William and Harry's Education


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes I wish I knew some answers to those questions. I would love to see something he's done himself! I know he drew with the kids at the childrens hospital when he visited New Zealand. A lot of members of a royal family are artistic though aren't they?
 
I really wonder who his favorite artist is, though. If he even has one. And does he prefer realist art or abstract art, or watercolors like his father, or impressionist art maybe. And is their one ancestor he likes in particular?
He so much resembles King George III!!!!!!!!! Of course we can bet he doesn't resemble the old Mad King in terms of the latter's adled brains! For whatever faults William has, he does seem to possess all his mental faculties, a full deck, you might say!
 
Aussie Princess said:
Well I sure hope so!
Click to expand...

me too, for the sake of the future of the British monarchy, indeed, yes!
Though it seems that William does have his moments of questionable sanity, as anyone might, I suppose. that "road rage" incident was pretty alarming. still, these things do seem to be isolated and few and far between. Considering his Saxon ancestry on the Windsor side and his rather colorful
Spencer heritage, to say nothing of the humiliations he endured during the "Charles and Di" fiasco years, I'd say William is pretty balanced! How he came out all those things fairly clean I have no idea. Wonders never cease.
 
William isn't artistic. He said that Harry is the artistic one. William and Harry are like night and day. Harry seems to be into more abstact art, so William may enjoy realism more. Will will not answer the questions so we have to piece together the information that we know. Will majored in art history, and watercolors, do have an interesting background, but it is not so complex that watercolors would inspire him to study art history. In my opinion, Will is more interested in historical events and there effect on art. With Wills interest in geography he may also have combound cultural effects and location with art history, Giving him a much wider range of art.
 
Harry's polo shirt said:
William isn't artistic. He said that Harry is the artistic one. William and Harry are like night and day. Harry seems to be into more abstact art, so William may enjoy realism more. Will will not answer the questions so we have to piece together the information that we know. Will majored in art history, and watercolors, do have an interesting background, but it is not so complex that watercolors would inspire him to study art history. In my opinion, Will is more interested in historical events and there effect on art. With Wills interest in geography he may also have combound cultural effects and location with art history, Giving him a much wider range of art.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that you think his interest lies more in historical changes and influences on art, or how art has influenced or perhaps changed events or people in history, rather than the art itself?
I don't agree Will and Harry are "night and day" exactly. I agree they have differences, but I think and have always thought they have many commonalities as well, so the "night and day" theory might be a bit extreme. I think it is possible, though, to agree with you in the assessment of Harry being more into abstract art, as we saw with that painting in the Eton pics. As I recall, the few examples ever shown of Will's art were watercolors and were landscapes, so this is obviously very different of style of art from what Harry seems to like.
 
I think Will is interested in how history in different cultures and locations effected art. Night and day may be a bit extreme, but their differences are not suttle, they have more differences than similarities. I read somewere (don't remember were, it was along time ago, I am not sure if it was an interview) that Will chose watercolors because they are easier to work with. The landscapes would show Wills interest in geography as well. So I guess it would be safe to say that Will likes landscapes.
 
School and University

How many of the British royal family have advanced degrees?

Charles went to Cambridge??? Ditto for Edward?

I always remember criticism that that the entire family was not particularly well formally educated.
 
Well William went to St. Andrews. Harry didn't go to university. Zara and Peter went to Exeter University.
 
What is an 'advanced' degree? I haven't come across that term before and assume that in Australia we have a different expression to describe it. Once I know what you mean by that term I may be able to answer your question.

This is one of those occasions where are different uses of this great language show us the variety of use of words and terms and help make us better able to understand each other.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think what Lady Bluffton wants to say is that nowadays almost all princes/ss (whether they are heirs or not) have advanced degrees like masters and stuff and there isn't anyone at the BRF like that (as far as I know no one of the Queen's children has a master's degree and Andrew and Anne didn't even go to uni in the first place:confused: , am I wrong?)
Maybe it has to do with the desertion level in Britain, I'm not trying to be rude, I live in England and I really love the country but in these times young people are dropping out school or even not going to university in the first place; I went to undergrad school (university) here (Oxford), we were 50 and 32 of us weren't english (it's the same in other schools not only Oxford or Cambridge) and now in my master's group we are 10 and there isn't any english person so I don't know; it's quite a shame, because the education here at uni level is incredibly good...
 
So what she is calling an 'advanced degree' we would call an 'higher degree'?

Thanks for clearing that up.

I believe that Charles, Edward and William all have what we in Australia call an Honours degree - certainly being described as a 2:1 or 2:2 would suggest that. To do that in Australia requires an extra year of study after achieving a Bachelors degree. Masters degrees can be done from either a basic Bachelors or from an Honours degree. Top candidates can even go from an Honours degree straight to a Ph.D.
 
I believe that Charles, Edward and William all have what we in Australia call an Honours degree - certainly being described as a 2:1 or 2:2 would suggest that.
Click to expand...

It's called the same in the UK too although there are differences between England and Scotland. In England a degree is 3 years long and would normally be called a Bachelors degree whilst in Scotland it is 4 years normally and would be called a Masters. Both you can get with honours. William was at uni for 4 years so got a masters degree with honours.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lizy said:
I believe that Charles, Edward and William all have what we in Australia call an Honours degree - certainly being described as a 2:1 or 2:2 would suggest that.

It's called the same in the UK too although there are differences between England and Scotland. In England a degree is 3 years long and would normally be called a Bachelors degree whilst in Scotland it is 4 years normally and would be called a Masters. Both you can get with honours. William was at uni for 4 years so got a masters degree with honours.
Click to expand...

Whereas in Australia he would only have a Bachelors with Honours after 4 years and have to do another year or two for a Masters.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.
 
In most English universities a three-year course leads to a bachelor's degree, and students have to do postgraduate study for one or two more years - either advanced coursework or original research or a combination - to get a master's degree. I think Oxford and Cambridge MA degrees are awarded pretty much automatically a few years after the bachelor's degree, without the student having to do any more work.

So seeing MA (Oxon) or MA (Cantab) after a person's name doesn't necessarily mean they've done any advanced research or study, it just means they got their regular degrees from those universities a few years earlier.

In other words, since Prince Charles graduated from Cambridge, he's probably got a Master of Arts degree but it didn't take any extra work to get it.
 
Were they all in Extra-curricular activities... Like sports. We all know about polo, and rugby. What awards did they get?
 
Advanced means...

In my lingo, by "advanced" I mean beyond high school -- college, university, master's, doctorate, etc.

In other words, who is a stellar scholar / brain?
 
crisiñaki said:
Maybe it has to do with the desertion level in Britain, I'm not trying to be rude, I live in England and I really love the country but in these times young people are dropping out school or even not going to university in the first place; I went to undergrad school (university) here (Oxford), we were 50 and 32 of us weren't english (it's the same in other schools not only Oxford or Cambridge) and now in my master's group we are 10 and there isn't any english person so I don't know; it's quite a shame, because the education here at uni level is incredibly good...
Click to expand...
It is a sad state of affairs, just as you describe it. It has a lot to do with universities having to operate as businesses and be funded for 'bums on seats'. Subsequently, standards drop and education is not respected.
Oxford, Cambridge, Durham and a few others have maintained high standards in spite of this. Cambridge and Oxford undergrad degrees can indeed be converted to Masters after a few years but, in comparison to other universities, they are Masters level anyway!
In the case of the few royals who went to Cambridge, I don't believe for a moment that their degrees were 'honorary' and not deserved. They were probably helped and coached, but in an exam you are on your own!
 
I have read in the last day or so that Charles BA was upgraded to an MA in 1975.
 
In the US an "advanced" degree refers to post baccalaureate degree; i.e. masters and doctors.
 
 
Mermaid1962 said:
How many members of royal families have lived outside their native countries except for exile or marrying a foreign royal? I can't think of any who've done so permanently, although some do for education.
Click to expand...
I can't think of any except like you said to go to school. In fact I think most of the European princes have gone to school for at least part of their education outside of their country. William and Harry are the only princes who have had their entire education within their country. Personally I think it's a good experience to go to school abroad to learn about another culture/language and leave your comfort zone. Maybe Wm & Harry's children will be allowed to do this?

I think it would be odd for Prince Harry to live permanently in another country though unless the Queen gave him a reason to such as serving that country in some capacity.
 
I have always thought it strange that neither William nor Harry had any education abroad, particularly as all three of the Queen's sons did so - Charles to Australia, Andrew in Canada and Edward in New Zealand (although not actually while still at school but more as a house tutor at a boarding school).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Charles' higher education seemed to be a little politicised. I really doubt that he independently chose to spend that token term studying in Wales before his investiture. I wonder if maybe he and his brothers were dispatched to spread across the Queen's largest realms the honour of having a member of the royal family study at a local school.

If that was the case, I can see why Charles might have wanted to avoid pressuring his sons into that.
 
:previous: I think the personal lives of the Princes parents would have left them very exposed. Could you imagine what it would have been like if the kids had been at school in another country at the time of Diana's death? It would have been past unbearable and an absolute nightmare getting them home again.

Also, I think the family history and the degree of protection they would have required as a result is what kept them home during their secondary schooling and William's choice of University.
 
wbenson said:
Charles' higher education seemed to be a little politicised...
Click to expand...
I was referring to Charles two terms in Australia - which he described as the best times of his school life.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Considering the ages William and Harry were at the time of Diana's death they wouldn't have been overseas anyway.
Charles, Andrew and Edward were older than William was. Why would it have been a nightmare to put them on a plane and land in London - something they had to do anyway from Scotland?

Had they been at school in the northern hemisphere at that time (and as I said their ages would have seen them as being too young) they would have been exactly where they were when she died - Balmoral - as northern hemisphere schools are on holidays in August.

William went to Chile after school and would have needed just as much security so why not have gone to a school somewhere else a year or two earlier?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lumutqueen said:
They wouldn't of been abroad for Diana's death, they would've been too young.
He and Harry could've gone presumably after there english university traning or after college. :)
I think they should've gone to school, even for a little bit, somewhere abroad.
Click to expand...


Harry never went to uni. Harry had a gap nearly two years after school.

William had a gap year both after school and again after uni.

Since their years off they have been training in the army or airforce, with Harry spending a short tour in Afghanistan.

The time to go was after GCSEs or after school to go to school but they didn't. Maybe too they wouldn't want to go to a school where they didn't speak the language meaning they would really have to go to school in an English speaking country, meaning the US or a Commonwealth country where republicanism is on the rise. For William the ideal year would have been during 1999 for instance during the republican referendum debate in Australia, ruling out that country so it could have been political considerations playing a part as well. To go to the US over say Canada or Australia or NZ would be seen as potentially sending the wrong message about the future of those countries as ones with the Queen as Queen.
 
You know, i do know these things. But thank you for reminding me.
The comment about university was dedicated to William, and the college part was dedicated to both. I saw little use in splitting the comment up, and presumed that people would know that Harry didn't go to a english university.

I disagree with you, I think William should've gone after his education at St Andrews and he should've gone to a place in the commonwealth. The problem with the USA, there education is quite different to ours.
I understand that Harry didn't go to a english university, so i see little thought behind him going to a foreign university.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lumutqueen said:
The problem with the USA, there education is quite different to ours.
I understand that Harry didn't go to a english university, so i see little thought behind him going to a foreign university.
Click to expand...

How's the education different? Because of the history or just the universities in general?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

LadyFinn
Crown Princess Victoria & Prince Daniel's Official Visit to UK: Nov 29-Dec 1, 2023
Replies
17
Views
3K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
Crown Princess Couple's Official Visit to California, USA: February 19-22, 2024
Replies
11
Views
2K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
Blog Real
Education and Career of the Princess of Wales
Replies
1
Views
813
victor1319
V
iceflower
State Visit from Moldova to Norway: May 6 - 7, 2024
Replies
3
Views
632
Muhler
Muhler
LadyFinn
Finnish State Visit to Sweden: April 23 - 24, 2024
Replies
23
Views
3K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom