The Windsors and Europe

[Hans-Rickard]

I agree that it is sad if this becomes the main thread from the funeral day and not the thread about the funeral itself BUT it's not an unimportant question. It is deeply irritating that all other monarchies can reschedile their agenda and send members from the family but not the british one because they are unable (or maybe unwilling) to reschedule their military inspections and ribbon cuttings, and everyone is expected to be indulgent with that ! That's the main point.

And don't come and tell me that i don't like the british R F now. I also criticize my own King (Carl XVI Gustaf) and his family from time to time. I like many of the members of the british royal family, especially The Queen, Philip and their 4 children but this was a very bad decision from them or the government or whoever it was who decided that they shouldn't go to Belgium in person.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

This comes off as very rude, I secretly hope they just weren't invited. I think it might be time for other royals to stop attending British events.

 

[mslewis]

I realize people on here love all royalty but, from the standpoint of a casual observer (me), this is just funny. You all have turned a mole hill into a huge mountain.

 

[marlene]

In order to give some possible clarification to the lack of BRF presence at the funeral you will have to go back into the earlier years of king Baudoin's rule.He took offence in regards to the British government's comments about his father (while his father was still alive) and had very frosty relations with them for a number of years following the incident.Eventually things regained a calmer perspective but I don't believe they were ever quite the same.

 

[mslewis]

This comes off as very rude, I secretly hope they just weren't invited. I think it might be time for other royals to stop attending British events.

And that would be so grown up, wouldn't it? And, you know what, not one person on earth would even notice if no other "royal" showed up at a British wedding or other occasion. You know why? Because, except for blogs like this, nobody knows any other royals so nobody would care.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I see this as a storm in a teacup. As a royal watcher for some years I was not surprised at all. George V made a conscious decision to separate his family from other European royals and that has stuck. They don't do things together. Their interrelatedness is quite distant. Sure Philip was born a Prince of Greece and Denmark but he doesn't make a big thing of that and hardly has much to do with the Danes at all - sees more of the Greeks of course because they live in London.


Since WWI there have only been two marriages of royals into Europe - the late Duke of Kent and The Queen. George VI however really wanted Elizabeth to marry a British aristocrat and not a foreign prince - he was won over to Philip as a man and not because of his title and status as a foreigner. The British public weren't that keen on him and he always had to keep his family low-key so as not to upset the Brits if he was visiting his German relations.


I don't think most Britain's cared about this event - how much coverage did it actually get in Britain? How many Brits even know that Belgium has a royal family?


I was there recently with some fellow teachers from Australia - educated people who teach History and I was the only one who knew that Belgium was still a monarchy - they all thought that Belgium had become a republic at the end of WWI when so many other monarchies were falling (mind you they knew Denmark still had a monarchy but were surprised when I said that Norway, Sweden, The Netherlands and Spain were also still monarchies).


On a world stage - the BRF rates - the others don't. They know that. They will turn up to British events because it actually gets them coverage elsewhere in the world whereas they own events simply don't get the coverage.


When the Queen or Philip passes there will be TV coverage all over the world - as there was for William' wedding and The Queen's Jubilee. How much coverage did this funeral get? I have seen no mention of it on the news bulletins I have watched here since it happened - nothing. If I hadn't read about her death on this board I would have never heard of it and I am sure that there are millions of other people who are the same - never heard of her or her death whereas when Philip dies or The Queen dies the situation will be very different as they are two of the best known figures in the world today.

 

[Iluvbertie]

And that would be so grown up, wouldn't it? And, you know what, not one person on earth would even notice if no other "royal" showed up at a British wedding or other occasion. You know why? Because, except for blogs like this, nobody knows any other royals so nobody would care.

My post, which follows yours, was trying to make the same point - but you said it so much more succinctly than I did.

The BRF rates on the world stage while the others don't - simple.

 

[PrincessofEurope]

Disgrace on the British family for not sending a Royal representative - they have let themselves down on the world stage.


Previous posters have mentioned that Charles quickly dropped engagement (Kate stood in) for the funeral of a Middle-eastern prince, less known than that of the profile of the late Queen of the Belgians. It should have been Charles who should have cancelled his Friday engagements and stepped up in his role at Prince of Wales and attend as the representative of the Queen. Its been mentioned that Baudoin and Fabiola were close with the Queen and DoE - the Queen went to his funeral which is un heard of. What happened now this time round for his widows funeral - they send an ambassor. Poor show.


The Belgian royal family will have the manners and respect to send a high profile representative to the Duke of Ed's funeral and the Queen. Pity that respect from the British royals for a former monarch couldnt have been granted for Fabiola

 

[PetticoatLane]

Were this about any other RF than the British, a thread like this would never happen in a million years. This is only an issue because it is the British royals.

If the other royal families want to boycott British events then they are quite welcome to. I'd bet my house, however, that they won't pass up the opportunity to attend. Only the Queen can get almost all the world's crowned heads in one room as she did for her Diamond Jubilee. No other monarch could come close. That's the simple reality.

 

[Nikki63]

Late to the discussion, but it does seem to me that the BRF ought to be by now, after some hundreds of years dealing with this sort of thing, be used to shuffling schedules and such to include attendance at funerals. Weddings are planned months in advance. Easy peasy. I know also that all other engagements are also planned far in advance and people are expecting them to show up as agreed, but showing respect to a neighboring country's loss of a beloved former Queen, who was well known to at least the Queen and DoE, should have trumped other engagements that are easily rescheduled. If they can reschedule when one of them becomes ill, then rescheduling to allow them to attend a funeral should be as easy.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Were this about any other RF than the British, a thread like this would never happen in a million years. This is only an issue because it is the British royals.

If the other royal families want to boycott British events then they are quite welcome to. I'd bet my house, however, that they won't pass up the opportunity to attend. Only the Queen can get almost all the world's crowned heads in one room as she did for her Diamond Jubilee. No other monarch could come close. That's the simple reality.

The uncomfortable fact is that we would not need a thread like this for any other Royal family in Europe. For all their low level, low interest, lack of star power I can't think of any Continental House that is so boorish, impolite or ill advised to ever allow a faux pas like this to ever happen in relation to their fellow royals.

That's the simple reality for me.

 

[Chimene]

@Moonmaiden23 - Thank you for the above post and the previous one. Well done!

 

[Mbruno]

. We don't really see ourselves as having more in common with Belgians or Austrians than we do with Canadians, Australians or even Americans.

It is ironic to hear you say that in the year when Britain is celebrating the 100th anniversary of the beginning of World War I, a war which Britain joined, at least officially, precisely because of the invasion of Belgium by the Germans.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Previous posters have mentioned that Charles quickly dropped engagement (Kate stood in) for the funeral of a Middle-eastern prince, less known than that of the profile of the late Queen of the Belgians. It should have been Charles who should have cancelled his Friday engagements and stepped up in his role at Prince of Wales and attend as the representative of the Queen.

Not comparable events.

One was basically a reception in CH that could have been undertaken by almost any royal - and so Kate could step in.

Friday's events for Charles could only have been undertaken by Charles because they related to his position as Honorary Colonel of a regiment and would have disappointed literally 1000s of people - those who were to march through the town, the people who came to see the event and those who had worked so hard to rebuild the hall.

Other royals may have been available but as she was a Queen then only the Queen, spouse or heir should have attended anyway and for various reasons they couldn't do so.

 

[Iluvbertie]

It is ironic to hear you say that in the year when Britain is celebrating the 100th anniversary of the beginning of World War I, a war which Britain joined, at least officially, precisely because of the invasion of Belgium by the Germans.

May have the 'official reason' but the reality was the British just needed an excuse as they were rearing to go and if it hadn't been Belgium it would have been something else.

The biggest thing to remember with relevance to this discussion is that George V then became determined to separate the BRF from Europe so that the internal family issues never arose again and that has been their view ever since. The rest of the European royal families have continued to interact as if the wars never happened but the BRF withdrew from those connections deliberately and as the decades go by will continue that separation.

 

[Mbruno]

Other royals may have been available but as she was a Queen then only the Queen, spouse or heir should have attended anyway and for various reasons they couldn't do so.

I disagree. Queen Elizabeth II has been represented in the past by less senior royals in in other funerals. If I am not mistaken , the Duke of York fpr example attended the funeral of Queen Ingrid of Denmark, who was a dowager queen like Fabiola. It would have been perfectlly acceptable to send Andrew, Edward, or even one of the Queen's cousins in lieu of Charles if he were not available.

 

[Cris M]

I disagree. Queen Elizabeth II has been represented in the past by less senior royals in in other funerals. If I am not mistaken , the Duke of York fpr example attended the funeral of Queen Ingrid of Denmark, who was a dowager queen like Fabiola.

The Prince of Wales attended Queen Ingrid's funeral. The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester and Princess Alexandra were also there.

 

[Mbruno]

May have the 'official reason' but the reality was the British just needed an excuse as they were rearing to go and if it hadn't been Belgium it would have been something else.

The biggest thing to remember with relevance to this discussion is that George V then became determined to separate the BRF from Europe so that the internal family issues never arose again and that has been their view ever since. The rest of the European royal families have continued to interact as if the wars never happened but the BRF withdrew from those connections deliberately and as the decades go by will continue that separation.

That view may have made some sense in 1914, when there were still semi-absolute monarchies in places like Germany or Russia. Of course, that is no longer the case now when most European countries are republics and, in those few that are still monarchies, foreign policy is directed by elected politicians and not by royal houses. Furthermore, most of Europe is already united under the European Union anyway.

 

[Fürstin Taxis]

There was this one Daily Mail comment which said something like in a time where Royalty gets more irrelevant, that it is ironic that one group of royals can still look down on one other
Imo it doesn't matter if they weren't there. While I watched it I thought of Fabiola and not of these "very busy" people.

 

[Valerie Rose]

I have still some four pages of this thread to read, but wanted to express my surprise and disappointment that nobody from the BRF could attend this funeral, especially when representatives of so many others were able to - it was a memorable and historic gathering to acknowledge the life of a most gracious and Christian queen.

 

[Queen Penelope]

My feeling is, as much as I believe they should have been better represented, they and the government were represent by the Ambassador. Ideal? no, but someone of influence felt that this was the way to go. The BRF have maintained cordial relations with their continental contemporaries, but have never been accused of fostering close personal ties. This is just maintaining the status quo, as it were. A shame, because It's rather lovely when they all get together.

Just to put this out there - wouldn't having someone attending (who didn't know Queen Fabiola) just because they were availiable seem to be a rather hollow gesture? (The Ambassador notwithstanding, as he was also representing the British Government). My guess is HM, The DoE and The PoW knew Queen Fabiola. After them, how far down the line before it becomes more showing up for the sake of showing up and less paying respects to somone you knew? What is an acceptable "degree of separation"?

On a personal note - I've only attended funerals of someone close to me, my family or if it is a family member of a close friend. With that criteria, I could understand if no one attended. Funerals are hard. A few of my relations and I have this morbid joke of "see you at the next one" as it has been the only time we've seen each other for years. Needless to say, I don't like seeing them anymore?.

 

[kbk]

QEII didn't attend the funeral of her first cousin, the late George, Earl of Harewood, a grandson of George V. Why would she attend this funeral?

Of course, someone from the RF could but they (jointly the FCO and someone from the Queen's household or the Gov. alone?) decided to limit their representation to the most convenient form of an ambassador.

However, I remind you that in a foreign country, the Ambassador is the highest and definitive representative of his or her sending country (in this case, Her Majesty's formally), so it was not a low-profile representation. However, QFabiola's funeral's case is something different, because the two countries are both monarchies and traditionally and historically, there were close and direct links between their royal families (thus, we could expect some more personal and more familial rep. than the Ambassador, who is simply an official) but it doesn't seem to last anymore...

I repeat my question - were there any other foreign ambassadors at the funeral? I wonder, because Fabiola was neihter the queen regnant nor the queen consort of the current Sovereign, thus her funeral was not of full state level. It was rather a nationally important and celebrated event with foreign attendance limited only or almost to those few remaining monarchies in the world (except for the British )

 

[Claire]

I am no longer involved in the royal press coverage but as I was in London I asked old colleagues, but can't vouch for their validity. There appears to have been some confusion and perhaps a mix up.
The Earl and Countess of Wessex were expected to go _ but they are considered too junior royals for such an occasion. Either the foreign office never confirmed them going or they, their office, were told a senior royal was attending. No senior royal attended, so something went wrong. Complete speculation here - it might have been considered better for no one to attended over a lesser royal. This is a protocol problem, the foreign office has to match the stature of the other royals attending to the royalt they are sending, if we look at who attended that would have been the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh or Prince Charles. If none of them were available then it is in lieu of the Queen and anyone can represent her. Another problem could have been that the Foreign Office thought Edward and Sophie were attending on their own accord - in a personal capacity not as the Queen's representative. They often get invited to European events in their own right, and since they are going anyway they end up representing the Queen as well.
Either way it was a mess up and is been investigated. The journalists appear to be taking it as a miscommunication between the Foreign Office and the Palace. It really appears to have been a problem between their distinction of private and state occasions. Protocol is rigid and often doesn't leave room for politiness.

Would you have preferred if Edward and Sophie attending? I get the impression that another thread, bemoaning the fact that it wasn't William and Kate would have taken its place rather easily.

 

[Iluvbertie]

That view may have made some sense in 1914, when there were still semi-absolute monarchies in places like Germany or Russia. Of course, that is no longer the case now when most European countries are republics and, in those few that are still monarchies, foreign policy is directed by elected politicians and not by royal houses. Furthermore, most of Europe is already united under the European Union anyway.

In 1914 the view held by the BRF was that they should intermingle with the European monarchies but the war changed that as George V felt that was the best way to preserve the British throne was to separate his family from the Europeans and I suspect that the British people today would still feel the same way.


Europe may be officially united but from an outsider who visits occasionally it is far from united in spirit with massive differences in living standards and attitudes to a range of issues.

 

[Tiggersk8]

I am no longer involved in the royal press coverage but as I was in London I asked old colleagues, but can't vouch for their validity. There appears to have been some confusion and perhaps a mix up.
The Earl and Countess of Wessex were expected to go _ but they are considered too junior royals for such an occasion. Either the foreign office never confirmed them going or they, their office, were told a senior royal was attending. No senior royal attended, so something went wrong. Complete speculation here - it might have been considered better for no one to attended over a lesser royal. This is a protocol problem, the foreign office has to match the stature of the other royals attending to the royalt they are sending, if we look at who attended that would have been the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh or Prince Charles. If none of them were available then it is in lieu of the Queen and anyone can represent her. Another problem could have been that the Foreign Office thought Edward and Sophie were attending on their own accord - in a personal capacity not as the Queen's representative. They often get invited to European events in their own right, and since they are going anyway they end up representing the Queen as well.
Either way it was a mess up and is been investigated. The journalists appear to be taking it as a miscommunication between the Foreign Office and the Palace. It really appears to have been a problem between their distinction of private and state occasions. Protocol is rigid and often doesn't leave room for politiness.

Would you have preferred if Edward and Sophie attending? I get the impression that another thread, bemoaning the fact that it wasn't William and Kate would have taken its place rather easily.

I would have preferred it, as I don't see a Son of a Current Monarch and his Wife as "Junior Royals" and there would have been someone from the BrRF there. Then again, while I do follow the Cambridges, I also know they really don't know that Generation that well, if at all, whereas the Wessexes do. Just because they're the " cool kids" at the moment does not mean William and Kate should be sent automatically to these Events. Besides, William was one w/Engagements on Friday & while he could have changed his schedule, I also think that this time it was more fitting (for lack of a better term) if it had been either his Father, his Aunt or one of his Uncles.

Just my now obsolete 2cents Canadian.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[AristoCat]

I thought the whole point of the BRF was to represent the British government, NOT act like it's the job of an ambassador to represent them? The BRF is supposedly the people that go to things like this to maintain non-political diplomatic goodwill between nations.

So to me, the BRF have failed to do their job. No matter how 'low' Fabiola might be to the BRF, she meant something to everyone in Belgium and certainly to the royal family of Belgium and the people of Spain since she was on of their aristocrats.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

The thread has derailed a bit. The British royal family has been represented at all major European royal events. This time, for some mysteriously reasons, they were not represented at the funeral of a grande dame which was the late Doña Fabiola Fernanda María-de-las-Victorias Antonia Adelaida de Mora y Aragón, Queen of the Belgians, Princess of Belgium.

So be it. Let us assume it was an unlucky error.

 

[Tarlita]

At the end of the day I am sure the good people of Belgium will not lose any sleep over the fact that no one from the BRF attended. However, I find it disappointing that no one from the Royal Family represented Her Majesty in this. As Aristocat says the royal family are their Countries representatives, if not the Commonwealth's representatives.
As this thread is now 18 pages goes to show people feel very strongly one way or another about the issue.
As Claire has suggested it may have been a miscommunication by the foreign office.

 

[Eden]

I think emotions are running high after the funeral, seeing children crying and the current queen and her king becoming emotional also, can cause the blood to boil. However, the general feeling is not that the BRF are all bad. Maybe rather than trying to argue with people it may be a better idea to shush and allow the emotions to run its course and the thread to petter out naturally. Asking for the thread to close is wrong, I have learnt that if you don't like the thread, don't tune in ?


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I am no longer involved in the royal press coverage but as I was in London I asked old colleagues, but can't vouch for their validity. There appears to have been some confusion and perhaps a mix up.
The Earl and Countess of Wessex were expected to go _ but they are considered too junior royals for such an occasion. Either the foreign office never confirmed them going or they, their office, were told a senior royal was attending. No senior royal attended, so something went wrong. Complete speculation here - it might have been considered better for no one to attended over a lesser royal. This is a protocol problem, the foreign office has to match the stature of the other royals attending to the royalt they are sending, if we look at who attended that would have been the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh or Prince Charles. If none of them were available then it is in lieu of the Queen and anyone can represent her. Another problem could have been that the Foreign Office thought Edward and Sophie were attending on their own accord - in a personal capacity not as the Queen's representative. They often get invited to European events in their own right, and since they are going anyway they end up representing the Queen as well.
Either way it was a mess up and is been investigated. The journalists appear to be taking it as a miscommunication between the Foreign Office and the Palace. It really appears to have been a problem between their distinction of private and state occasions. Protocol is rigid and often doesn't leave room for politiness.

Would you have preferred if Edward and Sophie attending? I get the impression that another thread, bemoaning the fact that it wasn't William and Kate would have taken its place rather easily.

Claire-

Thank you very much for your interesting and thoughtful post. It makes since that there was simply a RARE AND UNFORTUNATE mix-up. I will not and can not believe that HM QEII for whom I have so much respect, would deliberately choose to insult the Belgian RF. She was nothing but gracious to Philippe and Mathilde when they visited her recently.