The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2101  
Old 02-13-2015, 05:55 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoriaB View Post
I agree with you. But isn't that what monarchy is all about? The very existence of Kings and Queens not to mention an aristocracy has nothing to do with merit, it's all about elitism. From there it's a very short leap to honorary promotions.
Precisely. And in an era of increasing equality in all levels of society, when the very existence of such elitist and increasingly anachronistic institutions is questioned more and more, elements like these un-earned promotions attract attention to the "specialness" of the Royals in a way that is unhelpful to them and their cause.

I say "unearned" promotions rather than "honorary" for the reasons I have stated in another thread. I have no trouble with honorary appointments as long as it is made unambiguously clear they are honorary, as it was with Prince Michael's honorary naval ranks, etc.

As for the argument it is reasonable for the heir, at least, to get increasing ranks since you can't have a head of the armed forces having to salute officers who are senior to him in earned rank, this argument falls apart when you look what happens in the USA. I could be wrong but the American President seems to actually make decisions; the British Monarch seems to just do what he/she is advised by cabinet. Even if the President does not have more power, he is still Commander-in-Chief and there have been many presidents who served and attained fairly junior ranks, and of course Barack Obama has never been in the services. Perhaps the difference is the President is there because he has been voted in by the people and isn't just there because of accident of birth.
__________________

__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #2102  
Old 02-13-2015, 06:16 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 4,039
The Monarchy under Charles

The question is did the Queen act alone or the Navy make the decision in the Queen's name? The Honors List - most of them are not picked by the Queen but by the government and awarded by the Queen. So if you are a big party donor you are more likely to a gong than the plumber in Sheffield who volunteers with the elderly each week.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2103  
Old 02-13-2015, 06:26 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
The question is did the Queen act alone or the Navy make the decision in the Queen's name? [...]
It is not so relevant. Her Majesty can do nothing without a ministerial backing: The King is inviolable, the ministers are responsible. The Minister of Defence and the Prime Minister are accountable for the promotion of the Duke of York.

When the Minister of Defence or the Prime Minister would have opposed the promotion of the Duke, this would not have happened. It is as simple as that. The Queen's personal opinion is pretty irrelevant in this sort of automatic promotions. Now the Duke of York and Prince Michael have been promoted, this is the expression of the Government's decision with the Queen's assent.

Reply With Quote
  #2104  
Old 02-13-2015, 06:50 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 2,802
If Charles had castles restored, would this help England's tourism?
Reply With Quote
  #2105  
Old 02-13-2015, 07:32 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: many places, United States
Posts: 1,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla View Post
If Charles had castles restored, would this help England's tourism?
I would certainly think so. Plus many jobs both during restoration and competition would serve the local citizens. Just depends on their location and if people really want to stay there
__________________
Forgiveness is the fragrance the violet shed on the heel that crushed it - Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #2106  
Old 02-13-2015, 08:03 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
I agree, and I certainly think that if Charles decides it's a good idea and sets his mind to it, he will do a good job.

Here is a link to the documentary on the restoration of Dumfries House and I recommend it to anyone who hasn't seen it. It gives an insight into Charles' way of thinking and his dedication to such projects, and what they can achieve.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #2107  
Old 02-13-2015, 08:25 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,015
When people are talking about castles what are we meaning?


Those basically completely ruined castles - then no way can they be restored - the current approach by archaeologists is to NOT restore ruins but to preserve and conserve but not restore as they wouldn't be true restorations but really recreations using a modern interpretation of what a castle etc was like.


Next question - most castles were built over centuries - therefore to what century or time period would the castle be restored??? Another reason why archaeologists don't believe in restoring these places.


We also don't really 'know' what a specific castle was like. We know what castles were like 'in general' but not the specifics of castle xxxx compared to castle yyyy.
Reply With Quote
  #2108  
Old 02-13-2015, 08:27 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
When people are talking about castles what are we meaning?


Those basically completely ruined castles - then no way can they be restored - the current approach by archaeologists is to NOT restore ruins but to preserve and conserve but not restore as they wouldn't be true restorations but really recreations using a modern interpretation of what a castle etc was like.


Next question - most castles were built over centuries - therefore to what century or time period would the castle be restored??? Another reason why archaeologists don't believe in restoring these places.


We also don't really 'know' what a specific castle was like. We know what castles were like 'in general' but not the specifics of castle xxxx compared to castle yyyy.
I think they mean renovate. Use old pictures/paintings to try and recreate certain rooms, restore murals, fix mold etc. Not build up a ruin.
Reply With Quote
  #2109  
Old 02-13-2015, 08:33 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,957
We do not "renovate" castles in Britain. We leave them alone. What we do is put in guides, perhaps have a building which explains the history using models, graphics and maps but we do not rebuild or restore. English Heritage and the National Trust would have a blue fit!

What Charles did re Dumfries house was instigated because priceless Chippendale furniture, specifically designed for the House was to be sold off. He raised money through the PRince's Trust (and got a lot of criticism at the time) - about £20m.

He saved the furniture, and the house and has developed small businesses on the site to help make it self-funding in the future.

He didn't restore or renovate it.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #2110  
Old 02-13-2015, 08:35 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
I envisage restoration of the Cardiff Castle variety, not rebuilding crumbled Gothic churches.

http://edwardshart.co.uk/wp-content/...astle-2008.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
We do not "renovate" castles in Britain. We leave them alone. What we do is put in guides, perhaps have a building which explains the history using models, graphics and maps but we do not rebuild or restore. English Heritage and the National Trust would have a blue fit!
But if a building has not reached the stage of being beyond restoration, is it not a good idea to at least think about restoring it? As Charles says in the doco, should we not at least try to do something about it?

Quote:
What Charles did re Dumfries house was instigated because priceless Chippendale furniture, specifically designed for the House was to be sold off. He raised money through the PRince's Trust (and got a lot of criticism at the time) - about £20m.

He saved the furniture, and the house and has developed small businesses on the site to help make it self-funding in the future.

He didn't restore or renovate it.
But now, because the furniture is still there, a piece of history has been preserved.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #2111  
Old 02-13-2015, 08:39 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
We do not "renovate" castles in Britain. We leave them alone. What we do is put in guides, perhaps have a building which explains the history using models, graphics and maps but we do not rebuild or restore. English Heritage and the National Trust would have a blue fit!

What Charles did re Dumfries house was instigated because priceless Chippendale furniture, specifically designed for the House was to be sold off. He raised money through the PRince's Trust (and got a lot of criticism at the time) - about £20m.

He saved the furniture, and the house and has developed small businesses on the site to help make it self-funding in the future.

He didn't restore or renovate it.
I used renovate wrongly, as this is not my first language. But ofc the lived in palaces/castles is "renovated" as in restored when murals crack too much or if mold is found in a bathroom. Just as churches have their ceiling murals repainted I would think it normal that castles does to?
Reply With Quote
  #2112  
Old 02-13-2015, 09:03 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by hernameispekka View Post
I used renovate wrongly, as this is not my first language. But ofc the lived in palaces/castles is "renovated" as in restored when murals crack too much or if mold is found in a bathroom. Just as churches have their ceiling murals repainted I would think it normal that castles does to?
Sorry - I didn't realise (I think your English is good). We maintain the palaces/castles that are lived in; some would use the word conservation.

But the rules are very strict and therefore the cost is enormous for buildings such as Windsor Castle.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #2113  
Old 02-14-2015, 06:37 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
Sorry - I didn't realise (I think your English is good). We maintain the palaces/castles that are lived in; some would use the word conservation.

But the rules are very strict and therefore the cost is enormous for buildings such as Windsor Castle.
I understand that there are lot of rules (as it should be). But if he hired specialists to restore parts, I think it would be good :)
Reply With Quote
  #2114  
Old 02-14-2015, 09:59 AM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 4,039
One of the largest departments in the Royal Household is the Royal Collection where the take care of the art, furniture, tapestries etc that has been collected through out the years. This department was relatively small but the money brought in by touring the palaces and gift shops are used to finance its activities. So when you tour BP or Windsor Castle, you are helping to preserve its contents.




Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #2115  
Old 02-14-2015, 10:47 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Next question - most castles were built over centuries - therefore to what century or time period would the castle be restored??? Another reason why archaeologists don't believe in restoring these places.
Another aspect along these lines is that it is better to preserve the area where the ruins are because if left as much as possible in their original state (of decline even), historians and archaeologists and anthropologists can better determine more of the history of the site.

To recreate something that existed long ago would just be a replica. It would be like replacing the standing stones at Stonehenge with concrete blocks as it once was in its heyday. It may last but so much would be lost.

Charles, I think, is very interested in the preservation of things whether it be animal, vegetable or mineral. This is one reason why I believe that he will retain as much of the traditions as he possibly can.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #2116  
Old 04-09-2015, 07:26 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Balmoral, United Kingdom
Posts: 405
I would like Charles to go even further:
  • Scrap the royal train
  • His mother's cousins to retire
  • Announce that Beatrice and Eugenie will lose their title upon marriage
  • A merger of the two royal duchies with the Crown Estates
  • All costs of the monarchy, including all security and current Civil List payments (yes I know it's only for 2 people) to come solely from the Sovereign Support Grant (increased from merger with duchies)
Reply With Quote
  #2117  
Old 04-09-2015, 07:38 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,538
I think the Royal train will be scrapped when it can no longer be used, I can't see a new train being put into service and the current carriages are very old so even if the train carries on in Charles' reign (which it might as he uses it relatively a lot) it won't last much longer at all.
I don't think you can make the Queen's cousins retire but as they get older (the Duke of Kent has had a few health issues) they will probably do less and less until they support a few charities or military links that go with their Duchies.
I can't see Charles taking titles away from Beatrice & Eugenie, it would look petty and vindictive and would be seen as Charles doing something his mother might of disapproved. More likely the girls will be stripped of any privileges associated with the HRH title.
I read somewhere that Charles wanted the monarchy to be funded by the Crown Estates again (which it now is) so he might take this a little further but I can't see the Duchy of Cornwall going as Charles has given a lot of time and energy to it.

I do feel thought that Charles will make some big changes, I suspect he'll feel like he won't have a long reign (which of course he won't) so he might see it as his role to make big changes to the monarchy to 'improve it' for William, George and beyond.
Reply With Quote
  #2118  
Old 04-09-2015, 08:01 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal-blue View Post
Scrap the royal train
This would mean other means of transport and accommodation needed. The train is often used as an office on wheels and thus does double duty. It isn't a full train anyway but just a few carriages often added to a standard train when necessary.

Quote:
His mother's cousins to retire
Why? They have served the Queen all their adult lives so their thanks, from the new King is - get lost you are no longer wanted or needed. Great thanks from the new King and the British people.

Quote:
Announce that Beatrice and Eugenie will lose their title upon marriage
What if they are already married?

Again why?

Would you also expect that Harry's children - who will also be the children of the second son were to lose their titles?

Quote:
A merger of the two royal duchies with the Crown Estates
Again why?

These are the means of providing the monarch and the heir to the throne with a private income and is the means of actually supporting their day to day lives.

Remember that they don't get any form of salary on which to live so merging these duchies would remove any independent income.

Quote:
All costs of the monarchy, including all security and current Civil List payments (yes I know it's only for 2 people) to come solely from the Sovereign Support Grant (increased from merger with duchies)
Civil List hasn't existed since 2012 as it was replaced by the Sovereign Grant.

There is only the Sovereign Grant that covers the expenses of the Queen and Philip, maintenance of the royal palaces (that are millions behind at the moment), transport etc.

Adding all of the money together wouldn't cover the security costs let alone everything else.
Reply With Quote
  #2119  
Old 04-09-2015, 09:05 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 2,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
More likely the girls will be stripped of any privileges associated with the HRH title.
The privileges that Beatrice and Eugenie enjoys is being paid by Andrew.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
I do feel thought that Charles will make some big changes, I suspect he'll feel like he won't have a long reign (which of course he won't) so he might see it as his role to make big changes to the monarchy to 'improve it' for William, George and beyond.
There are not many changes he can do with a constitutional monarchy. The cousin problem will resolve itself and he will not force anyone to retire. If he wants the monarchy to be less expensive then he must cut down on staff and that is not possible if he / the monarchy shall continue to be responsible for Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, St James's Palace, Clarence House and the private part of Kensington Palace.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #2120  
Old 04-09-2015, 09:19 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
This would mean other means of transport and accommodation needed. The train is often used as an office on wheels and thus does double duty. It isn't a full train anyway but just a few carriages often added to a standard train when necessary.



Why? They have served the Queen all their adult lives so their thanks, from the new King is - get lost you are no longer wanted or needed. Great thanks from the new King and the British people.



What if they are already married?

Again why?

Would you also expect that Harry's children - who will also be the children of the second son were to lose their titles?



Again why?

These are the means of providing the monarch and the heir to the throne with a private income and is the means of actually supporting their day to day lives.

Remember that they don't get any form of salary on which to live so merging these duchies would remove any independent income.



Civil List hasn't existed since 2012 as it was replaced by the Sovereign Grant.

There is only the Sovereign Grant that covers the expenses of the Queen and Philip, maintenance of the royal palaces (that are millions behind at the moment), transport etc.

Adding all of the money together wouldn't cover the security costs let alone everything else.
Agree with you on all these points.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british, camilla, charles iii, charles of wales, coronation, crown jewels, duchess of cornwall, legacy, prince charles, prince of wales, queen camilla, titles, william v


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 Monarchy after Elizabeth II ysbel British Royals 515 09-28-2017 09:22 PM
Monarchy vs Republic marian Royalty Past, Present, and Future 393 08-14-2017 05:32 AM
The Monarchy in Greece Fireweaver The Royal Family of Greece 309 10-31-2016 05:54 PM
The Monarchy And The Media Alexandria Royal House of Norway 12 04-08-2004 04:06 PM




Popular Tags
affair best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events denmark duke of cambridge dutch earthquakes europe fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín kate king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy news november 2016 october 2016 picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince nicholas prince oscar prince philip princessanne princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:05 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises