The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1701  
Old 07-14-2020, 11:09 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
If Charles were to do anything of that kind, yes it would affect William since he gets a share in the income from the Duchy. ANd William was involved in the discussions in January because its possible that if Harry does not make good, he's going to be in receipt of some kind of income from his fathter or brother for all his life...
I addressed that in the very comment you quoted.

It is an assumption / speculation that William may end up supporting Harry if Harry does not make good. If Harry does not make good and returns to royal work then he will be supported by King William as a working royal. However if Harry does not make good and William chooses to financially support him then that is William as the Duke of Cornwall or Duke of Lancaster, whatever applies, choosing how he spends his duchy income which brings us full circle back to that it is the current Duke's (Prince Charles) choice how he spends his duchy income.
__________________

  #1702  
Old 07-14-2020, 11:33 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
I addressed that in the very comment you quoted.

It is an assumption / speculation that William may end up supporting Harry if Harry does not make good. If Harry does not make good and returns to royal work then he will be supported by King William as a working royal. However if Harry does not make good and William chooses to financially support him then that is William as the Duke of Cornwall or Duke of Lancaster, whatever applies, choosing how he spends his duchy income which brings us full circle back to that it is the current Duke's (Prince Charles) choice how he spends his duchy income.
It is his choice but I hope it is one that he's cautious about making. Charles is not overly popular and with the latest problems in the RF there is an increased idea that "second sons" can be a problem.. I think if Chas does support Harry for years to come, it will be out of his private income. It wont make Harry look any better.. I think that Charles regards the Duchy income as money that he uses for "doing good".. and so he wont use it to support a non working son...
As for Harry I dont think he will be exactly welcomed back ot royal work. Charles may feel that he needs his son to help with royal duties, but if he walked out once, he can do so again,
__________________

  #1703  
Old 07-14-2020, 12:33 PM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,122
As previously stated, the duchy income is used to "fund the public, private and charitable activities" of Charles and his family. So "doing good" is just one aspect of how Charles chooses to spend his duchy income.

Depending on what poll or metric used, Harry, William and The Queen are / were neck in neck to be the most popular royal. I would not be surprised if going forward it will just be The Queen and William, but I do not think that Harry (or Meghan) is persona non grata. I think that if Harry chooses to return to royal work, he will be welcomed. I think that if Meghan chooses to return to royal work, she will be welcomed as well, but IMO, on her end, there is no way that she will return beyond her existing patronages and perhaps the addition of a small number of cherry picked causes / patronages / projects. If Harry returns and they are still married, she will be his plus one in a way that male married ins have been in the past.
  #1704  
Old 07-14-2020, 05:23 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Charles has other people to take care of financially, He has William who is working for the firm. There are other relatives again who work for the Firm and are helped by him or the queen. He tries to support charities. Why should he have to help a son who has claimed that he wants to work for himself and make his own money?
Simple answer. Because he wants to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
I addressed that in the very comment you quoted.

It is an assumption / speculation that William may end up supporting Harry if Harry does not make good. If Harry does not make good and returns to royal work then he will be supported by King William as a working royal. However if Harry does not make good and William chooses to financially support him then that is William as the Duke of Cornwall or Duke of Lancaster, whatever applies, choosing how he spends his duchy income which brings us full circle back to that it is the current Duke's (Prince Charles) choice how he spends his duchy income.
William will not have to determine whether or not to "support" Harry at all during his tenure as the Duke of Cornwall. His income from that is solely to support himself and his family. Charles is doing exactly that with *his* Duke of Cornwall income. His family. Charles becomes king and then can choose to support Harry if he wants to out of his Duchy of Lancaster private income. William will do the same as king.

Remember too that, for public awareness of Duchy of Cornwall spending by the Duke, it is itemized so far as the expenditures that Charles makes in relation to "business" expenses and shows where the money goes (tax deductible). Then there's the private expenditures that are not itemized and determines the amount of private income Charles gets and pays taxes (voluntarily) on. Harry would now fall into the private expenditures and those payouts would not be made public whatsoever and it isn't necessary for Charles to make it public. Something like "250.000 bracelet for Camilla" and "25,000 Savile Row suit" and "100,000 gift to the Ginger". Like a checkbook entry. None of our business.

It is true that Charles has managed the Duchy of Cornwall to ensure its growth and its sustainability for future Dukes of Cornwall. The Duke of Cornwall before him was single and used the income with just himself in mind and I would imagine that none of his expenditures ever were made public knowledge. I haven't checked.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1705  
Old 07-14-2020, 06:35 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
As previously stated, the duchy income is used to "fund the public, private and charitable activities" of Charles and his family. So "doing good" is just one aspect of how Charles chooses to spend his duchy income.

Depending on what poll or metric used, Harry, William and The Queen are / were neck in neck to be the most popular royal. I would not be surprised if going forward it will just be The Queen and William, but I do not think that Harry (or Meghan) is persona non grata. I think that if Harry chooses to return to royal work, he will be welcomed. I think that if Meghan chooses to return to royal work, she will be welcomed as well, but IMO, on her end, there is no way that she will return beyond her existing patronages and perhaps the addition of a small number of cherry picked causes / patronages / projects. If Harry returns and they are still married, she will be his plus one in a way that male married ins have been in the past.
You raise a good point. Why should the married ins not be allowed to continue their life and by marrying in subsume their identity. And yes this is largely women. Snowden kept his career, in fact he got more famous. Mark Phillips too. Laurence. Phillip is different. I see no reason that Meghan, or any future woman to marry in, is not encouraged to keep up their own lives and careers. And to move with the times. We are still far too masogonistic as a society. The woman are wanted because really everyone wants to take about their weight, clothes, make up. Problem with Meghan is she is too political. And that will never swing.
  #1706  
Old 07-14-2020, 06:38 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
The press wrong stated they were paid for the JP Morgan event talking about Diana and his mental health. Then they backtracked. They were just apparently guests of the summit. It was a networking event. But the initial report obviously got more coverage than the correction.

That is pretty typical of their coverage though.

Everyone is allowed their opinions. No one really knows anything as fact about what happened. It is all projection based on what we believe is to be true, whether that is the case or not. And that is fine.

Though I do think it is interesting that people have already determined their future. Shall be interesting to watch it all play out in the next year.
Its just plain ol witch hunting been around for centuries they are the new witches being chased by angry persecutors "facts" and "opinions" and "quotes" are their torches and pitchforks hellbent and drooling at the mouth hoping that Harry and Megan fall to their knees broken and divorced.
  #1707  
Old 07-14-2020, 07:07 PM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
William will not have to determine whether or not to "support" Harry at all during his tenure as the Duke of Cornwall. His income from that is solely to support himself and his family. Charles is doing exactly that with *his* Duke of Cornwall income. His family. Charles becomes king and then can choose to support Harry if he wants to out of his Duchy of Lancaster private income. William will do the same as king.

Remember too that, for public awareness of Duchy of Cornwall spending by the Duke, it is itemized so far as the expenditures that Charles makes in relation to "business" expenses and shows where the money goes (tax deductible). Then there's the private expenditures that are not itemized and determines the amount of private income Charles gets and pays taxes (voluntarily) on. Harry would now fall into the private expenditures and those payouts would not be made public whatsoever and it isn't necessary for Charles to make it public. Something like "250.000 bracelet for Camilla" and "25,000 Savile Row suit" and "100,000 gift to the Ginger". Like a checkbook entry. None of our business.

It is true that Charles has managed the Duchy of Cornwall to ensure its growth and its sustainability for future Dukes of Cornwall. The Duke of Cornwall before him was single and used the income with just himself in mind and I would imagine that none of his expenditures ever were made public knowledge. I haven't checked.
The overall point that I am making is that it is the Duke of Cornwall's choice how he spends his income which I don't think you disagree with.
  #1708  
Old 07-14-2020, 07:12 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
The overall point that I am making is that it is the Duke of Cornwall's choice how he spends his income which I don't think you disagree with.
Exactly and I was trying to amplify that point.

Not every penny Charles has access to is deemed necessary to be public knowledge of exactly how it's spent.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1709  
Old 07-14-2020, 10:35 PM
Eskimo's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 423
Charles is free to use his private income/assets any way he sees fit. It seems that he is not willing to support H&M in perpetuity, otherwise a lot of things would be different
  #1710  
Old 07-14-2020, 11:31 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
She was a bit of a kleptomaniac and would often just help herself. She was also a bit annoying as a house guest because one is grand, with a lot of staff, and she would take over the house and there was no use hinting for her to leave. She spent the second world war at Badminton House, some house with her niece and family (brought the Kent grandchildren too). Took over the whole place.
I have the book "The Quest For Queen Mary" assembled by James Pope-Hennessey and edited by Hugo Vickers.

A scene is described where she settled in at an aristocratic home for luncheon, and wouldn't leave until the hostess's staff had put a charming little table in The Queen's car for her to take home. This was late in the evening. HM wouldn't leave until she got the table. The lady of the house couldn't take the pressure.
  #1711  
Old 07-15-2020, 06:19 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
Charles is free to use his private income/assets any way he sees fit. It seems that he is not willing to support H&M in perpetuity, otherwise a lot of things would be different
As Harry's father he may wish to support him.. However i think it would be a bigger kindness to say that he will support him for a year or 2 and then its up to Harry. he wanted to leave. He and Meghan clearly see their future in the US, and not in the UK.. so let them sort it out.
  #1712  
Old 07-15-2020, 06:51 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
As Harry's father he may wish to support him.. However i think it would be a bigger kindness to say that he will support him for a year or 2 and then its up to Harry. he wanted to leave. He and Meghan clearly see their future in the US, and not in the UK.. so let them sort it out.
I think it would be even kinder to keep everything between them privately and tell the public absolutely nothing. Nil. Zero. Zip. Nada. Let this family business sort itself out privately. Its not for us to even begin to think of what they should do or don't do.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1713  
Old 07-15-2020, 07:07 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I think it would be even kinder to keep everything between them privately and tell the public absolutely nothing. Nil. Zero. Zip. Nada. Let this family business sort itself out privately. Its not for us to even begin to think of what they should do or don't do.
They're not telling the public anything. But they have made it public tat the situation with Harry and Meg will be reviewed in a year. Its possible that Charles and the queen hope that by the ends of the year M and H will have decided they want to come back,.. and they would like them back. However IMO They haven't shown willing to do the royal job and want to go away and work for themselves... so if that's what they want, Charles should say that there is an end to when he will support them. That may give them a push to achieve the financial independence that they want..
  #1714  
Old 07-15-2020, 07:23 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,258
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
You raise a good point. Why should the married ins not be allowed to continue their life and by marrying in subsume their identity. And yes this is largely women. Snowden kept his career, in fact he got more famous. Mark Phillips too. Laurence. Phillip is different. I see no reason that Meghan, or any future woman to marry in, is not encouraged to keep up their own lives and careers. And to move with the times. We are still far too masogonistic as a society. The woman are wanted because really everyone wants to take about their weight, clothes, make up. Problem with Meghan is she is too political. And that will never swing.
I think if the RF and their staff were ever to look back and reflect this is where they will see a change may be needed.

I've always maintained that in many ways Meghan may have enjoyed life more if she has simply been Harry's wife rather than a "full time royal" herself. That is to say, keeping her own work (yes probably moving to the UK but picking up acting roles or some other role she wanted, maybe even working for a NGO etc) that she could get on with as Mrs Mountabatten-Windsor most of the time and then accompanying Harry to Trooping, the odd State Banquet etc rather like Sir Tim does with Princess Anne now. That way she could have done pretty much what she wanted with the line being (as it is for Tim Zara Peter etc) she is not an official representative of HM just a member of the family.

To be perfectly honest I think if they (the Royal Family and Household) had been more willing to take this approach Harry may still be with Chelsey or Cressida, but we'll never know.

Of course opinions will differ as so why this was not a possibility, and to be honest I don't think it is what Meghan wanted, she wanted the full time, fully titled RF thing but it didn't work out. But I do think in the future we may have to see a slight softening of this - "if you marry a Prince you become a public figure" - mantra. To be honest with Charles supposed wish of a slimmed down monarchy this might be a good way to help achieve it - limit the automatically becoming a public figure approach to spouses of future sovereigns only.
  #1715  
Old 07-15-2020, 07:34 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
I think if the RF and their staff were ever to look back and reflect this is where they will see a change may be needed.

I've always maintained that in many ways Meghan may have enjoyed life more if she has simply been Harry's wife rather than a "full time royal" herself. That is to say, keeping her own work (yes probably moving to the UK but picking up acting roles or some other role she wanted, maybe even working for a NGO etc)

Of course opinions will differ as so why this was not a possibility, and to be honest I don't think it is what Meghan wanted, she wanted the full time, fully titled RF thing but it didn't work out. But I do think in the future we may have to see a slight softening of this - "if you marry a Prince you become a public figure" - mantra. To be honest with Charles supposed wish of a slimmed down monarchy this might be a good way to help achieve it - limit the automatically becoming a public figure approach to spouses of future sovereigns only.
I dont think it would work.. She was the wife of a senior royal who was working for the firm. If she went on acting, I think it would be said that she only got acting roles because of who she was married to.. if she said anything controversial, she would be too close to the throne for there not to be comment about it. People like Tim Lawrence or Mark Phillips have mostly kept away from controversy.. got on with their work lives and were quiet people.
But Meghan isn't. (And just because of who they are, there are criticisms of say the Philipses over business issues etc because they ARE the queen's grandchildren...)
Besides as I recall Meghan said she was keen to get stuck in and hit the grounds running as a working royal.. so I don't think she really disliked the idea of being a representative of the queen and giving up "her own life". I think it only bothered her when she realised that Royal duchesses get bad press and crtiicism... the same as other people..
I think that she did go into full time royal work too soon and wondered if the queen had pushed for it, after lettings Kate have years of not being a full tiem royal... but I think that Meghan was quite keen at first...
  #1716  
Old 07-15-2020, 08:02 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
I think if the RF and their staff were ever to look back and reflect this is where they will see a change may be needed.

I've always maintained that in many ways Meghan may have enjoyed life more if she has simply been Harry's wife rather than a "full time royal" herself. That is to say, keeping her own work (yes probably moving to the UK but picking up acting roles or some other role she wanted, maybe even working for a NGO etc) that she could get on with as Mrs Mountabatten-Windsor most of the time and then accompanying Harry to Trooping, the odd State Banquet etc rather like Sir Tim does with Princess Anne now. That way she could have done pretty much what she wanted with the line being (as it is for Tim Zara Peter etc) she is not an official representative of HM just a member of the family.

To be perfectly honest I think if they (the Royal Family and Household) had been more willing to take this approach Harry may still be with Chelsey or Cressida, but we'll never know.

Of course opinions will differ as so why this was not a possibility, and to be honest I don't think it is what Meghan wanted, she wanted the full time, fully titled RF thing but it didn't work out. But I do think in the future we may have to see a slight softening of this - "if you marry a Prince you become a public figure" - mantra. To be honest with Charles supposed wish of a slimmed down monarchy this might be a good way to help achieve it - limit the automatically becoming a public figure approach to spouses of future sovereigns only.

I don't think working would of been or was the issue with Chelsea or Cressida. Living in the fishbowl and being trashed by the media was seemingly the major issue....also I think Chelsea and Harry were not that solid of a couple in terms of maturity.


LaRae
  #1717  
Old 07-15-2020, 08:08 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
They're not telling the public anything. But they have made it public tat the situation with Harry and Meg will be reviewed in a year. Its possible that Charles and the queen hope that by the ends of the year M and H will have decided they want to come back,.. and they would like them back. However IMO They haven't shown willing to do the royal job and want to go away and work for themselves... so if that's what they want, Charles should say that there is an end to when he will support them. That may give them a push to achieve the financial independence that they want..
Do we really know what the year in review is about as far as particulars? I don't think we do. All we know is that they've decided on a year in review. Thinking along those lines, if the pandemic had never happened and things progressed along the lines with the year with the Sussexes establishing themselves and a plan established as to how to go forward, an agreement may have come at the end of the year to actually implement a half in, half out kind of a situation that works for all sides.

This makes as much sense as any other supposition of what the year in review was for and what they were looking at. We can only surmise the scenarios.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1718  
Old 07-15-2020, 08:14 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Do we really know what the year in review is about as far as particulars? I don't think we do. All we know is that they've decided on a year in review. Thinking along those lines, if the pandemic had never happened and things progressed along the lines with the year with the Sussexes establishing themselves and a plan established as to how to go forward, an agreement may have come at the end of the year to actually implement a half in, half out kind of a situation that works for all sides.

This makes as much sense as any other supposition of what the year in review was for and what they were looking at. We can only surmise the scenarios.
IM sure that they would not agree to a half in half out situation. They said a very frim no, when it was mooted. If it wasn't considered workable n January I doubt if it would be considered workable next year. It didn't work for Ed and Sophie and the queen's learned from that...
I suspect they thought that they could not stop M and H leaving if they really wanted to.. but hoped that they would comes back... and suggested a review in a year, in hopes that they would not find the grass was so green in Canada or the US.. and that the couple would be Ok with coming back. And the Q adn Charles might hope that they could put them back on royal duties..and the public would not be all that keen but would tolerate it and life would return to normal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
I don't think working would of been or was the issue with Chelsea or Cressida. Living in the fishbowl and being trashed by the media was seemingly the major issue....also I think Chelsea and Harry were not that solid of a couple in terms of maturity.


LaRae
Anyone who marries a senior royal in whatever monarchy, at least in Europe gets a baptism of fire. Kate was criticked, so was Camilla.. so was Letizia in Spain or Maxima in the Netherland. There was a time when new royals got a honeymoon period, but that seems to have gone now.. with social media and the decline of deference towards the Royals...
I agree that probably Chelsea and Cressida weren't that bothered about "keeping up their careers" but they were well aware that their lives would never be private again, and that they would probably undergo some years of minute criticism by many people...
Evidently they didn't care enough for Harry to put up with that.. or they did love him but still felt that Royal status and Harry just weren't enough to compensate
  #1719  
Old 07-15-2020, 10:19 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
IM sure that they would not agree to a half in half out situation. They said a very frim no, when it was mooted. If it wasn't considered workable n January I doubt if it would be considered workable next year. It didn't work for Ed and Sophie and the queen's learned from that...
I suspect they thought that they could not stop M and H leaving if they really wanted to.. but hoped that they would comes back... and suggested a review in a year, in hopes that they would not find the grass was so green in Canada or the US.. and that the couple would be Ok with coming back. And the Q adn Charles might hope that they could put them back on royal duties..and the public would not be all that keen but would tolerate it and life would return to normal.

As far as I can tell, Canada didn't work out. The Canadian government didn't agree to pay for the couple's security and Meghan has now antagonized her Canadian friends too.



They have now moved to LA, which they hope will be more promising "for business", but where they have even less of an official status than in Canada (actually no official status at all). They are basically celebrities in a city that is already full of those.
  #1720  
Old 07-15-2020, 10:35 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
As far as I can tell, Canada didn't work out. The Canadian government didn't agree to pay for the couple's security and Meghan has now antagonized her Canadian friends too.



They have now moved to LA, which they hope will be more promising "for business", but where they have even less of an official status than in Canada (actually no official status at all). They are basically celebrities in a city that is already full of those.
I really can't guess whether LA and the US was always their ultimate aim or if they dashed there, when Canada refused to give them security indefinitely.. Perhaps they really did think that the Can govt would pay for them for life.. but since neither of them were Can Citizens they didn't even have a settled right to live and work there.
I think that perhaps they did intend to move to the US eventually but they initially settled for Canada because Meg knew it and had friends there and it was near enough to the US to "do business" in America.. ie speaking engagements, commerce or whatever.. And possibly they felt that the RF and British public would be a bit more tolerant of a move to a Commonwealth country.. so while LA was always the ultimate goal they were Ok with Canada perhaps for a few years... I dont know if Chares was aware of any notions of going to the US.
But with the Canadians refusing them free security, travel becoming more difficult, and perhaps the Canadians pointing out that there might be problems with them getting permits to live there, they panicked and hurried to LA.
__________________

Closed Thread


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





Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abu dhabi american history anastasia once upon a time ancestry armstrong-jones baptism british royal family british royals cht commonwealth countries countess of snowdon cover-up customs daisy doge of venice dutch royals family life family tree games gustaf vi adolf haakon vii history imperial household interesting introduction israel jack brooksbank jewelry jumma kent kids movie king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers mailing maxima nepal nepalese royal family plantinum jubilee popularity prince charles prince charles of luxembourg prince constantijn princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn princess elizabeth pronunciation queen consort queen maud queen maxima royal balls royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royal wedding russian court dress spain speech startling new evidence taiwan thailand tradition united kingdom videos wedding gown


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:34 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×