The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #401  
Old 01-10-2020, 07:58 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla View Post
Philip had been born as a Royal Prince: Prince Philip of Greece.
True Philip was born HRH Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark.

In 1947, as part of the process of naturalisation as a British citizen he renounced his Greek and Danish titles, and rights to the thrones of those two countries.

From early 1947 until the 19th November 1947 he was Lt Philip Mountbatten - not a prince, not royal just a plain Lt in the Royal Navy. That is what is says on the official marriage programme as well as they were printed before he was given his titles.

On the 19th November, 1947 George VI created him HRH The Duke of Edinburgh, The Earl of Merioneth and The Baron Greenwich but not a Prince.

In 1957 The Queen issued the Letters Patent to give Philip back the title of Prince - when she created him a Prince of the United Kingdom in his own right and also gave him the use of the word 'The' so he became HRH The Prince Philip, The Duke of Edinburgh etc.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #402  
Old 01-11-2020, 09:44 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: oswestry, United Kingdom
Posts: 5
With all this talk about how Prince Charles wants to slim down the monarchy what will happen at evens like trooping the colour, royal weddings, coronations. Would his family still go. Would Charles still do the Christmas message when he becomes king
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #403  
Old 01-11-2020, 09:52 AM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 4,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post


It's possible I didn't understand what you meant in the earlier discussion My only point (and the point which I think muriel was addressing) was that in my opinion, if King Charles issued an announcement that his wife would be styled HRH The Princess Consort, without issuing any Letters Patent, he would not be failing any legal requirements and nobody, even the British government, would stop him. .
You understood my point perfectly. We just have different opinions .

I think that issuing a statement only works when you announce that someone will not use something that he/she would normally be entitled to but not the other way around: announce that someone will use a style and title that he/she is not entitled to - the latter needs a bit more paperwork.
Reply With Quote
  #404  
Old 01-11-2020, 11:43 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,075
As a Dutch I have been viewing it all with open mouth. All that hullabaloo. That senior royals want to pursue an own career is actually the norm over here, as the Dutch State only supports the King, the future King and the former King (and their eventual spouses).

I do not know how it is in the UK, but in my country ANY citizen with a risk profile, rich or poor, prince or pauper, a celebrity or a nobody, is provided personal security by the police.

A Dutch newspaper worded it as: the British monarchy 2.0 is very much alike the Dutch monarchy now. The King's two brothers (back then the Number 2 and the Number 3 in the succession) fully aimed for a succesful career outside the Royal House. They had to provide in their own living as any Dutch has to do.

For the occasional representation and formal outings there is a reimbursement by the Royal House. And like Queen Juliana did for her three youngest daughters, also Queen Beatrix created a special Trust (Foundation Functional Costs of the House Orange-Nassau II) to support her two youngest sons "in their execution of the royal dignity".

Read: maybe both princes and their families have to go to a private function like a royal wedding somewhere in Germany and need transport, accommodation, personnel, a garderobe, gifts, etc. These private costs (when it are no State events) are met by this Trust.

This is a situation already existing for 50 years. It is mind-boggling that Harry and Meghan are treated alike traitors of the Queen. In fact they finally brought the monarchy from 1952 to 2020. Pfffff. Come oooooooon....
Reply With Quote
  #405  
Old 01-11-2020, 11:59 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,640
But the UK is not the Netherlands. Edward and Sophie tried to work, but were forced to give up their careers. Things are working out a bit better for Beatrice & Eugenie with their careers, but they are further from the throne-and still got negativity directed at them.
And the criticism directed at Harry & Meghan is for a situation a lot more complicated than stepping back from bring full-time royal roles to focus on their careers. For one, they don’t actually have careers.
Reply With Quote
  #406  
Old 01-11-2020, 12:07 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 20,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by travelguy View Post
With all this talk about how Prince Charles wants to slim down the monarchy what will happen at evens like trooping the colour, royal weddings, coronations. Would his family still go. Would Charles still do the Christmas message when he becomes king
The slim down monarchy talk has been rumoured for years, it is something that Prince Charles has never said anything about wanting a slimdown monarchy. It will eventually happen as nature takes its course, but they need Henry and Meghan to maintain the current engagement tally for at least another 20-30 years.

The slim down monarchy, has only ever referred to the members of the royal family doing engagements on behalf of The Queen/The King. It's never referred to balconies, troopings or coronations. Charles will I imagine continue to do the message, it's not something that started with his mother, and it won't end with him.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #407  
Old 01-11-2020, 07:35 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 350
Thanks for your perspective, Duc_et_Pair.
Reply With Quote
  #408  
Old 01-11-2020, 09:21 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
As a Dutch I have been viewing it all with open mouth. All that hullabaloo. That senior royals want to pursue an own career is actually the norm over here, as the Dutch State only supports the King, the future King and the former King (and their eventual spouses).

I do not know how it is in the UK, but in my country ANY citizen with a risk profile, rich or poor, prince or pauper, a celebrity or a nobody, is provided personal security by the police.

A Dutch newspaper worded it as: the British monarchy 2.0 is very much alike the Dutch monarchy now. The King's two brothers (back then the Number 2 and the Number 3 in the succession) fully aimed for a succesful career outside the Royal House. They had to provide in their own living as any Dutch has to do.

For the occasional representation and formal outings there is a reimbursement by the Royal House. And like Queen Juliana did for her three youngest daughters, also Queen Beatrix created a special Trust (Foundation Functional Costs of the House Orange-Nassau II) to support her two youngest sons "in their execution of the royal dignity".

Read: maybe both princes and their families have to go to a private function like a royal wedding somewhere in Germany and need transport, accommodation, personnel, a garderobe, gifts, etc. These private costs (when it are no State events) are met by this Trust.

This is a situation already existing for 50 years. It is mind-boggling that Harry and Meghan are treated alike traitors of the Queen. In fact they finally brought the monarchy from 1952 to 2020. Pfffff. Come oooooooon....
THIS THIS THIS THIS! What Harry and Mehgan presented to the world is not without precedence. The Dutch monarchy is a perfect, and imho, template example of a modern monarchy that accepted change and are still a strong and very well respected royal family. The Norwegian, Danish, Belgium and other REIGNING monarchies have all followed suit.

The BRF could not expect Harry, as the future second son of the reigning monarch, to simply expect to fully support his family and then be told in the very near future he'd be told "thank you, but now we have Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis to fill our needs". In 20-25 years, Harry will be in his mid to late 50s, and would have missed a lot of opportunities to be seriously financially independent and do some serious work, which don't have any caveats.

HMQ and Prince Charles should have been a lot more proactive when both William and Harry were adults, and changed "protocols" to enable royals, who are not in the direct line, to be a lot more financially independent. It's not like this couldn't have been forseen.

The members of the BRF who will benefit from Harry and Meghan's actions are Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis. And honestly, they should be grateful they will have control of their lives that others before them didn't have.
Reply With Quote
  #409  
Old 01-11-2020, 09:28 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
But the UK is not the Netherlands. Edward and Sophie tried to work, but were forced to give up their careers. Things are working out a bit better for Beatrice & Eugenie with their careers, but they are further from the throne-and still got negativity directed at them.
And the criticism directed at Harry & Meghan is for a situation a lot more complicated than stepping back from bring full-time royal roles to focus on their careers. For one, they don’t actually have careers.
They gave up their jobs because of the intrusive media, imho. What the newspaper did was so incredibly illegal and it was only after the mobile phone scandal where celebrities sued media outlets that justice was finally served.

The BRF should have been a lot tougher with the media, especially after what happened to Edward and Sophie, and had actually dealt with the want of royals wanting to be financially independent.
Reply With Quote
  #410  
Old 01-11-2020, 09:35 PM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,889
No one is going to kick Harry & Meghan out just because the Cambridge kids are out of school and expected to work for the monarchy. This rumoured slimmed down monarchy (eminent Royal blogger Marlene Koenig says an internal decision has been made long ago) is nothing more than the monarch, heir, heirs children + their spouses working for the monarchy. The only difference from today would be that the children of Harry, Charlotte, Louis won't have royal roles like the Kents and the Gloucesters do today.
Besides that judging from William and Harry the Cambridge kids will be in their mid-thirties before they become full time royals. At that time Harry and Meghan will be in their sixties which would be a suitable retirement age if they so wanted anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #411  
Old 01-11-2020, 09:48 PM
Eskimo's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
As a Dutch I have been viewing it all with open mouth. All that hullabaloo. That senior royals want to pursue an own career is actually the norm over here, as the Dutch State only supports the King, the future King and the former King (and their eventual spouses).

I do not know how it is in the UK, but in my country ANY citizen with a risk profile, rich or poor, prince or pauper, a celebrity or a nobody, is provided personal security by the police.

A Dutch newspaper worded it as: the British monarchy 2.0 is very much alike the Dutch monarchy now. The King's two brothers (back then the Number 2 and the Number 3 in the succession) fully aimed for a succesful career outside the Royal House. They had to provide in their own living as any Dutch has to do.

For the occasional representation and formal outings there is a reimbursement by the Royal House. And like Queen Juliana did for her three youngest daughters, also Queen Beatrix created a special Trust (Foundation Functional Costs of the House Orange-Nassau II) to support her two youngest sons "in their execution of the royal dignity".

Read: maybe both princes and their families have to go to a private function like a royal wedding somewhere in Germany and need transport, accommodation, personnel, a garderobe, gifts, etc. These private costs (when it are no State events) are met by this Trust.

This is a situation already existing for 50 years. It is mind-boggling that Harry and Meghan are treated alike traitors of the Queen. In fact they finally brought the monarchy from 1952 to 2020. Pfffff. Come oooooooon....
The Dutch Model is a good one for the BRF to follow but not in this situation....

If Harry and Meghan want to go out and get jobs to support themselves, more power to them. But this is not what they want or intend to do (as stated on their new website). They want to use their status as royals to shill merchandise and give speeches.

As a Dutch person, how would you feel if Prince Constantijn went around charging millions of dollars to talk about his life as a Prince of the Netherlands and started making paid questionable endorsements that could be misunderstood as having the backing of the entire DRF? All the while expecting the dutch taxpayers to pay for his and his family's homes, security and salary. Do you remember the scandals with Queen Juliana's husband and his kickbacks. This is what it would lead to.

The ONLY problem here is this: Harry is HRH The Duke of Sussex due to the goodwill of the British people. Multiple recent polls seem to indicate that the BRITISH people are not comfortable using their tax dollars to support a part-time Royal who wants to make his money elsewhere.
Reply With Quote
  #412  
Old 01-11-2020, 11:06 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
The Dutch Model is a good one for the BRF to follow but not in this situation....

If Harry and Meghan want to go out and get jobs to support themselves, more power to them. But this is not what they want or intend to do (as stated on their new website). They want to use their status as royals to shill merchandise and give speeches.

As a Dutch person, how would you feel if Prince Constantijn went around charging millions of dollars to talk about his life as a Prince of the Netherlands and started making paid questionable endorsements that could be misunderstood as having the backing of the entire DRF? All the while expecting the dutch taxpayers to pay for his and his family's homes, security and salary. Do you remember the scandals with Queen Juliana's husband and his kickbacks. This is what it would lead to.

The ONLY problem here is this: Harry is HRH The Duke of Sussex due to the goodwill of the British people. Multiple recent polls seem to indicate that the BRITISH people are not comfortable using their tax dollars to support a part-time Royal who wants to make his money elsewhere.
Which website did you read because their official one never stated that they are using their royal status to gain financial independence. The MEDIA have stated that. What you have written is PURE SPECULATION, which has been published by the media. Meghan apprently signed this; Harry is apparently planning this etc etc

The BRF, in conjunction withe the Sussexes are drawing up the Rules of Engagement on how to be part time royals who will earn an income independently. Much like what the Dutch RF did many many decades ago
Reply With Quote
  #413  
Old 01-11-2020, 11:13 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,639
I think that they will be told 'you can't use your royal titles and status for personal gain' and have to sign agreements to that effect. If Meghan wants to return to acting - fine but she would have to use her former name and not act as HRH The Duchess of Sussex or Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor (like Lady Frederick doesn't use her title for her career).

I do think, however, that they have to be all in or all out.

I don't understand why they are allegedly wanting money from Charles and/or The Queen AND wanting financial independence as that is contradictory.

This is a watershed moment for the BRF. I do think Charles' slimmed down monarchy was intended to be siblings and spouses and adult children and spouses but not cousins. Now it seems it is just the one couple in each generation. They will have to work a lot hard (and sorry but the Dutch example ignores one massive difference - The King of the Netherlands if King of ONE country while the monarch of the UK is monarch of 16 different countries AND is head of an organisation that covers about one-third of the earth's population). That is why the BRF needs to be larger in many ways - the Commonwealth.
Reply With Quote
  #414  
Old 01-11-2020, 11:26 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownPrincessJava View Post
Which website did you read because their official one never stated that they are using their royal status to gain financial independence. The MEDIA have stated that. What you have written is PURE SPECULATION, which has been published by the media. Meghan apprently signed this; Harry is apparently planning this etc etc

The BRF, in conjunction withe the Sussexes are drawing up the Rules of Engagement on how to be part time royals who will earn an income independently. Much like what the Dutch RF did many many decades ago
One thing that keeps floating through my head is that this is a statement that really, really, really needs to be clarified. I'm going to present a "what if" as it, to me, presents a huge possibility of what their intent is.

What if. What if by being "financially independent" and earning a "professional income" it is all encapsulated within the Sussex Royal Foundation. The aim of the foundation is to be self supporting without the Sovereign Grant funding and it would then, make Harry and Meghan "professional philanthropists". Many seem to think it means hawking their wares that are branded by their titles and status but just what if that is not the intention.

Harry and Meghan, to me, have absolutely no need to be street vendors or on the home shopping channels hawking wares a la Fergie or do the talk show rounds for their own pockets. However, being able to commercially enhance their philanthropic work in said manners could really skyrocket their incentives.

This fits into the framework of being "royal" with a leap into the 21st century in the way philanthropic work would be done. If I remember right, people were aghast that the Queen's coronation would be broadcast on the TV and people in *pubs* would see it. Times changed and the television medium became a huge asset to the BRF and their work.

Just thoughts here. Nothing stays the same and all change seems scary and uncalled for and improper when new but once applied, can be the best thing since sliced bread.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #415  
Old 01-11-2020, 11:28 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I think that they will be told 'you can't use your royal titles and status for personal gain' and have to sign agreements to that effect. If Meghan wants to return to acting - fine but she would have to use her former name and not act as HRH The Duchess of Sussex or Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor (like Lady Frederick doesn't use her title for her career).

I do think, however, that they have to be all in or all out.

I don't understand why they are allegedly wanting money from Charles and/or The Queen AND wanting financial independence as that is contradictory.

This is a watershed moment for the BRF. I do think Charles' slimmed down monarchy was intended to be siblings and spouses and adult children and spouses but not cousins. Now it seems it is just the one couple in each generation. They will have to work a lot hard (and sorry but the Dutch example ignores one massive difference - The King of the Netherlands if King of ONE country while the monarch of the UK is monarch of 16 different countries AND is head of an organisation that covers about one-third of the earth's population). That is why the BRF needs to be larger in many ways - the Commonwealth.
No doubt future BRF members who wish to be part time royals and in the direct line will be understanding their titles cannot be used for financial/personal advantage. NDAs are just the start. Those who believe its just the 4 main senior royals, and not with a team of lawyers, financial, government officials etc are not involved are deluded.

Kingdom of the Netherlands have 4 constituent countries —the Netherlands, Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten.
Reply With Quote
  #416  
Old 01-11-2020, 11:34 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
One thing that keeps floating through my head is that this is a statement that really, really, really needs to be clarified. I'm going to present a "what if" as it, to me, presents a huge possibility of what their intent is.

What if. What if by being "financially independent" and earning a "professional income" it is all encapsulated within the Sussex Royal Foundation. The aim of the foundation is to be self supporting without the Sovereign Grant funding and it would then, make Harry and Meghan "professional philanthropists". Many seem to think it means hawking their wares that are branded by their titles and status but just what if that is not the intention.

Harry and Meghan, to me, have absolutely no need to be street vendors or on the home shopping channels hawking wares a la Fergie or do the talk show rounds for their own pockets. However, being able to commercially enhance their philanthropic work in said manners could really skyrocket their incentives.

This fits into the framework of being "royal" with a leap into the 21st century in the way philanthropic work would be done. If I remember right, people were aghast that the Queen's coronation would be broadcast on the TV and people in *pubs* would see it. Times changed and the television medium became a huge asset to the BRF and their work.

Just thoughts here. Nothing stays the same and all change seems scary and uncalled for and improper when new but once applied, can be the best thing since sliced bread.
I do not believe the Sovereign Grant has ever been in involved in private charitable foundations, i.e. The Duke ofEdinburgh Awards, The Prince’s Trust or The Royal Foundation of.... That has nothing to do with the Sussex Royal set up.
Reply With Quote
  #417  
Old 01-11-2020, 11:36 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
One thing that keeps floating through my head is that this is a statement that really, really, really needs to be clarified. I'm going to present a "what if" as it, to me, presents a huge possibility of what their intent is.

What if. What if by being "financially independent" and earning a "professional income" it is all encapsulated within the Sussex Royal Foundation. The aim of the foundation is to be self supporting without the Sovereign Grant funding and it would then, make Harry and Meghan "professional philanthropists". Many seem to think it means hawking their wares that are branded by their titles and status but just what if that is not the intention.

Harry and Meghan, to me, have absolutely no need to be street vendors or on the home shopping channels hawking wares a la Fergie or do the talk show rounds for their own pockets. However, being able to commercially enhance their philanthropic work in said manners could really skyrocket their incentives.

This fits into the framework of being "royal" with a leap into the 21st century in the way philanthropic work would be done. If I remember right, people were aghast that the Queen's coronation would be broadcast on the TV and people in *pubs* would see it. Times changed and the television medium became a huge asset to the BRF and their work.

Just thoughts here. Nothing stays the same and all change seems scary and uncalled for and improper when new but once applied, can be the best thing since sliced bread.


In my opinion and my interpretation, when I read the website, I believe the Sussexes want to be professional philanthropists. In the patronanges they've signed up to as Royals, and those of personal interest, it seems they want to be like Bill and Melinda Gates. You have articulated my interpretation perfectly.

Changes need to occur, and like most transformations, it scares people. The BRF will survive this and honestly, I believe it will make the British Royal Family brand a lot stronger and far more relevant for today and the future.
Reply With Quote
  #418  
Old 01-11-2020, 11:36 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,639
The UK has four constituent countries - England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The Netherlands you are describing is the same as the UK not separate independent countries at all.
Reply With Quote
  #419  
Old 01-12-2020, 12:02 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
I do not believe the Sovereign Grant has ever been in involved in private charitable foundations, i.e. The Duke ofEdinburgh Awards, The Prince’s Trust or The Royal Foundation of.... That has nothing to do with the Sussex Royal set up.
Exactly. Its why its been stated that they're going to forgo the 5% funding from the Sovereign Grant for the Sussex Royal foundation. I do believe that The Cambridge's foundation does receive funding from the Sovereign Grant but not the other ones listed. Perhaps that is why Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall were able to incorporate the Duchy Originals and such products contract with Waitrose with profits percentages going into the Prince's Trust endeavor.

On the funding page of the Sussex IG account, it goes into detail to explain the Sovereign Grant....
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #420  
Old 01-12-2020, 12:30 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Exactly. Its why its been stated that they're going to forgo the 5% funding from the Sovereign Grant for the Sussex Royal foundation. I do believe that The Cambridge's foundation does receive funding from the Sovereign Grant but not the other ones listed. Perhaps that is why Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall were able to incorporate the Duchy Originals and such products contract with Waitrose with profits percentages going into the Prince's Trust endeavor.

On the funding page of the Sussex IG account, it goes into detail to explain the Sovereign Grant....
The Sovereign Grant funds The Monarch’s (and her representatives’) official duties. Neither The Royal Foundation,in either of its iterations, or Sussex Royal qualify.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Future of the Belgian monarchy Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 119 03-24-2020 10:41 AM
Future and Popularity of the Spanish Monarchy TODOI Royal Family of Spain 1530 03-22-2020 02:01 PM
The Future of the Danish Monarchy Empress Royal House of Denmark 768 02-15-2020 03:49 PM
Future of the Dutch Monarchy Marengo Dutch Royals 39 11-29-2017 09:53 AM




Popular Tags
administrator althorp aristocracy armenia armstrong-jones bangladesh belgian royal belgian royal family chittagong coronavirus crown prince hussein's future wife cyprus danish royalty denmark diana princess of wales duchess of cambridge duchess of sussex dutch royal family dutch royals foundation future future wife of prince hussein germany haakon vii hill history israel jumma king philippe king salman list of rulers lithuania lithuanian palaces mailing meghan markle memoir monaco history monarchist monarchy mountbatten naples netflix nobel prize norway history official visit pakistan potential areas prince charles prince daniel princess benedikte princess elizabeth princess margaret pronunciation queen mathilde queen maud rown royal children russian imperial family saudi arabia south korea spanish history spencer family state visit state visit to denmark sweden tracts united kingdom visit from sweden von hofmannsthal working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:54 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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