Most Annoying Royal

[tiaraprin]

Originally posted by Chatleen+May 30th, 2004 - 3:23 am--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Chatleen @ May 30th, 2004 - 3:23 am)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Prince Philip has never been know to be tactful--on a state visit to China in 1986, he met some British students and told them to leave as soon as possible or they would end up with "slitty eyes" Now, if that isn't a kick in the head!!

What a charming fellow Makes me wonder, what he thinks of Princess Alexandra Christina of Denmark :o :) [/b][/quote]
Very valid point Chatleen!!!

[tiaraprin]

Originally posted by Georgia@May 30th, 2004 - 8:28 am
I would have to say, Princess Micheal of Kent is the most annoying Royal. Her racist comments in New York are just the lastest in a long list of gaffes made by her that embarrass the British Royal Family

Amen Georgia!! I live in New York where she made her latest gaffe and reported the story here from our news sources!

[renats]

All the time, none of them. But I find very annoying who ever is being over-talked about(or over-valued) during the/a specific time.

[nouwrein]

Originally posted by renats@Jun 1st, 2004 - 11:34 pm
All the time, none of them. But I find very annoying who ever is being over-talked about(or over-valued during the/a specific time

Same here :flower:

[Iain]

For me it has to be Diana.

[royal_sophietje]

explain please??

Just curious: when she was alive, everybody adored her. Now she is dead, everyone hates her. Why??

Don't forget when your answer is that she is annoying "because she still gets press attention, and I'm not interested in that kind of stories. Let go of her", that that is due to people who wants to cash in on her or wants to blame her for everything.

[Helena]

when alive not everybody adored her, the media chose to adore her. A woman who puts her entire private life on the street, without any regard for the feelings of her children is very annoying indeed, no matter what the reasons for her revelations were. Her firsat and formost responsibility were her children & by writing such a book she clearly dd not have their welfare in mind.

Most annoying to me:

1) Johan-Friso of the Netherlands (and Mabel)
2) Diane of Wurttemberg
3) Margarita of Bourbon-Parma

[royal_sophietje]

Well, what would you do if your man had a another woman?? Ordinary people would be angry, and so are princes and princesses.

If I was married with a noble, royal or other public person, and he would cheat at me, he can go. No matter how big the headlines and how big the scandal. Anyone may know it. I'm not going to sit down quietly and listen to the court that I have to hold up my marriage for the public and that I have to fake that I'm happy while I'm not.

And so thought Diana too.

[Lalla Meriem]

Originally posted by wymanda+Jan 29th, 2004 - 8:09 am--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (wymanda @ Jan 29th, 2004 - 8:09 am)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-sky@Jan 27th, 2004 - 9:56 pm
Prince E-A
Legally, he is not a prince, as the kingdom of Hanover ceased to exist in 1848.

I have to correct you here. Prince Ernst is legally a prince of Great Britain and Ireland. As a direct descendant of King George III he holds this title by right of birth. [/b][/quote]
Actually, EA isn't legally a Prince of anything.

I assume you are referring to The Letters Patent of January 1, 1864 (Queen Victoria) that stated that the title of Prince of Great Britian and Ireland with the style of Royal Highness would only be held by children of the monarch and male line grand children. Male line great-grand children were accorded the title, as well, with only the style of Highness. This applied to the decendants of Queen Victoria and King George III.

However, The LP of Jan. 1, 1864 was superceded by the LP of November 30, 1917.

I would point out that even if it hadn't be replaced by the LP of Nov. 30, 1917 he would still NOT be a prince of Great Britian and Ireland under the LP of 1864 because it only allows the title as far as male line great grand children. That is 3 generations from George III (with only the style of Highness, to boot).

The current Ernst August, Prince of Hannover (born 1954) is the great-great-great-great-great grandson of George III. Thus, far more than a great grandson of GIII as required under the 1864 LP.

The line being George III ---- Ernst August I, King of Hannover (Jun 5, 1771- Nov 18, 1851) m. Duchess Friederike of Mecklenburg-Sterliz ----- George V, King of Hannover (May 27, 1819-jun 12, 1878) m. Princess Mary of Saxe-Altenburg ----- Ernst August, Prince of Hannover (Sept. 21, 1845-Nov. 14, 1923) m. Princess Thyra of Denmark ------- Ernst August, Duke of Brunswick (Nov. 17, 1887-Jan. 30, 1953) m. Princess Viktoria Luise of Prussia ----- Ernst August, Prince of Hannover (March 18, 1914-Dec. 9, 1987) m. Princess Ortrud of Scheleswig-Holstein --- our current EA husband of Caroline of Monaco.

There was also a Royal Warrant issued June 17, 1914 allowing the eldest son and children of The Duke of Brunswick (then reigning and husband of Princess Thyra of Denmark) to hold the title of Prince of Great Britian and Ireland witht he style of Royal Highness. This RW was also, however, replaced by the 1917 LP. So, he is a no go for being a Prince of GB under this one, as well.

The Letters Patent of November 30, 1917 allow for the title of Prince/ss and the style of Royal Highness only for the child of a monarch of the United Kingdom and male line grand children. And, also for the eldest male grandchild of a living Prince of Wales (Prince William's oldest son, for example).

The LP of 1917 went on to state that all other forms of Royal Highness, Highness and Serene Highness and the title of Prince/ss would cease except where already grand and remaining [unrevoked]. Thus, any pretense of the Hannovarian's to be British Prince/ss was ended.

In 1931 The Duke of Brunswick (after he had lost his throne) decreed that his family would remain Prince/ss of Great Britian and Ireland with the style of Royal Highness. He had no authority to do this as he was not the monarch of Great Britian. The British Sovereign alone has authority over the titles of his/her domain. Any pretense to use British styles under this decree is superflous and moot.

To make a very long story short EA and his family are not Prince/ss of Great Britian in any context legally. In fact, after the dissolution of the German monarchy all German titles ceased to be titles and became mere surnames with no rank, privledge, or precedance. Their styles (highness, ect) were also lost at this time. So, EA is legally a prince of nothing with no style. He does, however, have a nice pedigree and a very long "surname."

[mgrant]

Originally posted by Lalla Meriem+Jun 13th, 2004 - 7:34 am--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lalla Meriem @ Jun 13th, 2004 - 7:34 am)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

I have to correct you here. Prince Ernst is legally a prince of Great Britain and Ireland. As a direct descendant of King George III he holds this title by right of birth.

Actually, EA isn't legally a Prince of anything.

I assume you are referring to The Letters Patent of January 1, 1864 (Queen Victoria) that stated that the title of Prince of Great Britian and Ireland with the style of Royal Highness would only be held by children of the monarch and male line grand children. Male line great-grand children were accorded the title, as well, with only the style of Highness. This applied to the decendants of Queen Victoria and King George III.

However, The LP of Jan. 1, 1864 was superceded by the LP of November 30, 1917.

I would point out that even if it hadn't be replaced by the LP of Nov. 30, 1917 he would still NOT be a prince of Great Britian and Ireland under the LP of 1864 because it only allows the title as far as male line great grand children. That is 3 generations from George III (with only the style of Highness, to boot).

The current Ernst August, Prince of Hannover (born 1954) is the great-great-great-great-great grandson of George III. Thus, far more than a great grandson of GIII as required under the 1864 LP.

The line being George III ---- Ernst August I, King of Hannover (Jun 5, 1771- Nov 18, 1851) m. Duchess Friederike of Mecklenburg-Sterliz ----- George V, King of Hannover (May 27, 1819-jun 12, 1878) m. Princess Mary of Saxe-Altenburg ----- Ernst August, Prince of Hannover (Sept. 21, 1845-Nov. 14, 1923) m. Princess Thyra of Denmark ------- Ernst August, Duke of Brunswick (Nov. 17, 1887-Jan. 30, 1953) m. Princess Viktoria Luise of Prussia ----- Ernst August, Prince of Hannover (March 18, 1914-Dec. 9, 1987) m. Princess Ortrud of Scheleswig-Holstein --- our current EA husband of Caroline of Monaco.

There was also a Royal Warrant issued June 17, 1914 allowing the eldest son and children of The Duke of Brunswick (then reigning and husband of Princess Thyra of Denmark) to hold the title of Prince of Great Britian and Ireland witht he style of Royal Highness. This RW was also, however, replaced by the 1917 LP. So, he is a no go for being a Prince of GB under this one, as well.

The Letters Patent of November 30, 1917 allow for the title of Prince/ss and the style of Royal Highness only for the child of a monarch of the United Kingdom and male line grand children. And, also for the eldest male grandchild of a living Prince of Wales (Prince William's oldest son, for example).

The LP of 1917 went on to state that all other forms of Royal Highness, Highness and Serene Highness and the title of Prince/ss would cease except where already grand and remaining [unrevoked]. Thus, any pretense of the Hannovarian's to be British Prince/ss was ended.

In 1931 The Duke of Brunswick (after he had lost his throne) decreed that his family would remain Prince/ss of Great Britian and Ireland with the style of Royal Highness. He had no authority to do this as he was not the monarch of Great Britian. The British Sovereign alone has authority over the titles of his/her domain. Any pretense to use British styles under this decree is superflous and moot.

To make a very long story short EA and his family are not Prince/ss of Great Britian in any context legally. In fact, after the dissolution of the German monarchy all German titles ceased to be titles and became mere surnames with no rank, privledge, or precedance. Their styles (highness, ect) were also lost at this time. So, EA is legally a prince of nothing with no style. He does, however, have a nice pedigree and a very long "surname." [/b][/quote]
OUCH!!! (That's the truth hurting :P )

[tiaraprin]

Now that was a statement Mgrant!! Bravo to you!! And Lalla Meriem got it all down right--kudos to you also!

[tiaraprin]

Originally posted by royal_sophietje@Jun 13th, 2004 - 6:04 am
Well, what would you do if your man had a another woman?? Ordinary people would be angry, and so are princes and princesses.

If I was married with a noble, royal or other public person, and he would cheat at me, he can go. No matter how big the headlines and how big the scandal. Anyone may know it. I'm not going to sit down quietly and listen to the court that I have to hold up my marriage for the public and that I have to fake that I'm happy while I'm not.

And so thought Diana too.

BRAVO RoyalSophie!!!!!!!!!! I love the way you think!!!!

And Diana staying in a sham of a marriage was a good lesson for the boys also???

[hillary_nugent]

she's not royal but close enough and she annoys me with her existence ^__^..............CAMILLA PARKER-BOWLES *shudders* just typing her names makes me *shudder*

hahahahaha

*still shuddeing*

[Helena]

Well, what would you do if your man had a another woman?? Ordinary people would be angry, and so are princes and princesses.

If I was married with a noble, royal or other public person, and he would cheat at me, he can go. No matter how big the headlines and how big the scandal. Anyone may know it. I'm not going to sit down quietly and listen to the court that I have to hold up my marriage for the public and that I have to fake that I'm happy while I'm not.

And so thought Diana too.

Of course I would divorce him! Considering the circumstances I do not question the divorce & I kno that she had a hard time, BUT telling all these things to journalists like Diana did, publishing a book etc ...has a devastating effect on your children! If Diana was such a good mother as everybody claims she was, she would have spared her children and would not have cooperated with people like Andrew Morton.

[royal_sophietje]

Don't forget everybody was already writing about the state of the marriage before it could be publicly seen that is was over. So the children already got their part. I guess it was the best for the children. And Diana always talked about it with the boys why she did some things.

Diana was a good mother, but she had her faults. My mum is a good mum too, but she has her faults also.

[royal_sophietje]

Camilla Parker Bowles gives me the Woops!!!

[hillary_nugent]

Originally posted by royal_sophietje@Jun 14th, 2004 - 7:11 am
Camilla Parker Bowles gives me the Woops!!!

she has the same affect on me too...she must give off bad vibes hahahaha

[tiaraprin]

Originally posted by hillary_nugent+Jun 15th, 2004 - 3:09 am--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hillary_nugent @ Jun 15th, 2004 - 3:09 am)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-royal_sophietje@Jun 14th, 2004 - 7:11 am
Camilla Parker Bowles gives me the Woops!!!

she has the same affect on me too...she must give off bad vibes hahahaha [/b][/quote]
Camilla Parker-Bowles has been know to have many effects on people--Woops, vomiting spells , anger moments, etc!!!

[Charles]

Originally posted by emsaeva@Jan 29th, 2004 - 3:14 am
Yes, I am sorry to say, that I think Diana, Princess of Wales, even at rest, is the most annoyong royal. Even though she was not technically a royal at the time of her death, I waive that fact because there comes a point where I am sick of hearing about her so much. JMO. Every day a new accusation comes forth. I know way more about her love life than I would ever care to. There are many more interesting members of the BRF. I am sorry if I offended anyone. I am just offering my honest opinion :grrr:

It's not fair to call Diana Princess of Wales annoying based on that. Surely, she was the most *annoyed*, I'd say.

[MoonlightRhapsody]

Originally posted by tiaraprin+Jun 16th, 2004 - 11:30 pm--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (tiaraprin @ Jun 16th, 2004 - 11:30 pm)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

she has the same affect on me too...she must give off bad vibes hahahaha

Camilla Parker-Bowles has been know to have many effects on people--Woops, vomiting spells , anger moments, etc!!! [/b][/quote]
She gives me the eeby-jeebies...