Jump to content

British Royal Family


Jem

Recommended Posts

Guest ranster627
Oh sorry -- I mean the whole question of the title -- its a new issue.  I don't recall reading in any other history book about a divorced prince -- a divorced prince remarrying -- a divorced prince who remarries and takes the throne.

Its all a new ball game.

I wonder if there is precedence in widower princes from the past? Seems to me the situation would be similar with the prince having the children from another woman?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest GaYToR

I don't think there ever has been a similar situation in the history of the Royals, at least not the British ones.

Closest think I can think of would be Henry VIII, and we all know how he handled the issue of his multple marriages. It's kinda like the old commercial I used to see for ant control. "Kill the queen, kill the whole mound."

I still want someone to answer my question. Maybe I missed the answer?

:?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

Why is it when there is a Queen on the throne, her husband is not referred to as King, but when a King is crowned, his wife is called Queen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest GaYToR
Is this just a bad picture or have others noticed how handsome Harry is, and how much he looks like his mother, while poor William seems to look more like his father as he gets older?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest XandraSkye
No they are not Catholic and have not been for a few centuries now.  Guess what -- I'm not Catholic either (nor am I Christian) but that doesn't mean I can't take the time to give homage to a good man.  I believe someone else called it selfish.  I tend to agree.

It's not like he was a relative or even a friend of the family. He was just another "celebrity".

"Go get married Charles & Camilla and BE HAPPY!!!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ranster627

I agree XS. While the passing of the Pope is a significant event to many, that is not true for all ... in the end, they were deferential (and did the right thing), so all the best to them.

They sure could use some good luck surrounding the wedding after all the bumbling and SNAFU's ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ranster627
I don't think there ever has been a similar situation in the history of the Royals, at least not the British ones.

Closest think I can think of would be Henry VIII, and we all know how he handled the issue of his multple marriages. It's kinda like the old commercial I used to see for ant control. "Kill the queen, kill the whole mound."

I still want someone to answer my question. Maybe I missed the answer?

:?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

Why is it when there is a Queen on the throne, her husband is not referred to as King, but when a King is crowned, his wife is called Queen?

This one has me stumped ... perhaps it is due to a fact that in the days of yore women with power were always vulnerable and had to ensure their positions and not give any excuses for a man to be able to usurp their positions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Its because the monarchy is patriarchal. Meaning that the throne passes down to the through the male line. If the title of King was given to the husband of the Queen (who is in the royal line to the throne) the title would change the family to whom the throne "belongs". It hasn't always been done this way, but was adopted because of the War of Roses (I believe -- I could be wrong here)

It basically assumes that King is more powerful than Queen. A King rules, but a Queen is simply the spouse to the King. When the line passes to a female offspring, its important that it is kept in the Stewart family, so the title of Prince is given to the spouse, rather than the (superior?) title of King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The monarchy now is falling apart at the seams... Time to throw it away... I wish Canada would just break ties already... I don't care about the queen or her wacked out family.... What do they do other than whine and act stupid???

I hearted Lady Di, She was the best thing that ever happened to that family and they managed to screw that up too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ranster627

I really can't disagree on that ... Have no worries King, if Charles gets the throne, the monarchy will disappear from Canada ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Actually I'd like to see the monarchy return to an earlier state and take more of a role in the politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ranster627
Actually I'd like to see the monarchy return to an earlier state and take more of a role in the politics.

:o:o:o:o:o:o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ranster627
You don't have to agree.  I know many don't.  Being unique is my specialty.  :wink:

Wasn't disagreeing, was just shocked! Although I don't happen to agree ... I prefer democracy in all it's forms, no matter how illogical it sometimes seems ... I just can't wrap MY head around birth bestowing special entitlements or knowledge ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Uh oh -- see I don't believe democracy exists. We are all most definitely "ruled" with little option to change the state. Much like true communism, true democracy is a myth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ranster627
Uh oh -- see I don't believe democracy exists.  We are all most definitely "ruled" with little option to change the state.  Much like true communism, true democracy is a myth.

Fascinating point of view!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest GaYToR
Actually I'd like to see the monarchy return to an earlier state and take more of a role in the politics.

Ineresting idea Spooky, but do we really want a family of inbreds making laws for any country. (I would add "look at what it has done for the US, with just a father and then his son in charge, but that is a personal opinion and if I said it I should probably delete myself for saying it.) OOOOPS .. MOD needed on Aisle 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ranster627

Ineresting idea Spooky' date=' but do we really want a family of inbreds making laws for any country. (I would add "look at what it has done for the US, with just a father and then his son in charge, but that is a personal opinion and if I said it I should probably delete myself for saying it.) OOOOPS .. MOD needed on Aisle 4.

Ummmmmm.... my point exactly :wink: :rofl[/quote']

Now you lost me Spooky ... I thought you were saying the exact opposite to GaYToR ... :? :? :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ranster627
Actually I'd like to see the monarchy return to an earlier state and take more of a role in the politics.

Ineresting idea Spooky, but do we really want a family of inbreds making laws for any country. (I would add "look at what it has done for the US, with just a father and then his son in charge, but that is a personal opinion and if I said it I should probably delete myself for saying it.) OOOOPS .. MOD needed on Aisle 4.

After careful consideration and a lifting of the fog of confusion ... I agree with GaYToR on this one! :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tourists Breach Security Before UK Royal Wedding

LONDON (Reuters) - Two tourists managed to avoid security and reach a private area of Windsor Castle just days before heir-to-the-throne Prince Charles has his wedding reception at the royal residence, police said on Wednesday.

The men were held in the grounds of the imposing castle, 32 km (20 miles) west of London, after climbing a perimeter fence on Sunday night. "The two men had entered the private area of the Windsor Castle estate and were immediately detected," a police spokeswoman said.

The Sun newspaper said they reached the area of the castle where Queen Elizabeth's private quarters are located, but the spokeswoman said the secure area used by the royal family had not been breached "at any stage." The tourists were quizzed before being released without arrest, she added, giving no further details.

The incident came less than a week before a royal wedding that Britain's most senior police officer has warned poses an obvious potential terrorist target. Prince Charles will marry his long-term lover Camilla Parker Bowles at a civil ceremony at the Guildhall in Windsor on Saturday. Queen Elizabeth has declined to attend the ceremony but instead will attend a later blessing service and host a reception for the couple at the castle.

The wedding has already suffered a number of setbacks. The venue was switched following a mixup of marriage licenses and then had to be rescheduled from Friday in order not to clash with the funeral of Pope John Paul.

Sunday's incident was also the latest in a series of high-profile breaches in royal security.

Last year a man tricked his way into Windsor Castle by pretending to be a policeman, and in 2003 self-styled "comedy terrorist" Aaron Barshcak managed to gate-crash the 21st birthday party of Charles's son Prince William there.

In September last year a campaigner for fathers' rights dressed in a Batman costume evaded police to scale the front of Buckingham Palace, the queen's London residence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UK Police Probe Royal Wedding Security Scare

LONDON (Reuters) - British police ordered an inquiry Thursday into how a journalist drove a fake "bomb" into the heart of the royal castle where heir-to-the-throne Prince Charles will marry this weekend.

An undercover reporter said he tricked police into letting him take a van carrying a brown box marked "bomb" close to Queen Elizabeth's apartments at Windsor Castle, 20 miles west of London. "This apparent breach of security at Windsor Castle in the run-up to the royal wedding properly raises serious concern," a police spokeswoman said in a statement. "It is only right that the facts are established before any action is taken against any police personnel who may be culpable."

London police chief Ian Blair, who said in February that the wedding was a potential terrorist target, has ordered an "immediate inquiry," the statement added.

The queen's eldest son Prince Charles will marry his long-term lover Camilla Parker Bowles at a civil ceremony in the small town of Windsor Saturday.

'ABSURDLY EASY'

The Sun newspaper said their reporter posed as a delivery driver to convince police to let him and a photographer past a barrier at the 900-year-old castle's King Henry VIII gate. "It was all absurdly easy," reporter Alex Peake wrote in the newspaper's Thursday edition. "It took just a hired van, two pairs of workmen's overalls and a bogus delivery note." Wednesday's incident was the latest in a series of royal security breaches.

Sunday, two tourists climbed a perimeter fence at the castle to reach an area near the queen's rooms.

Charles's wedding plans have been dogged by hitches since he announced in February he was to marry the woman blamed by many Britons for destroying his marriage to his first wife, the late Princess Diana. The venue was switched following a mixup over marriage licenses and then had to be rescheduled from Friday to avoid a clash with the funeral of Pope John Paul. Some constitutional experts have even questioned the legality of the pair marrying in a civil ceremony.

($1=.5327 Pound)

Link to comment
Share on other sites







Lobby

Lobby

Please enter your display name

×
×
  • Create New...