Recent content by monarchist-us

Good choice. It's not like this is breaking any sort of set-in-stone tradition. IMO this enhances it. SJP has a lot of history. It's not like they chose to do it in the Middletons' backyard. :rofl:

It's become harder, as constitutional monarchs, for them to really screw it up on a grand scale. The only contenders from the Post WWI era IMO, would be: - King Edward VIII - King Leopold III - Grand Duchess Marie-Adelaide - All of the Kings of Greece (each seemed pretty incompetent in their...

Had never noticed that before, but good call! I definitely see the resemblance.

Agreed. I think he's a mix of both. But I think he's grown to resemble Philip more as he's become older, whereas when he was younger I think he looked a lot more Windsor (compare him to HM or Margaret). Here's an interesting comparison. Young Charles (from a stamp) and his great aunt, Mary...

Haha! Beatrice is a member of the group "Let's Buy News Corp!" Go Bea! :rofl: .

I hope (and expect) we'll get to see a four generations photo, similar to what Victoria did! http://www.oldukphotos.com/graphics/England%20Photos/London,%20Royalty,%20Queen%20Victoria%20and%20Four%20Generations%20II.jpg

I doubt they'll sell any rights to photographs and if they do, they'll donate the proceeds to charity. Otherwise, that makes them look bad.

Amazing how much leg a rumor based on one barely-sourced article can get, isn't it? :ermm:

Great summary, IMO. The Charles-as-George (or George-as-Something-Else) possibility is probably a bored DM looking for clickbait. Yeah, Prince Charles can reign as "King George VII"....or "King Edward IX"....or "King Arthur"....or "King Chumbawumba" if he so chooses. But that doesn't mean...

I think all of the "he may reign as something else" is pure mindless media speculation, just like it is for Charles reigning as George VII. The circumstances for Princess Alexandrina Victoria, Prince Albert Edward, and Prince Albert could not be any different. In the first two's case, they had...

Of course, but all of those names (or variants of them) have long associations with the BRF in general. Alexander is probably a nod to HM, and I think having three names (especially considering Alexander's position among the three) might be as well. But not including a Spencer name while...

Interestingly enough, the last male "Cambridge baby" was also Prince George, and he was known as "Prince George of Cambridge" for the first 31 years of his life before inheriting the dukedom. Prince George, Duke of Cambridge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good point. It's probably best to include no one than to try to please everyone in the families.

At first, I didn't like George, but it's grown on me! Also surprised that he only has three names! But like I said could very well happen -- there's no Middleton or Spencer names to be found in this one.

Probably because making a surname (especially a family maiden name) into a first name is a American invention. Not an American invention I'm particularly fond of, but it's pretty common (especially nowadays, in the Hollywood/middle-class quest for "uniqueness" :whistling:). I think the BRF...