The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #701  
Old 11-02-2015, 12:38 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
One thing for sure is that if Philip did that, it would add fuel to the fire of the republican movement in Australia and most likely his wife would make him sleep in the stables with her horses. Even though Abbot made a huge mistake reviving the knights and dames, I do think Australians would take offense if Philip returned his.

Just to clarify here. HM is the epitome of diplomacy and most likely would advise Philip against returning his order. Best move in this kind of situation would be to do nothing. The issue has been rectified and that's all that matters.
I understand the diplomacy issue, but I'm sorry, I would've thrown that order in their face. People showed their behinds over him receiving the knighthood and I would've shown mines, if I was in his position.
__________________

__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #702  
Old 11-02-2015, 04:21 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyRohan View Post
I'm not sure the biggest mistake that Tony Abbott did, was to revive kinghts and dames in the Australian order hierarchy. If done correctly, as with most other things, it should had been explained properly to the Australian people, as a way to honour Australias finest, by way of an expert panel recommendation, and not at a PMs whim. I think a Dame Kate Blanchett or Dame Helen Reddy would be more understood than knighting a Prince.
The whole idea wouldn't have been supported in Australia as it is seen very much as a hangover of the colonial and imperial days. Had they never been removed in the first place that would have been fine but having been without them for around 30 years it didn't make sense to resurrect them. We have out own honours system and don't need a 'foreign' styling to add to that.

The UK is seen as a foreign, almost unconnected country here amongst many people - for instance we don't even have to teach any British history at all here anymore other than that they were on our side in the two world wars. Other than that - nothing. Even the unit on Middle Ages now it mainly European and no longer British or English based as it was 20 years ago.

We are an Asian country and a Pacific nation - not a British one any more and don't need British honours.

Quote:
The wider issue about Australia and the monarchy will flare up from time to time, but it always puzzles me, because the only argument I seem to ever pick up on, is that the Australian head of state should be Australian. Very few people say that it must be an elected president. Why does the Australian Monarchists not advocate adopting a branch of the current Royal Family as their own, ie Prince Henry of Wales as King of Australia? If done, I'm sure the 2 monarchist models, the one today and one with a resident Royal Family, would have FAR more support than a retired politician or businessperson being elected as figurehead every X years.
That idea might have worked 100 years ago but not anymore. It isn't just an Australian as a Head of State but one that we choose - not one who gains the job because of who their parents are. It is called 'democracy' when a nation is able to choose all its leaders.

Quote:
A future monarchy in Australia is entirely possible, even after the Queens reign, but the republican campaign should be countered, by planting the thoughts of a homegrown monarchy, to set Australia apart, from every other dull republic in the world, where few people even know who the head of state is, and even believe in politicians ability to handle power.
The monarchists know that that idea won't fly in Australia. It would split the monarchists and not gain any republicans who want to choose their Head of State (a strange idea for many monarchists I know - having been one a few short years ago) but a true democracy must also choose the Head of State who can represent them on the world stage. The Queen and BRF can't do that for Australia - quite simple really.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #703  
Old 11-02-2015, 04:56 PM
LadyRohan's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden, Slovenia
Posts: 395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The whole idea wouldn't have been supported in Australia as it is seen very much as a hangover of the colonial and imperial days. Had they never been removed in the first place that would have been fine but having been without them for around 30 years it didn't make sense to resurrect them. We have out own honours system and don't need a 'foreign' styling to add to that.

The UK is seen as a foreign, almost unconnected country here amongst many people - for instance we don't even have to teach any British history at all here anymore other than that they were on our side in the two world wars. Other than that - nothing. Even the unit on Middle Ages now it mainly European and no longer British or English based as it was 20 years ago.

We are an Asian country and a Pacific nation - not a British one any more and don't need British honours.



That idea might have worked 100 years ago but not anymore. It isn't just an Australian as a Head of State but one that we choose - not one who gains the job because of who their parents are. It is called 'democracy' when a nation is able to choose all its leaders.



The monarchists know that that idea won't fly in Australia. It would split the monarchists and not gain any republicans who want to choose their Head of State (a strange idea for many monarchists I know - having been one a few short years ago) but a true democracy must also choose the Head of State who can represent them on the world stage. The Queen and BRF can't do that for Australia - quite simple really.
There is really no real arguments in this post. There are 40 or so monarchies in the world today, and by far, most of them are the most democratic nations in the world. An extra election does not a democracy make.

Google for the lists of the most advanced democracies in the world, and you'll find that 7-8 of the top 10 are monarchies. That's quite impressive, in a world where republics outweigh monarchies 5 to 1.

I don't believe the argument has been properly presented, and can be done, even in a modern world. The Australian republic does not have enough support to overthrow the monarchy, every opinion poll makes that clear, so for those who believe in the monarchy and that is is the best safeguard a democracy can have, a different solution can be made, to ensure an authentic Australian monarchy, historically connected with, but independent of, Britain.

To claim that most Australians feel no connection with Britain is not supported by facts, but is just a personal claim. The amount of people studying in, working in, traveling between the UK and Australia, proves otherwise. In the end, when it comes to historical chances, they stir up something inside most citizens, that we don't connect with in our everyday lives. History, identity, links, language, culture and friendship matters, and thankfully, monarchists are good at envoking those things.
__________________
"He who has never failed to reach perfection, has a right to be the harshest critic" - Queen Elizabeth II
Reply With Quote
  #704  
Old 11-02-2015, 05:27 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,079
I just wish 'in the name of God [you would] GO'...

You no longer feel any affinity with us, nor we with you...

So hurry up, and sort yourselves out !
Reply With Quote
  #705  
Old 11-02-2015, 07:21 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyRohan View Post
To claim that most Australians feel no connection with Britain is not supported by facts, but is just a personal claim. The amount of people studying in, working in, traveling between the UK and Australia, proves otherwise. In the end, when it comes to historical chances, they stir up something inside most citizens, that we don't connect with in our everyday lives. History, identity, links, language, culture and friendship matters, and thankfully, monarchists are good at envoking those things.
Of course most Australians feel a connection with Britain! Most Australians are of British stock, and it is the land of our ancestors. We have a shared history and culture and language. My father's parents were born in England, and my mother's grandparents were born in England and Ireland. Many of us want to see the places our forebears lived, and will continue to do so when Australia is a republic. There is no reason there should be any lessening of the emotional ties.

I think it is important to not overlook the fact that both governments have been moving towards the severing of the formal ties between us for over 100 years. The Australian Constitution itself is part of that chain of weakening links. It is not something sudden that has been dreamed up by republicans here in the last 20 years. It's a natural progression. The last link is the formal one that sees the British monarch as our Head of State, and I think it's time to sever it. However a lot of Australians take the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" line of reasoning on the issue, as I used to. After all, the British Monarch doesn't interfere in the way we do things here so it doesn't make any difference in our day to day lives.

It's just that an increasing number of us want an Australian head of state as a matter of principle. We want someone representing us on the world stage who puts us first, not second, third, fourth, or whatever. It matters to me, but a helluva lot of Australians couldn't care less or don't think it's important to bother about. There is still a great deal of affection for QEII here and I think a lot of Australians would feel it to be a betrayal of all HM's years of service to the Commonwealth to ditch her at this stage of her life. I don't think there will be the same sense of loyalty to her successors though.

Even if the majority of Australian citizens wanted the change, the actual move to a republic here is not going to be simple. Iluvbertie and I both now want an Australian Head of State, but I think we want different models for an Australian republic. I don't want a big change. I want our President's role to be largely ceremonial. I want Parliament to rule, not one person with a bunch of un-elected advisors. I basically just want a President to step into the shoes currently worn by the Governor-General. I would be happy to have a President appointed by two thirds majority of joint sitting of Parliament, or by an electoral college or similar, but it seems most Australians want to have a say in the choice of President. If we are to have a directly elected President, I'd prefer it to be along the lines of the Irish model, not the system they have in the USA. It think deciding on the republic model for the country is what is going to delay the transition.

Oh, lest there be any doubt, I applaud Turnbull for reversing Abbott's decision to reintroduce knighthoods.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #706  
Old 11-02-2015, 07:33 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 219
LadyRohan, I have always supported the idea of a resident Australian monarch, but, unfortunately, the time for that option passed long ago and today would never get through a referendum. If the Queen moved permanently to Canberra, we would still need a Governor-General to keep the wheels of government turning. The Constitution ascribes certain duties directly to the Governor-General, not the Queen. So with a resident monarch, the Constitution would need a major overhaul to remove the Governor-General. Even for someone as popular as Prince Harry, it would require bipartisan support, and virtually no opposition, to just get to a referendum, let alone win it. So, no, it is not a viable option.

As for knights and dames, they were doomed from the moment of their reintroduction. The media’s virulent hatred of Mr Abbott is primarily to blame, along with the (deliberate?) misunderstanding that Imperial Honours were coming back. But Mr Abbott also made the mistake of excluding AKs and ADs from the governance of the Council of the Order of Australia. His notorious captain’s call exposed the Duke of Edinburgh to enough ridicule to spoil any chance of knights and dames getting a fair go. Quite clearly there was little public support for the reintroduction of AKs and ADs. But, as you said, if it had been handled differently, it might have succeeded. I was certainly very happy to see them back, and I know many people who supported the revival. But it didn't work, so for the good of the Order of Australia, it should now be left as it is. It would be undignified for AKs and ADs to bounce in and out according to the personal inclinations of a Prime Minister. It also would be unfair on the Queen to have her issue updated Letters Patent every time a change in government or leader resulted in a reversal of attitude.
Reply With Quote
  #707  
Old 11-02-2015, 08:13 PM
Sun Lion's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Such a shame a big fuss was made over Prince Philip's knighthood and now the honour system has been scraped. If I was Philip, I would give my Order to Charles to take back to Australia and let them know I didn't need it.

The request for Prince Philip to recieve the award was made by Buckingham Palace - and yes, a serious political mistake by the Prime Minister of the day to accede to it.

(I don't think the "letting it be known" overture would have been made to an avowed Oz republic PM.)

Mr Abbott didn't throw Her Majesty under the bus to save his political skin at the time of the uproar, but wore it to his own detriment.

Some commentators are saying Australia is already a republic, a "Crown Republic".

I googled that - quite interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #708  
Old 11-02-2015, 11:27 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,190
In many ways Australia is a Crown republic. There has been especially 'republicanism by stealth' in the last forty years or so in measures taken by some State governments.
Reply With Quote
  #709  
Old 11-03-2015, 01:30 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Lion View Post
The request for Prince Philip to recieve the award was made by Buckingham Palace.
There is no evidence whatsoever to support this claim. It is just a rumour spread by a journalist, Greg Sheridan, who says he is one of Mr Abbott's friends. He denies that Mr Abbott was the source of his information, but refuses to confirm who was. In other words, it's just as likely he made up the entire story. I suppose it is possible that someone at Buckingham Palace or Government House pointed out that with the reinstatement of knights and dames, the Duke of Edinburgh AC would no longer have Australia's highest honour. But it beggars belief that the Duke of Edinburgh would actually complain to the Queen about having only an AC while the Prince of Wales had an AK (which is what happened according to Greg Sheridan). I doubt the Duke of Edinburgh gives a damn over his rank in the Order of Australia. I think the truth is quite simple: it was Mr Abbott's captain's call, a nice gesture that he thought the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh would appreciate. Unfortunately it well and truly backfired. As Mr Abbott later acknowledged, it was an injudicious decision.
Reply With Quote
  #710  
Old 11-03-2015, 02:49 AM
Sun Lion's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubb Fuddler View Post
There is no evidence whatsoever to support this claim. It is just a rumour spread by a journalist, Greg Sheridan, who says he is one of Mr Abbott's friends. He denies that Mr Abbott was the source of his information, but refuses to confirm who was. In other words, it's just as likely he made up the entire story. I suppose it is possible that someone at Buckingham Palace or Government House pointed out that with the reinstatement of knights and dames, the Duke of Edinburgh AC would no longer have Australia's highest honour. But it beggars belief that the Duke of Edinburgh would actually complain to the Queen about having only an AC while the Prince of Wales had an AK (which is what happened according to Greg Sheridan). I doubt the Duke of Edinburgh gives a damn over his rank in the Order of Australia. I think the truth is quite simple: it was Mr Abbott's captain's call, a nice gesture that he thought the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh would appreciate. Unfortunately it well and truly backfired. As Mr Abbott later acknowledged, it was an injudicious decision.

You and I will have to agree to disagree about this Chubb Fuddler.
Reply With Quote
  #711  
Old 11-03-2015, 04:36 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Lion View Post
You and I will have to agree to disagree about this Chubb Fuddler.
Gladly Sun Lion, if there was something to disagree about. But all we have is a rumour, based on hearsay, without a single shred of evidence to back it up, so there's not really anything to agree or disagree about.

Australians for Constitutional Monarchy pushes the oxymoron that Australia is a so-called crowned republic, as if it is the perfect response to silence calls for Australia to become a republic. But as a republican friend of mine said, while laughing with derision, "but the crown is the problem." It's not ACM's brightest campaign, but, inexplicably to me, some monarchists seem to think it is a winning argument.
Reply With Quote
  #712  
Old 11-03-2015, 01:43 PM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale View Post
I just wish 'in the name of God [you would] GO'...

You no longer feel any affinity with us, nor we with you...

So hurry up, and sort yourselves out !
Hear! Hear!
Reply With Quote
  #713  
Old 11-03-2015, 05:56 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
Hear! Hear!
And where would that leave all the Australians (and there are millions of us) who do feel an affinity with the U.K. and want to remain a monarchy? There are plenty who emigrated, as I did, and still have family, friends and other links back to Britain. There are also many whose parents emigrated from Britain.

There's a great deal from certain posters that there are no links left between the British and the Australians and that Australia looks to Asia with no feeling for Britain at all. Well, I say that view is grossly exaggerated.
Reply With Quote
  #714  
Old 11-03-2015, 07:13 PM
Sun Lion's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
And where would that leave all the Australians (and there are millions of us) who do feel an affinity with the U.K. and want to remain a monarchy? There are plenty who emigrated, as I did, and still have family, friends and other links back to Britain. There are also many whose parents emigrated from Britain.

There's a great deal from certain posters that there are no links left between the British and the Australians and that Australia looks to Asia with no feeling for Britain at all. Well, I say that view is grossly exaggerated.

It's the usual shouty Left Curryong.

They all thought "things" would change when Mr Abbott, a true Conservative, was ousted by Mr Turnbull, who has expressed views more to their liking.

(I hope you caught Mr Turnbull not only backing our coal industry last week Curryong, but throwing into the arena that we should have a serious look at ways of making money from nuclear. So much for solar panels and wind generators.)

He hasn't quite turned out the way the Left had hoped.

The whole "let's go republic" is just a storm in Her Majesty The Queen of Australia's fine bone china tea-cup, when it all comes down to it.
Reply With Quote
  #715  
Old 11-03-2015, 07:40 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,190
I hope so, Sun Lion. There is no resurgent calls for a republic among the people I know. For most it's way away on the far back burner. Too many other things to worry about.
Reply With Quote
  #716  
Old 11-05-2015, 05:38 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 219
If Australia were to become a republic, we would not be cutting links with Great Britain. That has already happened, and Australia is a fully independent sovereign nation. Tiresome clichés about mothers and apron strings miss the point. Our monarchy is not the monarchy of Great Britain; it is the monarchy of Australia, comprised of the Queen and the Governor-General. To become a republic Australia would not have to sever ties with the British monarchy, it would have to abolish the Australian monarchy. For some Australians, there is no doubt still a deep affinity with Great Britain, but for me the affinity is with the Queen as Queen of Australia. For as long as I can remember, the Queen has always been there as part of our lives. When the Queen last visited in 2012, at a reception at Parliament House, Canberra, the nation’s capital, the then Prime Minister Julia Gillard said that:
many heads of state and government are welcomed within these walls. But in this, the home of Australian democracy, you are a vital constitutional part, not a guest. Just as in this nation you can only ever be welcomed as a beloved and respected friend.
I thought that nicely described the place the Queen has in the hearts of many Australians. Mr Abbott, then Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, also gave a fine speech that evening, pointing out that while
eleven Prime Ministers, and no less than seventeen opposition leaders, have come and gone, for sixty years you have been a presence in our national story, and given the vagaries of public life, I’m confident that this will not be the final tally of politicians you have outlasted.
How true, it’s now fourteen Prime Ministers and nineteen opposition leaders. Anyway, republicans have yet to come up with any reasons to convince me that a change is needed.

The rhetoric of republicans tends to make me laugh, with its ever so serious indignation at the shocking iniquity of monarchy, and the sickly sweet sentimentality of dashed childhood dreams. No young Australian can aspire to be our head of state? What an intolerable disgrace! Republicans also strike me as having an inordinate interest in what other countries think about us. Is it a lack of self-confidence, or an arrogant belief that Australia is a far more important country than it actually is? I don’t know. But, quite frankly, I don’t care if someone in Ecuador thinks Australia is still a British colony.

Then there’s sport. Prince Harry supported the English rhythmic gymnastics team in an epic battle against Australia! How can we bear the shame? Well, we can send the Governor-General along to support our team if we want. Australia is an Asian country, we are told. After several trips to China since 1993, as well as Japan, Thailand and Cambodia, I get the impression Asia may not see it that way. Finally, the great republican trump card: Democracy. They seem to take it for granted that monarchy and democracy are not compatible. But according to the World Democracy Ranking of 2014, six of the top ten most democratic nations in the world are monarchies, with the Kingdom of Norway at the top of the list. Australia is twelfth; pretty good out of a list of 112 nations, so I don’t think our monarchy is an impediment to democratic government.

No, none of these issues strike me as important enough to ditch our constitutional monarchy. I would much rather stick with our interesting, quirky arrangement, with its lingering glamour of royalty, than trade it in for the dull grey tones of generic republicanism.
Reply With Quote
  #717  
Old 01-24-2016, 02:27 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,121
Australian State call for the Queen to be dumped as head of state* | Daily Mail Online

Quote:
Almost all state and territory leaders have joined forces to call for an Australian head of state in a declaration hatched by the Australian Republican Movement.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who is a founding member of the ARM, said his 'commitment to Australia having Australian as head of state is undiminished,' but believes it should not happen until the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, according to The Herald Sun.

Australian Republican Movement chair Peter FitzSimons said it was a clear declaration of desired independence by almost all the country's state and territory leaders.
Not until HM passes though.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #718  
Old 01-25-2016, 05:48 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
It will take time to sort out the details anyway.

Perhaps we'll just make the Queen President. Monarchists Graciously Offer Compromise Where Queen Is President | SBS Comedy
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #719  
Old 01-25-2016, 06:18 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 219
It was a cheap publicity stunt from the Australian Republican Movement (ARM) that demeaned the premiers and chief ministers. A "Declaration of Desired Independence" on change.org is no way for seven heads of government to propose a fundamental change to a nation's form of government (particularly as they would be the first to reject change.org as a legitimate source of legislative proposals). To make matters worse, they give it a title that echoes an American declaration: that is just too corny for words, not to mention deliberately misleading (Australia already is a fully independent sovereign nation). If they really want to kickstart a change they should agree on a proposal and put it on the agenda for the Council of Australian Governments (COAG). All this head of state rhetoric is irrelevant. Republicans need to provide detailed information on how a president will replace the Queen and the Governor-General, how a president will be chosen, and how the state constitutions will be changed.

Australians for Constitutional Monarchy (ACM) is not much better, with their misguided fixation on proving that the Governor-General is head of state, and that Australia is already a republic, a crowned republic. Both sides need to state boldly what they believe in, and stop going on about heads of state. We either remain a monarchy with the Queen and the Governor-General, or become a republic by replacing them with a president. That is the core issue, and it is all based on the text of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia; the rest is just window dressing.
Reply With Quote
  #720  
Old 01-25-2016, 06:46 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,190
I can remember politicians as well as TV personalities, actors, journalists, celebrities etc all being for a republic last time. No doubt the chattering classes will be out again next time as well. It did them no good last time and won't on the next occasion. This has still got to have an acceptable model, it's still got to get through a referendum and the Queen may live for another decade. These premiers and PM are probably not going to be in power when the referendum is held. I'm certainly not worrying about it until it occurs.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
australia, british commonwealth, elizabeth ii, governor general, julia gillard, monarchy versus republic, parliament, queen elizabeth ii


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Queen and Canada: Residences, Governor General, etc... Duchess Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh 552 11-14-2016 07:12 PM
The Queen and New Zealand: Residences, Governor-General, etc... wbenson Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh 51 09-08-2016 11:29 PM
Brazilian Imperial Palaces, residences etc Marengo The Imperial Family of Brazil 23 03-14-2015 10:01 PM
General Discussion about Dutch Royal Residences Tina Dutch Royal Residences 20 10-06-2014 05:13 AM
The Queen and the Caribbean: Residences, Governors-General, etc... wbenson Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh 48 02-25-2012 05:56 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit british catherine middleton style chris o'neill coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary eveningwear crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events denmark duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles prince nikolaos princess madeleine princess marie princess marie daytime outfit princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:05 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises