Relationships between Members of the British Royal Family


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think that HM and Louise are close with sharing a love of horses. I don't really think that the Queen would have a definite favorite grandchild but rather have her own unique bond with each of them.
 
I haven't heard about Beatrice being her favourite before. I've heard rumours about Peter, Louise and James being her favourites which generally seems logical as Peter is the oldest - HM's first grandchild - and Louise and James are the youngest - the ones she has had more opportunities to spend time with. But if she indeed has a favourite grandchild, how should we know? Presumably she wouldn't go around telling people all about it.
 
So just from speculation, it's more likely true that HM The Queen's favorite grandchild is HRH Princess Beatrice? Ive read this many of times before--obviously there has been much speculation about her favorite, but Ive read Princess Beatrice more than any other.

Never read that, can you provide some articles?
 
We saw images of little 2 year old James holding Peter Phillips' finger as they departed the Hebridean Princess in 2010.{Quote}

I'd love to see that picture. Haven't seen it before.





















 
So just from speculation, it's more likely true that HM The Queen's favorite grandchild is HRH Princess Beatrice? Ive read this many of times before--obviously there has been much speculation about her favorite, but Ive read Princess Beatrice more than any other.


I have read that as well, even though I have also heard that Anne's children are her favorites because they came first.

BTW, it's Beatrice and Eugenie who call their Royal grandmother "Super Gran" which must delight her!:lol:
 
Actually I found this article very amusing and a good read. The good vicar shares with us some of the interesting events of his stay at Balmoral and paints a good picture of just how relaxed and "at home" the Queen is while she's there. I really didn't see anything in the article that could really be deemed "scandalous" or "disturbing" but occasions where a family was acting just like a family.

His recollections are no different nor a breach of confidence than the book that Margaret Rhodes has written about her life and times with the Queen and the Queen Mother. It gives a more private view into personalities rather than what we usually see as "game faces" when the royal family is in public.

Once again the Daily Fail's headlines are misleading.
 
Yes I noticed that too, and the sisters aren't that much alike. Honestly, I don't believe the Daily Fail employs anyone who looks out for mistakes any more!
 
The mere typos in every single article are enough to keep me from believing anything they say. Their website must be edited by a bunch of drunks.
 
Actually I have it from a "source close to the Mail" that their editors are children who have gotten in trouble at school for not paying attention in class. I guess the punishment doesn't work very well.

Sorry... hadda do it. :D
 
I love the image of the queen mum in her garter robes, perched watching horse racing on television. Makes me smile :flowers:

I like the stories of how close Elizabeth was to her parents as a kid, going into their bedroom in the mornings, her mum teaching her to read. And how she stopped a butler and showed him how to clean a pea stain properly as her mother made sure she knew such things.
 
It's Richard Kay and Geoffrey Levy for the Daily Fail so this must be taken with a pinch of salt.
 
The DM is running a series of articles to honour the Queen as she approaches her 90th birthday. The people who are writing these articles are people who have been around the royals for many years so why assume that they are telling porkies because you don't like the message.

I have read NOTHING in any of these articles that I haven't heard before from multiple sources - not just the DM but personal contacts who have known some royals for decades.
 
This is one of the worst, most idiotic, most laughable and most unreliable articles I ever read about the royal family in a British newspaper. If people believe in this (and some will), then they must have serious problems.

Oh that's horrendous. Horribly nasty catty article with veiled jabs at the York princesses' weight and clothing, and horrible tropes about women all around.

And terrible journalism! From what I can tell, it looks like they were walking into the party in order of precedence? Since William was present, Kate would have walked in ahead of the Yorks and that's not something that any of them would think twice about.
 
I'd like to comment that we have often seen photos of the Duchess before she hits a public moment. They all look like this. She takes a moment to gather herself. The Duke oCa does this as well. In fact, most of the family walks out to these garden parties calmed and silent rather than smiley and waving at the crowds or chatting among themselves. We have even seen William and Catherine at joint appearances where they are standing next to one another, silent and looking in different directions. They are getting ready to go "on" as their public personas.

I don't want to turn this into a discussion of the York girls - but find it absolutely normal, given their different lives, that these cousins in law are not besties.
Sometimes, I just wish the DM would grow up! :whistling:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Linking to stories in the DM doesn't help it 'grow up', it just adds fuel to the fire ;)

Monarchy is a top down organisation and everyone in the family knows this. It's just more of the same tabloid gossip. Andrew and his daughters don't like to be sidelined by Charles and his family but that's just life.

If the Queen wanted Beatrice and Eugenie to have more prominent roles, they would have more prominent roles.
 
Well, and the idea that it's significant somehow that the sisters were walking behind the duke and duchess, or that Catherine should have hung back to laugh and chat with them, just points out an ignorance of royal protocol that is inexcusable in a hack ostensibly assigned to the royal beat. It calls to mind that commercial: "That's now how this works. That's not how any of this works."

Of course, low information/high speculation and gossip is Catherine Ostler's specialty. I'm pretty sure she gets the stories that Rebecca English refuses to touch.
 
Oh that's horrendous. Horribly nasty catty article with veiled jabs at the York princesses' weight and clothing, and horrible tropes about women all around.

And terrible journalism! From what I can tell, it looks like they were walking into the party in order of precedence? Since William was present, Kate would have walked in ahead of the Yorks and that's not something that any of them would think twice about.

It is a terrible article and none of them deserve this type of treatment. The photos are just a moment in time and it is a shame that this form of click bait "journalism" exists. The York princesses have known for years that their role within the family was to be limited. Their uncle and his family would always take precedence over them. To insinuate that there is "bad blood" between any of them is wrong IMHO.
 
I'd like to comment that we have often seen photos of the Duchess before she hits a public moment. They all look like this. She takes a moment to gather herself. The Duke oCa does this as well. In fact, most of the family walks out to these garden parties calmed and silent rather than smiley and waving at the crowds or chatting among themselves. We have even seen William and Catherine at joint appearances where they are standing next to one another, silent and looking in different directions. They are getting ready to go "on" as their public personas.

I don't want to turn this into a discussion of the York girls - but find it absolutely normal, given their different lives, that these cousins in law are not besties.
Sometimes, I just wish the DM would grow up! :whistling:

I agree with this. I just read the article and was quite shocked at it's content. It was rather nasty and uncalled for. I got the impression that the author is rather jealous, throughout. I think the point you made about the Cambridges and York princesses having different lifestyles is definitely something to consider, even if their rumoured rivalry turned out to be true. I've personally never gotten the impression that the Cambridges and the Yorks weren't on good terms. With the photo of Beatrice and Eugenie walking behind Catherine at the garden party, it could just be that they were naturally looking like that. Not many people look terribly happy when they're not smiling or laughing, it's natural.
 
Its articles like this one that really make me wish I had a bird. :bang:
 
The article is such garbage. It's just pitting women against eachother for no reason at all and that is morally so wrong. Putting the York girls down is unnecessary but putting Kate on a pedestal is just as annoying.
 
I only read the first paragraph of this, is it a "slow news day" that the DM have to publish such spiteful nonsense !? Even if the relationship between the three women was frosty, I think they would be more careful than to show it when the press are around.:whistling:
 
The article is such garbage. It's just pitting women against eachother for no reason at all and that is morally so wrong. Putting the York girls down is unnecessary but putting Kate on a pedestal is just as annoying.


But that seems to be the way of the press. To have a heroine they have to have a villain. They did it in the 80s with Sarah and Diana. When Sarah first joined the family it was Diana's perceived faults that were highlighted while Sarah was portrayed as a breath of fresh air, after a while the press chose to pick on Sarah and elevate Diana to a pedestal.

With Camilla and Sophie out of Catherine's age bracket, the press have chosen to make it Catherine vs the York girls (although tried out a couple of Camilla v Catherine and Sophie v Catherine articles when Catherine first married). When Harry marries I'm sure we will see a plethora of Catherine vs Harry's wife articles.
 
Well said , VictoriaB. I remember the "fresh air " attitude that the press had over Sarah when she first joined the RF, although i don't think it was suggested that there was friction in the relationship between her and Diana. Sarah was mainly attacked over her dress sense, just as her daughters are.
But , as you say there always has to be the heroine and the villain. Do you remember some of the so called quotes from Diana about Sophie ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom