The Windsors and Europe

[Reina]

Does this not show precedence? http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=83154

 

[kelly9480]

Considering it's Denmark, where the Greeks are seated as though they still reign, it's hard to say. If Rainier or his representative was not present, then EIIR or her representative would be first, so Philip, who was standing in for EIIR who had to stay home with Blair problems, would take precedence before all the other non-Danish royals.

 

[Australian]

doesnt it make you wonder that if the Queen is not required to do anything in Scotland and other countries under the monarchy, that the monarchy is not needed in this day and age, lets face it, they have no real power or anything.

 

[Reina]

I kind of don't agree-they bring tourists (money) and make the UK and other countries interesting.

 

[Australian]

Maybe they make England and the rest of the UK interesting but they certaintly dont have any bearing on other countries of the commonwealth, Australia hasnt been made interesting because of the monarchy or Canada i assume, i think what makes other countries interesting is their own particular characterstics, not the British monarchy.

 

[kelly9480]

But it's not the British monarchy in Australia. It's the Australian monarchy and has been since Australia moved from being a colony. The actual head of state may not be present very much, but her representative, in the form of Governor-General, is. The Australian GG probably has a very different way of going about things than the Canadian GG, as a result of Australians being different from Canadians. In that, the GG, and by extension the monarchy the GG represents, highlights each country's characteristics.

 

[Iain]

There is nothing in Scotland that absolutely requires the monarch's presence. There's not a State Opening of Parliament. She's not likely to be asked to address Holyrood every year, or anything like that. She's not asked to open the General Synod in person, but is allowed to delegate that. Other than a garden party, and the Thistle ceremony, she isn't desperately required there. If something in Scotland absolutely had to be done by her, she'd be there. But she doesn't feel that she is absolutely required. And perhaps that's simply her perception of things, but it's not like Scots are in the streets demanding to see their Queen. Would it be nice if she were there more often? Yes, of course. But approval ratings seem to indicate they are perfectly happy with the job Anne is doing, and perhaps also Charles. They may like to see EIIR, but they may not be making that clear enough to her, her staff or the press.

Scotland is not a kindgom. It's part of a kingdom, but in no way can it be considered on par with Canada or Belize, independent kingdoms who also happen to share a monarch with the UK. She isn't Queen of Scots. She isn't even Queen of Scotland. She's Queen of the UK, which includes Scotland. She has never officially called herself Queen of Scots. To hold her to some standard as Queen of Scots, when she doesn't consider herself that is to ask for disappointment time and again.

In terms of workload, the Windsors are easily the greatest. They carry out more engagements than any of the others, though I would suspect Belgium and Spain compete for number 2. In terms of grandeur, they are the greatest, easily. No other monarchy in Europe can claim something like Windsor castle or the Coronation ceremony. In terms of being one of the ppl, they fall into the middle of the pack, depending on the family member. It depends on what a person is basing "greatest" on to say whether or not the Windsors are first.

I don't mean to be rude but it is really annoying that a foreigner should presume to know that there is nothing in Scotland that requires the monarch's presence. Scotland is a kingdom and the oldest in Europe at that. The Queen (she is not EIIR in Scotland) does open the Scottish parliament and when she did so last year was welcomed as Queen of Scots just as she was in 1953 when she came to Edinburgh for the first time as Queen to recieve the Honours of Scotland. I haven't a clue what you mean by the General Synod. There is no such thing. Anne does carry out some duties in Scotland but not that many. Any person or body wanting the Queen to carry out some sort of duty must arrange for it to take place in the first week of July as that is her "Scottish week" but when it comes to England it can be at almost any time apart from during her four months holiday. Many monarchies have buildings on a par, or even more beautiful than Windsor and as for the Coronation, that is on it's way out.

 

[james]

She attended the King of Belgium's funeral a few years ago so to say she dosn't attend foriegn funerals as a matter of course is wrong.

 

[ElisaR]

This is true. But he was a king. No reigning monarch has died since then (Rainier was a prince). Perhaps she would attend the funeral of a reigning king or queen.

 

[kelly9480]

She attended Badouin's funeral because she was told it would look bad for her not to go because she couldn't claim she had royal engagements (she was on holiday). Otherwise, she probably wouldn't have gone because she and Badouin reportedly had issues in the 1950s and 1960s

 

[Sean.~]

This is true. But he was a king. No reigning monarch has died since then (Rainier was a prince). Perhaps she would attend the funeral of a reigning king or queen.

I wouldn't bet on it. King Olav was also a reigning monarch at the time of his death, as was Furst Franz of Lichtenstein, but HM did not attend their funerals either. Nor did she attend those of King Frederick, King Gustav Adolf, King Paul, Emperor Hirohito etc. (to name a few).

Additionally, despite being 'only a Prince', Ranier was a reigning monarch, since a monarch is one who reigns or rules over a territory, usually by hereditary right. He was the longest reigning monarch in Europe at the time of his death.

Also, I know this thread is about the Windsors relations with European royals, there have been non-European reigning monarchs who have died since Boudioun (I can never spell it ;-)), The Kings of Nepal and Lesotho immediately come to mind.

As Kelly pointed out, she attended King B's funeral because she was told to.
She has also been prevented from attending royal events abroad because they could turn out to be 'undignified', (for lack of a better term) and not befitting her. An example of this is the Shah's rather tasteless (IMHO) party at Persopolis in the 1970s. Her Majesty was prevented from attending by the foreign office.

I get impression, actually, that the powers that be & Her Majesty want to avoid an image of her jetsetting across Europe attending weddings, parties, etc. with her entourage. Apparently she also doesn't want to upstage.

Besides, from what I know she isn't much for going out and to stay home when she can. Hence she often sends a rep who will be more 'into it' than she.


Sean

 

[Sean.~]

I kind of don't agree-they bring tourists (money) and make the UK and make the UK and other countries interesting.

However, one could argue (and I don't necessarily subscribe to this position) that the tourists will still come & even more so if the RF wasn't there. They would most likely have access to all the palaces, historical sites, works of art, etc. Look at France and Russia. How many travel to those countries to Versailles, the Winter Palace, etc. ?

But I do agree that they do make things more interesting. At least for those of us who are interested in such things.

 

[EmpressRouge]

However, one could argue (and I don't necessarily subscribe to this position) that the tourists will still come & even more so if the RF wasn't there. They would most likely have access to all the palaces, historical sites, works of art, etc. Look at France and Russia. How many travel to those countries to Versailles, the Winter Palace, etc. ?

But I do agree that they do make things more interesting. At least for those of us who are interested in such things.

I can see some random girl just going to Britain thinking that she will meet Prince William or Harry (somehow ), and it will be love at first sight, and they'll get married, and she'll become a Princess. Ok that's a little far fetched, but I was reading a biography about Grace Kelly and the author mentioned girls going to Monaco thinking they'll just pick up Prince Albert at a bar, and they'll all end up as the next Princess Grace.

 

[Sean.~]

I can see some random girl just going to Britain thinking that she will meet Prince William or Harry (somehow ), and it will be love at first sight, and they'll get married, and she'll become a Princess. Ok that's a little far fetched, but I was reading a biography about Grace Kelly and the author mentioned girls going to Monaco thinking they'll just pick up Prince Albert at a bar, and they'll all end up as the next Princess Grace.

Hey, it worked for Mary. ;-)

 

[Warren]

Issues

she and Badouin reportedly had issues in the 1950s and 1960s

More info please.

 

[EmpressRouge]

Hey, it worked for Mary. ;-)

Well, Frederick actually went to Mary's homeland, but I see your point...Guess you really can pick up random princes at bars.

 

[kelly9480]

Badouin wouldn't attend her dad's funeral because Belgian protocol said he shouldn't go to a country until he'd been on a state visit in the country beforehand, but he'd just come to the throne months before her dad died. EIIR reportedly took umbrage at Belgium's lack of an (appropriate) representative (they send Albert) and it simmered. Then he refused (like most other royals) to attend Margaret's wedding because of who she was marrying and EIIR got her own back by sending Margaret (and Tony) to his wedding.

 

[Alexandria]

Badouin wouldn't attend her dad's funeral because Belgian protocol said he shouldn't go to a country until he'd been on a state visit in the country beforehand, but he'd just come to the throne months before her dad died. EIIR reportedly took umbrage at Belgium's lack of a representative and it simmered. Then he refused (like most other royals) to attend Margaret's wedding because of who she was marrying and EIIR got her own back by sending Margaret (and Tony) to his wedding.

Thanks for this bit of information kelly9480. I never thought of Queen Elizabeth II as being "spiteful" in this way -- to send Princess Margaret and Lord Snowdon to King Baudoin's wedding when he had refused to attend their wedding as a bit of "revenge."

 

[kelly9480]

Well, Margaret, and EIIR, had been insulted by the refusal to attend Margaret's wedding, so I'm not going to fault EIIR for sending Margaret to Badouin's marriage. Tony wasn't titled until October 1961, so he went as a commoner. Since she herself wasn't going to attend the wedding (they hadn't sent anyone to Albert's wedding the previous year), who else could she have sent that was of the proper standing? Only the Queen Mum, Philip, or Margaret would have been good enough for the wedding of a King.

 

[Warren]

HM making a point

EIIR got her own back by sending Margaret (and Tony) to his wedding.

Queen Elizabeth was just making a point.
(something like "don't mess with me!").

Great story kelly9480, thanks.

 

[BeatrixFan]

I Vant to Be Alone

This may have been discussed before, but I can't find a topic along these lines so here goes.

Why oh Why, does QE2 insist on sending her children to big international events. With the exception of King Baudoin's funeral, she never goes to the family weddings, wedding anniversaries, funerals or Jubilees. And yet, everyone attends hers. It really gets on my nerves because an important part of her job is to represent Britain. How does it make us seem? Snooty and snobbish?

I understand she's 79. But come on, she's never really made an effort has she? I mean, would it have hurt her to attend Crown Prince Frederik's wedding? Why couldn't she go to the Grand Duchess Josephine-Charlotte's Funeral? Or Queen Ingrid's? Beatrix, Carl Gustav et al went to the Queen Mother's Funeral - but Elizabeth just wont.

Is there a reason for this that I've missed? I respect HM greatly and of course, as my Sovereign, she's got my love and loyalty - but as I'm learning more about the other Monarchs, I just see her as being a tad above herself and generally a little starchy. (Sorry Ma'am)

 

[Elspeth]

Im not sure how relevant it is, but there was some discussion of the topic in this thread:

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2060

 

[BeatrixFan]

Re;

Ah! Just ignore this one as my little rant!

 

[Elspeth]

Well, it's an interesting topic, considering how many European monarchs show up to British events and how the Queen doesn't return the favour.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Re:

It just makes her look like a grumpy old lady. Why can't I be Lord Chamberlain?!

 

[Maxie]

Well, it is interesting indeed. It's something I noticed too, since we recently had so many royal weddings and funerals here in Holland and it was always prince Charles who showed up...

 

[Mapple]

I wouldn't bet on it. King Olav was also a reigning monarch at the time of his death, as was Furst Franz of Lichtenstein, but HM did not attend their funerals either. Nor did she attend those of King Frederick, King Gustav Adolf, King Paul, Emperor Hirohito etc. (to name a few).

...

I understand why the Queen did not attend the funeral of Hirohito, but why she stayed away from the funerals of uncontroversial Scandinavian kings?

 

[BeatrixFan]

Re:

I wonder how she decides who goes in her place? Anne hardly every goes does she?

 

[pollyemma]

personally, I think she gets depressed at how much happier the family lives of most other royal families are....

 

[BeatrixFan]

Re:

Quite possibly PollyEmma. I can't imagine it, but Queen Margrethe must sometimes think, "Another wedding - I need a hat, I don't really like the two who are marrying and the parents are all wrong - but I'll go".