|
Post by paulchen on Jun 28, 2011 15:14:05 GMT
Since posting this item it has been confirmed that Lord and lady Nicholas Windsor indeed have two sons now, Albert and Leopold.
There are two unusual aspects still:
Firstly, they remain in the Line of Succession even though both parents are Roman Catholic and they have been baptised as such. The reason given is that they won't be deemed to have been "brought up" as Roman Catholic until they are confirmed.
Secondly, as opposed to what normally happens with the sons of younger sons of Dukes who are usually called Master until they reach the age of majority and become Mr, Albert and Leopold have received the courtesy title of Honourable. This is confirmed on the official website of the British Monarchy.
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Jun 28, 2011 14:59:57 GMT
After the adverse publicity for HRH The Duke of York since I first posted this item, I think I realise why he hasn't been appointed to the Order of St Michael and St George...
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Jun 28, 2011 14:51:32 GMT
I'm still interested if there is any information regarding this, especially those Royal Dukes that did Homage to the Monarch at the Coronation.
In the meantime I have seen footage of HM King George VI's Coronation in 1937. HM's brothers the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent [the 1st Duke of Kent as opposed to his son the 2nd Duke] are shown. I have a feeling that HRH Prince Arthur of Connaught also paid Homage, but he isn't shown.
At HM King George V's Coronation in 1910 I have a feeling it was HRH The Prince of Wales [later HM King Edward VIII], HRH The Duke of Connaught and, again, HRH Prince Arthur of Connaught, but wonder who else...
Any information would be gratefully received.
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on May 19, 2011 12:35:15 GMT
Since the announcement of Prince William and Catherine's new titles Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, there seemed to be some disappointment that she was not made a princess. People are not sure what to call her, or if she is even a princess at all. Some think that she IS a princess. Because she is the wife of Prince William, one of her titles would be 'Princess William' - whether she uses it or not. However a reporter on Twitter, who has contacts with Buckingham Palace says that BP is insistent that she is not a princess at all because she was made a Duchess. What do you think? Catherine has the style and title of princess and duchess because she is married to a man who holds the style and title of prince and duke. When he becomes king, she will be styled queen consort. The present queen has not made her either a princess or a duchess in her own right because it is not UK practice to do so. In the unlikely event that she divorces Willima, she will lose the right to use all styles and titles except by courtesy as Diana did. That is entirely correct, Observer. The "however", and I was not necessarily shocked but rather surprised to hear, is that a Clarence House spokesperson said words to the effect that no one would object to The Duchess of Cambridge being called Princess Catherine in everyday situations.
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on May 9, 2011 7:45:20 GMT
concerning Will's title..if/when he has a son would the son become earl of strathern(!), or prince X of cambridge kinda like what Will and Harry call themselves?.. In the normal run of events Prince William's eldest son, as great-grandchild of a monarch, would normally have the courtesy title of Earl of Strathern, following the example of the eldest sons of the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent. However, the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales is automatically a Prince. So he will be HRH Prince X of Cambridge. Other children of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will be Lord or Lady X Mountbatten-Windsor. HM The Queen may wish to issue Letters Patent to make all their children HRHs and Princes/Princesses as Queen Victoria did for her great-grandchildren [the Duke and Duchess of York's children]. The question, though is what will happen if the first born of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge is a girl...
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on May 2, 2011 12:57:23 GMT
There's a titanic amount of buzz in regards to the forthcoming royal wedding. The amount of coverage concerning the pending nuptials of Prince William and Kate Middleton has been staggering. I read this here: Royal wedding mania beginning to reach fever pitch"Forthcoming"? I hate to tell you, but the Royal Wedding was last Friday...
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on May 1, 2011 11:49:53 GMT
Does anyone know where the Duchess of Clarence now stands in the order of precedence - especially among the royal ladies? Is she third after the Duchess of Cornwall - marking William's place as 2nd in line to the throne? I can't imagine the Princess Royal or the Countess of Wessex (Princess Alexandra?) having to curtsey to her. I think you mean the Duchess of Cambridge [although I can't think of them as anything else than William and Catherine]. It depends on which order of precedence you consider. If all the Royal Family is present, then Catherine takes precedence from her husband as the second in line to the Throne. She is the third lady of the land after The Queen [first in her own right] and the Duchess of Cornwall [second only because she is married to the heir]. If only ladies are present then, according to the new Order introduced in 2005, Catherine should rank after The Queen, The Princess Royal, then Princess Alexandra [both Ladies of the Garter], then the Duchess of Cornwall and, presumably, before the York Princesses.
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Apr 29, 2011 20:29:11 GMT
What a beautiful day for a Royal Wedding. Congratulations to William and Catherine. Beautiful dress and a great ceremony.
God bless the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge!
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Mar 21, 2011 10:44:30 GMT
Sad news to have just before the Royal Wedding. But she had had a good innings and wasn't in the best of health. My condolences to the Monaco Royal Family.
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Mar 15, 2011 9:17:43 GMT
I do so agree with you chewsteraghi on both counts. A) That it would be a nice touch to make Catherine Middleton a Princess in her own right [like happens in Belgium and Denmark] although there isn't a precedent in the UK, not even for Diana. B) Why oh why do people believe what they read in the newspapers as opposed to what is actually issued by [or not as the case may be] by the Head of State who is the font of all honours? We have the same problem at work. HM The Queen has granted an extra Bank Holiday for the Royal Wedding, but whether we actually get the day off isn't in the hands of our Head of State, it is up to our Managing Director!
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Mar 3, 2011 11:26:17 GMT
Glad you enjoyed it too Wendy. I don't usually go to the cinema much bvut I felt I had to be a part of history being made. My fingers are still crossed that The King's Speech will sweep the Oscars too. Colin Firth should make it this year. As you say, Wendy, not an easy part to do, but a very consistant perfromance.
I've seen/heard a couple of documentries linking up with the film. First, one about the making fo the film. People are known to have given the film a standing ovation. [My work colleague said she was quite ready to watch the film again, right after watching it the first time.]
The other was on the TV about King George's stammer and also talking to other clients of Logue. An equally moving programme. Watching film of the real King's speeches you realise what a battle he had to overcome. He is the ultimate King, called to do his duty for his country. He overcame or, rather, managed his disability and lead the country, with the support of his consort, Queen Elizabeth, and Winston Chruchill. Exactly the right combination to keep the country going. I am sure the present Queen is proud of her father's work and shed a tear or two of pride when she was shown the film. c'mon now.. OK, I got a bit carried away. But if you compare King George VI and his elder brother King Edward VIII, I think we all know who had the greater sense of duty.
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Mar 1, 2011 18:43:20 GMT
So proud of The King's Speech. Well done, "King Colin"! ;o)
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Feb 27, 2011 13:18:28 GMT
I saw the movie and thought it was a disappointment kind of a waste of money. I am interested off topic for a min to see the mini series they are doing on the Kennedys it airs on April the 9th in my area of canada Janjan, of course you are welcome to voice your opinion, but I don't understand why you bothered to register here just to express "republican" views on a royalist forum. I also fail to understand what the Kennedy Family has to do with this film. Colin Firth is a good actor, whatever his opwn nationality and whatever the subject of the role he has played. It just happens that his portrayal of His Late Majesty King George VI deserves, in the opinion of quite a few people worldwide, an award or two. It has also highlighted the struggle, not only of the King, but of other people with stammers.
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Feb 26, 2011 21:29:36 GMT
Yes, I was reminded of Crown Princess Mary of Denmark. I think, as they were at University together, that this is a match of equals and HRH Prince William won't be struggling with his spouse as his father did with Diana.
Remember too, Wendy, that the Royal Couple will be celebrating Canada Day which, this year, marks the day the late Diana, Princess of Wales would have been 50 years of age. It will be an emotional day for William and significant that he will be out of the UK [away from the paparazzi] and with the woman he has chosen as his wife.
|
|
|
Post by paulchen on Feb 26, 2011 21:24:14 GMT
Glad you enjoyed it too Wendy. I don't usually go to the cinema much bvut I felt I had to be a part of history being made. My fingers are still crossed that The King's Speech will sweep the Oscars too. Colin Firth should make it this year. As you say, Wendy, not an easy part to do, but a very consistant perfromance.
I've seen/heard a couple of documentries linking up with the film. First, one about the making fo the film. People are known to have given the film a standing ovation. [My work colleague said she was quite ready to watch the film again, right after watching it the first time.]
The other was on the TV about King George's stammer and also talking to other clients of Logue. An equally moving programme. Watching film of the real King's speeches you realise what a battle he had to overcome. He is the ultimate King, called to do his duty for his country. He overcame or, rather, managed his disability and lead the country, with the support of his consort, Queen Elizabeth, and Winston Chruchill. Exactly the right combination to keep the country going. I am sure the present Queen is proud of her father's work and shed a tear or two of pride when she was shown the film.
|
|