Prince Andrew, Duke of York Current Events 6: July 2011-February 2015


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Today, March 2nd, Prince Andrew has visited the Reckitt Benckiser factory, the British
multinational producer of Strepsils among other consumer goods, on the outskirts of
Bangkok, Thailand.



** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 **
 
:previous:
I agree with you; Mabel Anderson is family, even if there are no blood ties.

Quote from the article:
The Prince of Wales described her as “a haven of security, the great haven”. She was called upon by Prince Charles to comfort him and his sons after Diana, Princess of Wales was killed in 1997. She retains a grace-and-favour apartment near Windsor Castle. Each Christmas, Charles sends a chauffeur-driven car to take Mabel to Sandringham, where she is treated like a cherished member of the family rather than an employee.
 
I have a doubt about royal titles:
Sarah Ferguson lost the title of Duchess of York if Andrew marries again?
Does she really holds this title?
 
Sarah holds no title. She is Sarah, Duchess of York the same as all ex-wives of peers, but she is not The Duchess of York. If Andrew were to marry again his new wife would be HRH The Duchess of York.
 
Last edited:
I have a doubt about royal titles:
Sarah Ferguson lost the title of Duchess of York if Andrew marries again?
Does she really holds this title?

Sarah does not hold the title of The Duchess of York. As former wife of a peer, she is styled and titled Sarah, Duchess of York; she will hold both for life, unless she remarries. If Andrew were to remarry, that would not affect Sarah's style at all. Andrew's new wife would be titled The Duchess of York, whereas his former wife would be Sarah, Duchess of York.

To explain better:
- While Sarah was married to Andrew, she was HRH The Princess Andrew, Duchess of York. In the same way, the current wife of Mr. John Brown is Mrs. John Brown.
- After the divorce, Sarah has been titled as Sarah, Duchess of York. In the same way, the former wife of Mr. Brown would be titles "Name", Mrs. Brown (as opposed to Mrs. John Brown).

Take the example of the Earl Spencer:
- His current wife, Karen Gordon, is The Right Honourable The Countess Spencer.
- His first wife, Victoria Lockwood, was The Right Honourable The Countess Spencer. After their divorce and until remarrying she was Victoria, Countess Spencer.
- His second wife was Mrs. Caroline Freud. She was born Caroline Hutton and was married to Matthew Freud in her first marriage; for the duration of that union, she was Mrs. Matthew Freud. Following the divorce, she came to be known as Mrs. Caroline Freud. After her marriage to Earl Spencer, she was The Right Honourable The Countess Spencer until the divorce. After her second divorce, she was titled Caroline, Countess Spencer.
 
Last edited:
It's a bit complicated but the latest examples helped a lot!
Yesn i can understand, thank you, girls!:flowers:
 
Prince Andrew, Duke of York speaks to Chief Executive of Badminton England Adrian Christy during the Yonex All England Badminton Open Championship at the NIA on March 8, 2012 in Birmingham, England.
- Picture
 
:previous: I think it's drivel. For one thing, Diana's dress wasn't "slinky and sequined." It was fushia taffeta. Granted, it was more slim-line than her dresses were at that time, but hardly "slinky." There's a picture of it in Elizabeth Emanuel's book. I remember a poster on another board saying that Catherine Oxenburg claimed to be on the BP balcony, which she never was. Plus, given that Oxenburg wasn't a prince or princess herself, she'd be expected to curtsy to one. She's not an HRH or even an HSH.
 
I also find it very hard to believe Andrew would propose to someone he hadn't really dated. I doubt it was serious. Sounds more like Barbara Cartland novel plot.
 
At age 21 I doubt Andrew was thinking about marrying any woman. Bedding her probably but wedding, I don't believe it.
 
I don't think that is actually Catherine Oxenberg's blog. It doesn't seem very professional in either design or writing style. I've never seen an actress' site that doesn't include basics like a picture, list of past projects etc.
 
Thank you Iceflower. Nice to see Prince Andrew out and about again.
 
Please note that usual posts regarding Andrew sharing his life with someone (as well as the inevitable Sarah was a train wreck, will they remarry, Phillip will have to die before that happens, ETC) have been deleted as off topic.
 
I am interested in people's opinions about what Andrew's role will be when Charles becomes king. I've been reading that Charles is interested in cutting down the number of working royals, to just he, Camilla, and his sons and their families. Opinions, any one?
 
I am interested in people's opinions about what Andrew's role will be when Charles becomes king. I've been reading that Charles is interested in cutting down the number of working royals, to just he, Camilla, and his sons and their families. Opinions, any one?

Until William and Harry's children are of age to engagements, Charles will have to choose between cutting away his siblings roles or cutting down the number of engagements the royal family do. I interpreted that his apparent "cutting down" was in regards to the likes of Eugenie, Beatrice, Louise and James even the extended royals such as the Kents and Gloucesters.
 
The Kents and Glouchesters should just retire gracefully, leaving Charles's siblings to do the work.
 
All of the Queen's children are already doing all the hard work, but Kents and Gloucesters have their place too. Given their advanced age, their retirement time will come just as the new generation of royals will be ready to become full-time working royals. And by new generation I mean William, Kate, Harry and Harry's future wife; the future of York Princesses in that picture is quite unclear, and the Wessex kids will almost definitely be out of it altogether.
 
The Kents and Glouchesters should just retire gracefully, leaving Charles's siblings to do the work.

Why? The Queens cousins have been supporting her and the monarchy for decades. Their engagements may be fewer and less high profile but as long as they are healthy and want to do the work, and the organizations they support feel there is value in it, I see no reason why they should be forced into any kind of retirement.
 
Alexandra is 76 this year and has cut back massively. The Duke of Kent, aged 77 is also cutting back. The Gloucesters are younger - closer in age to Charles and Camilla than to their cousin The Queen and so are still working.

Why should they have to give up their jobs of a lifetime?

Charles and his siblings already carry most of the load. Of the 1249 engagements done this year 724 have been done by The Queen, Charles and his siblings. So these 5 royals are doing 58% of the engagements. Add in the spouses of these five individuals and there is another 287 or 23% of the total engagements. So currently 81% of engagements are being done by The Queen, her children and their spouses. The few engagements being done by The Queen's cousins and her grandchildren add to the total of 19%.

When there is reference to cutting down the size of the royal family under Charles it has been made clear that he doesn't include his siblings in that. In other words he expects his brothers and sister, and presumably Sophie, to continue working. William and Kate will probably start full-time duties in a couple of years (although I wouldn't be surprised to see William stay in the RAF until 2017 when the SAR is privatised) and I expect Harry to remain in the army for another 20 years or so. That means on two new, maybe three, newies to pick up the work currently being done by the 6 members of the family older than Charles (excluding Camilla).
 
Last edited:
.

The Duke of York with Politburo member Liu Yandong and Li Changchun, head of propaganda and member
of the Politburo Standing Committee of the Communist Party of China, launched a China market focus
event at the London book fair on April 15, 2012.



** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 **
 
Andrew still hopes to represent British trade, even though it is no longer an official role. But,he is still going to be attacked by those who thinks that he travels too much in order to visit the other countries. He is going to be attacked no matter what he does; Andrew seems to be the royal targeted for negative attention, even when he is trying to do something positive.
 
Andrew still hopes to represent British trade, even though it is no longer an official role. But,he is still going to be attacked by those who thinks that he travels too much in order to visit the other countries. He is going to be attacked no matter what he does; Andrew seems to be the royal targeted for negative attention, even when he is trying to do something positive.

This is so true. Looking at Iluvbertie's tally of just how many events that Andrew does, I was really surprised at the number of engagements he has done so far this year. What we end up seeing from the press always seems to play on something negative if they can't find some kind of scandal to scare up.
 
Andrew has been one of the hardest workers for a few years, his number of engagements has been very high for sometime. Problem for Andrew is that the press do not take him seriously and because of comments he has made or others about him and of course the airmiles Andy tag he often get's treated like a joke. Maybe in a few years they will look back and see that he was a hard worker but they won't be doing the Yorks any favours anytime soon. Sadly they give them enough ammunition to make such negative comments about them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom