Prince Philip's memorial service - anyone else watching?

The Queen came through the side entrance, as she did at St. George's Chapel in Windsor last April, not that you bitches care!

Oh no! They're all in black. Except for a few outliers in . . . green????

Kate looks divine though. Live the boater. And George and Chsrlotte look so . . . incredibly well bred.

Link to live stream?

You can watch it here.

Is it pre-empting Suits? - The Humanitarian Duchess

And here.

R3, unfortunately, that only shows their arrival though I will say that you can get a good look at them. Have Marie-Christine's ankles always been that chunky or is she in heart failure?

The actual service inside the church is only being broadcast on the Beeb 1 or Beeb iPlayer. Have to wait until the actual service is uploaded somewhere if you can't access either.

The live feed in R5 is amusing. You can hear the photos making comments about the royals arriving.

Call me crazy but I think the Queen might not be long for this world. Just a hunch, though.

Neither are the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent or Prince Michael. They all barely shuffled in to the church. Sad.

Yes, Pss Michael is a big woman with bad legs.

The Queen used to call her Our Val. Short for Valkyrie.

Who was that stump walking in with three giant white Rose's on her head?

Tell me it wasn't Euge or Bea screaming Tell Them the Yorks are here.

^*roses (not Rose's)

Fucking autocorrect.

Didn't he die like a year ago? Has he been in the freezer at WIndsor Castle since then?

500+ people crammed into the church and not one is wearing a mask, including the Queen. I guess Covid is well and truly over in England.

The Queen had Prince Andrew ride in her car with her to the service. He accompanied her into the church. Quite the statement.

"Yes, of course I lent him the money."

R16 A mother's love knows no bounds. Or reason. Or sense.

Special shout-out to the Princess Royal, the Dukes of Gloucester, Kent and Prince Michael for taking a few minutes to chat with those poor kids in the honour guard who'd been standing there waiting around for at least half an hour.

In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation.

—Prince Philip

[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.]

R14 - What planet do you live on?

He had a televised funeral with a couple of iconic images of the Queen sitting alone with a mask on in black because of COVID.

This is a MEMORIAL service of thanksgiving for his life, not a funeral service for his death.

How did you happen to miss this photo?

I think she looks quite well and she must be pretty tough because for all the chatter of helicopter flights from Windsor to Buckingham Palace, the Maul shows she drove to London in a Range Rover before changing cars. The issue is plainly mobility and obviously she's shrinking with advanced age but she looked much more robust than I expected. To be honest, I'm surprised.

So Kate was actually in black with white spots and her hat was black and white. It's only when you watch live footage that you can see how beautifully the silky material moves against her legs. I think, in person, those maidenly dresses look sexier than still photographs show, especially if one has the figure for them, which she does. The hat was gorgeous.

The two Cambridge children are very attractive, both looking now completely Windsor, George especially.

They both also look as if they've inherited the Windsor complexion genes.

In case anyone asks, those in green were dressed in that colour because it was the colour of Philip's livery.

R14, it’s a memorial service, not a funeral.

R16 - I don't think banishment from official public life includes being excluded from one's own father's memorial service.

The other offspring were there with spouses. It was correct for the unattached son to support her going in and exiting.

The only absence that makes a statement was Harry's, who chose to ignore this. It makes a very, very large statement.

The SKY News royal reporter, asked outside the Abbey whether the Queen was saddened by his absence, carefully replied that "The Queen undoubtedly knows what we don't [about the issues between Harry and the family] . . . but I'm sure she would have liked all her family around her at this time."

I think 1,800 people were inside, not just 500.

And for R14, here's the OTHER iconic photo from Philip's actual funeral.

R23, I thought the same thing... George is becoming more and more Windsor all the time.... as his face thins, the resemblance to Michael Middleton softens. He will be quite tall, I think, but so is his father and Kate's not small, either.

Princess Anne's complexion is wonderful. I wonder what she does to it, besides the homeopathy of course.

Hard to believe the woman is in her 70s. She'll live well into her 90s.

[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.]

1,800??? And not a mask in the lot. Talk about a super-spreader event!!

Both Charlotte and her great grandmother, The Queen, are Tauruses.

Both Charlotte and her great grandmother, The Queen, are Tauruses.

I’ll sleep well tonight.

R28. Who had the death stare? Princess Diana or Mrs. Middleton?

R32

Little Charlotte!

R31

Charlotte's resemblance to the Queen is often commented on. One of the reasons being they are the same astrology sign.

Ignore R28. She infests every thread of this kind.

But since R29 asks, it is the Queen whose "death stare", inherited from her grandmother, Queen Mary, is famous behind the scenes.

The only time it's been captured directed at a senior royal was at Diana at her first Highland Games after the wedding, talking to Charles whilst the anthem was played, and at Meghan Markle at her wedding when the Queen saw the 20ft veil covering the face of a 36 year old divorcee as if she were a blushing first time bride. Bad form.

The Queen looks just like her granny, Queen Mary. Who's a Gemini.

All COVID restrictions have been lifted in England. Keep up, mate. And if any of those other crowned heads thought they were in danger, they wouldn't have come.

I doubt that Queen Margrethe of Denmark, who is 81 (another Taurus, I believe, R34), would have shown up if she really thought she was in any danger.

R23, stop it! Just stop!

R35, what have I ever posted to earn that? Unless you're a pompous ass and I've called you on it, I'm pretty agreeable about this topic.

R36 She looks even more like her Aunt, Mary the Princess Royal, also an April baby.

Sorry, R35, I just read your post. You're exactly the kind of pompous, know-it-all, down your nose set of human bagpipes I'd call on your silly, sad grandeur.

R38 - Why, Meghan, dear, you could have come, too. I'm sure you were invited.

R37, a lot them have had the COVID already anyway... Denmark did, I think Spain, too.

I saw exactly two people wearing masks. One was an equerry/body guard/whatever of a representative from (per kaffiyeh) Jordan. The other was on someone's dogsbody or other.

R33. Charlotte is her own grandmother?

Does everyone remember how the Klan Granny Troll screamed that no one is offended by Kate "merching" jewellery, referring to the pearl necklace Kate wore to Philip's funeral . . . totally ignorant of the fact that it was the Queen's necklace, and a one-off made up of a gift of pearls from the people of Japan, and that there were no "others"?

It was the comic relief in the funeral thread - that, and Harry pushing his way past his cousin, Peter, to get closer to William, and Omid Scobie describing the wreath Meghan had sent, the hand-written card in her very own calligraphy, and the flowers in complete with their meanings - during the service.

Senior foreign royals arriving, from Billed-Bladet.

Left to right: Queen Anne-Marie of Greece (Margrethe's youngest sister, married to ex King Constantine), Queen Maxima of The Netherlands, King Felipe and Queen Letizia of Spain, and Queen Margrethe of Denmark.

I agree with the sensitive, informed cunts on this thread that decency is required on such holy threads, and that Andrew was instructed by the queen before leaving Windsor to "rub one out, or two" so he didn't force himself on any of the lady sergeants.

Also, I was surprised they didn't cut away when the queen got up and staggered to the Archbishop of Canterbury and slapped him hard on the face when he said Philip had "practiced populating the Mediterranean rim before his professional insemination job with the beloved queen."

It made for great television.

R48. Do you have a mental problem?

R49 Do you really need to ask?

She's writing this from a half-way house with a little plastic cup of pills on a chair tray in front of her, and an aide in baggy blue shirt standing next to her to be sure she takes them.

I wonder what the Sussex crew will pull today to draw attention away from this service and onto themselves.

R51 - It's rather too late. The service was only 40 minutes long, so they missed their shot, and the huge headlines in places like the DM are already up.

Bea and Euge and husbands were behind the Cambridge, both respectably dressed. Whoever the guest was with the three huge white roses on top, it wasn't one of the Yorks. Bea apparently broke down crying during the service and put her programme up before her face to hide it.

Any Asians in attendance?

[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.]

186 pictures in that Mail article!

Mike Tindall looks like the bouncer. Princess Anne needs an eyelift.

There is still an actual "Countess Mountbatten of Burma." Get with the program, Royals! It's called Myanmar now.

Eug in a heinous red print is the worst dresser in the land.

Yes I'm watching. I was always very special to him.

R56 But it was Burma when the title was created. If they called it ". . . of Myanmar" they would be pilloried. If Sussex changed its name to Arden, do you think Harry would suddenly be Duke of Arden?

Oh, wait . . . ! Good folk of Sussex: this is your off-ramp from bring ties to the Harkles!

^*being tied to

R9 I don't think it's much of a hunch to say a 95 year old isn't long for this world.

I was perhaps overly impressed that Princess Anne stopped to talk to the kids standing at attention but when the Cambridges blew past them with nary a glance I decided I was right. Anne rules.

If you look at that picture of Princess Mary you see hints of Edward VII, who had hints of his mother, Queen Victoria. The two dominant faces in the family are Queen Victoria (mostly for eyes, I think) and Queen Mary. Diana too, if you count William.

The Kents (so frail) also stopped. I think it’s one of those programmed things, they talk to the ones whose association they are affiliated with.

Neither Princess Alexandra nor Duchess of Kent were there. I don’t think anyone missed Fergy.

I think it's wise for Harry not to attend. It will distract the serenity of the event and focus of the service.

R65 I think it made him look petty, but he wasn't missed really.

I admit I got a little teary-eyed when they played the national anthem. The Queen didn't look all that stable on her feet and I couldn't help think this might be the last time we hear the anthem with her standing there.

r57, India Hicks with a split up to her drawers,begs to differ.

R62. It is also possible that because by precedence William and Kate arrive near the end of the arrivals, they are not expected to delay the proceedings by pausing to talk to people on the side When the Queen arrives for a ceremony for example she usually does not step out of line to speak to anyone because she would delay the start of the ceremony. Anne arrived when people were arriving at a leisurely pace.

R68 Yes, it's just that how hard is it to glance in their direction? They're not furniture.

What kind of event is this? Nobody’s got their tits out, nobody’s getting slapped.

BORRRRRING

Did someone forget to explain the dress code to Eugenie?

R69. Glancing at them might look weird or disrespectful and even if it didn’t it wouldn’t really do the people any good. I think the Queen usually looks straight ahead since it looks better and more dignified and purposeful.

Letizia nailed it.

Kate looked lovely. That hat was striking!

Who’s the elder hussy covered in grey flannel, neck to toes, with a slit up to her slit? That’s quite the trick.

This one. Wow.

R72 It doesn't look weird to register someone's presence especially if you are trying to make the Monarchy more relevant and modern. Anyway, I don't really give a tuppence for these funny, odd people but I enjoy the spectacle.

Fuck, no.

R73 - Letizia's hat was questionable but I do love her green coat dress

R76 - I believe that is India Hicks, the Lord Louis Mountbatten granddaughter.

R76. You do illustrate the problem the monarchy faces. Every anodyne actin they take is interpreted as sinister or out of touch. It is unusual for a senior official to break out of line to talk to people while arriving at public ceremonies. Almost all democratic leaders must be snooty and out of touch as well

[quote]Almost all democratic leaders must be snooty and out of touch as well

Uh, no. Bill Clinton won twice BECAUSE he acknowledged everyone in the room. It's considered the apogee of a leader's skill set.

[quote] There is still an actual "Countess Mountbatten of Burma." Get with the program, Royals! It's called Myanmar now.

Peerage names cannot be changed from their original issue. You can change your name as it appears on your birth certificate, but not on the peerage rolls.

R81 Lets face it, anyone in positions of power and privileged are some what out of touch. Remember when Nancy Pelosi thought $600/month COVID stipend was enough to live off.

R82 In fairness the royals always stop and talk to people, I mean that's the purpose of the walkabout. I know it has to do with security, but when is the last time you've seen a US President or other heads of state just walk up to people in the street and hold a chat? Also at receptions, the Queen goes out of her way to talk to everyone there (I know I was at a reception in 2010 during her visit to Canada, my husband worked for the Ontario government and she and Philip talked to everyone in the room of about 500 people. Even it it was just a "lovely to see you, or warm weather today.") Also the Queen is the only royal who doesn't stop and talk to soldiers in an official honour guard. Charles, William, Anne and Edward all do.

I am obsessed with Kate's hat. It had a very Diana feel to it.

[quote] the Queen goes out of her way to talk to everyone there (I know I was at a reception in 2010 during her visit to Canada, my husband worked for the Ontario government and she and Philip talked to everyone in the room of about 500 people. Even it it was just a "lovely to see you, or warm weather today.

Andrew usually says, "Fancy a shag later?" or more recently, "I don't sweat, did you know that?"

Bea looks strangely gaunt. Eugenie is looking more and more like the Queen Mum every day.

I agree that George has always had a resemblance to the late, unlamented Duke of Windsor. I hope he meets a happier fate than his great-uncle.

And sixty years from now, Charlotte will be sweeping in just as warmly but imperiously as Princess Anne. Another future Princess Royal!

Kate wears severe fashions very well. Possibly because her figure is so severe. Perhaps that's why she keeps the long hair, as it helps soften everything else.

I think a page was turned today. Goodbye Prince Philip, hello Prince George.

Harry and Meghan should have attended. Nothing would have made them look more royal than attending the memorial service with the BRF and the other heads of state.

[quote]Mike Tindall looks like the bouncer.

Actually, I was thinking he looked quite good - like he was born to this; everyone looked dignified today. Eug's dress was questionable, but I thought Bea looked quite pretty and Kate looked gorgeous.

On a side note, I did see Fat Albert was there; I'm surprised the older sister Caroline of Many Husbands didn't come with him. I'm surprised they invited the Serbian Royals - aren't they total fake royals that got kicked to the curb after WWI?

Beatrice has evolved from a bug-eyed rabbit to a rather attractive woman. Eugenie is going the other way. She looks like motherhood is really taking a toll.

Motherhood and her father.

Albert is a monarch and head of state r91, that's why he was there. Why should his sister, who is not a head of state or relative, be there?

Well, because it's an *official* event and in the past, he has taken one of sisters to official events since his wife is locked up, on the run or whatever her status is these days.

Harry and his wife although technically royal, hate everything about it, and are better suited to things like earnest podcasts, kiddie books and shilling for any entity that will pay. This memorial service IS NOT IT

It's not an official event in Monaco, r95.

Why didn’t anyone warn us about this event?!

Will the recording be televised?

And what’s coming up next? Is there a calendar online for these things?

BBC broadcast it. It might be at or available through this link at some point. BBC is really stingy about access from outside the UK and they're tricky to get around with a VPN. (If anybody has let me know... I've got a headache trying to figure out a consistent workaround.) Maybe it will show up on one of the official royal social channels.

Why do they still call her "Kate Middleton?" Neither of those words are part of her name.

I always thought that was strange, R100. She's been the Duchess of Cambridge for over ten years.

The same reason why Henry VIii’s wives were called Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard, etc. She’s not the kind to phone you up and say “this is Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge”.

Princess Charlotte is doing the DL proud! Our chosen future Queen was magnificent today.

George still looks visibly distressed by all the cameras and attention. Charlotte just looks at the cameras like "Yeah, bitches, BRING IT."

Pity she wasn't born first.

There's a pic online of Charlotte catching a glimpse of herself on the TV camera and giving a big smile. That kid's got confidence.

R104. On the other hand that could signal she’s the next Prince Harry.

[quote] I'm surprised they invited the Serbian Royals - aren't they total fake royals that got kicked to the curb after WWI?

Quite a few royals got kicked to the kerb after both WWs, and a few of those monarchies were represented today, amongst others by Queen Anne-Marie of Greece and Margareta, the Custodian of the Romanian Crown.

Aren't all those people relatives anyway? Elizabeth and Philip both were cousins to most of the crowned and formerly crowned heads of Europe.

Charlotte doesn't have the weight of the world on her shoulders. George looks like he's already aware he's destined to be on the money, and he doesn't like it.

That said, I doubt Charlotte or Louis will turn out to be as unhappy and rebellious as Harry, as they'll be raised in a much more functional family unit and encouraged to get a good education.

[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.]

[quote]I think the DM must have a special staff member now in charge of trolling the Sussexes.

A single person - I'd guess they've got an entire staff!

Cousin Peter was looking in fine form today - I can't believe no one on DL noticed!

Interesting all the European monarchies were represented except for one: neither The Prince of Liechtenstein nor his heir The Hereditary Prince attended. Perhaps they’re still mourning Princess Marie-Alge?

I wonder if days like this are challenging for Meghan. Is Harry brooding? Does she have to distract and jolly him? "Look, what a beautiful day outside. You really can't beat the California weather and lifestyle. Right, baby? We're so lucky to be here. Best decision we could have made. And besides, your grandfather would have totally understood."

If Charles and William both live into their 90's and rule until the very end then George won't be king until he's in his 60's.

King Harald of Norway was due to attend, but he has covid.

Every time Harry has to flush his own toilet or put paste on his own toothbrush, he must curse Meghan

[quote] I'm surprised they invited the Serbian Royals - aren't they total fake royals that got kicked to the curb after WWI?

Crown Prince Alexander is a godson of the Queen. Alexander's mother was also a first cousin to Prince Philip.

I thought Harry didn't flush? Everybody here says Harry doesn't flush. Nobody said there was a reason.

R114. I think the days of reigning for life disappear at the latest with Charles.

Prince William may find a suitable royal husband for Charlotte from among these families, and perhaps forge an alliance between the UK and the husband’s country.

I think reign for life will continue but I also think you'll see more and more devolution of duties, like we're seeing now for the Queen on account of advanced age. It really is a shame Harry chose so poorly. There's so few of them to do the job.

Bad news for the York girls troll though... opines the columnist:

"There are certain things Britain does very well. Today’s service to remember the extraordinary life of the Duke of Edinburgh is a reminder that when it comes to big events with heraldry and trumpeters, few countries do it quite as well as Britain. Forget the professional sneering classes – for ordinary Brits the Royals still have huge pulling power and a significant place in national life. When it comes to opening a new community centre or rewarding a local hero it is our Royal Family that is called upon to celebrate the best of British.

Today’s service was stuffed full of charities boasting a link to the late Duke, and they tell a story of modern royalty that is easy to forget. Sensible members of the Royal Family understand that their role is to get around, cut ribbons and shake hands with Brits doing extraordinary things for worthy causes. There is plenty of work to be done but increasingly few Royals to do it.

Some years ago, the Duke of York had an almighty row with his brother, the Prince of Wales, over plans to shrink the size of the Royal family. Andrew wanted plumb Royal jobs for his daughters, “blood Royals” as he tastefully described them.

On this single issue, at least, he was probably right. Charles will inherit a “firm” much smaller than we expected but the workload remains the same. Today’s incredible service shows how important Royals are to organisations doing good works far away from the gaze of the national media.

Look at the stats compiled each Christmas by Tim O’Donovan. This amateur archivist meticulously records every Royal engagement contained in the daily Court Circular. In 2019, before Covid sent Royal engagements behind a computer screen, our collective Royal Family clocked up over 3,500 engagements at home and abroad. This figure has hardly moved over the last ten years. The only difference is the Royals undertaking this work either are getting older or disappearing altogether through petulance or scandal. It’s time for some new recruits to help “The Firm” meet demand.

Sensible Royals understand their role, keep your head down, cut ribbons, shake hands and thank people for good work. It’s a model that works, but supply and demand is now badly out of sync. In this, as in so much, The Queen has led the way, she doesn’t need a podcast or an "insta" account to give her role a purpose. With the Queen running down her public appearances to a small handful, it’s doubtful that the remaining seven “senior” Royals will be able to carry the workload. That’s a lot of disappointed communities not getting a Royal ribbon cutter or regal handshake to rewards acts of local heroism. Cast forward by a decade and the numbers dwindle yet further, 573 engagements were carried out by less well known Royals all well into their seventies.

This leaves us with a diminished Royal family, lacking “capacity” as a management consultant might say. It points one way. Someone needs to step up and put in a shift.

Egotists need not apply nor individuals who confuse Royalty with being a "celeb". There are plenty of vacuous reality TV stars ready to step into this role. What is needed is the unshowy commitment to turning up, without the need to share their truth. We could call it Princess Anne-ism.

2/

The Wessex and Cambridge children are still some years off taking on full time Royal duties and it is doubtful there is much public appetite for more Yorks. This leaves Zara Phillips to pick up the slack. Zara has the ideal CV. Accomplished in her field, mature enough to not need the attention and an admirably down to earth approach to life that would see her take to Royal duties without the need for self-aggrandisement. Her mother regularly tops the tables for Royal engagements having set an example her daughter would do well to follow. Princess Anne famously eschewed Royal titles and trappings for her children but this was at a time when the size of the future family could reasonably be expected to carry the burden.

There are plenty of parts of Britain that proudly put out the bunting when a Royal comes to town. It might seem unspeakably naff to some but for many the validation of a royal visit is still very meaningful. Invitations continue to roll into the Palace by the sack load.

Today was a joyous occasion as we remembered one of the truly great Britons. It also put a spotlight on the thoroughly modern role of the Royal family. Picking up patronages, attending engagements and being unshowy in going about it. It is no coincidence that the Princess Royal most embodies the approach to royalty laid down by the Duke of Edinburgh who we remembered today. Making sure there are enough Royals doing the real work of royalty would be a fitting tribute to the Duke.

R121. Do you really think William is one to hold on to the role till the bitter end like his grandmother, especially since the practice of abdicating is becoming by widely established?

R124. I honestly don't know. I think William is one more likely to consult with his heir. I know William is one who thinks young families need space to be young families for as long and as much as possible. So I don't know what he would do. He'd consult. I don't think that presupposes his decision.

Fascinating to watch the BBC coverage live. There was obviously strict agreement to show The Queen's dramatic discreet arrival in long shot only; then to cut away so she could settle in to her special chair with dignity as the first hymn boomed out. Only when she had indeed settled in were there a few more close-up shots. Shots of Andrew were vanishingly few. Commentary didn't mention his name as he led The Queen to her place, it was all so fleetingly done.

Similarly for The Queen's exit - though Andrew was then acknowledged as being there. We did get to see Her Majesty chatting as of old with the young lady who first spoke so well. And then cutaways to the lines of succession variously leaving from the main entrance. All in all both service and coverage were flawlessly done.

Why on earth was this televised?

Well, Philip was the consort of the United Kingdom's longest-serving and much beloved monarch. Is that enough, r127?

[quote]Why on earth was this televised?

So the poors can see it.

Not really R128. I have friends in the UK and none of them find the monarchy "beloved" or give two shits about the old broad and her trashy, fug family. The old fart being memorialized was a deplorable too.

R130. Case closed!

I didn't say "monarchy," r130. I clearly refered to the individual. Why do you believe your few friends are representative of the general population?

I'm not seeing any BAME casting at this event. How totally Eurocentric is this ritual?

Why couldn't Harry have attended this on his own? He could have paid respects to his grandfather, and left without any lunches of rattling teacups.

My "few" friends? LOL...

R134. He probably wouldn’t have lived. There are snipers all over London targeting him.

I thought that Bea looked lovely at the service, and I agree with a post up thread that she seems to be more attractive with age.

Why does someone need to fly halfway across the world to go to another service for Phillip? Harry can watch at home then send down a prayer to Phillip. No need to be here for yet another service to him. He wasn't a king, there is no need for another round of jerking off Phillip's corpse for 40 minutes. At that rate, it's more for the TV audience than anyone present.

Just another glitzy ceremony to make the monarchy look relevant and necessary. I don't begrudge them for having it, but it is not something that commands someone's presence, like say the actual funeral.

If Harry had went he'd get flack for never leaving royal engagements and overshadowing the event. You wanted him to stay away, he's staying away.

r121 they can't be that hard up for royal to help considering the York sisters are willing and ready to step in as Princesses of the Blood and someone under the age of 40, but the RF tossed them aside to keep the old birds around.

R137 Bea is the only member of the York family I actually like.

Re. R133. The opening speaker was a young black woman. The Queen chatted to her during her departure.

It was only a matter of time before the cling-ons showed up. Class all the way, just like their fixation.

Meghan sent an appropriate arrangement, along with a gift basket, artisanal reproductions of which are being made available to the pubic for a modest "contribution" to Archewell.

R62 - That is correct - they stop to speak with those representing military or regimental ones that they are associated with. That's why they go right to a specific one.

[quote] Why do they still call her "Kate Middleton?" Neither of those words are part of her name.

Ignorance or habit. Before, during, and after her marriage, Diana was often referred to as "Lady Di". She hated the "Di" part.

Because she's not the only bitch named Kate or Catherine, the common person would be confused if you didn't add her former last name. Just like we say Prince Andrew, Prince Harry, Prince Charles, Princess Anne, because these are common names and you add the extra bit to distinguish them from the millions of folks sharing those names.

Also, some reporters sound so insufferable when they use Catherine or the Duchess of Cambridge, depending on the situation. A decade ago she was no better than the average shop girl, stop playing around.

R66 He wasn't missed for sure, except possibly by the Queen, but it does make him look bad, and it is just as well he wasn't there, because all the talk would have been about him, not the DoE and the service.

The thing is, Harry had a close relationship with Philip. He inherited Philip's valuable Purdy guns, and even more, the Captain General of the Royal Marines position that Philip held for 60 years or so. Philip was probably aghast at Harry blowing off the RM Deal Memorial Service to go to the Lion King premiere instead and pimp Meghan out to Disney for voiceover work, and equally appalled at how she dressed for the last such event before they left for good.

It just looks bad. It nails his Outcast flag to the mast, further tarnishes the Sussex's "We're British Royalty!" aura, and would make sticking UK taxpayers with the bill for his security up his Hated Here even more of an outrage.

One hopes the High Court took note today.

R143 - ". . . which are being made available to the pubic , , ,"

Those are the ones she distributed to the sex workers, right?

Worse still, R146, is the habit of "Lady" Colin Campbell, who insists on calling her "Catherine Cambridge", affecting the upper-class habit of using the territorial designation (i.e. Cambridge) as a surname.

You know that if Harry and Meghan had attended they would have messed up the order of precedence again by pushing their way to the front. I'm sure the BRF were relieved they skipped it.

R103 - Not ours, Denmark's. If you think Queen Margrethe wasn't sitting there appraising Charlotte and thinking, "Ja, ja! Meget godt!, think again.

R149 - In fairness, it's probably how the Queen refers to Kate. She always called Fergie, "Sarah York". If you're dropping the HRH bit, that's the correct way to do it. The kids are probably George, Charlotte, and Louis Cambridge at school, not Windsor, just as William and Harry at schools were Wales.

R140 Bea is kind of sweet, if dim. But I'd never turn my back on Yuge.

Did you see Yuge's walk in the video? Like a lorry driver, which is how her mother walks.

R40

Thank you so much! The Queen resembles her aunt (a Taurus) much more than her granny Mary (Gemini).

My point exactly, all you astrology scoffers!

BBC News had a brief few minutes showing the Queen arriving. The notable absentees were "are the spotlights on me" duo from California.

R87

Trigger warning: this post involves proof of astrology.

I did not notice the resemblance between Prince George and Edward 8, but if so, both are Cancers.

You do know astrology is a bunch of horseshit?

R134 - Because he's got a lawsuit pending in front of the High Court claiming that England is too dangerous for him to visit without 24/7 police protection of the kind his father and brother have, and he wants his status changed so that whenever he visits, he gets what they get - at the taxpayers' expense.

If he'd attended, he would have showed that he really isn't that afraid, after all.

That's the practical excuse. The other one is he probably had no desire to attend. He doesn't care about anyone but himself, at Philip's funeral last year he was stunned by the cold shoulder the family gave him, and he's working on a memoir that the media keeps promising will trash the family again.

Why would he want to face the family, the foreign royals looking at him with obvious contempt . . . Philip isn't worth that to him. The Queen and his father aren't worth that to him.

He's done.

R149

In the same way, archbishops are referred to by the dioceses they preside over. Hence in "The Crown," the Queen looks out the window and says "I see Durham, York, and Canterbury coming up the drive. It must be serious."

Oh, I'm fully aware of the practice, R152. My point is that this usage is limited to those who actually know the people involved (i.e. the Queen talking about Fergie) or to situations where surnames are required (like school). When that ludicrous twat, "Lady" Colin Campbell, uses it, the clear implication is that she/he knows the royals.

R133 - Don't go simples on us.

On the topic of Prince Andrew, the usual suspects in the UK Press are coming out against it, but as much as I hate Andrew, I kind of love the Queen's ballsy move here. Andrew attending was always going to be an issue and it was going to be a point the royals would be attacked on by some quarters. So, the Queen arriving with him was basically a one-finger salute at those people and I bet you the majority of people in the UK will back her here.

Queen: "I love my handsome randy son, and fuck y'all!"

R98 - You should have checked the Prince Harry will not attend his grandfather's memorial service . . . thread. Duly noted there.

Yes, these things are calendared. I think the next thing up is the Queen's actual birthday on 21 April. I think the Platinum Jubilee events kick off for real then.

I'm sure if you google it, you'll find the list of events. The next Really Big Thing will be the special Trooping the Colour on her honorary birthday on 2 June.

That's when everyone comes out onto the balcony of Buckingham Palace to watch the RAF flyover and the crowds pack the Mall and cheer.

There may be another balcony appearance, I'm not sure, but the same issue will arise: who gets to go out there? Fore her Diamond Jubilee it was just Charles and Camilla, William and Kate, and, of course, Pre-Meghan Harry.

Andrew was said to be livid at the obvious message.

Now, the issue is, will Harry skip this, too, and even if he doesn't, will he still be allowed onto the balcony now that the Cambridges have three kids, and Harry is only adjacent?

Watch this space.

I like Bea's hat and shoes, which she has worn before but the coat....you can see her nipples prominently poking through, one much lower than the other, down near her waist.

I scoffed when people here said that Louise would outgrow her gawky looks, but it looks like she has. The eye op, dental brace and hair straightening have worked a treat. She's never be in the same class as the Spencer gals, looks-wise, but she does look very nice. Lovely skin she has.

Meanwhile, Edo is the best-looking of the lot. I wonder if he has any post-nuptial regrets at having hitched his wagon to the Yorks.

My money is on a big presence on the balcony this time... it's 70 years.

R162 - Andrew and Harry are like Trump: the gift that keeps on giving to the bloodthirsty British tabs.

She's retired him permanently from the public stage. But this was his father's memorial service. He didn't stop being Philip's son because he no longer has any official public role.

This wasn't an official public role. It was his father's memorial service. I doubt very much he'll be visible at any of the VIP Platinum Jubilee events, and sure as fucking hell not on that balcony.

But his own father's memorial service? That's ridiculous, to expect him not to be there. As it is, there were no photos of him at Bea's wedding or the christenings of his two grandchildren, but he was certainly there.

Charles' plus one was Camilla; William's plus one was Kate and two kids; Edward's was Sophie and his two kids; Peter Phillip's was his two kids (and very pretty they are, too) - it made sense for the unattached bachelor son, whose adult children were fine on their own, to be the one to walk her in.

[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.]

r155 they can't love the spotlight as much as you say since they both skipped out on this televised performance art, masquerading e a religious ceremony (complete with pedo loving Andrew playing the part of consort), knowing that they are the center of attention when in the UK because the tabloids love to hate on them. So, why would they skip an opportunity to be in the spotlight if that is their obsession?

r167 how it Harry grifting/. How is it like Andrew who remains at Royal Lodge and in the firm, collecting an allowance from mummy.

Can I just say how much I hate this current "look" of stiletto heels and the skirt length of 4-5 inches above them?

I love that look. Does anyone know what is the difference between regular heels and pumps? Would we classify Kate's shoes as pumps?

R120 - How many TIMES do I have to repeat that I have earmarked Charlotte as the bride of the future Crown Prince Christian of Denmark??!!

I like the combination of first name + title.

Charlotte Cambridge is a fantastic name. "I had champers with Charlotte Cambridge at Annabel's." That sort of thing.

Lady Louise REALLY looks like Queen Mary.

The slight off-match of Louise's jacket and dress are giving me eye twitches. Match them exactly or choose something contrasting, hon.

Of course, she's so well-born she can wear whatever she likes and get away with it.

Pumps are the same as court shoes, a plain, closed-toe high-heeled shoe. Heels can be anything - slingbacks, Mary Janes, t-straps.

The Cambridge kids are called that at school.

R171 - You may, and I concur. The only reason Kate gets away with it is her height, tiny waist, and the fact that, as today, there are usually slits. Today the slit was only to the knee or slightly above, but as she walked it did blunt the effect you mention, which I don't like, either.

Kate has no gift for picking the right footwear. She gets it wrong most of the time.

James Wessex resembles his Uncle Charles at that age.

Go get fucked!

R174 - I agree. It reeks but discreetly of WASP class.

You do know that Charlotte is Pippa's middle name, and Elizabeth is Kate's middle name - so the Cambridges managed to give the kid a name that recognises her two grans, her Mum, and her aunt.

And her grandfather, as well! Very smart.

WTF, R181? I'm not questioning the boy's paternity or anything. Uncles and nephews can resemble each other.

R176 - Lady Louise, after an ugly duckling "tween" phase that lasted from about 8-16, is turning out quite charming and sweet-looking. Pretty hair, she also inherited the beautiful Windsor skin, sweet face, and very quiet and unassuming.

A type made for marriage to a hearty country squire somewhere in Gloucestershire.

In an earlier generation, that would have been ideal for Bea.

[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.]

If this were a Netflix series, pretty, unassuming Louise would snag the Duke of Westminster or something. Of course, he's 13 years older than she is but BILLIONAIRE.

It's only practical that Andrew escorted the Queen to the memorial today.

1) They both were travelling from Windsor 2) HM and Andrew are both single 3) He's the son of the man they were honoring 4) A Queen with mobility problems needs an arm to steady her. A simple cane is not enough.

Andrew has paid for what he did both literally and figuratively. He doesn't deserve an official role at this point, but he's allowed to escort his mother to his father's memorial.

Practical, yes. Bad optics? YES.

He had every right to attend his father's service. But giving him a spotlight is not a good idea. Can only hope the old girl doesn't try to include him in the Jubilee.

They would have sat Harry and Meghan in the back row.

TQ knows that Andrew is going to be exiled to outer Siberia the second she pops her clogs. I think she's trying to mitigate that.

While I didn’t think Sarah, Duchess of York would be sitting with the family, I assumed she might have been invited to attend and sit at a discreet distance. But she was probably happy to babysit Yuge and Bea’s children for a few hours. But maybe since Philip is said to have loathed Sarah, they didn’t invite her, despite The Queen being fond of her and Andrew obviously still attached to her.

R193 you outlined exactly why she wasn't invited...

If they had attended, I'm guessing that Harry and Meghan would have been sitting where the Tindalls ended up sitting, in the second row behind the Wessexes. That would have been in line with their status and kept them a discreet distance from Will and Kate

The Daily Mail's guide to the photograph of everyone sitting lists "King Albert of Monaco".

King of Monaco!

Go jump in the toilet! All of you royal watching asses!

I hope those fucking Hun relations of Philip stayed in Germany where they belong.

Trending on Twitter. Abolish the Monarchy. Why? Andrew and the Caribbean tour. People are saying the brf don't care about the publics opinion and they have had enough. The optics once again are just so wrong.

R193: he despised her. Not withstanding it would be like inviting Ken Starr to Bill or Hillary's funeral, it would be about as disrespectful to him as you could get.

Also it would pull focus. Everybody's carping about Andrew, imagine Mme. Thenardier along for the ride.

My favorite of the whole bunch...Sarah, Duchess of York. She should have been invited.

To give Andrew pride of place by having him escort the Queen was exceptionally bad judgement. Most likely the old lady demanded it and once again, she has proven her awful emotional intelligence when it comes to her offspring. Andrew should have come in quietly with his daughters. The Queen could have been easily escorted by Edward, Peter Phillips or her cousin, the Duke of Kent. Their families would have been fine entering without them.

Were the Grimaldis of Monaco there?

How about Lichtenstein royal family?

Albert was there but no one from Liechtenstein.

It was a family occasion, not a state occasion. She was sending a message. He's creep, but not a convicted criminal.

R204. Andrew is his mother's son. She likes him. Philip was his father. His role to escort his mother was so that he didn't appear alone and had a function. Edward was with his family. Peter Philips would not have been appropriate. He's the grandson, not the son.

Was Princess Alexandra of Kent there?

Applause for the old cunt!

R171 It’s a very elegant and classic look. You type poor…or nouveau riche (shudder).

R209 - I only saw three Kents - the Duke of Kent, Prince Michael of Kent and his wife Marie-Christine.

Prince Andrew’s inclusion at his father’s memorial is a reminder that the Queen puts family first

Duke had been thought unlikely to appear at another royal occasion, yet when it comes to The Firm, blood has always been thicker than water

When he was alive, the Duke of Edinburgh was fond of reminding people that the Royal family is first and foremost a family - facing the same trials and tribulations as anybody else. “We are not a secret society!” he once railed.

So when it came to giving thanks for Prince Philip’s life at Westminster Abbey on Tuesday, it should perhaps have come as no surprise that family came first (with the exception of the Duke of Sussex, who was conspicuous by his absence).

Onlookers were surprised - if not shocked - to see the Duke of York controversially playing such a central role in the 40-minute ceremony.

Prince Andrew had been expected to completely disappear from public life after paying his sex abuse accuser Virginia Giuffre a reported £12 million last month, despite protesting his innocence.

The palace had been trying to distance the 95-year-old monarch from the Duke, 62, following the out-of-court settlement - but it seems a newly freelancing Andrew had other plans.

Yet as well as accompanying his mother on the 23-mile drive from Windsor Castle to London for the 11.30am service, the exiled royal also took a front-row seat inside the abbey, beside his brother Prince Edward, and escorted the Queen from his seat when the event ended.

Although prominent in the pews, the Duke was conveniently out of camera shot (and later omitted from any official social media posts).

The order of service had suggested he would walk to his seat with his daughters Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie and their husbands, who were seated on the second row behind the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Prince George, eight, and Princess Charlotte, six.

But instead he escorted his mother all the way from the Poets' Yard entrance, where her state limousine had delivered her as close as possible to the proceedings, to her seat next to Prince Charles.

The Queen, whose mobility issues meant the palace could only confirm her attendance at the last minute, held Andrew’s elbow with her left hand and had a walking stick in her right.

It had been suggested that they travelled together for convenience - since the Duke lives at Royal Lodge, just three miles from Windsor Castle, where he is a regular visitor.

But this was also a display of a mother’s love for her second - and some say “favourite” - son - as well as being an opportunity for the Duke to restore his reputation in the guise of helpful “plus one”.

As Prince Philip’s biographer Gyles Brandreth pointed out on ITV’s This Morning: “Thinking about the Queen today coming with the Duke of York, remember that her father was the Duke of York when she was born and Prince Andrew is named after Prince Philip’s father, Prince Andrew of Greece - so this is a family occasion celebrating the extraordinary life of a public man.”

According to a source close to the Duke: “As the Queen herself has often said: Sometimes people need to remember I have four children. We are a family.” Asked if this meant he would make another appearance at a series of events to mark the Platinum Jubilee this summer, the friend added: “Doubtful but too early to say.”

The palace is unlikely to look kindly on the suggestion, as evidenced by the fact Andrew was carefully kept out of camera view and omitted from any official social media posts.

The consensus among courtiers appears to be that the Duke should never appear at another royal occasion, yet when it comes to The Firm, blood has always been thicker than water.

As one royal watcher remarked: “Given that nothing happens by accident when it comes to the Royal family, the Duke of York’s supporting role allowed him to both slip in and out of the Abbey by the side door and send a thinly disguised message that as far as the Queen is concerned he still has a role to play.”

2/ The lack of uniforms worn by the Royal family was taken as another sign of the Queen’s support for Andrew, who would have sparked a media storm had he dressed as a Vice Admiral after being stripped of all his royal and military associations in January.

Since Charles and William had been the driving force behind that move, it was unclear whether they justified the risks of Andrew’s attendance on the basis it was a family affair - or raised concerns that were overruled by HM. A source close to William suggested he was keen for the focus to remain solely on his grandfather.

An event attended by 1,800 people including foreign royalty and the Prime Minister can never be private - but the very personal nature of such a public commemoration hit home when Beatrice, 33, started sobbing upon sight of her grandmother and father, arm in arm, covering her tearful face with her order of service.

In days gone by, Prince Harry would doubtless have been the first to wrap a comforting arm around his cousin - but he was not present amid an ongoing row with the Home Office over his taxpayer-funded security.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex may well have thought they dodged a bullet by avoiding an appearance alongside Andrew, who is even more unpopular in the US than he is in Britain.

Yet the presence of great-grandchildren, also including Peter Phillips’ daughters Savannah, 11, and Isla, 10, along with their cousin, Zara Tindall’s eldest daughter Mia, eight, only served as a reminder that the Queen has not seen Harry and Meghan’s two-year-old son Archie since November 2019 and has never met their nine-month-old daughter, Lilibet.

Whether the Sussexes will appear on the Buckingham Palace balcony come June is anyone’s guess. As the Duke of Edinburgh, who was separated from his parents as a child, knew better than most: families are complicated things.

Not to argue for him, but she's 95, if anybody has no fucks left to give it's her, and while he's proven to be a louche asshole he hasn't been convicted of anything criminal. He'll likely never be seen again in any meaningful way. He will be at his mother's funeral. He's in Duke of Windsor mode now. God, there's a lot of them....

R208 Nowhere in the rulebook does it say she has to be escorted by Andrew or any other son. Correct me if I’m wrong, but at the funeral, she was escorted by the Archbishop. Yes we know she loves that deviant and hedonistic son of hers, but it was an insensitive and crude choice.

[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.]

Mary! ^

Insensitive and crude? To whom?

I don't get this "bad optic" view. He got booted out of public life, not booted out of his family. And I don't get the centre-stage howls, either. He wasn't, except for a few minutes.

The Queen was centre-stage.

She was never going to banish him from view ever again as part of the family AND Philip was his fucking FATHER.

May be an unpopular opinion, but if there was any event where Andrew should be given slack for appearing with his mother, this was that occasion.

I think the media is blowing this up for another day's headlines just like they did with the "children in cages" in Jamaica last week.

As for "family sources" and "insiders" . . . what insider worthy of the name would EVER have leaked that to tabloid media?!

Andrew clearly has cast the royals in an unwholesome pedophilic light as he trafficked attention away from his departed father.

R216 - He was there for her to hold onto, literally, because the walking stick wasn't enough and her balance is obviously precarious at this point.

This wasn't a wedding, she didn't "need" to be escorted by some male.

And remember that at Philip's funeral last year she was completely alone. Maybe she was determined not to relive that, and if she wanted her son with her, she wouldn't be the only widow in the world to feel that way.

Jesus, you lot sound like the people stoning the adulteress.

The Queen is not escorted by an Archbishop. She is received.

Appearing at his father's service is understandable, escorting his mother was a bad choice.

If she lets him in on the Jubilee fun (50/50 chance I'd say)...YIKES

When do they slide the ole cooter under the floor? To think everyone will be traipsing all over the poor sot.

R204 - He didn't have bloody pride of place. Charles and William's family did. It took all of five minutes for him to get her to her place and then he sat down and all attention was on the Queen. Ffs.

If Charles felt so strongly about it, why didn't he offer to escort her to her place, he sat right next to her. Or William. Or Edward.

Because THEY all had to come down the immensely long aisle from the front entrance. It's the processional that they can't miss.

If Andrew had attended without escorting her, but had slipped in through the side door to sit next to his daughters, they'd all be screaming the same.

It's funny the people who think the royals are "just like us" and aren't the product of centuries of inbreeding and pampering and don't think or have emotions like a normal person. The only normals are the ones who come in from outside, and if they don't do as they're told they are quickly cast away.

The queen is being defiant here.

Never underestimate the adoration that mothers have for the child that spends time with them. Andrew is her only unmarried child, disgraced and rejected by society. What's not to love?

R187 - She may yet snag him. He's Prince George's godfather (one of them, you know). Thirteen years? Perfect, he'll need a healthy young brood mare, especially with all that blue blood in her veins.

What's more, he's had a non-elite upbringing. He actually countryside management at Newcastle University, getting a 2:1 degree. Went to the local comp, too, as a kid. Not Sebastian Flyte by a long shot.

He's worth about £10.045 billion.

The more I think about it, the clearer it is that Lady Louis is perfect for him.

Gawd, how that would burn Meghan's arse: Lady Louise snags Hugh Grosvenor, Duke of Westminster!

^*Lady Louise (not Louis - alas)

R198 - And, yet, here you are, having obviously scrolled through nearly 200 comments . . .

I tell my single London friends that they need to throw themselves at the Duke of Westminster. He's cute, young and rich as fuck.

R147 you probably know that Harry sold his grandfather's guns around the time he fled to California. That must have been disappointing

Sometimes Charlotte reminds me of young Tom Riddle/Voldemort from Harry Potter

...and I like it.

R231 Tell them to be all about how noble working the land is, and to show themselves most at home in Wellies and barn jackets.

R233 - I believe the actor is a nephew of Ralph Fiennes, and I agree, he made a very sultry bad little boy.

Hmm, I meant more that I hope Charlotte turns into a little hell raiser. And that she also has a good stern face like that kid.

While we're playing society dowagers and marrying off Louise, what about Earl Cadogan's grandson George? He'll inherit billions one day too, and he's only 8 years older than Louise. Of course, Grosvenor is a better prospect because he already has the title and money, but when it comes to London real estate, the Cadogans are not to be counted out.

I could only find one picture of him, and he isn't terrible looking.

One easy thing Lady Louise could do that would *vastly* improve her looks and show off her lovely skin and eyes is to have hair removed from the top of her forehead.

It would be easy for her, a bit of electrolysis, and what a difference it would make.

She has a strong jaw line, big cheeks which are mis matched with her tiny forehead. Add some height to the forehead, and her face would be more proportional.

Not watching. Not interested. May he rest in peace. Next!

I have to put in for the Guinness heir. Arthur, Viscount Elveden, is a year older than Louise and will inherit most of the vast Guinness brewery fortune (I believe he's the one in the pink shirt below--it's really hard to find pictures of some of these younger aristocrats).

Maybe not as top-drawer as Hugh Grosvenor, but there is something to be said for marrying someone your own age.

Would Viscount Rothermere's son Vere be a contender or is the family's ownership of the Daily Mail a conflict of interest? He's a decade older than Louise but a cutie.

I always thought Lady Louise had the "it" factor, even at her most awkward. Phil enjoyed riding and spending time with her, so she passed his muster, apparently not easy to do.

Her brother, however, has always had a "creepy" factor to me. Early on there were rumors that he was autistic. It seems darker to me than that. Hey, we haven't had a serial killer in the family for a while! You guys keep marrying the kids off, I'll be keeping an eye on the possible bad seed.

It was a good move by the Queen to help the monarchy by supporting Andrew. It served as a reminder to everyone that Andrew has not been found guilty of anything.

r243 If that was her intention, it backfired badly.

I'd believe the autistic rumors. James Wessex has a strangely dull look in his eyes.

R243 nice to see you on DL Fergs!

Is Mummy going to insist Andrew be her escort at the Jubilee, too?

[quote]The ITV live feed of the attendees arriving cut just after the Cambridges got there.

It was the ABC censors again. Will Smith came up out of nowhere and slapped the Queen, demanding she keep his wife's name "out of your fucking mouth!"

Andrew is living at home with his mom these days (I know, not under the same roof but in the same project). So he comes with the car to take mom to town. Nothing to see here.

R127 It was at 11:30am on a weekday, so it's not like there was much else to show, apart from another repeat of Bargain Hunt or Escape to the Country.

R14’s question is perfectly legit — not all of us masturbate over the big book of royal protocol.

It’s truly fucking weird to have a memorial service a year after someone dies. Why didn’t they just wait for ten years?

R251 I suspect it was because the funeral last year was so scaled back due to Covid.

If he'd died pre-pandemic he'd have had a large state funeral with all the people we saw today in attendance, so there wouldn't have been a need to repeat it a year later.

R236 - Oh, I didn't think his face was stern - I thought it was sulky and beautiful. But there you are. As for "hell-raiser", it's been clear from photos of her from two years old that she was going to be anything but a shrinking violet.

Euge and Bea looked good. So did their husbands.

The Queen looks like she only has a few months left on earth, and why was she clinging to gross Andrew in public? Has dementia set in?

r252 Which is exactly what he said he didn't want. He didn't want a big deal made out of it when he died. He would have been overruled of course had it not been for COVID.

I doubt he would have wanted this either especially given the Queen's mobility/health issues, the Andrew situation, etc. It all seemed rather forced.

Andrew will be fully rehabilitated. It’s only fanatics who express some kind of weird eternal loathing of him.

Duke of Pork

R257 Fergie, you are being so restrained today!

R237 - Not a bad pick, although Grosvenor is better looking. He inherited the title shockingly young. His mother was godmother to William, her name was Natasha and she was of Russian descent.

The Cadogan title is an earldom not a dukedom, but the Cadogan title is older (at least in its first creation in the 15th century). Westminster only dates back to late in Queen Victoria's reign, I think.

Titles are ranked by age: the newer ones are of lesser importance than the older ones.

That's why Edward was so shrewd to pick the Wessex earldom instead of a dukedom he didn't want, and in the expectation of his father's. The Wessex title is extremely old and distinguished, a far cry more distinguished than the Sussex ducal title.

The Guinnesses - that's not a bad pick, either, although not as classy, quite, as the other two.

Sabrina Guinness dated Charles for awhile. She had a racy past but quickly tried to clean herself up whilst dating him, but she hadn't a prayer.

Was Fergie there? I must have missed her.

The Grosvenors have been around since the Conqueror and before. Cadogans too, probably.

R261 - Not.

That would have been the absolute limit in bad optics.

If there is any truth to the rumours that Charles and William fought Andrew's appearance (and I'm not sure I believe it, the Queen has been through enough, I can't believe they'd have made a fuss about his five minutes up front), the lines between the Yorks (which is to say, Eugenie, I don't think Bea cares, and her husband is allegedly strongly pro-Wales/Cambridge) and the Wales/Cambridge faction.

It's an interesting little Wars of the Roses throwback roiling about under the surface, just like on Olden Days.

In fact, Bea and Charlotte exchanged a smile during the service. Someone put it up somewhere . . .

Hence, Euge's seeming alliance with the outcast Sussexes. It's a way of sticking it to Charles and William.

R262 - Yes, but the dukedom hasn't. I just looked it up: Queen Victoria created it in 1874, so it's relatively recent.

Cadogan: 15th century, then a second creation in 1800.

If we are only talking earldoms, the Duke of Westminster was a Marquess beforehand.

I thought Prince Edward just chose "Earl of Wessex" because he liked it from some film. It's not like it has any connection to the ancient Godwin Earls of Wessex.

Andrew and Liz were trying to save money by coming together. Have you seen the price of gas lately?!

R266 The Wessex title merged with the Crown by conquest. 1066 and all that...

Well, if you can bear to read The Maul, it claims Pork played a fast one. It was accepted he would bum a ride. Walker was news to everybody. I defended the Queen because she's the Queen and in my view can do as she pleases. To see the Mail tell it that asshole son has learned nothing and gamed the whole thing. Charles and William not best pleased.

I have always found the Cambridge kids are mirror images of the Middletons, in particular Kate's brother and Michael, the father. They are dark haired, ruddy olivey complexions. Someone on DL once likened the Middletons in partiuclar Pippa to a Romanian grape picker or was it Louis, the younger kiud? Anyway, there is very little of the Windsors in those 3 kids. Just the gene lottery I guess.

^^ I agree. I'm a Spaniard and all these loathsome "royals" throughout Europe need to go. They're nothing more than descendants of tribal warriors who deemed themselves "kings." Later Napoleon even declared himself Emperor.

Grifters. All of them.

OT, I couldn't believe how bloated Boris looked walking up the entrance. Bursting out of his suit, hair mussed up as usual. Johnson looks like he's carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders.

I usually love Lady Sarah Chatto, but she could have done with a bit of makeup today.

Or a veil.

Not interested, R239 and yet you navigated to the thread, read 238 replies and then felt the need to say that you’re not interested?

r275 Doubt r239 read the replies

R276 I’m sure that we’ll never know as R239 has since moved on, right?

R200 It's not trending on UK Twitter.

So the tea with the Andrew stuff (it's being reported by several royal reporters) is that Charles and William reluctantly agreed to Andrew driving with the Queen from Windsor (since he lives nearby anyways), but Andrew escorting her to her seat was made the morning of the memorial and William and Charles were not made aware of it. They believe Andrew talked the Queen into it at the very last minute and are pissed with him.

R273 Yes, and a cedar stone to remove the pills from her sweater.

[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.]

[quote] I wonder if he has any post-nuptial regrets at having hitched his wagon to the Yorks.

As long as we don't end up in a ditch!

The pilly sweater is very indicative of Lady Sarah’s class. You can be sure the sweater, though pilly and perhaps threadbare, is dozens of years old and extremely well-made.

Does Andrew realize his mother will be gone within the next few years, and his brother and nephew are going to be in charge? Why piss them off further? If he behaved himself he might keep some of his private perks, but stunts like this just ensure he'll be sent to rusticate in the hinterlands as soon as the Queen is buried.

Are there any current titles aristos in the UK that can provably trace their bloodline back to pre-1066? Please don't make fun of me if this is a dumb question, I am genuinely asking.

Someone up above asked about Princess Alexandra and apparently she didn't attend.

As for Andrew...meh. It was his father's memorial service....why wouldn't he be there?

He's tacky trash who stupidly fucked a 17 year old hooker who later was regretful that she was a hooker and made a big fuss so she could collect a lot of settlement money.

Good for Queenie for ignoring Wills and Chuck. They don't need to be dispensing any kind of rebuke about Andrew when they let stupid Harry marry the golddigging actress and let THAT mess get out of control.

[QUOTE] they

William allegedly DID try to halt the marriage, or at least slow it down, which caused some of the “distance” that Harry was whining about on Oprah.

I saw the Duke of Kent was present, but without his wife. Was the Duchess busy giving music lessons again or did she have a Catholic mass to attend?

R287 The Duchess is actually believed to be in poor health. She wasn't well enough to attend her brothers funeral a few weeks ago.

R285 Alexandra was at the Commonwealth Day Service two weeks ago and she appeared to be having mobility problems herself, so maybe she wasn't well enough to attend.

R286 William didn't try to halt the wedding, he did advice Harry early on to take it slow and get to know Meghan better. Remember Harry and Meghan lived in different countries so most of the relationship was conducted long-distance. I think they had probably spent less than a month together overall when they got engaged. Philip also warned Harry not to marry an actress because they are too narcissistic.

So 19th century. I was waiting for Queen Victoria to make an appearance.

What's worse to contemplate is that Charles makes his mother look like a hipster. He's a fuddy-duddy traditionalist who's going to lead the monarchy not to its demise perhaps but simply to irrelevancy and oblivion.

That's how he always looks, r272. It's a deliberately cultivated look to make him seem fun and cute.

What Philip allegedly told Harry was "One dates actresses, one doesn't' marry them." Harry was furious about the advice and Philip was furious about the marriage. He had Meghan's number from the get go.

Wait, Lady Louise isn't special needs? You old hens are trying to marry her off, meanwhile I'm wondering why these men, who could fuck and marry anyone given the wealth of these suitors, would want a basically titless girl that sadly looks a little special. If she looked like a supermodel or was an actual princess of the blood, I could see them taking her on, but being associated with the royals via marriage is too much pressure, even to these low hanging fruit types of members.

Slightly off topic but Philip's advice reminded me of Rex Harrison's famous comment "Never marry an actress. They never stop acting."

Correction, Philip said, 'One steps out with actresses; one doesn't marry them.'

If Philip saw MM's suitcase girl pics or her sex scenes in her tv show, the top of his head would have blown off.

Charles said, re Diana, 'When you marry someone dramatic, the drama never stops.'

Lady Louise is not 'special needs'. It's her brother who is reputed to have some behavioural problems, possibly temper outbursts in public, possibly autism.

r269 they can spin this but the RF doesn't just do things randomly and would have worked out who's walking with the Queen. There are no surprise like this. Why would Andrew even need to bum a ride with the Queen. She has an army of cars and he seem perfectly capable of getting around town, via his drivers, without her. So suddenly she needs the support of Andrew to make it from her home to the church? No, she probably demanded his presence on her arm because she's constantly covering for him, which is a stain on her reputation, but she doesn't care.

Often makes me wonder if the Queen, Charles, and William realize that they are also the leaders or future leaders of the church? I don't have any proof of Williams sins, so he keeps those in private. We all know about Charles. The Queens is showing her true colors as these final years go on. She's stellar otherwise, but is dropping the ball with Andrew. This type of stuff hurts the RF with the younger generation.

R290

Prince Chuck was talking to plants in the 70s and into organic gardening in the 70s when the rest of Britain laughed at him.

Now that science has proved him correct (on this issue at least), he can take his place among cancel culture and his contemporaries!

Wasn't Lady Louise born with an eye condition tha gave her a slightly wonky look but had to wait until she was old enough to have it corrected by surgery? And yes, it's her brother who has been rumored to be "special."

See r298 already sounds risky. So a person worth a billion or 6.5 billion in one case would want to take on a wife that had a condition and whose brother was special? Yeah, I doubt the men mentioned above would consider her. She will do like the York sisters and marry someone decent but not fabulously wealthy. Then she will retreat back into the shadows next to her brother.

Lady Louise, bless her heart. Not exactly a looker, unlike her distant cousin Princess Ingrid Alexandra, future queen regnant of Norway.

Arthur Chatto is hawt!

The "rumor" that Wills and Charles are pissed at Andrew is just a b.s. face-saving measure that was "leaked" after the backlash. Transparent as glass.

Harry and Andrew are really going to be outcasts once TQ goes. The only thing that will give them any leverage is the royal dirt in their possession.

[quote] The Queen could have been easily escorted by Edward, Peter Phillips or her cousin, the Duke of Kent.

Lol R204 95-year old Queen Elizabeth with cane being supported by the equally if not more frail 86-year old Duke of Kent — Now that would've been something.

[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.]

yeah what’s up with The Duke of Kent? He’s aged horribly for 86. Looks like that little Gollum from LOTR.

Were any of the Porchesters there?

The Duke of Kent is 86, yet as frail as he is, he's STILL on the stump performing royal duties/representing QEII. He's stated that he'll retire when his cousin (the Queen) does.

I guess Catherine Kent didn’t make it, she looks a little frail too. Anyway, she took a step back from these events decades ago, not a huge surprise that she didn’t soldier on and attend.

R306. I realise life expectancies have increased significantly, but what is an 86-yea-old man supposed to look like?

yeah I know, but HM looks so robust (until recently) compared to her cousin. Maybe it’s because she gets to wear cosmetics.

He is a msn (seven year shorter life expectancy) and the Queen’s longevity is exceptional.

R310, according to the typical DLer, any guy at the age of 86 needs to look like he's 26.

The Duke's missus Katherine is 89 and in even worse condition that the Duke, suffering from a variety of debilitating illnesses, including Epstein-Barr aka chronic fatigue syndrome. The Duchess was a teacher by profession and she's still works part-time as a teacher in a primary school. She's also active in Future Talent, a charity that helps gifted children develop their musical talens.

Erratum R314 than the Duke

Oh for fuck's sakes! Erratum R314 talenTs

R266 ^ is right, it is that Wessex and Edward would have known that.

Meanwhile, the story that was supposed to end yesterday is snowballing. If you want to believe the DM, Andrew pulled a switch at the last minute.

Instead of handing the Queen over to the Dean who was supposed to see her to her seat, Andrew just didn't let go, the Dean was left to follow the two awkwardly.

If Andtew seized the moment after an agreement was made, then the alleged fury of Charles and William is less likely a rumour.

The question is, did he take his mother by surprise, leaving her and everyone else helpless to make a fuss, or did he and the Queen cook it up between them privately?

Eirher way, if it's true. Andtrw as usual has shown himself to be even dumber than his nephew in La La Land, and with just asos inhibition controls.

He's yet again made a laughingstock of the very family he wants to be seen as part of, proven he's untrustworthy, only cares about himself ' AFTER his mother and brother bailed him out financially, AND diverted attention from the meaning of the service.

It also points up the Queen's helplessness.

The best thing that c oi ykd happen to this family is for Charles to die of an apoplectic fit of rage and the Queen follow shortly after, so William can take over and right the ship.

Charles is already on the back foot starting his reign any time soon, and the sight of all those elderly royals shuffling in can't have generated much enthusiasm in the public.

They are fools if they can't see the handwriting on the wall.

Andrew knows he's toast once his mother bites the dust. This is one of the last opportunities to get public "acclaim".

public "acclaim" as in scorn and ridicule, but hey, it's common knowledge Andrew is not the sharpest tool in the box.

Oh the drama.

R306 we are talking about an 86-year old, not 56. He's old as dirt and it's a miracle he can still walk without assistance. 86 is really, really old.

R270 You're either blind or another of the stealth Meghanstan Cambridge haters.

Louis is the only child who looks like a Middleton. George is fair-haired and could be the son of Edward VIII. Charlotte's resemblance to the Queen has been noticeable since birth.

And in case you forgot to notice, the Queen, her sister, her son Andrew, and her granddaughter Eugenie, are all Windsors and are all dark-haired.

Margaret's hair was even darker than the Queen's.

You shouldn't have mentioned the grape picker: it gave the game away.

By the way, Queen Victoria had dark hair, too - it is painted nearly black in portraits of her young.

Now roll away like a hoop to peddle your spite elsewhere, there's a good boy.

Arthur Chatto looks like a Young Randy Andy.

So I guess the consensus is R306 is admitted to the Order of Shut Up, Moron.

Do you think those who wore the green livery of Prince Philip had them specially tailored for the event, or already had the outfits in their wardrobe from some other Philip event?

R324- I thought Camilla's dress was the most elegant looking one. It was a perfectly tailored and the color suits her.

R425- It was perfectly tailored. Typo.

I love Lady Sarah Chatto, she seems a very classy lady. She would have been a real asset as a working member of the Royal Family.

Hard to know for a casual observer R324. I think the Queen's dress was made for her, considering the occasion and that her body has changed. Anne has been seen fitting into outfits she's had since she was younger, like in her 30s, but for father's funeral she might have splashed out.

To the dizzy moron who intimated that Catherine's neutral black and white outfit was a shady choice -- it wasn't, she was properly blending into the background. In the Markle style, heiffer Eug had a bright red floral granny dress on, but at least covered most of it up in the church.

My mother refers to them as "those weird inbreeders"

R328 Most of the Queen's dresses are made for her by her close friend and head of the royal wardrobe Angela Kelly.

I wonder if that pin Louise was wearing was a gift from her grandfather.

R322 Arthur Chatto is very handsome. He doesn’t look like Andrew at all

R293 Lady Louise is a “Princes of the blood.” She has the title “Princess” if she wants to use it. It’s very simple and I don’t know how you missed it. She is the daughter of Prince Edward just as Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice are the daughters of Prince Andrew.

“Princess”

Oh, you're right r333, almost forgot she and her brother had those titles. They certainly never use them. I wouldn't want to be called Lady over Princess, but the Brits are weird that way. She's still no looker and her father isn't that wealthy so I doubt she's a catch to any of the top of the line aristocrats you all are laughably suggesting. British standards on beauty are nearly ground level, but there are still some standards and I doubt that unfortunate looking princess will pass the test, She'll marry a business man.

[quote] Are there any current titles aristos in the UK that can provably trace their bloodline back to pre-1066?

The Barons Beaumont go back to the de Brienne family who were Kings of Jerusalem, so that's one very ancient lineage.

I read in an English genealogy book that the Arden family (not noble) were the oldest traceable family in England, to Anglo-Saxon times.

Andrew was a lot more handsome than Arthur at the same age, r332.

Is it wrong that I found young Prince Charles to be sort of hot or at least confident in a smug rich boy type of way. It's no wonder that each of his sons had a few good years of sexiness. Harry in uniform and William in his college days. Maybe that was Diana doing the heavy lifting.

What's odd is that the Queen passed on a lot of fug genes, probably from her unfortunate looking mother, onto her kids. Phillip was very handsome but you hardly see it considering what those two produced, big yikes!

Charles looks so bad that he almost looks good. Like my dick is a tad confused so it must be the vapors from his title. I'd happily suck off late 60s or 1970s Charles.

I love gingers and I love blonds. Bless Diana and Charles for giving us both!

Prince Andrew was very handsome but a younger Prince Edward looked like he could suck a mean dick (we know he did).

[quote]I love Lady Sarah Chatto, she seems a very classy lady. She would have been a real asset as a working member of the Royal Family.

R327, even though she is the Queen's niece, Sarah Chatto has never been an official senior working royal, nor has her brother. Yet, for some reason, many on DL are under the bizarre impression that it's the norm for the monarch's nieces and nephews to be senior working royals and are convinced that Charles is breaking with tradition with his alleged plan to "slim down" his nieces, even though this is exactly how things are under the present Queen.

Phillip was one of those guys that certainly looked better with his clothes on.

[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.]

Andrew’s goose is cooked once HM the Queen passes away . I highly doubt Charles, William or Andrew’s other siblings will put up with much nonsense from him.

Anyone who knows anything about the Queen knows she is anti-confrontational and goes out of her way to avoid unpleasantness particularly when it comes to her children. If there has been a weak point in her reign, it's that she often waits until the damage is done before she reacts. I certainly don't begrudge her for wanting her [allegedly favourite] son with her at such a deeply sentimental occasion, but as Dan Wooton says in R343 if Andrew had any dignity he'd have realized the optics of walking his mother up the aisle particularly on a day that should have been about Philip. Clearly in her final shuffle off this mortal coil, and after a life of service, the Queen is entitled to do what she wants but she must also think to the future. The past few weeks have proven that media atmosphere to the monarchy is becoming increasingly hostile and every little blip is going to be attacked and sensationalized going forward. For the sake of Charles and William, she needs to put Andrew to pasture. He should never been seen again at royal events (public or private).

People say the Queen can continue to reign because she can work effectively on her box of govt papers and speak lucidly. But I think she is now too tired and too weak to repel the demands of Andrew and Harry and Meghan. They are getting their own way to some degree just because she doesn’t have the strength to repel them, and for that reason, she should step down.

R27, She is confident in herself and her duty. It shows, doesn't it?

R342 unless it was Matt Smith’s naked ass in The Crown. But I digress…

The thing is, she DID put Andrew out to pasture. She stripped) him of his royal public duties and he cannot publicly use his HRH any longer,

She, like everyone else, probably thought that with his public life over, he had an individual right to attend his own father's memorial service as a private citizen.

No one is able to know whether Andrew caught her on the back foot along with everyone else, or whether she agreed privately that he could do what he did.

And since she is unlikely to clarify that, she'll have to take more blame for being unable to control the most damaging of her relatives. Without an outright denial, her ability to lead the family in a way that serves the monarchy will justifiably come under further criticism.

That the family couldn't pull off as appealing and benign an event as this memorial service without bad optics, let alone in front of 1800 people containing a dozen members of other royal houses, is a very bad sign.

Their lustre is tarnishing rapidly, and all because their senior members have refused to deal harshly enough with two rogue members.

I hope there's no truth to the rumours about Charles wanting to bring Harry back and hand him the DoE title. If there is, the falloff the Romanovs will pale by comparison.

R341 Yes of course she was never going to be a working royal, but I think she would have been very good at it. It’s well known that Charles holds her up as an example of what a Duchess should be. There are very few pictures of her and the only time I can recall ever hearing her speak was on a TV programme celebrating The Queen’s 90th birthday. Sarah, Anne, Charles etc were watching some of the Queen’s old home movies (separately) from the 6o’s and 70’s and commenting on them. Sarah came across as really nice, genuine and with a lovely personality, not at all showy or above herself.

All this fuss over total trash is unbelievable . That hooker had been around the block many times long before she allegedly met Prince Andrew .

R138 "If Harry had went he'd get..." oh, dear...

Can we remember the most important thing about Sarah Chatto? Her sons are HOT!!

I thought Beatrice was crying into her memorial program because she was upset about her grandfather's death but now I suspect it was because she got emotional seeing her disgraced father walking the Queen down the aisle.

[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.]

Several press reports said exactly that, r354.

R354- Maybe it was because she suddenly realized how hideous her dress was.

Okay, I'm gonna say something positive here. The Mountbatten-Windsor family seem like a tight-knit bunch who clearly love each other. Sure, there's dysfunction and falling outs but you have that with lots of families. These people seem to really care about each other as evidenced by their grief-stricken faces here and at the funeral last year. I think it says a lot that the loss of a 100 year old man leaves even his littlest great-grandchildren bereft.

The same thought occurred to me about Beatrice, but it also occurred that she may not have known what he was planning to do, and may have been aware the moment she saw him walk the Queen out that another storm of bad PR was about to break over their heads around her father, and covered up her dismay. Her husband is known to side completely with the Cambridge side of things and to despise his father-in-law and Harry and Meghan.

I'm sure Euge at it up. It's odd, how short-sighted they all are. If the monarchy survives, the Yorks will be totally cut off and Andrew and his offspring will get no further favours whatsoever from those at the top.

R358 knows nothing of how other classes live, or what their actions actually tell one.

Not really, R355. When he was younger, George did look like Kate's dad a lot, but's Louis who is Mini Michael Middleton these days.

George is a fine blend of Spencer, Windsor, and some Middleton genes. I like the strawberry blonde hair he's got - sometimes it looks reddish, then again it looks blonde.

William would've looked incredible with strawberry blonde hair, but his blonde mop of hair used to look nice, too.

Does anyone know if Andrew walked her out, too?

*but it's Louis

R358 - You may be right, but the fact is, not all of them love each other uniformly. There was never much love lost between Charles and Andrew, Charles despises Andrew's ex-wife, who still lives with Andrew at Royal Lodge, a lifestyle she has enjoyed free of charge since the divorce. Eugenie is openly putting two fingers up to Charles, William, and Kate, by allying herself with the two traitorous vipers in California, and Anne also likely despises her brother and the Sussexes.

I would say that what you are seeing is more a form of corporate loyalty, not love. William and Harry will never have a functional relationship again. Charles wouldn't care if he never saw Andrew again. Anne has little to do with the other siblings she grew up with.

They do not have the luxury of "standing by" each other at cost to the monarchy, from which they derive all their status. And, for the senior tier, their wealth.

They are playing with fire by not making it clear to the public that the rogues will be dealt with harshly.

In this game, you can't run with the fox and hunt with the hounds, especially in full view of the peasants. This isn't like the 1930s, when so many scandals and bad behaviours were quietly hidden. The Harewoods are a classic example, and so is the bisexuality and drug addiction of Prince George, Duke of Kent.

There's nowhere to run and hide now, and no "gentleman's agreement" not to publish big stories, the way the affair between Wallis Simpson and Edward VIII was dutifully unreported in 1935 until it finally broke in foreign papers and it was impossible to keep under wraps.

As it is, the Queen and Charles bailed Andrew out of his financial legal rabbit hole. His utter inability to think about anyone but himself is the hallmark of disgruntled spares who, despite how much they have, feel they've been cheated out of more.

Harry and Andrew have a great deal in common: a gift for cutting off their noses to spite their faces; hugely inflated views of their own importance; failure to see beyond petty concerns and take the long view; low inhibition controls; and, a marked propensity for doubling down on their mistakes.

The best thing Harry ever did was leave. But Andrew isn't leaving. One problem subsided, and he immediately caused another one.

The two of them are hopeless, and no amount of familial feeling should have prevented the Windsors from accepting that the two boils on their arse needed to be lanced and drained, and quickly.

Instead, the family left the infection untreated and the infection to fester.

Yes, r362, and they rode back to the Windsor Estate together, the way they had come to the Abby together.

R345, attendance at one's father's funeral, and escorting one's widowed mother as the only unmarried child available, is not a matter of privilege or position or ambition. It was expedient as well. That the funeral was public had nothing to do with anything.

It is why people sometimes are briefly released from jail to attend a family funeral. The fact that the person is offensive or a cause for discomfort to the eyes of family members, never mind strangers, also changes nothing. Note that his traveling from and to Windsor with Elizabeth also absented him from any of the elaborate round of receptions that took place after the funeral. (I don't know when international family and royalty arrived but a couple of days early would have permitted a rest and a chance to mingle strategically or tactically as well.)

Abby? Oh, dear.

Andrew will have one other appearance, and that will be at Elizabeth's funeral.

^ Abbey, not Abby. I'm sure I fixed that but there is is.

I'm sure there are many reasons why Andrew should have appeared at the Service on release from jail but that would never happen to HM's favorite son.

[quote]Does anyone know if Andrew walked her out, too?

He stuck to her like glue. He had a smirk on his face too.

I have a feeling he'll continue to go out to events with his mother. He has no shame at all. And the brits don't really give a shit about what he did. They're okay with rapists.

Lady Louise is making whatever remote semblance I have of a maternal instinct flare up. I get a strong Anne, the Princess Royal vibe from her. She was born quite premature and her mother came close to bleeding out having her so bless them both I say! Edward was truly handsome is his youth but then there's his son. Yes I went there. His son hasn't that almost downright prettiness Edward had. What's the deal? What's with the dark circles under his eyes and such? I wonder.

Andrew can just go the hell for all I care. I feel bad for his daughters in a way because they seemingly weren't raised anything like that Lady Louise but their dad is just out to lunch or something at this point. Anne, the Princess Royal could have tended to her own mother, hell have that bad ass Charlotte do it since she looks a great deal like HRH but seems to have a bit of Princess Margaret's manner at this point in a little girl fashion (that stone cold stare, that checking her looks out in the camera for a moment).

“HRH”, R370?

Lèse majesté!

I'm sorry R371. English is technically my second whole language and I meant no disrespect.

Here's Edward VIII (known to his family as David) when he was about the same age George is now. I can see the resemblance.

I think Lady Louise is quite pretty at this point and don't understand the comments to the contrary.

Lady Sarah Chatto isn't a Duchess, r350.

[quote] Anne has little to do with the other siblings she grew up with.

Anne has always maintained a consistent relationship with Edward. She neither likes nor dislikes Sophie. She probably scarcely gives her a thought.

Some posters are assuming that men like Hugh Grosvenor or George Cadogan would want a trophy wife. Maybe they would, but what a billionaire blue-blood aristocrat considers a trophy often differs from that of the general population. Is his wife well-connected and discreet? Does she have a sweet temper, a good reputation, and share his values? Can he depend on her to be an excellent hostess, an affectionate mother to his children, and a pleasant companion among friends and family? Will those friends and family accept her?

From what we know of Louise, the answer to all of those questions would be "yes." I'm not saying she'll snag an aristocratic billionaire, but she's the kind of woman a man of that position usually wants. The ones who don't select a mate using those standards often come to grief.

Yes, the younger Windsors often tend to be quite pretty. But when they hit the wall, boy do they slam into it. Anne was gorgeous when she was young and Randy Andy quite pretty.

Young Charles had a great bod, striking coloring, and the hauteur and gravitas of a man who will one day be King. I can see that being catnip to some folks.

Charles had one period when he was passable but for the most part he was a dork. Google pics of his Investiture as PoW.

He was only 21 at the investiture. He peaked looks-wise in the mid-70s.

Tina Brown said Charles is much better-looking in person. The ears don't look so big, and he's always exquisitely turned out.

I enjoyed the IMPRESSIVE display of royal Windsor dongage when the men walked behind Philip's coffin down the lane at the funeral.

For heaven's sake, lady Louise is plain and dull. Her only accomplishment thus far appears to be carriage driving. My idea of a wife of a tp tier aristocrat would be Beatrice Borromeo.

Whatever his taste, I'm betting Hugh Grosvenor is getting pressure from many sides to marry and produce an heir. He's 31 already, and the Grosvenors aren't particularly long-lived.

Beatrice Borromeo looks like a Botticelli.

This is Hugh Grosvenor's long-term on-again, off-again girlfriend: Upper-middle-class, college-educated, private and discreet. If you think that sounds a bit like Kate Middleton you're right, though Harriet Tomlinson has an actual career. She even looks a bit like Kate.

Hugh Grosvenor is descended from Pushkin. He can become the next biracial member of the family.

He looks every bit as biracial as Archie Sussex.

Andrew always has had a smug, entitled expression. He reportedly is very abusive to staff as well, which really tells one all they need to know about him. He is a corpulent bully.

It must be so frustrating to have Andrew still hiding behind Mummy even after all the damage he's caused and is causing to the family's reputation. If I were Charles and Wiliam, I'd pitch his fat, entitled ass into the Thames the day after the Queen's funeral.

R375 Of course I know that Lady Sarah Chatto is not a Duchess. I was just saying that Charles reportedly views her as a perfect example of how a duchess should be. Presumably by that he means compared to Fergie.

R390- I agree. He looked so smug today, as if he had really accomplished something. Andrew and the ridiculous Harkles will never be accepted nor tolerated by the public again. That ship sailed long ago.

Don't do it Hughie. She is nice in a dreary way.

[quote]I was just saying that Charles reportedly views her as a perfect example of how a duchess should be.

[quote]I hope there's no truth to the rumours about Charles wanting to bring Harry back and hand him the DoE title.

Where do you people get this stuff? If it's rumoured, it's reportedly, how about a link? Otherwise, you want to theorize, fill your boots. But for God's sake can this misrepresentation of musings like it's written fact... because if it is, substantiate it.

There is so much bullshit on these threads.

R389 - The paradigmatic story about Andrew is that whilst a young serving naval officer, he and some mates went ashore for some R&R. They went into a bar and saw a senior officer sitting there. Andrew went up to the officer and greeted him, shall we say, rather too familiarly, saying jovially, "And you can call me Andy." To which the senior officer tersely replied, "Thanks. And you can call me 'Sir"".

He has been a selfish, entitled, stupid, petulant twat from childhood.

The Windsors can't get away with what the family got away with in the 1930s-1950s. The media no longer cherish any respect for persons, and is far more pervasive, and needs fresh blood constantly.

In the mid-1930s, when all of cafe society and aristo circles knew about Mrs Simpson, the UK press dutifully kept a lid on the story, which was being discussed openly in America and Europe. Only a few weeks before the Abdication did the lid come off on the story in the UK. The press also didn't report on the drug addiction and sexual history of Prince George, Duke of Kent. The Harewoods were also leading a rather colourful existence behind the scenes, ditto the Mountbattens, that is, Louis and his wife, not Philip.

If the Queen gave her assent to Andrew usurping the memorial service yesterday, then there would have been little to nothing Charles and William could do about it.

She's still Queen. She lost her husband a year ago. She knows that every day might be her last. If Andrew is the Son-Husband Replacement, it will take her death and her successor to kick him to the kerb for good.

The Maul claims he just kept pushing the envelope throughout the morning and she didn't say no, but in the middle of it, concentrating on managing and just on standing up and not tripping, I can see where every time he pushed the envelope she didn't stomach the fight.

Hugh Grosvenor will marry a Kate Middleton type: That's the kind he has dated in the past. Louise will get a nice country squire, along the lines of what Sarah Spencer married.

Looking at that picture, Harry is all Spencer, isn't he? His aunt looks more like him than his mother did. (Diana took after her mother's side of the family.)

Kate Middleton types are what billionaires want. She is the perfect 21st Century trophy wife: lovely, discreet, intelligent, supportive, excellent mother, low drama, looks fantastic in a tiara. If William were run over by a bus tomorrow, she'd have her pick of second husbands.

R95- But will they kick him to the curb, do you think? Harry as well?

Interestingly (or not so interesting considering how small the marriage pool is in the English higher orders) Sarah’s husband Neil McCorquodale was related to the evil Spencer stepmother Raine, who was born Raine McCorquodale. Some kind of cousins something removed.

Yes, and Jane Spencer's husband Robert Fellowes was the Queen's personal secretary for years. Small world.

And one of Neil’s sisters married a van Cutsem who are also closely tied with the BRF (former friends of Charles, close friends of William) and IIRC one married a daughter of the previous Duke of Westminister.

Someone should come up with a new Six Degrees of Separation and replace Kevin Bacon with some random posh Brit.

You could probably do it with Princess Diana. Her family seems to be related to everybody.

There are 24 non-Royal dukes in the UK (Out of a population of c67 million.

They are all related.

Same with the crowned heads of Europe. All cousins thanks to Queen Victoria and Christian IX of Denmark.

Will Harry ever see Her Majesty again?

Will he attend her funeral?

What about seeing his father and his brother?

No.

Yes.

Only at funerals.

R284 - many ordinary citizens can trace their ancestry earlier than 1066. In my case to Arnoald. It's all a question of records.

R399 Charles would kick Andtew to the kerb for good; William would kick both Harry and Andrew to the kerb. Harry is the problem for Charles.

Harry is the same problem for Charles that Andrew is for the Queen. Love and guilt.

The Queen of Denmark and 'Princess' Beatrix of the Netherlands stole the show, ha!

The Duke of Kent’s autobiography “A Royal Life” will be published in May. Of course nothing scandalous will be included but there will probably be a few interesting tidbits.

No

No

Maybe dad.

R394 It has been reported many times that Charles and Sarah Chatto have a close relationship, they paint together every year a Balmoral, and that Charles views her as what a perfect Duchess should be like.

I get my information mostly from the TV and newspapers, where do you get your information from? Do you have personal contacts within the palace?

Now fuck off with your thicko comments and shitty attitude.

[quote] He stuck to her like glue. He had a smirk on his face too. I have a feeling he'll continue to go out to events with his mother.

I seriously doubt that. I doubt she will attend many more public events She could barely stand or walk but seemed determined to perform her duty and to honor her beloved husband. I hope she is able to make at least one Jubilee appearance but I have my doubts at this point. Perhaps a final appearance on the balcony. But Andrew won't be there if so. He may still be family but he's no longer Royal.

I'm sure Charles would never tolerate another Andy appearance on the balcony, especially after Andy's latest stunt.

And if does show up, Charles could just slap him.

What a ratings boost!

I find it notable she skipped all the diplomatic receptions after the service and went straight back to Windsor. She never greeted her Royal foreign cousins. She is quite close with some of them and even has them call her Lillibet

But there was one report she did meet the German side at Windsor.

He's still royal, r414.

No, he's not, r419. When HM stripped him of the right to use his HRH, he became no longer Royal even if still a Duke and a member off the Royal family. Harry is in the same situation.

R414, what did you think removing his ability to use his HRH meant?

I meant r419 above, not r414.

"R419, what did you think removing his ability to use HRH meant?"

Like Harry, he wasn't formally divested of HRH status but agreed or was ordered not to use it publicly.

Ordered. HM formally went through the process off restyling them.

R424 From the Guardian:

"Though Harry and Meghan still technically retain their HRH styles, they have agreed they will not use them. They have not been stripped of them, unlike Harry’s mother Diana, Princess of Wales following her divorce."

You are of course free to post a link to the Queen's order formally restyling them off, if there be such a thing as you claim.

The Monarch is the Font/Fount of All Honors. And if Her Majesty says you can't call yourself a Royal Highness, you can't, and therefor aren't Royal. No matter what your other titles or other family relationships.

That Guardian account is wrong starting with the first sentence: "Harry and Meghan still technically retain their HRH styles." No. Their styles are what HM took away from them.

Camilla, being married to The Prince of Wales, is The Princess of Wales. But Her Majesty ordered her to be styled The Duchess of Cornwall because of fears that Camilla would be accused of stealing not only Diana's husband but also her title.

R427 You're just spouting hot air without some source for your assertion. (Myself, I think you've muddled this with Diana's case, where HRH was formally divested. No apology needed, though. It happens.)

Diana and Fergie were both divested of their of their HRH titles as part of their their divorce negotiations. They both got more money and privileges for agreeing to it. Fergie was OK with it because she got so little anyway but Diana later regretted it bitterly.

Their has always been speculation that when William ascends he will restore his mother's HRH.

Andrew is a royal as he is a member of the royal family, r420. Having the title of HRH is not what makes you a royal (in any case, he still has the HRH, even if it's not used). What makes one a royal is being a member of the royal family. He is even still down as a member of the royal family on the royal family's website (as are the Harkles), even if the first page is the statement that he will no longer perform royal duties.

Why would the public believe that Camilla "stole" Diana's title, r428? We didn't even think she "stole" Diana's husband.

R429, if you're the one who is going to challenge facts with your erroneous opinions then you're the one who needs to provide links to support them. But since you've already provided one link (that Guardian article) that provides a clearly wrong assertion in the very first sentence I doubt I'll take your sources seriously.

There are many, many members of The Royal Family who are not considered Royals. Is Zara? Is Mike? Mike Tindall is a Royal? Really?

[quote]"Harry and Meghan still technically retain their HRH styles." No. Their styles are what HM took away from them.

There is nothing to prevent Ginger and Megs from referring to themselves as "royal". What they cannot do is use the style His/Her Royal Highness (HRH).

Is Mr. Jack Brooksbank a Royal?

Zara is a royal. Tindall and Brookbank maybe not because they only married in, but their children are royals. What exactly do you think a "royal" is? It simply means a member of a royal family. It's not an official title.

R436. Can you imagine how many descendants the medieval kings have. Are they all royal?

You all keep comparing Andrew to Harry, especially one long winded poster. I don’t see it. The damage to the firm from Meghan and Harry is effectively done. They didn’t manage those two correctly and those two didn’t manage their roles effectively. The family always had a race problem because a part of their wealth and power came on the backs of black and brown people. So, I’m this era of bringing up the historical connections of institutions to racist policies, the RF was always going to get the heat they’ve king deserved for their heavy hand in slavery and colonialism.

Andrew is a completely different issue. Charles is not coddling Harry and won’t pay for his list of demands. There are no threats from Harry, he just stays home. Great! Andrew, unlike Harry, refuses to leave Windsor. He refuses to repay the public for Royal Lodge upkeep, which Harry had to repay for their home, and has the nerve to take center stage at his father’s memorial service.

They are not at all comparable. This constant hate for a couple that did nothing wrong by staying in CA and didn’t attempt to attract attention, over the pedo that walked the Queen down the aisle is simply weird.

Some of you are taking all of this too seriously anyway. It’s just an entitled family. Who cares if members give them a headache? Not like they really work or have to lift a finger to do anything.

Of course, you make no effort to demonstrate that the royal family had a race problem or mismanaged Harry and Meghan

How is Harry paying for his upkeep? By conning the riyal family into giving him a high profile wedding and then commercialising and politicising their titles. Andrew has not done that. You make it sound as if Harry and Meghan are toiling with their muscles or brains to bring in hard earned cash. What a joke.

R432 More hot air. "The Guardian is wrong because I say it is wrong."

"There are no threats from Harry" haha moron R438 SS intern. He's SUING Her Majesty's government because he wants motorcades of police to stop traffic for his flat worthless ass. And pouts and cries weekly, threatening to TELL ALL in his little memoir. Losers

R438 Has Andrew actually been asked to leave Windsor?

R413, but despite these "many" reports you can't even cite one specific example of a time Prince Charles has described Sarah Chatto as "the perfect duchess" - or anything like it.

Sorry if I've punctured your fantasy of being a royal expert. You're full of shit.

So if you marry into a family you're not a member of the family?

OK.

No, in this context if you marry in you're not royal in your own right. Status descends from the male, or the female is the sovereign is female. Princess Anne's children are not royal and got no title because their father was not royal and did not have a title. They can, fairly, say they are descended from royalty. A bunch of the dukedoms in the UK have their origins in the king getting a mistress pregnant. Those families are not royal, though they can claim descent from royalty, but they were ennobled and the title descends in almost all cases through the male line.

Status descends from the male?? That's it, I'm trans!

By hook or by crook, eh, Char?

R439 not sure how Harry pays for his upkeep. But I guess their brand deals, his Diana inheritance, and whatever trust Charles setup for his son. His father is rich as hell, so Harry would never be destitute.

But at least he and his wife had the good sense to leave the UK, where as many posters have said, they are allegedly despised.

Why hasn’t Andrew been drummed out of town or off Windsor grounds. Does a pedo Prince really need his own palace? I bring him up since he selfishly forced himself into his father’s memorial service.

That bird brain queen also allowed him to ride with her. Why? They have a crazy amount of cars at their disposal. Obviously the queen, for all her impeccable service (and she’s been one of the best) has lost her shit and reverted back to the Devine Rights of Kings mentality with her blatant support of Andrew. She’s supposed to be the head of a church, so flashing her pedo son around seems to go against the faith.

This crap, along with the Harry and Meghan Oprah drama, is why the family keeps taking hits with the press and younger generations.

^ Unhinged. Even if they believed their rantings, a normal mind doesn't express it with that much vitriol.

What’s unhinged about not wanted to give a pedo the honor of waking your queen down the aisle?

Princess Anne's children are royal because they are members of the royal family by birth. "Royal" is simply a description for member of the royal family, it is not an official title or rank or status or style. It's simply a descriptive word used in everyday speech. Those who marry into the royal family are probably not referred to as royal in their own right, but they might be if they were pictured with their family.

Here's an example of Zara being referred to as a royal in the Tatler a couple of weeks ago.

[quote]The royal looked elegant in a red coat and matching hat

Here's an example of 10-year-old Isla Phillips, being referred to as a "royal" in Hello magazine, even though she is far from any official title. It was her birthday when Prince Philip's memorial was held. Both the Tatler and Hello are obsessed with royal stuff, so they know how to use this language.

[quote]The young royal's life in photos - birth to present day

Is google-eyed Lord Freddie Windsor royal?

R448. We all know how he pays for himself—by parasitising the family he despises and the goodwill they enjoy as a result of the queen not doing what he did.—-using a positon of public trust for personal enrichment and self promotion.

I wouldn’t put too much faith in his continuing ability to support himself. He’s constantly begging for public or semi public money and additional branding opportunities with his family.

Neither of them was hated until they revealed their con game and started being nasty to everyone.

I can't believe the whole Who's Royal and Removal of HRHs has come up yet again.

Royal refers ONLY to people holding the style and title of HRH or above, and above, of course, means King or Queen, whether regnant or consort.

Royal dukedoms carry the rank of HRH/Prince/Princess, as opposed to ordinary dukedoms. Thus, HRH Prince William The Duke of Cambridge, and His Grace the Duke of Westminster.

Harry and Andrew as Princes of the Blood (i.e., hold the titles by right of being sons of Princes of the Blood) were born HRHs. The Queen, in reality, can't remove those without a formal process that Charles would have balked at for his son, and she wouldn't have done to Andrew unless he got caught boiling bunnies for breakfast in front of his grandchildren.

She can order them not to use them publicly, but contrary to the ridiculous assertions that the Queen completely removed those HRHs with a formal instrument, that is what she did. If she had used a formal instrument to remove them completely, the whole world would have known, because said instrument would have been published for the world to see. Just as the Letters Patent making the Cambridge kids HRHs were published.

Taking their ducal titles would have been a possibility, but as peers of the Realm, it would have taken the assent of Parliament to finalise such a step. She would have to start the ball rolling, and it's a safe bet that she only would after private consultations that would assure that Parliament would sign off on it.

And even if she did succeed in formally removing the two ducal titles, the two men would still, technically, be Princes of the Blood, and retaining an HRH by birth.

Removing an HRH from a married in whose right to the title is completely pendant upon marriage to one who holds it by right of birth is easy. Removing it from someone who holds it by right of birth is a very different matter. The title was never Diana's, isn't Kate's, or Meghan's: they hold those titles by courtesy. The only real holders of the titles are the men they are married to. In the event of a divorce, Meghan would probably lose the title. In the event of widowhood, perhaps not. And Archie remains the heir to Harry's title AND to the style of HRH the moment the Queen takes her last breath.

What the Queen CAN do without the assent of Parliament, I believe, is put those titles into "abeyance" - in other words not removed but dormant, as it were.

The poster insisting that Harry's and Andrew's HRHs were formally and permanently removed by a formal instrument has yet to provide the slightest proof thereof. Such a move would have made gigantic headlines in every newspaper in the Anglosphere and probably beyond, and would have been a step that would have put paid to Harry or Meghan ever setting foot in Britain again.

So put up or shut up. Produce a single legitimate statement on the royal website or a news article that announced the permanent, formal removal of either man's possession (as opposed to cessation of public use - you can bet your arse that Andrew's staff still refers to him as Your Royal Highness) of the style of HRH.

As for William restoring his mother's HRH, that's nonsense. She's dead, it would be a meaningless gesture especially as, by the time William ascends and has the power to do it, she'll have been dead for half a century. It would look silly instead of sweet.

The Queen has made an incredible number of mistakes privately over the last 40 years, and is apparently still making them. But one thing she was right about, was that trying to take Harry's HRH formally, and his ducal title via the assent of Parliament, would have been a PR disaster unless she did the same thing to Andrew, and she is clearly unwilling to humiliate Andrew any further than he already has been.

The HRHs are in abeyance, as it were, but the two men retain them technically. They are, therefore, still royal - you cannot undo being born a Prince of the Blood. But you can undo royal status for a couple of commoners who married in.

Oh, and, no, Freddie Windsor and anyone else not technically holding the style of HRH/Prince/Princess is not royal. Neither are the Tindalls, the Phillips, the Brooksbanks' kids, or Bea's child. Their parents, or one parent, yes; the kids, no.

He is, however, a member of the British royal family, and the idiot media that called Diana Princess Diana for her entire life, even though that wasn't ever her title for a nano second, lumps them all together as royals.

Anne's kids are commoners and private citizens with no titles. Andrew's and Edward's kids are royal, although the latter have refused to use the HRHs they are entitled to. Charles' kids are also royal, and his grandchildren, as well - well, three of them. The Sussex kids don't get the HRH until the Queen dies.

And everyone asserting that that will never happen needs to get a grip. Grandchildren of the Sovereign in the male line are HRHs. When the Queen dies, that's who Archie and Lilibet will be. The only way that doesn't happen is if Charles dies before the Queen does - then the two kids never get to be grandchildren of the Sovereign in the male line, just the nephew and niece thereof.

The only other way it doesn't happen is if either the Queen issues Letters Patent changing how the HRHs are distributed before she kicks the bucket, or Charles issues those same LPs upon his ascension to the throne.

He is unlikely to humiliate HIS son and grandchildren further, any more than the Queen is. And neither of them want to start the screams of Racism! again.

So you'll just have to lie back and think of England when it happens.

Or stick pins into a poppet representing Charles.

Sometimes I think Julian Fellowes posts here.

R443 Do your own research you lazy piece of miserable shit, you are only here to dump your negativity onto the rest of us. If you don’t like this thread then go away, I can assure you that you won’t be missed by any of us.

Ignore the twits who are saying that the word "royal" can only be applied to certain members of the royal family who have a particular title. Calling a member of the royal family a "royal" has nothing to do with them being an HRH. It's just an everyday word, in the same sense as saying "A-listers" or "dignitaries" or "VIPs".

Freddie Windsor is perhaps a royal in a very broad sense, r453. His commoner actress wife, Sophie Winkleman, is even the Royal Patron of The Children’s Surgery Foundation, a point that should be pondered by those who mistakenly believe that only senior working members of the royal family can hold royal patronages and therefore it's an absolute tragedy for the survival of the royal family that Charles isn't doling out the royal patronages to his nieces.

But in private, Meghan forces her kids to say, "Your Royal Highness, please, please, may I have a cup of milk for my cereal?"

R48. Your not having cereal today children. Bring out the waffle iron granny gave you.

I think Princess Bea has done an excellent job of losing the baby weight, Eug not so much.

R458, you're so sad. I'll block you instead. There's a lot of good posters on these threads but you're not one of them, though your presume to speak for them. Poor, unhappy, unsourced fantasist.

The Queen largely raised Sarah Chatto as her parents were behaving disastrously during her childhood. Charles and Sarah had a brother-little sister relationship. The Queen doesn't appear to have cared for her brother though. Don't know why.

The problem with Meghan Markle has nothing to do with race and everything to do with her being an American with an unsuccessful acting career who thought she was finally going to get the starring role casting agents had denied her. Coming from a family of grifters obviously added to the problem. Had Harry married a 100% black Brit, there would have been no problem. But would Harry have been attracted to a black woman rather than a woman who can pass for white and whose con artistry could subjugate dumb Harry?

R443 - Not the poster you were replying to with your silly post, but the fact is, he's right and you're wrong and you can't put up a shred of proof of your assertion that the Queen by formal instrument on record that would have been announced in headlines in 24pt type removed permanently and legally the style of HRH from her son AND grandson.

No Letters Patent were issued to that effect, no instrument doing so exists. If she had, they would have seen the headlines on Mars.

Insulting other people who proved you didn't know what you were talking about is playground stuff. Go back to primary school and bully the class geek.

R465, that wasn't what I was talking about. Please indicate the link to the post where you think I did. And get your act together, because it wasn't me. I await your apology.

^R466

[quote]Just as the Letters Patent making the Cambridge kids HRHs were published.

To clarify this: weren't George, Charlotte and Louis born into their HRHs? They were descended through the male line (Charles, William). Wouldn't they automatically be HRHs, or was it required that Her Majesty issue Letters Patent?

^*apologies, my post above was aimed at R458 (who was responding so rudely to R443).

R458 is the idiot.

Thank you. Sorry to sound like R458. ;)

R468, great-grandchildren of the Sovereign wouldn't have been HRH automatically. In view of the high position in the line of succession into which they were going to be born, the Queen issued letters patent granting HRH styling and the title of Prince/Princess to the children of the Prince of Wales' eldest son.

R468, under the terms of the previous LP, no they would not have been automatically granted HRH. Sons of sovereigns, sons of the heir, no provision for the child of the son of an heir. William apparently wanted it from the get go.

Snap, R472. Here's the text, R468:

[quote]The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm dated 31 December 2012 to declare that all the children of the eldest son of The Prince of Wales should have and enjoy the style, title and attribute of Royal Highness with the titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their Christian names or with such other titles of honour.

I love your even handed take r455/r456 too many (or just one poster) literally sees red when even thinking about Harry or Meghan. It's ok to debate royal matters but one person is unhinged when it comes to those two, but has next to nothing to say about Andrew. It's fucking weird as hell. You come in with a calm detail of the facts and situation with titles. It's nice to see we can debate things without sounding like QAnon loons as some in here sound like.

R468 - No. They are GREAT-grandchildren of the Sovereign in the male line (from King George VI). The automatic HRH stops with the grandchild status. The Cambridges were great-grandchildren. But as they were the new direct line of succession, the Queen conferred HRHs on any offspring of William as soon as Kate passed her first trimester safely.

She also, in that announcement, assured that all children born to the Cambridges, regardless of gender, would be in the line of succession only by birth order. Along with Parliament, the Queen did away with primogeniture in the line of succession. It remains, however, in traditional force in the aristocracy and peerage.

Had she not done so, Prince George would carry as his regular title William's secondary Earldom title, and Charlotte would be Lady Charlotte Windsor.

Archie is currently entitled to use his father's secondary title, Earl Dumbarton, and Lilibet is entitled to call herself Lady Lilibet Windsor. The Sussexes, instead, they SAY want their children to be called Archie and Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor. They didn't like the Dumbarton title, which just shows how ignorant they are, as the Dumbarton title has a distinguished and interesting history.

Well, those titles used in American schools would probably do the two kids no favours; they're probably going to be the object of more status envy using Mountbatten-Windsor.

It will be interesting to see whether the Sussexes make good on their earnest classlessness when the two kiddies become HRHs.

^*would probably NOT do those kids any favours

If for some reason - not saying it will ever happen, just if - Kate and William were to divorce, what happens to Kate's HRH?

R474, that's why I get so annoyed about the absolutist arrogance attached to some posts on this thread. Same with the Gilded Age thread. Certain topics seems to bring out the Lady Bracknell in certain disorders. I can be pretty shirty, but I never fire the first shot.

Why can't people just share their knowledge and enthusiasm with grace and good humour?

R477, if based on the Diana precedent, it goes. But there's no rules.

[quote]The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm dated 21st August 1996, to declare that a former wife (other than a widow until she shall remarry) of a son of a Sovereign of these Realms, of a son of a son of a Sovereign and of the eldest living son of the eldest son of The Prince of Wales shall not be entitled to hold and enjoy the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness.

r475 just because a title is distinguished and has history doesn't mean someone has to prefer it. Mountbatten-Windsor probably means a lot more to Harry, given the links that title has had to his immediate family, then some dusty title of Dumbarton. Plus, if/when his children use the Dumbarton title, those on here and the British press will scream fowl. So, Mountbatten-Windsor is a non-offensive title (or last name?) for his children.

Remember, Prince Edward isn't even allowing his children to be called HRH and Anne gave up the title for her husband that would give her kids titles. Tossing aside high and mighty titles is common for the RF. I really don't see how it's stupid on Harry and Meghan's part when even his aunt and uncle made similar decisions that didn't use the highest possible or any title for their children.

By the titles for Anne, I mean she and her first husband were offered title from the Queen which would have ensured her kids weren't so common. The couple rejected that offer.

Forgive me if this has been mentioned already but isn't it likely that Andy was given his escort role in order to avoid a prominent entrance and arrival like the rest of the Royal Family and guests? Once inside I can certainly believe he acted like this was an honor bestowed on him instead of a maneuver to keep him supervised.

[quote]. . . those on here and the British press will scream fowl

Don't you mean "squawk fowl," r481? Or maybe just some disgruntled clucking?

No way that giving him the role of consort, walking beside the monarch, could have been less attention grabbing than making him walk in with everyone else.

The Queen is the last to arrive, everyone sees her and some still bow. So no, there is no way that escorting the Queen was somehow a compromise to reduce his level of honor. It gave him a higher honor than what Prince Charles received. Charles should have been the one to walk her in or some high ranking Duke, or any of her other children. Prince Edward was a good choice, his wife could have survived arriving alone.

The Maul has claimed Andrew gamed it all morning... one opportunity seized after another... then today claims it was with the Queen's approval. He's an ass. I would bet money it will be argued to her there is no place for him at the Jubilee and anything otherwise will be harmful to the monarchy and on that basis she will agree. Maybe he's allowed to the service at St. Paul's as a member of the family but I would guess his days as escort are done. Consistent in the reporting is Charles and William are in opposition to Andrew's presence at anything official. If he had any shot at redemption in the long term, he blew it with that stunt - it was everything people loathe about Andrew: entitlement, arrogance, selfishness, weasly and, most of all, cluelessly tone deaf.

I used to get actively involved in these threads however I gave up trying to point out where people got things wrong. Firstly because people, mostly American, refused to accept that they may not know what they are talking about on the subject of the British Monarchy. Secondly because the same three or four topics of dispute come up every time.

Now I just scan through and see if there’s anything interesting to me. There was a surge in postings today so I thought that I’d pop in and check out the latest.

Can I just say this: many of you are confusing the Queen’s family with the Royal family. They are two different things.

The Queen’s family is just that - the descendants of her marriage plus spouses. Some are titled, most are not.

The Royal Family are all those people (mostly descendants of George V) who have the style of HRH and the title of Prince or Princess. Some are members of the Queen’s family.

There is crossover between the two but they are separate entities.

Those of you quoting Tatler or HuffPo or whatever referring to people such as Zara Tindall as royal? The press is lazy and gets it wrong all the time.

Anyway tl;dr for most of you but hope this helps.

But

[quote] Anyway tl;dr for most of you but hope this helps.

I read it and I can let other DLers know that it added no value to this thread at all.

R485 I'm sure you're right, plus most sources are saying the Queen insisted on Andrew escorting her as Prince Phillip was proud of Andy's navy service. Also, The Queen a very literal person--Andy settled the case against him without admitting fault, therefore he is innocent and has suffered enough.

I did enjoy imagining for a second that once inside the church Andy went rogue and wedged himself between his mother and the Archbishop who is still reeling from the offense and plotting his revenge.

Charles and William need to get over their petty squabble with Andrew and let it go, for the sake of the family and the monarchy.

What if Henry continued to use HRH? It would bring down the family's wrath certainly and would bring too all sorts of family retributions. But the Queen couldn't get a court order say enjoining him from using the title, could she?

She probably couldn’t, but using the title would probably backfire. Everyone would know it was unauthorised and corrupt.

The Sussexes live in the US. I don't see Americans calling a rogue prince and his trashy wife Your Royal Highness. So that styling would be about as useful as a tiara.

R480. Andrew polls SUPER high in the UK. They should make sure they are locked in the tightest public embrace possible to save the monarchy.

R493 But she's doing rather well getting Americans to call her "Duchess," isn't she? Not that anything could be less woke than importing and claiming noble status in the US, especially by an American citizen.

R477 - See R180's post. If they get divorced, she will end like Diana, Catherine, Princess of Wales (no HRH, no "THE"). As the mother of a future Sovereign, they'll have to leave her significant status, but she'll lose the HRH. If they are parted by death, she will remain HRH The Princess of Wales (which I expect she will be within a short time) unless she remarries, which is doubtful. It is not at all likely that a divorce would occur after William becomes King. They'll work out separate lives or something. But I'm not sure what her title would be as a widow. Probably she will remain Queen Catherine, and whoever George marries will be Queen (I'm pushing for Denmark's Princess Isabella).

In the event of a divorce by the Sussexes, however, Meghan loses that title (again, see R180's post). That's why the betting on a divorce there any time soon is hot air. She'll only give that up with porch railings under her fingernails, unless she's lined up a better gig, which is doubtful, as she's lost her looks, has shown herself to be greedy, dishonest, and indiscreet, and comes with two kids.

R495 - Well, she IS a Duchess, so, in fairness, wherever she goes she has the right to be called that. But the US doesn't recognise foreign titles formally. Informally, of course, Americans lap them up.

But if Harry were to file for American citizenship, he would have to renounce formally all foreign titles.

If the High Court tell him to fuck off re his police protection claim, I wonder if he'll consider it. The title won't be any more use to him, really, if he can't get the bennies he wants.

R490 - It's for the sake of the monarchy that they protested the move. It would have been quite sufficient for him to slide in and sit down next to his two daughters.

The optics of rewards for bad behaviour are not good.

R495. But the Queen didn’t specifically tell them not to use the ducal titles and probably couldn’t really do so. Using titles they were specifically told not to use would look even worse than most of the things they have done.

Am I the only one who is not shocked that a prince had sex with a 17 year old? Jeez, it’s not as if she was 13 or something, she was a hooker who seemingly enjoyed her job, at least until she changed her mind. By that I mean she got fat, lost her good looks and saw an opportunity to cash in after she squandered the huge payout from Epstein. And I’m still not sure what kind of sex they had, given the gobbly gook lawyer talk…

Harry and his wife will NEVER give up his title. It's the only talent he has to sell.

R480, Andrew Windsor does not enjoy public support here in the UK. There has even been a petition by the citizens of York to remove his title of Duke of York, because they do not want to be associated with him.

His ego must border on clinical disorder to think he can achieve any meaningful kind of comeback.

If he had any smarts he'd disappear from sight until his mother's funeral. In the midst of all that, he'd get a day pass. What a dick. I never feel sorry for his ludicrous daughters but I do feel sorry for them in this respect: he was apparently a good father who earned their love and loyalty, so to have to put up with him now... what a burden.

No, the Queen did6take the Sussex title and they were free to use it without the HRH, but not as a marketing tool. She took away their right to call their brand SussexRoyal.

Andrew and Meghan are the worst polling royals in the family. The top 3 are the Queen, Kate, and William, in that order.

Even Camilla polls better than Meghan.

What a fucking mess.

As Meghan and maybe Harry will live out their lives in the US, it's ridiculous for them to have titles.

She will. I’m not sure he will. He may end up in the basement of Frogmore Cottage.

He'll be like Marley's ghost, wandering the earth without place or purpose, but it'll be bottles you hear rattling, not chains.

Meghan cares deeply about titles: She's only having Archie use Mountbatten-Windsor because Dumbarton could bring on ridicule in the US. If he was the Earl of Renton or Arden or some other euphonious Scottish place name, she wouldn't let him be called anything else. She introduces herself as the Duchess of Sussex even when it's silly, like when she was cold-calling members of Congress.

Meghan will stay with Harry unless she figures out a better life without him. She won't stay out of loyalty to the marriage or the kids, only loyalty to herself.

Lineage of the Dumbarton title:

"Earl of Dumbarton is a title of Scottish nobility, referring to Dumbarton in the area West Dunbartonshire, Scotland. The title has been created twice, once in the Peerage of Scotland in 1675 and once in the Peerage of the United Kingdom in 2018.

The title was first created in the Peerage of Scotland on 9 March 1675 for Lord George Douglas, son of the Marquess of Douglas and younger brother of the Earl of Selkirk, for services fighting in the Franco-Dutch War. Lord Dumbarton was also created Lord Douglas of Ettrick. He was married to Anne Douglas (née Wheatley), the first Countess of Dumbarton, who was the sister of Catherine Fitzroy, Duchess of Northumberland. Following the death of their only son, the unmarried second Earl, both titles became extinct on 7 January 1749.

On 16 July 2018, the title was recreated in the Peerage of the United Kingdom by Queen Elizabeth II as one of the two subsidiary titles for her grandson Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, on the occasion of his wedding, when he was also created Baron Kilkeel. The title was announced on 19 May 2018. The heir to the earldom is his son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor."

The Spencer earldom only dates to 1765.

George Douglas was also a professional soldier who spent years fighting in France, and who served under James II and VI (II in England, VI in Scotland). In fact, he went into exile in France with Hames after the Glorious Revolution in 1688. It was probably selected for the first Earl's life as a professional soldier. The Selkirk-Douglas connection is far superior to that of Diana's family title.

Harry and Meghan are fools. Neither of them knows real class when they see it - they lean on it, they try to copy it, they act as if they belong to it . . . but they don't even recognise it when it's in their laps.

Of course, the irony is that rather than the loyal professional soldier, the Dumbarton connection is now more apt because Douglas ended his life in exile in France.

^*in France with James (not Hames)

I don't know if anyone has yet commented on the issue of D imwit's book coming out (is it this summer?) pretty soon. There is no way he could face the family given the likely explosive details about to emerge. These two are schemers of the highest order. I'm surprised that the media is not picking up on this little bookie coxming out pretty soon and making the link to the absence at the memorial.

R437 I am a direct descendant of medieval kings and queens and one emperor and one empress but I am neither royal nor imperial.

R442 Drew has a long lease on his house at Windsor. He's not living in the castle with his mom.

R457 Julian Fellowes is such a fucked up snob.

R464 Who is Sarah Chatto?

R515 too tired to google but you can make a post? K

R515 don’t give a fuck but still asked the question?

R511 - It is allegedly scheduled to be published late in the year.

Harry clearly hopes Gran will have bought the farm by then, and he won't have to face her wrath, or claims that he killed her, and she won't be able to take his title away and the Sussex kiddies will be HRHs. He knows his guilt-ridden fatuous Papa will do nothing to him, as well.

So it's scheduled to launch after the Platinum events, which are looking less Exsultate Jubilate by the day.

When Andrew moved into Royal Lodge, he pumped a cool million into its renovations, and thus got a 75-year lease, rent-free, because the cost of the renovations exceeded the minimum needed. So, no, he does not live with Mum, but he doesn't live very far from her, either.

Royal Lodge was once the home of the Queen's parents when first married. It is a Crown Estate property - that is, although the Queen has the disposal of it at her pleasure, she cannot obtain any personal revenue for it, or sell it, etc., etc.

Frogmore Cottage, where Andrew's daughter Eugenie lives (once the not so Home Sweet Home of the Sussexes), is in the same area, all within a half mile or so of the Castle.

If the Cambridges, if rumours are true, also move to the area, I look forward to the townsfolk going about with either red or white roses in their buttonholes.

Fuck the snark R516 = R517 and tell me who is this Chatto broad and why I should care.

You don’t understand how Google works, do you, precious?

To me, the title looks like it naturally splits into Dum-barton, not Dumb-arton anyway.

Ok, listen up: Brit here to tell you that none of these people matters constitutionally except the Queen and the Prince of Wales. Tisdale, Laurence, Chatov et al: fuck off, we don't care; same for the Harkles,

[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.]

R514, that's why I posted it. The posing here....

Here, r519.

Why should we care R525?

The Telegraph says Andy escorting the Queen was NOT in the plan and the sibs are pissed.

R519 was asking, r526.

[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.]

rince Andrew’s accompanying the 95-year-old Queen to her front-row position, on his first public appearance since paying millions to his sexual abuse accuser, didn’t just raise eyebrows among the millions watching the Westminster Abbey service on television. According to insiders, it blindsided his siblings, too.

The official plan had been for the Queen to travel by car from Windsor Castle with Andrew, who lives in the estate’s grounds, “for convenience”. The monarch was then to be escorted to the pews by the Dean of Westminster, the Very Reverend Dr David Hoyle, with Andrew expected to walk to his seat with his daughters Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie and their husbands.

Yet to the surprise – and downright shock – of the congregation, the exiled royal, 62, took on a far more prominent role than had been originally envisaged, ushering Her Majesty by the elbow to her seat – in full view of the live broadcast cameras. It follows the Queen having suffered with mobility issues in recent months, with Buckingham Palace only able to confirm her attendance at the last minute.

Royals were later described as “dismayed” and “despairing” over Andrew’s freelancing, with insiders expressing a “strong sense of regret” over his behaviour.

If Andrew escorting the Queen wasn't in the plans then who was going to escort her?

R522 - That's Tindall to you, sirrah - Zara, whose husband can break you in half.

Lady Sarah Chatto is Princess Margaret's only daughter, and has been very close to the Queen and Charles since girlhood. She has a somewhat Leslie Caron-ish quality, very arty, and has lived a quiet life with actor husband Daniel Chatto, and has produced two extremely hawt sons, the younger of whom is causing much drooling on DL. Jaspoer Conran. It was very lovely in its arty way.

She dresses beautifully, more in the French than English style, but has an unfortunate habit of not wearing a brassiere, which, really, she should.

R532 why should we care?

" . . . but there is no suggestion of wrongdoing on their part."

You can always tell a big DM story because they splurge and bring the lawyers in first.

R531 The church guy, who Andrew pushed aside.

[quote] If Andrew escorting the Queen wasn't in the plans then who was going to escort her?

If the Queen needed an escort, she knew Andrew knew how to hire one.

R526 - Why, you need not care at all, darling. It's just gossip.

I mean to say, does one really care about Madonna's unfortunate looking daughter? Recipes? Questions about wedding invitations?

There does seem to be something wrong with the Chatto info post I put up. It wiggled when I put the cursor over it. I think it may be because the photo is from HELLO.

I really did like the dress. I'll try again.

Proably behind paywall:

What my friend Prince Philip really would have made of 2022

As the Duke of Edinburgh’s life was celebrated this week, I’ve been imagining how he would have reacted to recent events By Gyles Brandreth

What would Prince Philip make of what’s happening in the world right now? I couldn’t help wondering about it as I watched this week’s memorial service. As chairman of one of his favourite charities – the National Playing Fields Association (NPFA) – I spent time with the Duke on and off over 40 years. I wrote about his life and views, sometimes with his encouragement, occasionally not. I think I got to know the way his mind ticked.

Certainly, I know as an avid student of military history, the Duke would have followed the horrors of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in close detail.

Surely his own personal history would have been foremost in his mind too: the Duke’s Greek grandfather was assassinated in 1913; he was a cousin of Nicholas II, the last Tsar of Russia, murdered with his family in 1918; it was the turbulence of Balkan politics that drove his own family into exile in France when he was a baby.

And he was familiar with the reality of war at a personal level. In the 1930s, the Duke’s sisters were married to Germans, which was why they could not be invited to his wedding to Princess Elizabeth in 1947. (One of his brothers-in-law was still undergoing the denazification process at the time.)

During the Second World War itself, he served with distinction in the Royal Navy. In 1941, as a midshipman on board HMS Valiant, manning a searchlight under enemy fire, the Duke was mentioned in despatches during the battle of Cape Matapan in the Mediterranean Sea. The action culminated in the early hours of March 29, 1941. Though no one has said so, I imagine that is why the Queen chose March 29 as the date for Prince Philip’s memorial service. She always knew her husband was a hero.

One of his personal heroes (the Duke would have called her a heroine) was his great-aunt Grand Duchess Ella who, before she was murdered by the Bolsheviks, established a convent of nursing sisters in Russia. She is now recognised as a saint by the Russian Orthodox Church and is one of the 10 20th century martyrs whose carved effigies are above the Great Door of Westminster Abbey. Prince Philip told me how Ella had inspired his own mother to found an order of nursing sisters and taught him the value of what he called “using faith to a purpose”.

He talked knowledgeably of Russia and her history. Over the years he met a number of Soviet leaders (Kruschev and Bulganin in 1956; President Podgorny in 1973) and was intrigued by the respect they evinced for some of their Tsarist predecessors and their ability to hold the vast and unwieldy Russian empire together. In 1973, as president of the International Equestrian Federation, and piloting his own plane, the Duke became the first senior member of the Royal family to visit the Soviet Union, flying to Moscow and then on to Kiev (as it was known then) to attend the European Horse Trials in which his daughter, Princess Anne, was competing. In 1994, he joined the Queen on a state visit to Russia and one of their hosts in St Petersburg was the deputy mayor, a 41-year-old Vladimir Putin.

2/ (the best bits)

Inevitably, the Duke reflected the values and attitudes of his generation. He once showed me a quotation by Napoleon: “If you want to understand a man you should understand what the world was like in the year that man turned twenty-one.” Prince Philip turned 21 in 1941. He saw the value of a stiff upper lip and the dangers of too much introspection. Cancel culture would have depressed him. He believed in debate and disagreement. “Why should everyone agree about everything?” he asked. “There are several sides to most arguments.” Wokery would not have appealed to him, but he accepted the usefulness of some elements of political correctness. More than once I saw him rebuke people who were guilty of using outdated sexist and homophobic turns of phrase. He was intolerant of intolerance – and always open to change.

At the Abbey on Tuesday, hundreds of organisations he helped to create or develop were on parade. They are part of his legacy. But his principal role was as the Queen’s consort and for more than 70 years he delivered the goods in full measure. The Duke pursued his own causes and had his own passions and enthusiasms, but from start to finish his priority was to serve the Queen – always one step behind, never upstaging, never getting in the way.

Perhaps his greatest legacy will prove to be being the role model for future consorts. I had lunch with him the week Camilla and Charles got married. “I like her very much,” he said – and he didn’t often offer verdicts on individuals. The Duchess of Cornwall has acknowledged her indebtedness to her father-in-law’s example – and I am sure that’s why the Queen used her Platinum Jubilee message in February to ensure her daughter-in-law’s status as Queen Consort in the fullness of time. If you’re destined to be married to the sovereign, ‘Doing it Philip’s way’ is not a bad recipe for success.

R530 - Oh, props to you for the Rex Mottram comparison!!!!

Listen to me. The fruitcake closet case Julian Fellowes played TOM Mottram in "Rumpole and the Reform of Joby Jonson" 30 years ago. Joby was quite cute.

R522 - The problem is that those who don't matter constitutionally have managed to damage the product the ones who do are selling.

And the other problem is that the ones who do matter are making more mistakes lately than Putin in Ukraine.

And if they don't change course, quickly, the monarchy will look the way Mariupol does.

Their best shot is to drown Andrew in a butt of Malmsey, exile Harry for life, and fool around with the electric plugs in Charles' bath.

Remember: royalty were the first film stars. There's a reason they use the term "Hollywood Royalty" "American Royalty" . . .

These were the first sources of worthy gossip.

The whole world is in revolt. Soon there will be only five Kings left—the King of England, the King of Spades, the King of Clubs, the King of Hearts and the King of Diamonds.

John Simm played Joby. Quite fuckable in his day. The show does not say if Joby screwed Tom Mottram.

Which church guy, r535?

R545 If you'd taken the time to read preceding posts you'd know.

Read church gay, not guy, R545.

By the definitions bandied about here, you’re racist if you’re white. It doesn’t matter that actual slavery is alive and well and perpetrated by brown and black people seems to be irrelevant.

I’m not considering any of them racist except Harry and Princess Michael.

I was watching with him. We thought the Queen of Denmark and 'Princess' Beatrix of the Netherlands stole the show. We had some mint tea on the clouds after. BTW Julian Fellowes was born my subject in Cairo; I had him castrated.

[quote] I’m not considering any of them racist except Harry and Princess Michael.

Harry Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg and Marie-Christine Anna Agnes Hedwig Ida von Reibnitz = Nazis.

[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.]

That stick she's carrying isn't for walking it's to slap Chaz and Wills if nec.

Hmmm I thought I read that Andrew forced his way forward with his mother, leaving the vicar behind. But in the photo at r551, the vicar is in front. So maybe it was planned after all?

"Vicar" R553? Not in that place.

^ That's well into her entry. She came into the Abbey at the back of that aisle and to the left. That's apparently where he horned in, if you accept he did. He was probably in position as soon as she got out of the car.

He got her to the front then she veered off to the brothers grim.

Are there any pics of the royals as The Queen made her way to her seat on Andrew’s arm? I’m skeptical that this wasn’t agreed upon ahead of time, I think it’s just spin to say Charles and Wills are annoyed now.

I did read most of previous almost 550 posts r546, but there's nothing about a church guy - and certainly no vicar - who was meant to escort the Queen. That's not the job of the clergy - who would all have had other tasks - anyway.

I really do think it's simply a case of the Queen needed some help walking and Andrew helped her. It was either casual, i.e. she was going to walk by herself but then realised she needed some assistance and Andrew was on hand, or planned, in which case it was always planned to be Andrew who helped her. This whole attempt to create some controversy around it is nonsense. These events are always highly orchestrated anyway, especially with so many people in attendance, a strict schedule and cameras. It's not as though Andrew could just start walking about or pushing archbishops out of the way.

I understand that the very interesting Justin Welby was officiating.

Having just watched the video of the Queen entering again I can't see anything controversial or even significant about this. She and Andrew arrived together so were going to walk in together and alongside each other. She is almost 96 and needed some help so he gave her his arm to lean on. There was no grand public gesture of him "escorting" the Queen.

One thing I do know, and which unites Charles, William, Harry and Diana, is that they all hate(d) the press and think it just makes things up. As William once said, you shouldn't believe everything you read in the press. The entire story of Andrew apparently "escorting" the Queen is made-up bullshit.

Did someone finally kick the Dean of Westminster in the knutz?

"The monarch was then to be escorted to the pews by the Dean of Westminster, the Very Reverend Dr David Hoyle, with Andrew expected to walk to his seat with his daughters Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie and their husbands."

From the article.

Whatever, there was no vicar. Vicar = parish priest.

Someone is really after Andrew and seem to be leaking stories that only an insider would be aware of to the press. He must have REALLY pissed someone off by escorting the Queen at the Remembrance.

R545. Read the article. The Dean of Westminister, he's a Reverend.

I think the Queen allowing Andrew to escort her was a little message to Harry that, even if you humiliate the monarchy, I can still love you. But don’t bring your cunt wife anywhere best me.

R565 they are all Reverends. The Most Reverend. The Right Reverend. The Reverend (for a vicass). The Very Reverend. Whatever, there was no lowly vicar there.

567 I'm not the poster who said vicar. I posted the article. It's from the Telegraph via yahoo.

R559 long time atheist here but I’ve always been fascinated by Justin Welby’s backstory.

R568 = worse than Putin

He looks absolutely evil in that photo. Chilling.

Sorry, the photo at R529's link

Fellowes can't be a snob which is short for sine nobile as her mahareenee is now Julian Alexander Kitchener-Fellowes, Baron Fellowes of West Stafford, DL, KUNt (Papal)

Prince Andrew is a smug piece of shit and the royals should send him and that joke of an ex-wife of his off on a boat and have the royal navy sink it. That being said, I do think it's kind of bad taste to criticize the actions of a 95 year old woman at her husband's memorial even if she the head of state. It's not like she walked up the aisle with Putin or Hitler or something. I honestly think the press needs to take some THC or something because everything is sensationalized beyond belief these days. Hopefully, when the Queen dies, Charles will push Andrew in the grave and yell "start shovelling boys."

Did you all see the pic of Andrew in the car with the Queen where he is waving to the crowd? He seems to be unaware of his current position.

Da Kween like Drew. Get ovah it.

Andrew knows this is his last bow in the spotlight. As soon as Charles is King, Andrew won't be making any more public appearances related to the BRF. Ever.

I'm sure he realizes that pushing his way into the public eye right now is damaging the institution, but he probably doesn't give a shit because he has no future with the institution. Nor does he seem to care that people don't WANT to see him--any cheers or waves were for his mother.

Yes, he appears to be very bitter and angry.

I wonder if Eug will keep Frogmore Cottage if she keeps siding with the Sussexes. Not during William's reign, anyway.

R579 I don’t think anyone else wants it, so I doubt Charles and Will will care enough to take it away. Just the name Frogmore” probably makes them both break out in a rash. Plus, It’s a good idea for old homes to be lived in, so needed maintenance and updates can be made.

Meghan's taken up creative writing. See R448.

Izzy of Denmark is too old for George. She’s already made her confirmation, already has boobs, already wears heels. George is a little boy barely out of short pants. More likely she will marry some international businessman, no title but lots of money.

[QUOTE] As soon as Charles is King, Andrew won't be making any more public appearances related to the BRF. Ever.

As a Royal Duke, I would expect Andrew to be present at Charles’ coronation, dressed in an ermine robe with gilded coronet, to perform homage to the Sovereign. I don’t expect The Duke of Kent will still be kicking around, so Andrew will be the second highest-ranking Royal Duke behind The Duke of Gloucester.

R583 We have a royal duke posting here! Please identify yourself.

The Queen is disgusting by trying to rehab her perverted son's reputation. She had to other sons who could have escorted her, but she insisted on the son who raped a sex trafficked teenager.

The entire family are vile. And the other members don't give a shit what he did, just that he might tarnish their already terrible reputations.

And Andrew could have avoided all of this by shutting the fuck up and paying her off quietly. But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. He thought he was so smart and he would outsmart everyone, including the media.

[quote] the Duke’s Greek grandfather was assassinated in 1913;

George I was a Danish prince. Didn't have a drop of Greek blood in him. Neither did any of the "Greek royals", including Philip, who is German and Danish.

[quote] the Duke’s sisters were married to Germans, which was why they could not be invited to his wedding

The Duke's sisters and brothers-in-law were all Nazi party members and ardent Nazis. His brothers-in-law were members of the SS, who were at the forefront of the extermination of the Jews. THAT'S why they weren't invited.

[quote] Prince Philip told me how Ella had inspired his own mother to found an order of nursing sisters

Ella was murdered by the Bolsheviks in1918. Her remains were eventually buried at the Russian Orthodox Church of St. Mary Magdalene in Jeusalem in 1921. Phil's mum requested that she be buried next to her Aunt Ella, which she was in 1988 .

[quote] We thought the Queen of Denmark and 'Princess' Beatrix of the Netherlands

Saw the snap of Daisy and Trixie leaving the church together and started to wonder in what language do those two old chooks have a chin wag in?

[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.]

Old Andy looks like a wary, hunted animal in that photo. I wonder if there was any covert hissing going on in church that day.

It's hard to believe that members of the UK aristocracy would really denigrate Andrew because of the V. Giuffre caper (rather than being merely titillated by it). As has been pointed out here, they know full well that sweet little Virginia was actually a 17-year-old, jaded hooker, not really anyone's "sex slave." Andrew is in permanent "time out" solely because of the Royals' expediency in appearing to go along with the current situation of "political correctness" ('Me Too'). Banishing him was just a symbolic gesture by the Queen, who understood that it was prudent, in order to shore up support for the monarchy, which is going to need all the help it can get when she passes from the scene.

^^^ Mary and drama Queen clutching her pearls…

I said earlier I think water met its own level when those two met. Those inside will know much more than anyone outside knows. I don't argue it exculpates Pork but there will be things that in his mother's eyes, and perhaps his family's, that make sense, so to call the Queen disgusting etc seems likely ill-informed. That said, whatever the truth of the matter if there's more it hasn't come out and he should accept his fate and stop making things worse because at a minimum, he's a louche asshole who no one respects as a public figure.

That was meant for R585 ^^

OP here - sorry for inflicting this cringe-making thread on the denizens of Datalounge. The comparison to the insufferable Julian Fellowes is APT.

R585. Is nationality determined by blood?

R594, agreed. So many Lady Bracknells and each with such lengthy soliloquies. This topic, Gilded Age, theater threads - it's like a landslide of territorial hissing, pontificated through bagpipes.

R587. The Queen of Denmark speaks better English than almost all British people Beatrix’s English is not bad either.

R582 You're right. I keep thinking of her as a little girl. She's turning up quite attractive, now, too.

Frogmore Cottage just underwent substantial upgrades and renovations three years ago, at a cost of three million (sterling), which Harry allegedly repaid so it could stop being used against him after he flounced out.

It's no secret the Sussexes hated the place, seeing it as more proof of how little they were getting compared to what they think they deserved. I.e., whatever Kate and William had.

Of course, it didn't occur to them that the Palace already knew that the pair were hostile, angry, probably not going to stay the course, and that lavishing the 6th in line and a wife who had already alienated most of the family was to send send good money after bad.

The tabs blow everything out of proportion. It's the oldest maxim in newspapers: blood sells.

Whether the Queen and Andrew cooked it up together, or he sprang it on a woman helpless to do anything about it (and I suspect the latter because of Bea's reaction, which to me indicated dismayed shock and told me his kids knew what was supposed to happen but didn't), it was another bruise on the face of the monarchy.

Andrew has been gaslighting his Mum since he was born.

Unpopular opinion, but if it's that easy for him to fo st a moment like that, she's no longer fit for purpose.

Say goodbye, Betty. With any luck, Charles won't be too far behind.

The monarchy needs William and Kate. Now.

R551 you’re really sick to admire that bitch and her need to show off her pedo loving son. He associates with trash. The queen gleefully parades him around in church. As the head of her church she should do better. He doesn’t repent or apologize for his actions.

It’s sick and a sign that the queen has lost her marbles.

Whatever the royals say to spin this story, there is still not excuse for Andrew riding with his mother if it wasn’t her intent to once again show him favor.

She’s lost it. I’m too ready for King Charles because then we can finally rid the public from fugly Andrew.

To refer back to earlier comments: they had to remove Diana's HRH when she divorced. It was very plain that she was capable of using William and her own popularity to challenge Charles's succession. (She told the Panorama interviewer Charles didn't really want to be king.) The sooner they made her not Royal the better.

On the other hand, nobody in their right mind would think Camilla could get away with calling herself the Princess of Wales, and not just because of the husband thing. Diana was a superstar under that title. It would be like some other opera singer calling herself La Stupenda. You have to wait at least a generation for people to have forgotten. Even the people who haven't forgotten by then will be happy to see it bestowed on Kate, who is owner of the One Ring and is helping to put Diana's progeny on the throne. But no second wife of Charles's was ever getting that title, no matter how innocent.