The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #61  
Old 02-22-2014, 08:34 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
All very interesting ideas.
As far as Joseph Wenzel of Leichtenstein goes, with his Douglas heritage from his mother, the Douglas heritage might be of some importance to Scots historians--and maybe the people. The Douglases were at one time as prominent as the Stuarts, if not more so. Princess Alice of Gloucester was a Douglas--Help, Ish, tell me if that's wrong, I think it's right.
It would be nice to give Beatrice a job as governor, though. She needs a job, doesn't she. Harry could be a very popular governor, with his red hair. Fit right in to a significant minority of the Scots population, including the Stuart descendants, of which there are many many many of us.
The Leichtenstein folks are rather arrogant, presumably, which would not go over well, but I think their Stuart creds are good, although of course very "thin". After so many generations, genetics get thin...but some things persist remarkably.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 02-22-2014, 08:42 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
I was being facetious with my suggestions of course. I would expect them to demand a Scotsman for that job and as much as the BRF are called 'British' they don't really come across as anything other than English with no real connection to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 02-22-2014, 08:45 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,670
Oh thank goodness!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 02-22-2014, 08:58 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I was being facetious with my suggestions of course. I would expect them to demand a Scotsman for that job and as much as the BRF are called 'British' they don't really come across as anything other than English with no real connection to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.
They may come across as that way to you on the other side of the world but the BRF have really strong connections with both SCotland and Wales.

The problem is NI and I dont the the issue is with the BRF rather thn with the Government (any flavour) because of security issues. I believe that left to themselves the BRF would be there more often, but Government says no.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 02-23-2014, 12:04 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariel View Post
All very interesting ideas.
As far as Joseph Wenzel of Leichtenstein goes, with his Douglas heritage from his mother, the Douglas heritage might be of some importance to Scots historians--and maybe the people. The Douglases were at one time as prominent as the Stuarts, if not more so. Princess Alice of Gloucester was a Douglas--Help, Ish, tell me if that's wrong, I think it's right.
The Douglas' were a very important clan and they did hold a lot of power during periods of Scottish history, but it's important to remember that they themselves were never royals. It's kind of like the Nevilles in English history; a very important family that even married into the English Royal houses at times, but not royal itself.

The Stuarts were a similar family, until fortune fell their way - a Stuart married the daughter of the King, then when the King's only son died without any children the line passed on through his daughter to the Stuarts - it doesn't make the Stuarts prior to then any more important, because the royal line didn't flow from them. A comparison would be the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. While the Royal House is extremely significant in British history they aren't all that significant - from a purely British royal perspective - prior to the marriage of Victoria and Albert.

Likewise, Joseph Wenzl of Liechtenstein isn't significant because his grandmother was a Douglas at birth. He's significant because his grandfather's brother is the senior descendant of Charles I, and thus the claimant to Charles' titles in the same sense that Elizabeth II is the senior descendant of George I and thus the claimant to George's titles (or at least his British ones). Owing to the fact that Franz of Bavaria has no descendants when he dies his claims pass on to his brother, and to his brother's descendants, of which Joseph Wenzl is in the direct line (consider how HM inherited a title that was once her uncle's).

The Douglas' do come into play here, although not in a way you might expect. If the Duchess of Alba can be considered a claimant owing to the fact that she is the senior descendant of James II through his eldest illegitimate son then there are actually 5 different lines of possible claimaints to the British throne(s) through the Stuarts (more come up if you consider the York and Lancasters).

The first two claims are the Fuke of Bavaria, as the senior legitimate descendant of Charles I, and HM as the senior legitimate descendant of Sophia of Hanover. A third claim brings forth the Dowager Duchess of Calabria, owing to a marriage leading to the Duke of Bavaria's line being illegal under British law. Under that argument, the Duke's line is illegitimate, and instead the Dowager Duchess' line is the senior legitimate line from Charles I.

Next is the Duchess of Alba, who is the senior descendant of James II through his eldest (illegitimate) son James FitzJames, 1st Duke of Berwick. This only comes into play because James' legitimate line died out very quickly. The fifth claimaint would be the current Duke of Buccleuch, as the senior descendant of Charles II through his eldest (illegitimate) son, James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth. The Duke of Buccleuch, Sir Richard Montagu Douglas Scott, is the only claimant other than HM to have any actual connection to the UK. And he is related to Princess Alice and the Gloucesters; his grandfather was Princess Alice's elder brother.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 02-23-2014, 09:02 AM
HereditaryPrincess's Avatar
Heir Apparent
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Greater London, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,156
I saw the "Royalty of Scotland and Ireland" thread and was wondering if there were any Scottish clans that are related to the last Scottish Kings somehow. Could any of their members become King/Queen of Scotland if they decide to have a separate monarchy? Just a thought.
__________________
"She is a little angel and like her name, she brings sunshine even on cloudy days. From the bottom of our hearts, we would like to thank each and every one of you for your lovely best wishes for our daughter. She feels very loved". HRH Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland on her daughter, HRH Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland.
Join my new group!
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 02-24-2014, 12:48 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: brisbane, Australia
Posts: 502
Quote:
Originally Posted by HereditaryPrincess View Post
I saw the "Royalty of Scotland and Ireland" thread and was wondering if there were any Scottish clans that are related to the last Scottish Kings somehow. Could any of their members become King/Queen of Scotland if they decide to have a separate monarchy? Just a thought.
Personally I think either the McDonalds or the Campbells. The Campbells power was near to being equal to the Stewarts at times and at its height The Lordship of the Isles (McDonalds) was effectively a Kingdom of the Highlands and the Isles. That was why it was so important for the Stewarts to destroy the Lordship.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 02-24-2014, 12:57 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
Thanks for your deep knowledge of history, Ish, applied to this matter.

And fearghas and HereditaryPrincess, that's a good idea to think of other clans besides the Stuarts. I am appalled that the Stuarts destroyed the Lordship of the Isles, but I suspected that were not always up to the highest standard of behavior, to put it mildly.
The Isles Lordship sounds promising indeed. I know little about them, but I know a woman who is a direct descendent of Joan of Acre and of "the Isles".
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 02-24-2014, 02:26 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
The current Lord of the Isles, of course, is Prince Charles who no doubt would cease to hold his many Scottish titles if his mother was no longer The Queen.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 02-24-2014, 05:09 PM
LadyGabrielle's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: kapaa, United States
Posts: 1,149
O.k. Maybe I'm not understanding this. The Duchess of Alba god forbid as Queen of Scotland, I find difficult to swallow considering Queen Elizabeth I presumed was already the Queen of Scotland. And when she is gone Prince Charles becomes King of Scotland. I thought this was part of her kingdom. Am I missing something? Maybe I'm not making the connection correctly.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using The Royals Community mobile app
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 02-24-2014, 05:16 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyGabrielle View Post
O.k. Maybe I'm not understanding this. The Duchess of Alba god forbid as Queen of Scotland, I find difficult to swallow considering Queen Elizabeth I presumed was already the Queen of Scotland. And when she is gone Prince Charles becomes King of Scotland. I thought this was part of her kingdom. Am I missing something? Maybe I'm not making the connection correctly.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using The Royals Community mobile app
The Duchess of Alba story started because a journalist said it wasn't a done deal that the Queen would be Monarch of an independent Scotland and here is an alternative.

It will NEVER happen. It was a piece of mischief making.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 02-24-2014, 06:21 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyGabrielle View Post
O.k. Maybe I'm not understanding this. The Duchess of Alba god forbid as Queen of Scotland, I find difficult to swallow considering Queen Elizabeth I presumed was already the Queen of Scotland. And when she is gone Prince Charles becomes King of Scotland. I thought this was part of her kingdom. Am I missing something? Maybe I'm not making the connection correctly.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using The Royals Community mobile app

The Queen isn't Queen of Scotland. She isn't Queen of England or Wales either.

Her title is Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.


The Scots may vote for independence and if they do they then have to decide what sort of country they wish to be - republic or monarchy. If they choose the latter then they have to decide on who will be the monarch - do they want to share a monarch with countries from whom they have just split for instance? or do they want their own monarch?

That is where the idea of The Duchess of Alba comes in.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 02-24-2014, 06:33 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariel View Post
Thanks for your deep knowledge of history, Ish, applied to this matter.

And fearghas and HereditaryPrincess, that's a good idea to think of other clans besides the Stuarts. I am appalled that the Stuarts destroyed the Lordship of the Isles, but I suspected that were not always up to the highest standard of behavior, to put it mildly.
The Isles Lordship sounds promising indeed. I know little about them, but I know a woman who is a direct descendent of Joan of Acre and of "the Isles".
It's not like the Stuarts simply decided that they wanted the Isles and as such took out the Lords. Alexander of Islay chose to support James Mor in his claim to the Scottish throne against James I - and ended up losing the subsequent war. Alexander lucked out and was granted grace by the king, but his son, John, wasn't so lucky - after John lead a revolt against James IV, which included signing a treaty with the English king Edward IV, the Isles were firmly brought under the control of the crown. The lesson of this was basically that if you lead a revolt against the king and lose you're going to end up losing the independence you had before hand. It's not poor behaviour on the part of the Stuarts; it's completely in line with how other monarchs would have reacted at the time.

The problem with looking at other "clans" is that it treats the Scottish throne as if it was one that was conquered by the English. This isn't true; Scotland didn't enter into a relationship with England in the same way that Ireland or Wales did. While the English did at times try to conquer Scotland, and after the union of the two thrones often did act as though it was the conqueror, ultimately what happened was the two thrones merged through marriage. The English Henry VII's daughter married the Scottish James IV, and when the male-line of Henry died out the English throne passed to the Scottish monarch, then James VI. To look at other clans who are descended from Scottish monarchs is to really make things unnecessarily complicated - at what point do you cut off the "Scottish" monarchs. James VI was also an English monarch, so do his descendants count (and if they do, you end up with the Duke of Bavaria, the Dowager Duchess of Calabria, or HM as the contenders)? If James VI doesn't count, then you kind of have to go back a bit - he was the only surviving child of the last purely Scottish monarch, Mary, who in turn was the only surviving legitimate child of the previous monarch, James V, who was also the only surviving legitimate child of the previous monarch, James IV. James IV wasn't the only surviving child of his father, James III, but his brothers didn't have children. You would literally have to go back to James II in order to find descendants of a Scottish king who was not also an English king.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 02-24-2014, 09:35 PM
LadyGabrielle's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: kapaa, United States
Posts: 1,149
Thanks iluvbertie. I guess I don't know as much as I thought afterall. Here I was under the impression that she was also Queen of Scotland. Hmm. I better do more reading or pay better attention to things. I get it now. :)

Sent from my SCH-I545 using The Royals Community mobile app
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 03-01-2014, 06:58 AM
Lenora's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 2,056
Quote:
Last queen of Scotland? Salmond says an independent Scotland wd keep the Queen, but what if she doesn't want to stay?
The next king or queen of Scotland - Channel 4 News
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 03-06-2014, 04:01 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 19
AristoCat said:

Quote:
Right now she's Queen of Britain and the Commonwealth, but without Scotland, there is no "Britain" and she would no longer be a Queen in Scotland.
Actually, She is queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. My understanding is that it is Scotland that makes Britain 'Great'. The name Britain relates to the original Roman province that covered what is now England & Wales. Therefore the name post-Scottish independence should be the United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 03-31-2014, 11:53 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Makati, Philippines
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
The fifth claimaint would be the current Duke of Buccleuch, as the senior descendant of Charles II through his eldest (illegitimate) son, James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth. The Duke of Buccleuch, Sir Richard Montagu Douglas Scott, is the only claimant other than HM to have any actual connection to the UK. And he is related to Princess Alice and the Gloucesters; his grandfather was Princess Alice's elder brother.
Thanks for the wonderful information, but just a quick question.. Since we are now taking into consideration of the illegitimate lines of possibly succeeding the throne, wouldn't the natural children of James II preceed that of the natural children of his older brother Charles II? so after the Dukes of Alba who were the descendants of James FitzJames, Duke of Berwick, shouldn't be the next in line be the descendants of James II eldest daughter Henrietta FitzJames which includes the Earls Waldergrave, Dukes of Grafton and Earls Spencer? so wouldn't the Waldergraves, Graftons and Spencers somehow precede the Buccleuchs?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 03-31-2014, 12:21 PM
ff462's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Oxford, United Kingdom
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nudge View Post
Actually, She is queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. My understanding is that it is Scotland that makes Britain 'Great'. The name Britain relates to the original Roman province that covered what is now England & Wales. Therefore the name post-Scottish independence should be the United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland.
Well isn't Britain just a general term for the whole of the British area? I think it would be odd to have Northern Ireland listed as something separate in the name when it could be considered part of Britain as well.

It could just be the United Kingdom of Britain, or an even more simplified version would be the Kingdom of Britain (seeing as it wouldn't really be united any longer).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 03-31-2014, 01:41 PM
Jacknch's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Grundisburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nudge View Post
AristoCat said:



Actually, She is queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. My understanding is that it is Scotland that makes Britain 'Great'. The name Britain relates to the original Roman province that covered what is now England & Wales. Therefore the name post-Scottish independence should be the United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland.
I'm not sure whether I entirely agree with you...the term "Great Britain" was devised as a way of distinguishing between the island of Britain (the areas now covered by England, Scotland and Wales OR as you say just England and Wales) and the French region of Brittany.
__________________
J
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 03-31-2014, 02:12 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by ff462 View Post
Well isn't Britain just a general term for the whole of the British area? I think it would be odd to have Northern Ireland listed as something separate in the name when it could be considered part of Britain as well.



It could just be the United Kingdom of Britain, or an even more simplified version would be the Kingdom of Britain (seeing as it wouldn't really be united any longer).

Great Britain is the name for the Island that is composed of England, Scotland, and Wales. The United Kingdom of Great Britain refers to the fact that it is a union between to kingdoms - that of England (and Wales) and Scotland.

Britain is a short form version of Great Britain. Therefore, without Scotland it ceases to be Great Britain or Britain at all, and resumes being England (and Wales).

If Scotland left, then it would be the United Kingdom of England and North Ireland.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
referendums, scotland, scottish independence


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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit duchess of cambridge dutch royal history engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games olympics ottoman picture of the month pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:12 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]