The Windsors and Europe

[ysbel]

One reason why the Windsor's absence is drawing so much comment is people's natural tendency to look for conformity in groups. We expect people that belong to the same group to behave in a consistent manner, at least in social situations.

Regardless of how the royal families feel about each other, non-royals will lump them all together as the royals. When we see a behavior that the majority of the group exhibits (like showing up at Carl Gustaf's birthday) its natural to criticize the odd one out and want to bring them back inline with the rest of the group. In this case, its the British and the Spanish.

The Spanish haven't received so much comment, I think, because in general, they do show up at other royal events and the monarchs do appear at some of them.

With the British, however, people have noted that the Queen has never really participated in other royal events so its an observable pattern.

My own personal opinion is that until recently it wasn't really a big deal and part of the reason was that the European monarchies were called 'bicycle monarchies' and not considered in the same league as the British who were really royal. The Europeans liked their monarchies but everyone seemed to agree that the British were a family apart from other royal families.

Now with the scandals of the 80s and 90s and recently steps to simplify the British monarchy, the attributes of royal silence and lack of scandal which set the British apart from other royal families have been eroded somewhat. So ts harder for the rest of us not to lump the British monarchy with the other monarchies and wonder why they're not getting with the program.

We do the same when one royal doesn't seem to fit in with the other royals in their family. Princess Michael has a much more flaboyant and outspoken style than the rest of the British Royals and she is routinely criticized because she doesn't fit the mold of how people expect British royals to behave.

 

[Karisma]

King Juan Carlos

The Spanish haven't received so much comment, I think, because in general, they do show up at other royal events and the monarchs do appear at some of them.

With the British, however, people have noted that the Queen has never really participated in other royal events so its an observable pattern.

It´s well known that King Juan Carlos nowdays is a rare guest in "Royal parties". But he still went to Stockholm!

Queen Elisabet never have participated in other royal events. I can understand she mybe can be forced having to present a united front in this matter. But in my point of wiev it´s all about breach of style in the BRF when they all failed to attend a Monarch:s 60th years celebration.

 

[Marengo]

Exactly!This has been blown out of proportion. Was it a state event? NO! Was it crucial to British-Swedish realtions to have them there-NO! The Royal Family had a busy week with the Queen's 80th birthday, so it's quite understandable that they didn't attend the Swedish affair. Why weren't tehre this many complaints when the royal bunch didn't turn up for the Prince of Wales' wedding? This is such a petty discussion!

The 'royal bunch' did not show up as Charles and Camilla themselves did not want the wedding to be to high profile and they send personal invitations to some royals.

Busy with a birthday? What did they actually do? Attend a few parties and that's it! I am sure it must be tiring for the Queen and the DoE but the others are still young and have enough energy to attend two (or more) birthday celebrations in one week. They don't have that many official tasks anyway.

I agree that it was not essensial for the swedish-british relations, but some courtesy would have been nice.

 

[Skydragon]

monarchy, the attributes of royal silence and lack of scandal which set the British apart from other royal families have been eroded somewhat. So ts harder for the rest of us not to lump the British monarchy with the other monarchies and wonder why they're not getting with the program.
.

Why should anyone have the right to demand that they change to accomodate the views and wishes of any non related country. There are, I am sure, many instances of behavior in other royal families that the British would frown upon but, we don't start ranting about it.

How many other's didn't go, the Japanese for instance.

It was a birthday party, they didn't go, so what. Marengo states it is a courtesy that the BRF didn't afford the Swedes but, as long as they declined the invitation and didn't just not turn up, then courtesy was extended.

 

[Skydragon]

The 'royal bunch' did not show up as Charles and Camilla themselves did not want the wedding to be to high profile and they send personal invitations to some royals.

There were some royals that were invited but, were unable or chose not to attend and nobody made a great fuss about it.

 

[ysbel]

Why should anyone have the right to demand that they change to accomodate the views and wishes of any non related country.

One reason is that the royals are observed to belong in the same social 'class' and classes do tend to have standards of behavior in social situations (many of them unwritten) where breaches are frowned upon and commented upon.

In a strict sense, within Britain and other monarchies, no one else is in the Royals' class - not the middle class, not the aristocracy. The only place royals can find their peers are in the countries with other monarchies.

From what I read, class distinctions within the countries are disappearing so in the future it may not be that big of a deal. See the current article on the BBC about the British confusion about who is middle class. But the foundation of the monarchy is based on a class system so if the class system totally becomes irrelevant, it could have larger impact than just not showing up at birthday parties.

 

[Elspeth]

Perhaps we could get off the subject of this particular birthday party and back onto the general topic.

 

[Daneborn]

They've actually been modernising throughout the 20th century; they tend to do it slowly, though. The British royal family tends to have a high profile because the UK was such a major player on the world stage until relatively recently in historical times, but many of the other constitutional monarchies have been every bit as hide-bound by tradition (the Spanish and Japanese ones as obvious examples). It was permitted for British royals to marry commoners and remain royal quite some time before it was allowed in Sweden.

Well, for the last 100 years or more, the UK has been focused far more on the British Empire than on Europe. While the European monarchs have been closer and have intermarried, the British have tended to marry German royalty, which don't exist any more, or British aristocrats. The fact that we're an island nation, even if the Channel is really quite narrow, has had a significant effect on the British character.

I think you are slightly constructing your own view of the 20th century history.

Firstly, I don't agreee marrying commoners has been more accepted in the UK than in Sweden.

In the beginning of the 70's, when the reigning King of Sweden married the commoner Silvia Sommerlath, the English prince Charles wasn't even allowed to think about marrying Camilla.

For the 1910 generation of Swedish princes it's true they lost their titles as they married commoners, just like the English King George 8 (the Wallis Simpson incident.)

The 1930 / 1940 generation of Swedish princesses (similar to the late princess Margaret) kept their titles as they married commoners. One kept her HH title as she married a German Hohenzollern prince, but the only one who has kept performing duties for the Swedish court is Princess Christina Mrs. Magnuson.

Secondly, about in-married German royalty in the 20th century:

England
Queen Elizabeth married the Duke of Edinburgh. His mother was a German, that's true, and through his father he's got Greek and thereby Danish ancestry.
King Georg 6 (died 1936) and Georg 7 (died 1952) both married English women, I believe, the later Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth.
King Edward 7 (died 1910) was married to princess Alexandra of Denmark

Sweden
As we know, the current Queen Silvia is German, be it a commoner.
Carl Gustaf's mother was the German princess Sibylla of Saxe-Coburg.
The generation prior to that (since Carl-Gustaf's father died young):
Gustav 6 (died 1973) married the English princess Margaret of Connaught and as she died he married the English Lady Louise Mountbatten.
Gustav 5 (died 1950) married the German princess Victoria of Baden.
His father Oscar 2 (died 1907) was married to the German princess Sophia of Nassau.

Denmark
Queen Margrethe is married to prince Henrik from France.
Her father Frederik 9 (died 1972) was married to Ingrid of Sweden.
His father Christian 10 (died 1947) was married to the German princess Alexandrine of Mecklenburg.
And his father Frederik 8 (died 1912) was married to Louise of Sweden.
His father, Christian 9 (died 1906) was married to the German princess Louise of Hessen-Kassel.

As I sum it up the word German appears far more often in the Swedish 20th century history than the English.

German royalty, whether it still exists or not, that's an issue I suggest we debate in another topic since it could get rather extensive.

Continental mentality as opposed to our own mentality, we got that in Sweden too, as we often refer to things happening on the continent and praise ourself for being a little off limit.

 

[Skydragon]

One reason is that the royals are observed to belong in the same social 'class' and classes do tend to have standards of behavior in social situations (many of them unwritten) where breaches are frowned upon and commented upon.
.

A simple question then, do you like all of the people you know in the same social class as yourself and would you associate with them purely because they are from that class?

The Windsors and any family have the right to decide who they wish to mix with and who they don't.

At the moment I believe they are still reflecting the view of the Europeans that many of their subjects have, that we do not want closer ties.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The information was taken from a site on haemophiliacs which I should have mentioned (and now can't find), so thank you very much for the facts you have given!

Thank you for understanding.

 

[Kelly]

A simple question then, do you like all of the people you know in the same social class as yourself and would you associate with them purely because they are from that class?

The Windsors and any family have the right to decide who they wish to mix with and who they don't.

At the moment I believe they are still reflecting the view of the Europeans that many of their subjects have, that we do not want closer ties.

I agree they do have the right to choose because they are royals. However what do you mean by "we do not want closer ties"?

 

[Karisma]

What is "being Royal"?

Well, we don´t live in the 19:th or 20:th century now! What is "being Royal” nowdays, is what we should ask ourselves? In the past many of them, before the 19:th, were war heros. But in a modern society we needs other “heros”. We need them to pattern oneself on. Then social class and high standard isn´t enough being a person for someone to model themselves on. Royals need to attend to one's commitments the way people in their contries expects, otherwise they will abolish themselves.

 

[Kelly]

Well, we don´t live in the 18:th century now! What is "being Royal” nowdays, is what we should ask ourselves? In the past many of them, before the 18:th, were war heros. But in a modern society we needs other “heros”. We need them to pattern oneself on. Then social class and high standard isn´t enough being a person for someone to model themselves on. Royals need to attend to one's commitments the way people in their contries expects, otherwise they will abolish themselves.

I suppose you are right. However most of the royals now are under a constitutional monarchy. The way I see it is that they are just there because the people are use to that tradition. They don't actually govern the country persay. They are head of states but other than that....? As you say though, it is the people who pay taxes that keep up their life styles and if they want them there... they may want to consider that.

 

[Karisma]

Proud and conceited

At the moment I believe they are still reflecting the view of the Europeans that many of their subjects have, that we do not want closer ties.

You must excuse me but I don´t know how to interpret what You wrote? Naturaly You can´t mean that Brittish people don´t like people from other European nations. Our Royals represents us, and Your Royals represnt You! And of course You are far from the days when the BRF were a dynasty who effected the society. Nowdays they don´t!Not even on Your own island.

Today individuals have gained greater influence over developments in society than Royals. So when Royals don´t gain their society and deserve one's needs they will be replaced. Royals need to serve their sociaity nowdays. And I´m sure Britten needs Europe more then inversely. That´s why one shall keep up relations - nobility and commoner, Briton and Svensson.

 

[redfox6]

You must excuse me but I don´t know how to interpret what You wrote? Naturaly You can´t mean that Brittish people don´t like people from other European nations. Our Royals represents us, and Your Royals represnt You! And of course You are far from the days when the BRF were a dynasty who effected the society. Nowdays they don´t!Not even on Your own island.

Today individuals have gained greater influence over developments in society than Royals. So when Royals don´t gain their society and deserve one's needs they will be replaced. Royals need to serve their sociaity nowdays. And I´m sure Britten needs Europe more then inversely. That´s why one shall keep up relations - nobility and commoner, Briton and Svensson.

Actually, from an American standpoint, it is all nonsense. You choose with whom you wish to associate. If they went or didn't go, in the long runs who cares and what is changed. Royals are no better than anyone else. They are just people. Some kind and giving others selfish and disinterested. How they view themselves these days is actually through the mirror of your eyes. Those of you who dwell in each country approves or disapproves of their royalty and how they live their lives. The Swedes are warm and outgoing, the British aloof and distant. It is neither good or bad. It is. If you want change you (each citizen of the country) must demand the change. Part of your tax money pays for their ways.

 

[Elspeth]

I think you are slightly constructing your own view of the 20th century history.

Firstly, I don't agreee marrying commoners has been more accepted in the UK than in Sweden.

I didn't say anything about it being accepted, I said it was permitted for royals to marry commoners and remain royal. One of Queen Victoria's daughters married a commoner (the heir to a dukedom is a commoner in the British system) and continued to be known as Princess Louise. The Queen's aunt Princess Mary married a commoner and continued to be HRH; in fact she was created Princess Royal some years after her marriage. The Queen's father and two of her uncles married commoners and kept their titles (albeit with a struggle and morganatically in the case of the Duke of Windsor, but that was because of marrying a divorcee). In the case of the Swedish king's uncles, two of them married commoners and had to give up their royal titles and one of them spent years not getting married because he'd have had to give up his royal status if he did.

For the 1910 generation of Swedish princes it's true they lost their titles as they married commoners, just like the English King George 8 (the Wallis Simpson incident.)

Absolutely not just like Edward (not George) VIII. He remained His Royal Highness throughout his life (he was introduced as His Royal Highness The Prince Edward before his radio broadcast directly after the abdication); his wife wasn't given a royal title because of her marital status, not because of being a commoner.

Secondly, about in-married German royalty in the 20th century:

If you read my post, you'd see I was explaining why British royalty tended to marry Germans when there were still Germans for them to marry, and I said this tradition went back to the first Hanover kings. I wasn't talking about just the 20th century, but all the way back to the early 18th century.

 

[Margrethe II]

his wife wasn't given a royal title because of her marital status, not because of being a commoner.

Perhaps, maybe a little "influence" over the Kings decision is also likely...

Just a little of course

"MII"

 

[Duc de Chatres]

Does the world have to come to an end because the Queen did not attend a Swedish birthday? I don't think the Queen nor her family are under any obligation to attend any mass partying on the Continent. It was clearly a private affair despite teh tiaras and carriages. I don't think it has anything to do with Windsor indifference to their European cousins nor the supposed superiority complex that majority of respondents seem to accuse them of. True, the Windsors are the last great dynasty in Europe but policy since the end of the First and Second World Wars has been to place emphasis on British rather that Germanic and Continental links. Someone mentioned the Queen Mother's disdain for the 'Faberge aunts' earlier and maybe the Queen shares the same sentiments but we will never know. What counts is the services Her Majesty and the family perform at home and in the Commonwealth. Not appearing at the Swedish birthday doesn't really count as an aspect of royal life crucial to Britain and the Commonwealth. Besides, those dynastic links are watering down with every royal marriage these days. I think we are going round in circles, with no offense to anyone. Maybe the moderator should be thinking of closing this thread?

 

[Duc de Chatres]

Out of curiosity, who thinks things should have been left as they were up to the 1960s- royalty only marrying royalty? Maybe all the problems the Windsors have faced wouldn't have happened if they married into Continental royal families. Sounds a bit too old fashioned, I know!

 

[Daneborn]

Out of curiosity, who thinks things should have been left as they were up to the 1960s- royalty only marrying royalty? Maybe all the problems the Windsors have faced wouldn't have happened if they married into Continental royal families. Sounds a bit too old fashioned, I know!

It's not old-fashioned at all.

When we no longer see the difference between ourselves and those who represent the country what's the point in having people as state heads who are born into it ??

I'm not suggesting people who actually dislike each other should be forced to marry each other, but I believe our somewhat romantic idea about love doesn't always meet the requirements of an institution with 1000 years of history.

If they want the priviliges they ought to think twice, thrice, fource before they marry and not rush into things like Charles / Diana and the Danish Joachim / Alexandra.

Duty sticks, love fades.

Just out of curiosity, are there any eligable princesses around that could have been married to Charles back in the 70's / 80's ??

My suggestion would be princess Alexia of Greece.

 

[Karisma]

Sandpit

Not appearing at the Swedish birthday doesn't really count as an aspect of royal life crucial to Britain and the Commonwealth.

No, it´s about honour our King since 33 years by attending the party when he, the head of state (Sweden), celebrated his sixith anniversary. For me it´s a question of etiquette and behavior. Of course BRF can do as they like to do, but I do think a representative from the BRF would have been very welcome.

 

[Warren]

Posts not relating to the Windsors have been removed.

Warren
British Forums moderator

 

[Skydragon]

What counts is the services Her Majesty and the family perform at home and in the Commonwealth. Not appearing at the Swedish birthday doesn't really count as an aspect of royal life crucial to Britain and the Commonwealth.

I think the royal family does a brilliant job of representing the UK wherever they go.

 

[ysbel]

A simple question then, do you like all of the people you know in the same social class as yourself and would you associate with them purely because they are from that class?

The Windsors and any family have the right to decide who they wish to mix with and who they don't.

At the moment I believe they are still reflecting the view of the Europeans that many of their subjects have, that we do not want closer ties.

I do go to events where I don't particularly like the people and I don't necessarily want to go because it's considered appropriate.

I think we all have been to some of those. I doubt if everybody who went to CGs birthday party were really fond of the man or were looking forward to a good time, some probably went because it was considered the right thing to do.

Public figures like the royals don't always have the luxury to turn down an event just because they don't feel like it or they don't like a person.

I think you may be right in that the Queen is following public sentiment. What interests me is that while the Queen has placed a great care in maintaining the traditional ties to the Commonwealth, the results haven't really panned out; those ties seem to be shrinking despite her best efforts whereas ties with other members of the European Union are looking stronger regardless of whether people like each other or not.

 

[Karisma]

Very well written

I do go to events where I don't particularly like the people and I don't necessarily want to go because it's considered appropriate.

I think we all have been to some of those. I doubt if everybody who went to CGs birthday party were really fond of the man or were looking forward to a good time, some probably went because it was considered the right thing to do.

Public figures like the royals don't always have the luxury to turn down an event just because they don't feel like it or they don't like a person.

I think you may be right in that the Queen is following public sentiment. What interests me is that while the Queen has placed a great care in maintaining the traditional ties to the Commonwealth, the results haven't really panned out; those ties seem to be shrinking despite her best efforts whereas ties with other members of the European Union are looking stronger regardless of whether people like each other or not.

Exactly in my point of view, ysbel! You have to see Your neighbours almost every day even if You don´t feel like it or don't like them. You must be in staff meetings among people You don´t feel companionable about. There are traditions to follow everywere! Commoner or Royalty - we all have to consider what´s the right thing to do.

The traditional ties to the Commonwealth has gone down the pan! It seem to be necessary measures, in any case for the British, taking consideration of the disadvantages repudiation of the majority and in the future, perhaps, being outsiders. Fact is: There isn´t even a translation for "the Commonwealth" in a moder n dictionary of 2006. But You can find facts in a history book...

 

[kelly9480]

The Commonwealth of Nations is probably on it's way out, but that has more to do with the organization's inability to equalize standards of living among it's members than anything the British have done. Unfortunately, there's a division in the group that splits down racial lines (it's been referred to as the White Commonwealth and the Black Commonwealth, roughly equating to the developed world and the developing world).

The ties to Commonwealth nations aren't fading, though. The Queen is still highly thought of throughout the Commonwealth, even among the republics and the soon-to-be republics.

I don't think the British mind the idea of being outsiders when the club is the EU. You rarely hear the Brits say much of anything nice about the EU and many people have said they'd like to leave it. British nationalism -- the isolation that inevitably comes from being an island nation with a long, and storied past, seems to play a large role in why the Windsors are so keen to play down their continental links. After Diana died, the Windsors were derided as being krauts are Germans again -- those links are something that is used to attack the monarchy all the time.

 

[ysbel]

After Diana died, the Windsors were derided as being krauts are Germans again -- those links are something that is used to attack the monarchy all the time.

That's interesting, kelly. I indeed remember the Earl Spencer's speech which was IMHO in very bad taste. As if the Windsors hadn't been in England for almost 300 years! No wonder the English royals want to play the ties down if people attack them for it.

 

[kelly9480]

Diana's own stepgrandmother, Barbara Cartland, went public calling the family krauts. Obviously, she chose to ignore the fact that her stepgreatgrandsons are part of the family she was deriding.

The family's german roots are always been brought up in criticisms of the monarchy. You'd think the Scots Queen Mum and English Diana never existed.

 

[Karisma]

Whatever

GB as a nation, in full parliamentary democracy , have decided that "the club" is EU, an "joind that club", so what the BRF imagine personally is not an important matter. There are no royal power so the BRF are forced to represent the majority of the British people.

 

[Skydragon]

I think you may be right in that the Queen is following public sentiment. What interests me is that while the Queen has placed a great care in maintaining the traditional ties to the Commonwealth, the results haven't really panned out; those ties seem to be shrinking despite her best efforts whereas ties with other members of the European Union are looking stronger regardless of whether people like each other or not.

The ties with Europe are not at all strong, the ties with the commonwealth countries (whether in or out) will be in everyones minds for a very long time and will remain strongest. We have done so much together and that can't be dismissed, there is a real history between us. Some may want to think we are close to Europe but, that is according to polls and IMO, a myth.

It is sad that the Swedes have been so upset by this matter, (that shows how different we are, as it wouldn't be noticed by the British) but, we do not know what the reasons were and it seems wrong to judge someone before knowing all the facts.

The Windsors are, IMO, still thought highly of in Europe, if the amount of European tourists coming over for events that they are going to be at, is anything to go by.