Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Princess Anne the only female behind the hearse

538 replies

jeanne16 · 18/04/2021 07:35

While the funeral was beautiful, I couldn’t help feeling annoyed that Princess Anne was the only female to walk behind the hearse. Surely all the grandchildren could have been included. Instead we see Beatrice, Eugenie and Zara tottering along on high heels. It would have been so much better to see them take an equal place with the men.

OP posts:
JudgeJ · 18/04/2021 20:55

@Laggartha

Apparently if you stay with the royals at Balmoral, the men go down to breakfast but the women are served breakfast in bed.

Traditionally just married women would breakfast in bed.

Not just at Balmoral, it was the norm in all grand houses. Downton Abbey 101!
melj1213 · 18/04/2021 21:01

Who would be the regent then if Charles and William were assasinated for example?

If Prince George were to succeed to the throne before his 18th birthday on 22 July 2031 Prince Harry would serve as regent but only if he lived in the UK (as required by the 1937 Regency Act)

In the event that Prince Harry would be unable to serve as regent (a possibility since he moved to the US), the next in line would be Prince Andrew, followed by Princess Beatrice and then Princess Eugenie.

It basically follows the line of succession, just bypassing those in line who would also be underage (Charlotte, Louis, Archie, Harry's second child etc)

JudgeJ · 18/04/2021 21:02

The Earl of Snowdon is Anne's son, not her spouse. He inherited the title on the death of Anne's ex husband Anthony Armstrong Jones.
Has anyone told Anne of all this???

CallmeHendricks · 18/04/2021 21:05

"By the way, I only found out recently that Princess Anne had a thing with Camilla's ex Andrew Parker Bowles. It must be the horses."

I don't know about Anne, but I gather Andrew Parker Bowles had "things" going with half the landed gentry. It is said that Jilly Cooper based her character Rupert Campbell-Black on him. Yet he was painted as the poor cuckolded husband when Camilla got back with Charles.

Isthereaduckinthehouse · 18/04/2021 21:05

@SenecaFallsRedux

If a minor (under 18) becomes monarch, there is a regency until the monarch turns 18. Under the regency act currently in effect, the regent would be the person over the age of 21 who is the closest in line to the throne. That person is Harry, and after him, Andrew, and then Beatrice, and Eugenie.

The Act could be amended, for example, to make Kate regent. Something similar happened in 1953 when the Act was amended to allow Prince Philip to be regent during the minority of his children; otherwise the regent would have been Princess Margaret.

I thought it was that alright. They laugh about security for them and it's not really an issue if Harry was taken out on his own in LA, but if they managed to take out Charles and William then poor Harry would have to drag Meghan back here lol. Kicking and screaming 'over my dead body'. He wouldn't do it, so it would be Andrew then? That would be the end of the monarchy surely? Ye, they really can't afford to have Charles and William in reach of a sniper. I know that I jest, but that is the reality of the protection they have to have. It must be fucking hell to not be able to move without protection.
NearlyAlwaysInsane · 18/04/2021 21:11

It wasn't your family's funeral. Yes, the Royal Family is a bit less private than most of us, but how would you like it if a total stranger decided to genderise your funeral and get all judgemental because Auntie Sheila didn't have another woman walking with her?

And I made up 'genderise', by the way, or so my spellchecker tells me. Now off to trademark it.

Isthereaduckinthehouse · 18/04/2021 21:11

Can you just imagine if one of them was assasinated and they call in the relatives. Can you think of anyone who might have a grudge against then? Well apart from 5 continents no, he was well liked by all.

Babyroobs · 18/04/2021 21:14

@CallmeHendricks

"By the way, I only found out recently that Princess Anne had a thing with Camilla's ex Andrew Parker Bowles. It must be the horses."

I don't know about Anne, but I gather Andrew Parker Bowles had "things" going with half the landed gentry. It is said that Jilly Cooper based her character Rupert Campbell-Black on him. Yet he was painted as the poor cuckolded husband when Camilla got back with Charles.

Have you been watching the Crown to find that out ! ?
Isthereaduckinthehouse · 18/04/2021 21:15

Which makes it all the more interesting actually that Harry does not have security provided for him. I wonder whether more has been agreed in terms of him not being next in line to William in the event of Charles and William's deaths while George is still under age? I'd be a bit pissed off if part of my job description as child was to take on a role, temporarily, if my father and brother died.

JustLyra · 18/04/2021 21:17

My DS (it’s due to his obsession that I had to learn royal stuff) is absolutely convinced that the reason Prince Michael of Kent wasn’t there was a designated survivor type thing (well designated regent in this case)

CallmeHendricks · 18/04/2021 21:25

@Babyroobs, "Have you been watching the Crown to find that out ! ?"

No! I haven't watched any of it, actually. I get all my gossip from the tabloids! Grin

melj1213 · 18/04/2021 21:36

I wonder whether more has been agreed in terms of him not being next in line to William in the event of Charles and William's deaths while George is still under age?

Harry isn't next in line though - George, Charlotte and Louis are all still ahead of him in succession. If Charles and William both die George will still become King, regardless of if he is 14 or 74 when it happens the only caveat is that if he is under 18 he will need a Regent to offically represent him until he comes of age.

Currently the role of regent goes to the next person in succession that is over 21, but that doesn't make them King or Queen - the underage child will still be the King/Queen. So if Harry became Regent (which he may not do if he doesn't want to return to live permanently in the UK) he wouldn't be King, he would just be representing King George until he turns 18.

Equally there is a possibility that a change could be made so that Kate could become Regent until her children come of age, as was done with the Queen/Prince Philip where an Act was passed so that Prince Philip would have been Regent until Charles turned 18 if the Queen died, as otherwise Princess Margaret would have been Regent.

SenecaFallsRedux · 18/04/2021 21:36

Prince Michael of Kent would be interesting for a number of reasons. He lost his place in the line of succession when he married a Catholic so couldn't have been regent then. But since the law was changed to allow people in the line of succession to marry Catholics, Michael is back in.

However, I think there were people not in attendance who are higher up: Charles Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley and the Chatto sons, and the children of the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent.

CecilyP · 18/04/2021 21:41

Prince Michael is only 50th in line of succession. We seem to be killing off members of the royal family at great speed this evening!

JustLyra · 18/04/2021 21:42

@SenecaFallsRedux

Prince Michael of Kent would be interesting for a number of reasons. He lost his place in the line of succession when he married a Catholic so couldn't have been regent then. But since the law was changed to allow people in the line of succession to marry Catholics, Michael is back in.

However, I think there were people not in attendance who are higher up: Charles Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley and the Chatto sons, and the children of the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent.

He would have went.

Yes, it will rather burst his bubble when he realises, but it was a fun thought.

I have a feeling that “first in line not in attendance” will be the obsession for a while.

JustLyra · 18/04/2021 21:42

*He would have been interesting

SenecaFallsRedux · 18/04/2021 21:43

Fun historical fact: Henry VIII was under 18 (just barely) when he became king. His grandmother Lady Margaret Beaufort was regent for him until he turned 18.

Isthereaduckinthehouse · 18/04/2021 21:50

@melj1213

I wonder whether more has been agreed in terms of him not being next in line to William in the event of Charles and William's deaths while George is still under age?

Harry isn't next in line though - George, Charlotte and Louis are all still ahead of him in succession. If Charles and William both die George will still become King, regardless of if he is 14 or 74 when it happens the only caveat is that if he is under 18 he will need a Regent to offically represent him until he comes of age.

Currently the role of regent goes to the next person in succession that is over 21, but that doesn't make them King or Queen - the underage child will still be the King/Queen. So if Harry became Regent (which he may not do if he doesn't want to return to live permanently in the UK) he wouldn't be King, he would just be representing King George until he turns 18.

Equally there is a possibility that a change could be made so that Kate could become Regent until her children come of age, as was done with the Queen/Prince Philip where an Act was passed so that Prince Philip would have been Regent until Charles turned 18 if the Queen died, as otherwise Princess Margaret would have been Regent.

I stated 'while George is underage'. First sentence.
melj1213 · 18/04/2021 21:53

Even if George is underage, he would still be King.

Harry (or Andrew, Beatrice or Eugenie if Harry didn't move back to the UK so was ineligible) would be Regent until George's 18th birthday, but that does not make them the monarch.

Pixxie7 · 18/04/2021 21:54

Does it matter, I certainly don’t think it is anything to do with feminism it could easily have been the duke’s request.

Isthereaduckinthehouse · 18/04/2021 21:58

@melj1213

Even if George is underage, he would still be King.

Harry (or Andrew, Beatrice or Eugenie if Harry didn't move back to the UK so was ineligible) would be Regent until George's 18th birthday, but that does not make them the monarch.

Yes, we understand that if you read through the thread rather than rushing to put your tuppence worth in.
Isthereaduckinthehouse · 18/04/2021 21:58

@Pixxie7

Does it matter, I certainly don’t think it is anything to do with feminism it could easily have been the duke’s request.
Nothing matters anymore.
ElphabaTheGreen · 18/04/2021 22:13

@Onwardsandupwardswego

Should have put Mike tindell in between
Holding onto the collar of one and the ear of the other, shooting a ‘don’t you fooking try it’ expression to each of them at regular intervals en route.

Wearing latex gloves of course. Covid secure and all that.

Peregrina · 18/04/2021 22:20

... as was done with the Queen/Prince Philip where an Act was passed so that Prince Philip would have been Regent until Charles turned 18 ....

Is that correct? Back in 1953 the age of majority was 21.

I wonder whether we will see the landrover hearse again? No worse than a gun carriage IMO>

SenecaFallsRedux · 18/04/2021 22:26

@Peregrina

... as was done with the Queen/Prince Philip where an Act was passed so that Prince Philip would have been Regent until Charles turned 18 ....

Is that correct? Back in 1953 the age of majority was 21.

I wonder whether we will see the landrover hearse again? No worse than a gun carriage IMO>

The constitutional age of majority in 1953 (as well as before and since) for the monarch was 18.