Jessica Schmessica...We got a royal wedding to look forward to!
 

Prince William and Kate Middleton are engaged. He gave her his mother's engagement ring. Any speculation on a wedding date?

I'm excited. She has beautiful taste (and/or great stylists) and I can't wait to see it.

How can it have been a generation since his parents got married? (I was in San Francisco that day and remember all these ancient Chinese men in a restaurant clustered around the TV).

We're one step closer to Charles never being king. I'd say you heard it here first, but I heard it when a psychic was on Oprah YEARS ago when Di was pregnant the first time.
Oh, and in case you're wondering, she said William will be a great king.

I would just like Harry to come for a visit. To Central Illinois. I'll find something for him to do. Promise.

I thought it was odd at first that he used his mother's engagement ring, since that marriage didn't turn out all that great, but then I heard his reason and thought it was sweet.

I remember watching Charles & Di and Andrew & Fergie get married. I'm sure I'll be up at the crack of dawn to watch this one too.

I think the only way Charles will get passed over is if Elizabeth outlives him (which is not out of the question at all).

The neat thing about William being king will be that FINALLY one of Charles II's descendants will be on the throne (albeit from his illegitimate kids - Diana has ties to two of them).

I admit I'm not an expert on the British Monarchy, but how is this getting closer to Charles not being King?

Because theoretically William now has a "suitable" spouse and QEII would feel comfortable excluding him (the technical term) because of his divorce.

Not gonna happen.

I'm confused. Oprah's show didn't start until 1986; Prince William was born in 1982. Was it another show during Diana's first pregnancy, or was it on Oprah later on? :confused::confused::confused:

Tabloids aside, I think Charles may be closer to being Queen than King. I can remember thinking he wasn't straight before the word gaydar was on the radar.

I, too, had some questions about Prince William using his mother's ring until I heard the explanation. But I've also heard that the Windsors are notariously thrifty, so it doesn't surprise me. I'm more surprised that Kate accepted it, instead of having it reset.

And just like the other weddings, I'm sure to be watching it on television, should it be broadcast, complete with tiara and champagne. The British monarchy may be expensive to the everyday Englishman, but they generate more revenue than most other outlays!

I know absolutely nothing about British royal lineage. Could you explain? :confused:

I never considered this.......

I just wikied for the Hell of it, and it seems that while Camilla would legally be queen if Charles ascends, it's commonly known that she will be styled as Princess Consort.

Had a long post, but it didn't post right. Oh well. Nevermind.

^I'm fairly certain (without looking it up) that Camilla gave up the possibility of being Queen as part of the pre-nup. Probably the same article you read.


Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Cornwall but never Queen Camilla ;Charles excited...boys delighted; ROYAL WEDDING.

Byline: ROB SINGH

CAMILLA Parker Bowles is to be known as HRH the Duchess of Cornwall The Duchess of Cornwall is the title held by the wife of the Duke of Cornwall. Duke of Cornwall is a non-hereditary peerage held by the British Sovereign's eldest son and heir. once she marries Prince Charles - and will never be known as Queen.

When Charles accedes to the throne she will be known as Princess Consort.

The move to allow Charles to be King without his wife being Queen will have to be approved by a special Act of Parliament passed when he takes the throne.

The Queen approved her new daughter-in-law taking the style Her Royal Highness, making her the second most senior royal woman after the Queen.

But the option, which was technically available, of being Princess of WalesNoun 1. Princess of Wales - English aristocrat who was the first wife of Prince Charles; her death in an automobile accident in Paris produced intense national mourning (1961-1997)
Diana, Lady Diana Frances Spencer, Princess Diana
..... Click the link for more information., was never seriously considered.

"Legally she is to be the Princess of Wales but she has chosen not to use that title," said a senior royal aide."

Charles II was married but his wife never produced any kids. He did have a boatload of mistresses who DID reproduce. He duke-ified most of them, and Diana is descended from two of them.

King after Charles was his brother James, and then he was overthrown by his son-in-law. It was all because of the Protestant/Catholic tensions in England at the time.

Yes, but the current "King" (Philip) is not a King at all; he is Prince Consort. And I don't think that he gave up the name in a pre-nup. His is a case of not being a King by himself, needing the Queen to have any sort of monarch status. I know that Camilla didn't take the "Princess of Wales" title because the UK would have thrown a fit, and she knew they would. They still revere Di. (As do I. She and Philip were married on my first birthday!)

Fixed your post for you. http://www.gamershood.com/forum/imag...s//flag006.gif

Agreed, though I predict a relatively short reign for Charles, like Edward VII.

Even with the Queen, Prince Phillip has no "monarch status."

There are two kinds of Queen in British law -- a queen regnant and a queen consort. A queen regnant is a sovereign in her own right; she is in effect a female king. A queen consort is the wife of a king, whose status is totally dependent on the status of her husband and who has no status of sovereign. (When the king dies, a queen consort is referred to as a queen doweger and, if mother of the current monarch by children from the marriage with the king, is "the Queen Mother.")

By contrast there is only one kind of king -- a king regnant or sovereign. Husbands of queens regnant are never styled as "kings"; they are prince consorts, like Prince Phillip, Prince Albert (Queen Victoria's husband) and Prince George (Queen Anne's husband).

The one exception to this has been William and Mary, both of whom were invited by Parliament to exercise coregnancy. That's why she was a Queen Regnant rather than a Queen Consort.

Philip is a Prince, not a consort. He is not King because QEII is the one royal blood, and her husband can't have a higher title than her. King is higher than Queen.


ETA: MC and I were typing at the same time. I've read that Philip is not considered a consort because they are religiously and civilly married, while Charles and Camilla are only civilly married.

Thanks!!!

I'm guessing all this happened back in the 1700's or something?

Right. :D But to be clear, King is not necessarily higher than Queen. Queen regnant = king. Queen consort < king.


Is there a typo here? Philip is a prince consort.

Charles II was king after Cromwell was killed. He was restored to the throne, the time between the English Civil War (death of Charles I; roundheads and cavaliers) and Charles II crowning is called the interregnum.

Charles II reigned during the Restoration (a time restoring and rejoicing in bawdy literature and drama, drinking, general revelry, after the puritan rule of Cromwell... some really great stuff came out of this time period). This was late late 17th century. When he died, his brother James became king, but was very unpopular. When James was overthrown - that was the Glorious Revolution, and William and Mary ascended.

I went back and read it, and I had misunderstood...while he IS a consort, his Official Styling doesn't include consort, whereas Camilla's would. Sorry...RIF on me.

[QUOTE=MysticCat;2004311]Fixed your post for you. http://www.gamershood.com/forum/imag...s//flag006.gif

Agreed, though I predict a relatively short reign for Charles, like Edward VII.

Even with the Queen, Prince Phillip has no "monarch status."
QUOTE]

You're right, I just used the wrong word for what I meant. I just kinda meant the monarchy in general (which is used by many to represent the UK Royal Family, if technically incorrect) instead of the actual "Monarch". But yes, you're right.

No. He is a Prince Consort. In fact, he could be a King Consort if he wanted to; neither of those have any "royalty" attached to it. It's just a name. Both the same and up to royal discretion. When you say that King is higher than Queen, this isn't a game of cards. It's much more complicated than that.

Ah, gotcha.

FYI to anyone wondering, the "style" is how the royal is referred to formally (in Philip's case: His/Your Royal Highness). Prince Phillip's formal style and title in full is: His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth, Baron Greenwich, Royal Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Knight of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Grand Master and First and Principal Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the British Empire, Member of the Order of Merit, Companion of the Order of Australia, Extra Companion of the Queen's Service Order, Royal Chief of the Order of Logohu, Canadian Forces Decoration, Lord of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, Privy Councillor of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, Personal Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty.

More commonly, he is simply referred to as His Royal Highness, The Duke of Edinburgh.

Gesundheit. :eek:

This is a lane swerve, but I am completely impressed by all of this royal knowledge of my fellow GCers. I feel educated.

Try fitting all that into a monogram. ;)

This all reminds me of my "If Cinderella's father was royal enough to marry a woman with a title, why wasn't Cinderella royal enough to marry the prince (according to some telling like Ever After)?" Thread.

Quick question, but this was inspired by my suit guy when buying a suit.

Americans, why are you so enthralled with royalty?

Because we don't have an equivalent.

Listen, I would take QEII over Obama any day. Charles, well....there would be discussion first.

That was his joke, but he was serious about it.

His complete quote was, "Look for America to have fought so hard against the monarchy, we are so enthralled by them. Think about that when buying your suit and tie, and the particular occasion it is for, and what type of image you want to project when you walk into the room."

I care less about your politics, but if it is political reasons, I'll put you in the category of loving to be ruled by bloodline.

;)

Why are Americans enthralled with celebrities generally? I think it's a specialized form of our celebrity-enthrallment, fed, as k_s says, by our not having an equivalent.

There's also the British-American connection involved -- it's really only British royalty we're so enthralled with. I mean, Quick! Someone name the heir to the Dutch or Swedish throne without looking it up.

Then there's the pageantry. We may not want all that to-do here, but there's no denying it can be fun to watch them do it; they do it better than anyone.

And finally, for some of us there are the historical connections and implications as well. I mean, they've been doing this for 1000+ years.

ETA:

Apples to oranges, though. She's a Head of State without being a Head of Government. An American president is both. You might feel differently if she was pushing a political agenda instead of having to stay above politics.

And as I type I think that may be another factor in American fascination with the British royalty. I think to a greater or lesser degree, many of us envy the idea of a nationally unifying figure (in theory at least; I know there are certainly those in Britain who'd prefer to abolish the monarchy) who is above politics. That's what we don't have. I've often thought that in some ways, the flag is the closest equivalent we have in that regard.

That's one of the things I was explaining to my wife.

At one time Britain had their hand in everything in the world. They are better marketers.

I'm glad you brought up the star gazing, I wonder is it psychological. We don't have Kings and Queens but we have Hollywood and Camelot.

Queen Beatrix van Oranje-Nassau is the current queen, Willem -alexander (to be named Wilhelm) is expected to take over in a few years. He'll be the first King in a century. He's married to Maxima Zorreguita (Argentinian) and has 3 young daughters: Amalia, Alexia and Ariane


Heir to the Swedish throne is newlywed Victoria (who is Amalia's godmother)



But I live in Europe ;)

I can see why he is part of the Order of the Thistle and the Order of the Garter, but what connection does he have to Canada, Papua New Guinea and Australia besides being married to their Sovereign? Can those orders extend membership to people not of the country?

I actually knew the Dutch Queen because she's on the back of the Dutch Euro! :)