Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To find the royal family fascinating part 2

999 replies

MagicKingdomDizzy · 29/04/2019 20:43

Hello everyone, here's thread 2.

I'd be very grateful if someone could do a clicky link to the last one. Still can't figure it out.

Thanks!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
24
EdWinchester · 30/04/2019 20:09

I thought Eugenie was stunning, and looked far nicer than Kate or Meghan

I really disagree with this. I thought Kate looked great, but prissy and with weird conical boobage. Meghan looked amazing - completely stylish.

Did not like Eugenie's dress - too stiff.

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 30/04/2019 20:13

Eugenie was a lovely bride and actually her wedding was much the nicest to watch. No uniforms, just a family wedding, albeit a vair posh one.

On the baby thing, if it has been born, delaying an announcement this long could be an ill judged move. There's no reason why an announcement couldn't be made and them still be left alone to enjoy their first days together. If the baby turns out to be days old by the time we get to know about it I think people will feel short changed, even with the statement they put out.

I might not love Meghan quite as much if she's not pregnant any more Angry

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:13

That's perfectly true Lyra, but it doesn't mean it couldn't have been thought of if the will was there - or maybe if they wished to live in a manner more fitted to the current century

I think they've done plenty to get stick for. I just think it's a bit off slating them for doing something that, at the time, they were completely expected to do.

The royal family, and the public view of it, changed massively between 1988 when Beatrice was born and when Louise was born in the 2000's.

There was no talk yet of a slimmed down monarchy, Andrew wasn't yet seen as a disaster etc. They were just princesses with a Queen for a granny.
Things are different now, which is why I think it's not certain either way if Harry's kids will be HRH Prince/ss before Charles is King or not.

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 30/04/2019 20:14

Meghan looked amazing - completely stylish.

She did look beautiful but her dress wasn't a good fit.

Original poster
MagicKingdomDizzy · 30/04/2019 20:16

Myimaginarycathasfleas

Yes, I would agree a delay in at least telling people the baby is born wouldn't go down well.

OP posts:
MoreProseccoNow · 30/04/2019 20:18

I reckon that they would need to announce within 48hrs.

noodlenosefraggle · 30/04/2019 20:20

Thing is "cousin of the monarch" is this baby's destiny. Same as Beatrice and Eugénie. So you might as well start as you mean to go on. To an extent, anyway.

Exactly. Stating they will not be full time Royals from the start will give them a chance to make their own way in life, as it eventually will for Charlotte and Louis. We just don't need a load of minor Royals sitting around on the public purse openin fetes for a living.

MissParple · 30/04/2019 20:20

Kate - looked good but she shouldn't have done her own makeup. Too much blusher
Meghan - looked good but that dress did not fit her properly
Eugenie - looked good but I wasn't wowed by her dress.

I find royal wedding frocks too formal. But it's not as though any of them could have followed the strappy Carolyn Bessette Kennedy style.

Original poster
MagicKingdomDizzy · 30/04/2019 20:20

Myimaginarycathasfleas

Meghan's dress did look at bit sack like. Eugenie’s was a much better fit and she looked curvier too, rather than scrawny.

OP posts:
catofaragon · 30/04/2019 20:30

@MagicKingdomDizzy it's already been announced that Edward will one day become Duke of Edinburgh.

Cambridge and Sussex were available for William and Harry so when Harry was given a title it was inevitable that he would be Sussex as the only other Dukedom available was Connaught which is potentially controversial as in Ireland.

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:32

I think this baby, plus Charlotte and Louis will end up being full time royals. Even though there's less royal engagements now in 20 years time there will be a lot less full time working royals.

Prince Charles will be 90 if he's still around. Camilla would be 91 and with her osteoporosis I would be very surprised if she's still full time. Anne will be 88, Andrew 80, Edward 75 and Sophie 74.

The Queen, Philip, the Duke and Duchess of Kent, the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester and Princess Alexandra will no longer be around.

William's children, and Harry's, I think will be full time royals to replace Anne, Andrew and Edward and co unless there is a massive shift in royal roles I think.

catofaragon · 30/04/2019 20:33

I've seen both Meghan's dress and Eugenie's at Windsor Castle. Meghan's looked extremely simple and nothing special yet I thought she looked stunning on the day. It's clear she wore the dress, not the dress wore her. The veil was stunning.

I loved Eugenie's dress but didn't think it was so lovely when I saw the real thing. However her evening gown, which I wasn't sure about, was absolutely stunning. The most surprising thing for me was the outfit worn by Princess Beatrice for her sister's wedding. It was tiny - she must be a slip of a thing!

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:35

Cambridge and Sussex were available for William and Harry so when Harry was given a title it was inevitable that he would be Sussex as the only other Dukedom available was Connaught which is potentially controversial as in Ireland.

Clarence, Kendal and Ross were also available amongst others.

As you say though, Connaught was never going to be recreated.

Thisismadness · 30/04/2019 20:36

This is all fascinating, thanks to everyone for their expertise and interesting stories! What will be the position when/if Beatrice and Eugenie have kids? I don’t think E’s husband has any title so does that mean the kids wouldn’t? Is it normal that he doesn’t or would he have been offered one (and could still be)?

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:38

Thisismadness

Their children wouldn't be titled. Would be similar to Zara and Peter's children.

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:39

In years gone by thier husband's may have been offered a title, Princess Alexandra's husband was offered a title and declined it. As a resut her children are untitled. She's similar to B & E (although she has worked as a full time royal).

MissParple · 30/04/2019 20:40

That's interesting that Zara is free to accept sponsorship from brands whereas her cousins can't. That must bring in a pretty penny. More than makes up for not having a royal title I'd say.

TooManyPaws · 30/04/2019 20:41

Princess Marina was always Princess Marina as she was a Princess of Greece and Denmark in her own right; I don't think she had to give it up like Philip as a)she was female and b) her children would be further from the throne. Alice probably became a princess by marriage, certainly without the Dukedom she would have been HRH Princess Henry, just like Meghan. Incidentally, she was the oldest ever member of the BRF, beating the QM by a couple of years.

The Duchess of Kent is only trotted out occasionally for big family occasions as she's given up royal duties and they've effectively been separated for years. I remember that she had somewhat of a breakdown and she credited her daughter with getting her through it. She had had two late pregnancies several years after her other children; one had to be aborted due to measles, the other was a stillbirth, listed as Lord Patrick Windsor. A few years after that she converted to Roman Catholicism; she was Anglican at the time of her marriage so it didn't affect her husband or children's place in the succession,though at least one of her sons converted afterwards and some of her grandchildren. Some years ago she was revealed to be working as a music teacher, Mrs Kent, in Hull. I think she's still living apart from her husband and has dropped the HRH though still entitled to it, calling herself Katharine Kent.

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:49

Princess Marina was always Princess Marina as she was a Princess of Greece and Denmark in her own right; I don't think she had to give it up like Philip as a)she was female and b) her children would be further from the throne. Alice probably became a princess by marriage, certainly without the Dukedom she would have been HRH Princess Henry, just like Meghan. Incidentally, she was the oldest ever member of the BRF, beating the QM by a couple of years.

Marina requested permission from the Queen to return to be HRH Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent after her husband's death, rather than being HRH The Dowager Duchess of Kent, and was given specific permission to do so.
Although apparently the press often refered to her as Princess Marina rather than The Duchess of Kent anyway (even though she did give up her Greece and Denmark title on marriage)

When Alice was widowed later she was offered the same courtesy by the Queen (even though she wasn't originally a Princess in her own right), again to save being HRH The Dowager Duchess.

I think it says a lot for the Queen's affection for Princess Alice that she offered it.

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:51

Some years ago she was revealed to be working as a music teacher, Mrs Kent, in Hull

Really quite ballsy of her to just decide what she wanted to do and do it.

She is the one who married the Duke in Yorkminster, isn't she?

AppleKatie · 30/04/2019 20:54

Some years ago she was revealed to be working as a music teacher, Mrs Kent, in Hull.

Really? This is the thread that just keeps giving!

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 30/04/2019 20:57

I didn't know the Duchess of Kent was separated from her husband. I had heard she was quite poorly, and she certainly doesn't look herself on the rare occasions we see her. I associate her mainly with Wimbledon. She had the loveliest gentle face.

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:57

www.theguardian.com/news/2004/nov/01/guardianobituaries.monarchy

This obituary for Princess Alice amused me no end...

"After visiting India, she undertook what she called her "great adventure", smuggling herself into Afghanistan, disguised as an Afghan, entering by a secret overland route, into an area off limits to women. She was undetected by the Afghans, but there was "a great row" when news of her escapade reached the British authorities."

As you do, just smuggle yourself into Afghanistan in 1929

Also "Then, in 1935 she was called home, due to her father's failing health. She was 34 and having had "a good innings," decided to settle down."

She sounds like she was an absolute character!

Cookit · 30/04/2019 21:12

Andrew always makes a big deal of his daughters being the only “blood princesses” of their generation but Louise is just as much a “blood princess” of that generation just her parents are less self serving. That always really annoys me about Andrew.

BettyBooJustDoinTheDoo · 30/04/2019 21:26

I think the Duchess of Kent is a very kind woman, remember when she comforted the late Yana Navotna?

To find the royal family fascinating part 2