, including many tidbits that Pope-Hennessy chose to leave out of his book. The Quest for Queen Mary spills the dirt on royal personalities (the cold parenting of George and Mary, the strange aloofness of Queen Elizabeth II, the jovial friendliness of Alice Athlone, the odd drawl of the Duchess of Windsor). It dishes on royal residences (the coziness of Balmoral and Osborne, the eeriness of Sandringham). It whispers about Mary's carefully-crafted appearance (the fact, for example, that she had separate wigs for day and night occasions, and the deliberate height and shape of her hats, designed not to overwhelm her shorter husband). And it even speaks forthrightly about royal scandals (the illegitimate Mecklenburg-Strelitz baby, the Duke of Kent's drug addiction, Princess May's first love, the madness of the Duke of Teck, Queen Mary's secret love affair with Henry of Battenberg)."

I just finally got it for Kindle... it was hard to get hands on. See you later... am reading this afternoon!

[quote](the fact, for example, that she had separate wigs for day and night occasions

Just add a caftan and you would have many DLers!

Here's a story that's been told many times over the years even though most historians doubt it's true:

During the early 1930s, Cunard planned to build a new luxury superliner and name her Queen Elizabeth. So the firm's top people requested an audience with King George to request permission to use the royal name. After describing their plans, they asked to name the ship after England' greatest Queen.

"My wife will be delighted" he replied and the new ship became Queen Mary.

Well, George V knew how to achieve harmony at home, at least.

R414 - his children were afraid of him and his wife deferred to him so harmony came at a price.

Princess George at r408 needs to work a wee bit harder on his jazz hands, but he's getting there! And THANK YOU r400!

wait, Qqeen Mary had an affair with Henry of Battenberg? And Hugo Vickers wrote about it? more details please.

I wouldn't call it an affair, R417. He was only courting her at the time she was cherry picked to be wife to Prince Eddie, Duke of Clarence and future King. Of course, Eddie died, so she was then passed onto his brother George who became King.

Thanks r418. But now I'm reading online that he (Henry) may have had a relationship with....his sister in law, Louise Duchess of Argyll! Did this guy get around or what? The Victorians were very busy apparently.

I just found this photo of a young Prince Charles with a beard. I defy anyone to look at it and claim that Hewitt is Harry's father.

James Hewitt and Harry really don't look alike. They both have red hair ( a very common trait among Britons) but facially they do not resemble each other. Harry looks a lot like Phillip.

Someone on the Sparkles tendrils thread said that Maxima of the Netherlands is rumored to be bringing the enormous Stuart tiara with 40 carat diamond centerpiece with her to the upcoming state visit in London. Willem-A is supposed to be getting the Order of the Garter also on this trip.

The Stuart tiara is THE royal tiara of tiaras. Is huge, and so heavy that Beatrix refused to wear it as it gave her huge headaches. It wasn't seen in public since 1972 until Maxima pulled it out of mothballs this year - see link.

The only difference here is she detached the enormous Stuart diamond on the top hob and subbed a much smaller replacement, making it less flashy. Still - amazing:

Granted, 40 carats did huge. But The Cullinan is larger as is The Star of Africa, which are in the clutches of the British. But the Stuart is so special because it can be authenticated back to the Stuart’s, there aren’t that many of those in the British collection. Plus the color is remarkable, almost like a very pale sea green.

The Fife Tiara is better designed and more dense with larger stones.

Lady Sarah Chatto at Genie’s wedding:

Fuller view of her skirt:

The Queen's Great Nephew Arthur Chatto is a reason foe RF genetic family hope.

Dear [425} I have read about Lady Chatto but never seen her. Ok, so she is not a great beauty in the face department, but man! You can’t get classier in the fashion department! She looks absolutely fabulous in those pictures. How incredibly ingenious the clothes are! Wow! I would love to know more about her! Please tell us more! She is supposed to be cool and nice as well? Spill!

The problem with antique diamond jewellery is the diamonds do not sparkle. I think the diamonds should be dismounted and recut using modern techniques.

r429, then they would lose their historicity.

R427

He must take after his father.

R426, Not only is the skirt lovely, but that photo of it wind-blown is spectacular!

Sarah and her brother have tiny little eyes. She could do with some make-up.

That Chatto outfit is gorge.

Sparkle....take note.

(She won't....)

Lady Sarah Chatto studied painting at the Royal Academy of Arts at the same time as my best friend. He said she was sweet, charming, and unassuming. As it approached Christmastime, everyone spoke about where they would spend the holiday. She simply said "At my grandmother's." Of course, her grandmother was the Queen Mother.

Here's an HD video showing the Fife tiara in detail

Thanks r425. She also had a lovely wedding gown, very elegant.

Hell, Granny's Chips - the two diamond brooch the Queen wears - is four times the size of the stone mentioned in R422 as being part of the Stuart tiara. Granny's Chips are comprised of the top square cut diamond consisting of 63.6 carats, and the larger pear shaped diamond at 94.4 carats. They are part of the Cullinan Diamond, and they are the Queen's own personal property.

Vid of Queen wearing Granny's (Queen Mary's) Chips.

I'm glad Sarah is nice, because her brother David is an entitiled asshole. One lunch with him was more than enough.

Hi Lady Sarah/r428

I've never heard a bad word spoken about Lady Sarah. She must have sucked up all the nice genes for a couple of generations, because by all accounts her mother, father, and brother are/were total dicks.

The Stuart diamond isn’t as big, yes. But it’s a natural aqua greenish blue which makes it more valuable. Natural fancy colored at that size are very rare. But also the history of it. Queen Elizabeth has a string of pearls dating from Queen Anne, but other than the coronation regalia, no other Stuart pieces that we know of that get worn. So this diamond is significant in that historical respect.

Needless to say, Lady Sarah Chatto and her brother grew up in a very volatile atmosphere due to the relationship between their parents, who thought nothing of leaving them in the care of servants to pursue their own individual pleasures. The Queen is credited with including the children from time to time in her own family vacations - Balmoral, sailing on Brittania, etc. The Queen and Lady Sarah are said to be very close. Here's the newest bio/documentary on Princess Margaret if anyone cares to view it.

Will there be a tiara face-off when Max arrives? Is it the done thing to wear a grander tiara than one's host?

Thanks r443.

Princess Margaret was basically Datalounge personified.

So I am watching the Windors on Netflix. Prince Philip, Mountbatten and Prince Charles don't come off too well. All this soft glowing about David - Edward VIII is sickening to me. The Nazi King. Hard to believe that Charles felt a bond with him!

Anyway - who is this grand daughter of Mountbatten's that he kept pushing on Charles to marry? Apparently, Charles finally did propose to her and she said no. Who is she? Weeks later, Mountbatten was dead.

Amanda Knatchbull is the Mountbatten grandaughter. She’s a social worker now

Thanks R448. Makes me wonder, what if?

I think he would have still ended up with Camilla or at least pined for her. Marrying anyone other than her was destined to fail.

Indeed, R446, she was noted for her earrings and caftans.

R444 Personally I would never wear a grander tiara than my host. I am couth.

Oh, yeah...

Told ya I was hardcore.

So every November there is a massive reception at Buckingham Palace for the diplomatic corps stationed in London. If you've got an HRH you're basically there (we're talking Gloucesters and Kents.)

What I wonder is how do they sort out the tiaras? I mean, Queen goes first, obviously, but then is it down to precedent? Are some OK for Kate but off limits for anybody else, even if Kate elects not to wear them. Camilla seems fixed on the Boucheron tiara and nothing else (of course it would be headline city if she wore anything deeply identified with Diana, like Cambridge Lovers Knot), so maybe Camilla is actually confined to everything Diana never wore. But I'm just wondering how to do they dole out the bling. Must be a minefield of politics and egos.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Cambridge Lovers Knot

Queen Maxima won’t be outdoing Queen Elizabeth, because Elizabeth still has bigger diamonds and if she wears her Granny’s Chips diamonds she will outbling Maxima. However Maxima will blaze like a comet if she wears the entire Stuart setup plus the house diamonds necklace. No issue with offending the hostess Queen Elizabeth, because Queen Juliana also wore the set on a visit in 1972.

R455 The Gloucesters and Kents have their own - Queen Mary set up her Kent and Gloucester daughters in law with some decent jewels. Some of the Kent jewels have been sold but the Duchess of Gloucester has some serious tiaras and necklaces at her disposal.

It is fun to see tiaras come out in full force during a state visit and watch the queens bring out the bling. Otherwise, what is the point of jewels?

Tiara Wars

R447, don't forget to watch "The Windsors" comedy series on Netflix, too.

Amanda Knatchbull is Charles' second cousin. Thank God they didn't marry, because the last thing that family needs is more inbreeding.

I wonder if Charles had married Amanda Knatchbull, that when he strayed to Camilla, if Knatchbull would've been more tolerant because that's how things are done in those circles.

Well, that was the whole issue concerning Charles' marital dilemma. He was a sensitive man caught between finding someone to fulfill the role of wife to a future King, and finding a wife who would love him in the romantic sense, he returning that love. He dilly-dallied to damned long and by the age of 32 everyone was on his ass to choose someone NOW! He'd had Camilla within his grasp all those years ago, but took too long in deciding for her, so she married the other guy. We know that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Look at all the fucking detours and dead ends both of them had to take to finally end up together after forty years.

I saw a documentary recently about King George and Queen Mary, and was repeatedly struck by how much, in some of the images, they looked like Prince Andrew and the present Queen respectively.

George and Nicholas were cousins, identical cousins all the way, one pair of matching bookends, different as night and day!

[quote]Camilla within his grasp all those years ago, but took too long in deciding for her, so she married the other guy.

Charles and Camilla were forbidden to marry in the 70s. Camilla had a reputation as a party girl and was considered unsuitable as the wife of a future king. They would've gotten married back then if they'd been allowed to.

Too bad, because everybody would have been MUCH happier.

Unbearded George with resemblance to the young Prince Andrew.

Only the principals, R468. The public would never have seen Diana (worse still, she may have remained frumpy all her life!), and the RF would never have got her sons. It would probably be on its last legs now, just awaiting the death of QEII to dissolve.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Members of the Continental Royal Families seem more intelligent and accomplished, with the exception of the Greeks and Prince Frederik of Denmark.

....

Miss R17 certainly thinks her OCD merits constant repetition.

But would someone explain to her why the Windsors do not "suck" "$$$$" from the British people? I'm afraid I might just kick her in the gunt and toss a pound not at her. And shouldn't 13-year-old girls be doing their homework?

=======

British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

All the BRF do is suck up tax payer $$$$ from the public, nothing more. Bunch of fucking freeloaders.

They contribute nothing meaningful to society. They get a free ride on the taxpayers back.

British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

The whole monarchy institution needs to be done away with. People are poor and catching hell in london. And this family think they should live high off the hog at tax payer expense.

British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

I hope they break up the monarchy after elizabeth is gone. It's the 21st century. It shouldn't exist anyway.

British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

The senior "Royals" all eat babies, or so I heard.

British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

At least the kardashians finance their own extravagance. The "Royals" just steal it from the public.

Fucking freeloaders.

British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

They take a lot of money from the public and they don't even need it.

British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

So what's the difference between "Royalty" and "Aristocracy." Because to me it's all the same. There all over-privileged entitled glorified society figures to me. AKA socialites.

That's all these people are. Screw it.

British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

R174 At least the Kardashians finance there own extravagant lifestyles. Unlike the free loading so called "Royals."

Why are you so offended by people you don't even know? They don't care about you huni.

Remember that.

British Royal Family: general gossip and information.

The BRF wish they were as wealthy as the Kardashians. But there not.

Did they sell the royal yacht?

They sold the Presidential yacht. Carter did.

Is this is, R471?

Britannia was decommissioned in 1997. It is docked in Scotland and open to visitors as a museum.

When the engagement of Princess Elizabeth and Philip Mountbatten was announced all those years ago, some of his male acquaintances advised him that he'd gone after the wrong princess - that Margaret was the better looking of the two. Philip told them in a simple, matter-of-fact manner "Yes, but Elizabeth is sweet and kind." And that says it all.

^^ Margaret was also the snobbiest, more spoiled of the two. That marriage never would have lasted.

Oh my, HM's nips are making themselves quite known in the photo posted by R471 I love the caring expression on her face. She does indeed seem fond of Sarah.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R478 I like what Philip said, and yes, talk about a what a disaster of a marriage that would have been. I do admit I have often wondered if he and Margaret didn't have at least a one-off, if not a bit of a fling.

Even if Princess Margaret had been allowed to marry Peter Townsend, the marriage probably wouldn't have lasted. Margaret was such an impossible bitch, they would've eventually divorced and Margaret's life wouldn't have been much different than it turned out anyway.

LOL Pss Anne. What a broad!

Anne will kick your ass! She will fuck you up!

R471, that reminds me a bit of the way that Tony and Tina Radziwill ended up spending much of their adolescence staying with their aunt, Jackie Onassis, instead of their mother Lee. I've always thought there were a lot of similarities between Lee and Margaret.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R483 She eventually was allowed to marry Peter Townsend, but the deal was she would have to give up her HRH and her yearly stipend. She chose station and money over him. Even if she was not required to do those things, they would have divorced. I don't think she was capable of any sort of long term relationship.

R472, yes. They have interests in art, literature, and politics. Some of them excel in international finance. Some of them are even well known artists. The Windsors like dogs, horses, polo, and traipsing through the Scottish countryside like Earls.

Is Anne the sibling that Charles is closest to?

r490 That's a good question. I don't know that he is close to any of them.

Hopefully they're friends, since no one else can understand each other's childhoods as well as each other. When the old family home videos were released a few years ago, there were a few clips of the pair having fun together as children. They have very different personalities, though. Before Charles was allowed to marry Camilla, it was expected that Anne would be his formal companion at official events. He should be grateful that she carries such a heavy share of the workload attending official events.

I wonder what Princess Anne was like as a mum. She seems no nonsense and gruff but genuine.

She seems to have been a good mother, her two kids both turned out fine.

Anne has gone on the record saying that she doesn’t like children.

Some more tiara porn, for those interested....

The Fife tiara upthread at r424 is certainly gorgeous. It's now owned by the UK government and on permanent display at KP, since the Fife family donated it in some kind of death duties tax deal after the most recent Duke died last year. But what about tiaras currently in use by royals?

Here's the current GD of Luxembourg in the Empire Tiara. Not the most delicate or feminine, but very imposing. Check out the double diamond riviere necklace in the 2nd photo:

From the Swedes, the imposing but frilly Braganza Tiara, worn often by Queen Silvia:

An English cousin has a friend who was one of Andrew's through-the-circular-door "girlfriends" for about six months. She can't say anything about it too specifically (she wants to remain in the circle) but he sounds like he can be charming but is completely soulless in private. Cynical, grasping, entitled (well, he IS titled in spades). And all that's just from hints and little nods.

R471 And more evidence that Princess Charlotte looks like Sarah Chatto .

I have spent hours here.

It's amazing how strong those Windsor genes are.

They must be amazing to see in person but I don't like those massive tiaras. Too overwhelming. My favorite one so far is the one MM wore. She screwed it up by wearing the veil. I hope Eugenie is starting a trend of "no veils".

It's odd how often the Queen is called "icy" and "detached", when you can clearly see her tender, motherly side with Lady Sarah Chatto. And I've seen films of her with her children and grandchildren, and she seems like a pretty ordinary middle-class housewife and grandmother in those films. I don't think she's any kind of an actress: just a very reserved person.

I'll sneak two more in before calling it a night.

The Norwegian Emerald Parure Tiara - complete with other pieces:

And from the UK, the Kokoshnik Tiara, my favorite on QEII. Like a solid wall of diamonds:

My exact thoughts, r499. I think she’s beautiful. Only now her jaw is beginning to sag as she gets older. (Like all of us.)

I would hire Camilla to polish my silver when she retires.

I wonder what it would be like if Princess Anne somehow became Queen?

r508 Fucking AWESOME. She's got the stones, the commitment, the intelligence. None of Prince Charles self indulgent and self pity. I'm truly sorry she will never be granted the chance. She is the only one in that whole family that I can think of that would help ease the sorrow when HM dies just on the merit of her natural strengths.

Anne would be a much better monarch than Charles will be.

R375 here, just wanting to say I got jilted in this whole discussion about Lady Sarah. But thanks for answering all of my questions.

Sorry r375, maybe people didn't see your post. Try not to take things so fucking personally first of all.

There are a couple of good documentaries on YouTube about Princess Margaret. In one, a royal biographer specifically stated they were not hands on parents whatsoever. Often traveling for months at a time off doing their thing (and other people) Their kids were raised by nannies, and quite often farmed out to HM for long stays. Apparently, they grew closer to their parents later in life.

R509, Didn't Prince Philip pretty much wish it would be Anne instead of Charles?

Yes, r513. I have heard that before from many different books and documentaries. Phil really did see through Charles early on for being weak and self indulgent, not the makings of a good leader let alone a King. He tried to toughen him up, but to no avail. May have even made Charles' character problem worse, but he had good intentions.

Phil was a bully who sent his sensitive artistic son to a hearty rough public school which was totally unsuitable for him. Charles sent his parents anguished letters begging to be taken out of Gordenstein but they refused to.

How very odd that you mistake personal for "factual," R512.

However well intended, Philip, in his very old-style way of parenting, mistook King George V and the acquisitional Queen Mary of Theft's "parenting" as good for their potential heirs, hiring a brutal, abusive and traumatizing governess that assured David and Albert's neurotic idiosyncrasies would become full blown neuroses that eventually became their cornerstones and put the Windsor crown in peril. Edward's acquiescence to Nazi ideology and to Wallis's masochistic, imperious dominance and poor George VI's lack of confidence and stutter. Edward VIII fortunately sidelined himself. QEII's father was bolstered by a very strong wife and wartime duties. Elizabeth and Philip's first born sensitive child could have escaped such a bad fate, but it was sealed by Philip's decision to send him to Gordonstoun where he wasn't nurtured and disciplined as someone of his character might otherwise have been taught to thrive and become a a decent, not-so-self-absorbed young man, but was bullied and collapsed onto himself in a pile of self-pitying new-age BS, which his unparalleled privilege allowed once he left its abusive confines. "I shall break free!" He showed them, didn't he? Becoming a "master" architectural critic, demanding ironed shoelaces, bringing his own bread to dinner parties (and slapping uninstructed guests away from his vittles). talking to his plants, and dithering about mates, among other things. All things considered, not as bad as his male predecessors, but he could have been better without a resentful and castigating father. All the reasons why the more beloved and valued Princess Royal would be such a better monarch. Her absent mother and loving father didn't raise her to be insecure/

R516 You are missing the basic point. HM, as it is well documented, left the rearing of the kids and the general household to Philip. He saw what he saw and as head of the family did what he thought would be best for the future of the Monarchy. An attempt to make Charles less of a "sensitive child". This has been discussed by so many royal biographers, it is indeed factual. I'm not saying it was the right thing to do, but it was a different time and that has to be taken into account. Charles to this day is still incredibly oversensitive, self indulgent, selfish and has the emotional IQ of a doorknob. That can't be denied. He is ahead of his time in other ways, such as organic food, and having a feel for the life of plants (though not having much of a feel for the life of the women who have been in and out of his life) You might be watching "The Crown" a bit too often. While it is entertaining, it is quite whitewashed, which is to say, take very little from it as the gospel truth.

[quote]It's odd how often the Queen is called "icy" and "detached",

Kind of a perfect storm. Charles by nature, Philip by nature, Princess Anne by nature, the Queen young and new in role, the Queen Mother in contrast from the boy's parents, lavishing Queen Mother by nature affection and attention on her first grandchild and the future king. The bad parents theme was exploited by Charles and his defenders over the years, and acutely when he was losing the war with Diana. Her younger sons seem to have no problem with either parent, neither does Princess Anne. Charles was often left in care of his grandparents/grandmother in his early years because his parents went on such extended tours. Then they came home and it wasn't all sugar and worship.

It's no secret that the Queen was a more involved mother with Andrew and Edward than she was with Charles and Anne. According to her biographers, the Queen always saw herself as wife first, mother second. After she became Queen, it was Queen first, wife second, mother third. Charles and Anne were so young when she became Queen and she was overwhelmed to a degree with her role as monarch that she was more distant with Charles and Anne. This appears to have affected Charles deeply, but not Anne. In fact Anne has gone on record as saying that it "beggars belief" that anyone would accuse the Queen of being an uncaring mother (no doubt a dig at her older brother). Once Andrew and Edward came along, she was much more confident in her role as Queen and she and Philip reorganized their schedules to a degree that the Queen would often put Andrew and Edward to bed herself. She has a much closer relationship with Andrew and Edward (particularly Edward) than Charles and Anne. Philip's adores Anne but he's also very close to Edward, in fact Edward will inherit Philip's title when Philip dies.

....

I think Philip disliked Charles because he was pudgy, unathletic, and cautious. He was concerned that Charles wasn't macho enough. Anne on the other hand, was athletic, brave, and decisive; she wasn't afraid of new experiences. Supposedly, she's Philip's favorite child. He was probably proud of Andrew who was a more rugged boy. Supposedly, his favorite son is Edward, who seems even more sensitive than Charles.

Philip seems to have a personality clash with his oldest son. Maybe Charles subconsciously reminded Philip of a family member who had been cruel to him. According to some sources, Philip's tirades often reduced Charles to tears, and supposedly this still happened--at least once--after Charles was an adult.

Poor Charles. His schoolmates picked on him relentlessly. Then when he returned home from school on breaks, his father bullied him. His only source of comfort was his grandmother, his great uncle, and probably the servants.

Makes me wonder if Philip was worried that Charles was gay?

Philip has his own rather large bag of neuroses. Schizophrenic mum who became a Greek Orthodox nun, indifferent, absent father, who took off for the south of France to live with his mistress, 4 sisters who married Nazis. Poor, no home, until Uncle Dickie (Mountbatten) took charge of him, brought him to England, educated him and used him as a tool to meddle into the lives of George VI and the Queen Mum. Uncle Dickie's biggest coup was orchestrating Philip's match with Elizabeth. He was in the process of haranguing the Queen about changing the House name to Mountbatten-Windsor, when the Queen Mum put a halt to it by announcing "What's all this Montbatten-Windsor nonsense?".

Oh god, you queens are really laying on the drama.

Phil had a rough start in life from early childhood. The monarch in Greece was deposed which meant Phil and family had to leave the country for their safety. They may have been royal, but they had no money. They rented in Paris, moving from one place to the next as the need to economize grew greater as time went by. His father abandoned the family and went to live on the French Riviera with his mistress. His mother was carted off to a mental institution while he was on an outing and he would only see her very sporadically from that point on. He was just a kid. As noted above, Dickie Mountbatten stepped up to plate and brought him to Broadlands from time to time, but his primary base was boarding school at Gordonstoun. His four sisters married German and moved there. He was essentially orphaned. He, no doubt, thought that exposing Charles to some roughness away from all the trappings of royal life would do him the same good it had done Phil. But Phil was a tough little dude from the start with a capacity for endurance and tenacity. Charles was not the same. Nothing wrong with Charles as a child. He was just a different sort of child than his father was. Phil knew full well the potential wreck he was making of the boy's life - he was intentionally throwing the boy into the midst of trial and tribulation for the purpose of personal growth. In one biography, he was described as looking frightfully ashen faced with worry as he poured himself a very stiff drink just after depositing Charles at the school.

I was a sensitive boy with a father who didn’t “get it”. Add onto that he was raised by his grandparents so he was old school on top of old school. We’ve made our peace now and have a good relationship, but as a child I avoided him as much as I could to avoid his attempts to make me into the son he expected.

By contrast, when Anne got to boarding school, she marched up to the biggest bull-dyke of them all and told her "This is all MY shit now." Later on, she dared them all by shouting "come fuck with me - I DARE YOU!" as she fashioned a shank from the metal spiral of her notebook.

I don’t usually care for diamonds, but I love those emeralds and rubies!

A young Prince Andrew once swallowed 14 chicken bones at Balmoral. It took the powerful thrust of the Queen Mother’s strapping footman Hernando, in order to dislodge the blockage.

Speaking of the Queen Mother, we should all be so lucky as to drink ourselves shithammerd drunk every goddamn day and STILL live to be 101 years old.

I’m surprised Phillip likes Andrew. He’s not even been made a Duke. He abandoned the Marines, and eschews Royal responsibilities. How can this be?

I think eschews should be spelled with a “qu”, btw.

R101, she coined the phrase living your best life. Actually what she said was ‘liver is past life’ but nobody listened to her after about ten in the morning.

R531 do you mean Edward?

R533, yes, Andrew. He hates the life of public service he was born into.

What do the British think of him?

Oops, I mean EDWARD! Not Andrew,

Anne is Philip's favourite child, but Edward is Philip's favourite son. Anne is the most like Philip and Edward is the most like the Queen. Edward is allegedly the most down to Earth of the three sons and the most comfortable in his own skin. Edward is the only one of their children who married and stayed married and Sophie is very well liked by the Queen and Philip. Despite the gay rumours (which I don't think are true) Edward and Sophie are fairly low key for working royals. I was say Sophie is more popular than Edward and well liked, but again, low key.

Queen Mary went to great lengths to help her second son, Albert, win the hand of Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, whom almost all biographers agree was enthusiastically approved by Their Majesties, and who turned Albert's first two proposals down. It is true that Mary was a tough bird, but her partisanship of Elizabeth as Bertie's wife was never questioned by anyone, and by all accounts, she was an affectionate mother in law to the adorable Elizabeth, who was preturnaturally charming, dutiful, hardworking, adored by the public, and exerted what everyone felt was a positive influence on her diffident, stammering husband. George V, Mary's spouse, also adored his daughter in law, who wrote to a friend when he died that "in all the twelve years of having me as a daughter in law, he never spoke one unkind or abrupt word to me. Unlike his own children, I was never afraid of him."

People forget how equally steely the then-Duchess of York was, albeit hidden under all that creamy merengue exterior. I would guess that she and Queen Mary got on exceeding well.

Queen Mary was a complete and total whore. I mean hardcore dirty. She made that nymphomaniac Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother look like a nun.

Not according to Royal biographer Brian Hoey, R536. He says that of the four offspring, Edward was by far the grandest. Very formal. A servant could not enter into his presence without his suit jacket buttoned, and he had no qualm about directing you to button it if you'd forgotten. He insisted on the whole shebang at meal times - finest china and silver, being formally served for all meals even if it was just him alone.

Obviously none of R538 was true but it felt good to say it. Quite bored at work today do acting out.

[quote]Queen Mary was a complete and total whore.

She used to proposition footmen with the line "any of you nasty blokes fancy a ride in the Royal Carriage?"

Upthread it was mentioned that the Queen had an order of precedence being the Crown, then Philip, then the children. He left out one very important faction in that list - the Corgis, which I believe came before even Phil. Look at this woman traveling with all those dogs.

Can someone please make a thread for Queen Mary’s Pick Up Lines?

Fun fact: Queen Mary was a secret chain-smoker, as was her husband King George V. They both died from smoking-related illnesses.

R543 - Don't know any of her pickup lines, but I do love her response that I read of during a tour of a hospital with a cadet member of the family along, who finally complained that her feet hurt, she was tired, and besides, she hated hospitals. Queen Mary is alleged to have levelled the younger royal with one of her famous basilisk stares, saying, "You are a member of the British royal family. We are never tired. And we all LOVE hospitals."

I really rather like her.

Queen Mary: "Is that a big diamond in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?"

This was a fun watch

[quote]how weak and enabling QE II has been with her family.

But aren't all of her children and grandchildren (except for Louise and James) over the age of18 now, and thus fully capable of making their own decisions as adults?

The future Queen Elizabeth II with her grandmother Queen Mary. Note the strong resemblance.

One funny anecdote I read about Queen Mary was that during World War II she became obsessed with collecting scrap metal for the war effort. She and her servants would walk the roads around Badminton House for the sole purpose of picking up anything they could find. They would return dragging bits and pieces of old metal behind them to add to the pile, which was then sent off to be melted down.

UnFun fact: during her stay at Badminton House she said, either at or passing by the fields, ‘So that’s what hay looks like!’

The Queen on Queen Mary’s passionate hatred. 21:56 to 22:15.

During WWII, after so many American soldiers were in Britain, Queen Mary was known to stop and offer a ride to hitchhiking Americans in uniform.

It's hardly surprising that many of them did not recognize her.

When she finally revealed who she was, they didn't believe her.

Not quite there yet, but at the rate this thread is moving, I went ahead and created Part 2

The Norwegian Emeralds (a Napoleonic parure!) are one of the most beautiful emerald sets in Europe, with an interesting history dating back to the days of Napoleon. A friend of mind is a scholar of jewels and told me that these emeralds are very thin though, they’re like slices. But they’re lovely to me, nonetheless. The necklace used to be bigger and so was the tiara, but over the years they took emeralds off and made earrings from them, and also passed down a bunch of them as brooches and pendants to some royal ladies in the family.

Remember to add your pic, R554. I've done it for you here:

One of George V's great passions was collecting stamps. It is a rather extensive collection containing volumes and volumes of.......stamps! He went so far as to pay about 1,200 pounds for a single stamp during the reign of his father, Edward VII and told no one of the then astronomical sum he'd paid for a.......stamp! That stamps is worth over 2.5 million pounds today. In fact, his entire collection - which is owned free and clear by the present Queen - is valued at over 130 million pounds!

Queen Mary is shown an antique iron bench once belonging to Marie Antoinette: "IIIIIIIII LOVE IT!"

Was French Royalty related to the British Royalty? I guess if you go far enough back? I think the Plantagenets started in France.

I know that Charles II and Louis XIV were both grandsons of Maria de Medici, and they even bore a more than passing resemblance to each other.

Louis:

Charles:

Charles II was tight with his wig game.

Their common grandmother, Maria de Medici:

I thought it went back to Henry II who was married to Eleanor of Aquitaine.

Oops, I labeled that portrait wrong: The woman above is Henrietta Maria, Louis' aunt and Charles' mother.

This is Marie de Medici. She passed on that long face and almond eyes to both of her Kingly grandsons.

Queen Mary on the run after pocketing some silver at lunch. "Was that camera in the dining room?" she wonders.....

R563 Close but no cigar. The Plantagenet House began as the Anjou House, with Geoffrey Count of Anjou (d. 1151), and the empress Matilda, daughter of the English king Henry I.

Both branches of the House that were the primary actors in the Wars of the Roses, the Yorks and the Lancasters, descend from this union.

Speaking of Royal resemblances, here is Queen Mary with a baby Queen Elizabeth. It could almost as easily be a picture of Queen Elizabeth and Princess Charlotte.

I think the French and English royal houses crossed over quite a bit until the 18th Century, when the Hanovers came in. Then it was all German principalities, all the time: Those Hanovers loved marrying their equally froglike cousins. Victoria and Albert looked like twins, and they actually were related in several different ways.

Actually, R567, I think Baby Elizabeth bears a strong resemblance to Prince Charles in your picture.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The French were Catholics. The Royals would change religions, but generally, the Catholics and Protestants stuck to their own kind, with the Orthodox a one-off.

^England was a catholic country until Henry VIII and the early 1530s

R572, sure, and Henry VIII married a Spanish Catholic. But that was probably the last time, right? The English even have a prohibition against Catholic Kings, don’t they?

My bet is either Charles or William offloads the Church of England leadership to the Bishops rather quickly. They have no business leading a Church in this era.

None of the Royals of Charles's or William's generation are religious, they just go through the motions.

England didn't magically turn Protestant overnight...it took decades for it to become the dominant faction in Britain.

Elizabeth I was firmly Protestant but the Stuarts flipped and back all through the 17th Century which led to dumping James II to bring in the very Protestant William of Orange to be co-regnant with Mary II. Britain wasn't really solidly Protestant until well into the 18th Century with the establishment of the Hanovers on the throne.

The French and British royal houses didn't mix after 1701 because British royals could not marry Catholics without losing their place in the succession. That ended in 2013.

Most unruly bush:

May aka Mary The German Snaggletooth, The Queen Mother Or Her Maj?

With the likelihood of another divorced monarch after Charles, it's dumb to keep the king or queen as head of the church. Or what about an openly gay monarch? What would the C OE frauen do with that?

Excellent question r578 I wish we could do polls within threads. My money is on HM. Greeks like full bushes.

I would think Camilla's bush is like a tumbleweed.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Albert Victor. Oops

I loved your video R542. That is hysterical when all of a sudden you see her dogs!

Interesting that Charles was quite a good looking child, almost cute even, and yet grew up to be so ridiculously unattractive even in his twenties (he really doesn’t have a single redeeming feature). It doesn’t bode well for the Cambridge and Sussex kids.

The Sovereign holds the title

[quote] 'Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England'

I seem to remember reading that Charles wanted to use the term "Defender of Faiths" instead of "Defender of the Faith".

[quote] Strange that she felt that way, [R323], since three of her children married non-royal aristos.

Alexandra wouldn;t have hated Mary for being non-royal (she was not a snob at all); she would have hated her for being German.Germany was constantly at odds with Denmark in the 19th century, and Alexandra had a lot of trouble with her German relatives, such as her sister-in-law Vicky, who was the German Crown princess and then Empess, and was much beloved by her husband Bertie.

But I don;t think it's true at all Queen Alexandra hated Queen Mary. Mary was considered such a catch that when Bertie and Alexandra's eldest son Albert Victor ("Eddy"), the Duke of Clarence and heir to the throne, died of illness in the 1890s while he was engaged to Mary, she was immediately married instead to George, Albert Victor's only brother. She was thought that perfect a future queen of England by Bertie and Alexandra and Queen Victoria that they made sure she married the heir to the throne when the first one died. Fortunately for them, George and Mary adored each other right away and were one of the happiest of all royal couples, although neither was a very good parent.

Alexandra hated Germans, but her mother was a German princess and her father’s mother was a German princess and it just goes on and on for generations. Not really much of a ‘Dane’ was she, except for her national allegiances. Ethnically she was mostly German

[quote]Interesting that Charles was quite a good looking child, almost cute even, and yet grew up to be so ridiculously unattractive even in his twenties (he really doesn’t have a single redeeming feature).

It's so funny that in the 70s Charles was considered a hunky "eligible bachelor" and supposedly had girls swooning all around him. When you look at pictures of him from back then, it's not exactly the image you would think of. I mean, JESUS!

It just shows how little looks matter in defining a person’s attractiveness.

Those ears are the worst.

It’s really hard to say. The ears are tragic, but to me, his close set tiny eyes are the worst. The nose isn’t a winner either. Plus that weirdly shaped face and hair.

Britain's most eligible bachelor of the 70s, making knickers wet all over the nation!

Fun fact about Royal relationships: George V, who terrorised his sons and to some extent his formidable wife, apparently absolutely adored the young Princess Elizabeth, and she could do no wrong in his eyes. George V was obsessed with duty and order, George VI was so dutiful he had to fight his natural anxiety all the way, so no wonder the Queen learned it as she did. Especially with Uncle David as an example of what happened when you didn't respect it.

Going back to why the offer for Tsar Nicholas to come to England was withdrawn - I wonder whether anyone mentioned to the King that his close resemblance to the Tsar could result in a Tale of Two Cities-type mixup if they were both getting about in the same country. People wouldn't have imagined a whole family could be killed, but the Tsar and Alexei would surely have occurred to most people as being in danger.

Charles should have had his ears fixed. Margo had David's done.

QEII saw a special private screening for her and her family of The King's Speech. She told friends she loved it and it was 75% accurate.

When Eleanor Roosevelt visited Buckingham Palace, the two Princesses were mesmerized by "The Giantess."

Queen Mary was only half-royal, and a cunt.

It's time....

r598, does it matter when she was fully royal by marriage?

We wear gemstones on our heads at parties basically