If monarchs don't live in royal palaces, what's in them?

[CSENYC]

Many kings and queens don't use their countries' Royal Palaces as their principal residences, or residences at all. I believe (perhaps wrongly) that the kings of Belgium and Spain live elsewhere, for example.

Why don't all monarchs live in their Royal Palaces? Is it the buildings' large size, lack of privacy or something else?

Also, if monarchs don't live in their Royal Palaces, what are the buildings used for: state dinners, receptions, offices for the royal court, etc.? And are they largely unused, since surely a royal administration wouldn't need as much office space as an actual governing executive would need?

Thanks.

 

[Blog Real]

Most of the European royal families lives in palaces.

• The Spanish Royal family lives in the Palace of Zarzuela.
• The British Royal family has many palaces at his disposal including Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace. The Danish Royal family also has many palaces at his disposal, but reside most of the time at the Amalienborg Palace.
• The Swedish Royal family also has many palaces at his disposal, the Kings live at Drottningholm Palace and the Princes heirs live in the Haga Palace.
• The Norwegian Royal Family also has many palaces at his disposal, the Kings reside most of the time at the Royal Palace in Oslo and the Princes at Skaugum.
• The Dutch Royal family also has many palaces at his disposal and the Kings reside most of the time in the Palace Huis Ten Bosch.
• The Belgian Royal family resides in the Royal Castle of Laeken.
• The Grand Ducal Family of Luxembourg resides in the castle of Berg and also has other palaces at his disposal.
• The Princely Family of Monaco lives in the Royal Palace of Monaco.
• The Princely Family of Liechtenstein in Vaduz Castle lives but must also have private residences.

 

[amaryllus]

The Emperor of Japan lives at mainly at Tokyo Impetial Palace but has Various other Palaces at his disposal such as Kyoto Imperal Palace and The Togu palace.

The King of Morocco lives at Dâr-al-Makhzen Palace primarily.

 

[Lee-Z]

This is a list of royal palaces in the Netherlands and what they are currently used as
Lijst van paleizen in Nederland - Wikikids
google translated

Other point of note: in the original post only the monarch is mentioned but royal families are often larger than just the monarch's family and the other people often live in one of the palaces/royal residences too..

 

[CSENYC]

Sorry, I wasn't clear.

My question relates to the "official" Royal Palace, called the "Royal Palace".

For example, the Belgian Royal Family does not live in the Royal Palace in Brussels; it lives in the Chateau de Laeken.

So what's in the Royal Palace in Brussels, and why doesn't the Belgian Royal Family live there?

 

[Lee-Z]

So what's in the Royal Palace in Brussels, and why doesn't the Belgian Royal Family live there?

https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koninklijk_Paleis_van_Brussel
google translated

 

[Skippy]

Queen Elizabeth and The Duke of Edinburgh *do* live in Buckingham Palace and that is England's "Royal Palace".
Also King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia of Sweden lived in Kungliga slottet (Prince Carl Philip was born there) before their move to Drottningholms slott. Why they made that move I don't know, there are others more knowledgeable than I am on that.

I have read that King Felipe and his family don't live at La Zarzuela, but rather in a smaller house on the palace terrain. Which has to do with the economic times.

But I understand what you mean - many royals seem to live cluttered and not in the building they are "supposed" to live in according to its name.

 

[LadyFinn]

Queen Elizabeth and The Duke of Edinburgh *do* live in Buckingham Palace and that is England's "Royal Palace".
Also King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia of Sweden lived in Kungliga slottet (Prince Carl Philip was born there) before their move to Drottningholms slott. Why they made that move I don't know, there are others more knowledgeable than I am on that.

King Carl Gustaf, queen Silvia and their children Victoria and Carl Philip moved to Drottningholm Palace in 1981.
King Carl Gustaf tells at the book "Mina 40 år för Sverige": "In the beginning of 1980s we moved from the Royal Palace to Drottningholm Palace. It was more pleasant and simple to live there with small children. We had done a sandbox to Logården at the courtyard of the Royal Palace but it was not a suitable environment for children. Prince Bertil had a long time said that Drottningholm would be a good home for a family with children. We looked at both Tullgarn Palace and Haga Palace before we decided to move to Drottningholm. We have never repented our decision".

 

[paola]

Sorry, I wasn't clear.

My question relates to the "official" Royal Palace, called the "Royal Palace".

For example, the Belgian Royal Family does not live in the Royal Palace in Brussels; it lives in the Chateau de Laeken.

So what's in the Royal Palace in Brussels, and why doesn't the Belgian Royal Family live there?

You make it too complicated to say that there is only one "The Royal Palace". It's also the choice of the reigning monarch.
In the Netherlands there are several Royal Palaces. The first kings (as we start by Willem I) stayed alternately at Het Loo in Apeldoorn (now a museum) or in The Hague. When Queen Juliana married she went to live at Soestdijk Palace. When she became Queen, she stayed living there and also after her abdication until her death she did. And mostly she also worked there. (Soestdijk Palace is empty now). When Princess Beatrix became Queen, she moved to Huis ten Bosch Palace in The Hague and used Noordeinde Palace (also in the Hague) as a working palace (As office, some repersentive duties). King Willem-Alexander now has Noordeinde Palace as a working palace and goes to live at Huis ten Bosch when the renovation is done.

And to complicate matters we have in the Netherlands a Capital (Amsterdam) and a city where the government is settled - the "Residentie" - (The Hague). The Palace on Dam Square in Amsterdam was originally built as the City Hall of Amsterdam. Louis Napoleon, (actually the first king of the Netherlands) took this as his palace in the city. And to keep the peace between the cities there are carried out a number of representative duties in this palace. The palace on Dam Square can often be visit when it is not in use for this purpose.

The Royal Palace in Brussels is the working palace of the Belgium Kings. The Belgium Kings live at the Castle of Laeken smile:also in Brussels), with exeption of King Albert II, who stayed living in the Castle of Bevedere, at the other site of the road at the Casle of Laeken.

 

[Skippy]

That's why she asked, because it's not clear for her. And there is only one "The Royal Palace". The rest is 'just' a Royal Palace.
The Royal Palace, Amsterdam
Huis ten Bosch Palace, The Hague
Soestdijk Palace, Baarn
Het Loo Palace, Apeldoorn
and so on and so forth.

I just wanted to sort that out, although it can border on nitpicking...

For that same reason I wondered a while ago why King Willem-Alexander can't continue to live at Villa Eikenhorst, but that question is answered.

 

[paola]

As far as I know, in America, there is only one White House where the president lives and works.
I think we have no such thing in the Netherlands. There are palaces witch the King can use. What I am (among other things) trying to tell is:"To my knowledge there is no hierarchy in the palaces.
Please correct me if I am wrong and tell me where I can find it.
As an amateur historian, I'm crazy about sources to work on.

 

[tommy100]

I can see the point that CSENYC is making, a lot of royal families no longer reside full time in 'The Royal Palace' in the Capital City but in other residences or palaces for some or all of the time.
In Belgium for example the Royal Palace is still used as offices for staff and the King works from there everyday, I think I read on the royal website the King travels there after dropping his kids off at school.
In the Netherlands the Royal Palace Amsterdam is used only for major royal events such as State visits, the diplomatic reception etc and is open to the public the rest of the time.

Interestingly Denmark also has a Royal Palace in this way, Christiansborg Palace as well as being the office of the PM and the meeting place of parliament also has a set of state rooms for use by the sovereign and large royal gathering and dinners can be held here.

I think 'The Royal Palace' usually refers to what was traditionally the sovereign's official residence from where they ruled. In more modern times some RFs live elsewhere, often for reasons of privacy or to be out of the centre of the capital city. In most monarchies these 'The Royal Palace's' are used for important ceremonial events throughout the year as well as often being open to the public to view.

 

[Skippy]

As far as I know, in America, there is only one White House where the president lives and works.
I think we have no such thing in the Netherlands. There are palaces witch the King can use. What I am (among other things) trying to tell is:"To my knowledge there is no hierarchy in the palaces.
Please correct me if I am wrong and tell me where I can find it.
As an amateur historian, I'm crazy about sources to work on.

No, as far as I know there is indeed no hierarchy in our palaces. I was just emphasizing the use of 'The' in the name of the palace. As there is no The Royal Palace of Huis ten Bosch, The Royal Palace of Soestdijk etc..
I think the use of the word 'The' implies that it's the main palace in the country and that's where the confusion for the topic starter comes from.
"If it's the main Royal Palace, then why doesn't the King or Queen live there?". Among that rank.
It's very tricky to explain.

I can see the point that CSENYC is making, a lot of royal families no longer reside full time in 'The Royal Palace' in the Capital City but in other residences or palaces for some or all of the time.
In Belgium for example the Royal Palace is still used as offices for staff and the King works from there everyday, I think I read on the royal website the King travels there after dropping his kids off at school.
In the Netherlands the Royal Palace Amsterdam is used only for major royal events such as State visits, the diplomatic reception etc and is open to the public the rest of the time.

Interestingly Denmark also has a Royal Palace in this way, Christiansborg Palace as well as being the office of the PM and the meeting place of parliament also has a set of state rooms for use by the sovereign and large royal gathering and dinners can be held here.

I think 'The Royal Palace' usually refers to what was traditionally the sovereign's official residence from where they ruled. In more modern times some RFs live elsewhere, often for reasons of privacy or to be out of the centre of the capital city. In most monarchies these 'The Royal Palace's' are used for important ceremonial events throughout the year as well as often being open to the public to view.

I think this is the best explanation so far

 

[Muhler]

In Denmark, there is no official residence as such.

The most well-known and most used is Amalienborg. It's also around here the offices and court-administration is located. And that is as close to an official residence the DRF has.

But the official residence is always where the monarch at any given time takes up residence, marked with a flag.

Also, Danish monarchs have since the very beginning had a tradition of being more or less constantly on the move. For the first 500 years of the DRF that was very much the case. The king and as such the central administration (government), the court, the high command and the supreme court.
And that in a sparsely populated realm with few good roads that at times consisted of not only Denmark and Schleswig & Holstein, but a significant part of Sweden (at periods all of Sweden), Norway, Estonia, Iceland and even parts of England.
It was with the means of communications and level of administration of the time a necessity for the king to travel - all the time.
During the 1400's a central administration was finally in place and located in Copenhagen, but the kings continued to be on the move. Simply to keep check of the realm and also because the kings were elected, or rather acknowledged by the people and the nobility.
It was only around 1660 that Absolutism was introduced (and that only lasted until 1849), that the king didn't have to move around as much.

So in the words of QMII: the DRF are pretty much gypsies.

Nowadays, the DRF move around in order to maintain an affiliation with the various parts of Denmark. - And believe me, that is something people are very much aware of!
Or take up residence aboard Dannebrog because it's very practical.

That would be the equivalent of the US President taking up residence in say Washington, San Diego, Chicago, Denver and Miami at different times of the year, in order to maintain an affiliation with the various parts of USA. That would of course only be practical with a president as a symbolic head of state and not also the head of the government.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

That's why she asked, because it's not clear for her. And there is only one "The Royal Palace". The rest is 'just' a Royal Palace.
The Royal Palace, Amsterdam
Huis ten Bosch Palace, The Hague
Soestdijk Palace, Baarn
Het Loo Palace, Apeldoorn
and so on and so forth.

I just wanted to sort that out, although it can border on nitpicking...

For that same reason I wondered a while ago why King Willem-Alexander can't continue to live at Villa Eikenhorst, but that question is answered.

On itself King Willem-Alexander can continue to live at Eikenhorst but it would be strange when by law is regulated that the King has three palaces at his disposal, all three maintenanced in great state, at astronomic costs, that he then makes no use of these splendid residences.

Huis ten Bosch Palace is in complete renovation to make it a dream family home for the royal family. It has a very habitable feel while there are stunning state rooms and grand halls as well.

I think Eikenhorst will undergo a renovation and will become residence to the Princess of Orange. In 5 years time she will be 18. She will start her official royal life. She will have a seat in the Council of State. She will receive a lavish dotation to organize her own house(hold) and secretariate. Possibly the enormous mansion of Princess Margriet and Drakensteyn Castle of Princess Beatrix can serve as future private residences as well (Alexia? Ariane?).

 

[paola]

An additional problem is that some "palaces" are not owned by the state while others are.

Perhaps a bit OT, but maybe we could make some kind of a "White House" one in The Hague and one in Amsterdam and only of these are the costs for the state.
But with an eye to the fact that the palaces are cultural heritage and a status -that we call in the Netherlands- protected monument!

(And if a King chooses not to use them maybe we could make them open to the public, at low price)

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

An additional problem is that some "palaces" are not owned by the state while others are.

Perhaps a bit OT, but maybe we could make some kind of a "White House" one in The Hague and one in Amsterdam and only of these are the costs for the state.
But with an eye to the fact that the palaces are cultural heritage and a status -that we call in the Netherlands- protected monument!

(And if a King chooses not to use them maybe we could make them open to the public, at low price)

The Royal Palace Amsterdam is in fact uninhabitale. It has a mainly museal destination. Het Loo Palace has a mainly museal destination. Soestdijk Palace had a museal function and is closed, awaiting restoration. Noordeinde Palace is cramped with the offices of the Royal Household. As the park is open to the public, there is little privacy. There is a secluded Cour but surrounding buildings and the offices inside the palace have a view on it, also there is little privacy. Lange Voorhout Palace serves as a museum. The Stadholderly Court was sold in the 1970 and is now a hotel. The Castle of Breda is in use as Royal Military Academy. The palace at the Kneuterdijk is now in use by the Council of State. The palace of Willem V as well the remnants of the Stadholderly Quartier are in use by the Estates-General. All this leaves the medium sized but very beautiful Huis ten Bosch Palace as the only secluded royal residence in continue use by the family. So "the public" has access to almost everything except the last palace, however the main Hall has been opened to visitors for a while.

 

[Marengo]

I would say that all the Dutch palaces are too small to combine the complete offices of the king and house the family at the same time. Only the Amsterdam palace may be large enough but the building is unpractical in the extreme (and in Amsterdam, not in The Hague).

Noordeinde would be the only one that could possibly combine both destinations, but as it is they already had to add buildings that are attached to the complex because it is too small. It is a pity that Willem II's plans to connect Noordeinde and Kneuterdijk palaces crumbled (literally as most of the new structure fell to pieces). It would have been a decently sized palace complex. They could even have moved some offices to Kneuterdijk now IMHO, instead of buying several city mansions around it.

Of course the nicest and historically most interesting palace complex would have been the inner court in The Hague. But that was abandoned when the last stadholder was forced out.

I suppose the issue with the Dutch palaces was that the country was a republic in a time that the largest palaces were built in Europe. The stadholder had to show some restraint in his building projects and other ambitions. When the country became a monarchy some efforts were made. Willem I was however very frugal and what he built was mainly in Belgium, save for the depressing backside of Noordeinde. Willem II's projects fell apart. Willem III preferred to spend his money elsewhere and Wilhelmina was frugal in extremis. None of the Dutch palaces is very large, most English or French dukes or German princelings will have larger main residences.

**

Back to the question: the main palaces are mostly used as offices indeed. The change is most likely due to faster transportation possibilities. A car will quickly bring the king / queen to a more attractive and private palace with large gardens outside the busy and noisy city center.

 

[kvo]

I believe the Swedish court HQ is at the Royal Palace in Gamla Stan, Stockholm. They spend holidays and weekends at Drottningholm wich is largely a museum open to the public. A Mid sized baroque palace mostly from the 1600s and 1700s and definitley better for raising a family than the grander palace in the capital. This is how it was when I visited in July, anyway.

The Norwegian royal family resides mainly in two residences; The King and Queen in oslo at the Royal Palace, and the Crown Prince and his family at Skaugum, a villa in a lovely neighbourhood in Bærum outside Oslo.
Norway has only the one palace, the other residences are villas, really. The family also has at it's disposal their skiing cabin and a manor house at the estate of Bygdøy kongsgård.(in the Oslo fjord) Not the wealthiest of royal families, but a very down to earth and truly pleasant family mirroring their people perfectly and admirably.

I recently discovered that THE Royal Palace in England is St. James's palace, and that officially that is Her Majesty's residence and the HQ of her court. It is mostly offices, a few banqueting halls and flats for senior staff members. Why nobody has bothered to change her address I do not know, it is a nice little piece of trivia though. And also I have read that the Palace of Westminster is a royal palace used by the Houses of Parliament at Her Majesty's pleasure, as it were. No wonder, as the Kings of yore lived in the original palace, a small village of cramped and dilapidating buildings spanning seven centuries when it burned down in the 1800s and was rebuilt.

 

[Livia]

Spanish Royals live in the Zarzuela complex (or El Pardo complex), this complex has two main buildings, the Zarzuela Palace itself where Juan Carlos and Sofía live, also Princess Irene, she has apartments there, and the Prince’s Pavillion, and here is where King Felipe, Queen Letizia and the girls live, maybe they didn’t move to Zarzuela Palace when Felipe was proclamed King for two reasons, the girls are small and a moving is a very complicated thing even if they have people to do it, and the other reason is Juan Carlos and Sofía live there, but nothing related with economic problems, it was F&L own decision.

The official residence of the King of Spain is Royal Palace of Madrid. I am really happy because Felipe is opening the rest of the beautiful Royal Palaces for events, for example “La Granja de San Ildefonso” and “Palacio de Aranjuez”, they are amazing.

List of Spanish Royal Sites.

 

[Countessmeout]

I believe the Swedish court HQ is at the Royal Palace in Gamla Stan, Stockholm. They spend holidays and weekends at Drottningholm wich is largely a museum open to the public. A Mid sized baroque palace mostly from the 1600s and 1700s and definitley better for raising a family than the grander palace in the capital. This is how it was when I visited in July, anyway.

The Norwegian royal family resides mainly in two residences; The King and Queen in oslo at the Royal Palace, and the Crown Prince and his family at Skaugum, a villa in a lovely neighbourhood in Bærum outside Oslo.
Norway has only the one palace, the other residences are villas, really. The family also has at it's disposal their skiing cabin and a manor house at the estate of Bygdøy kongsgård.(in the Oslo fjord) Not the wealthiest of royal families, but a very down to earth and truly pleasant family mirroring their people perfectly and admirably.

I recently discovered that THE Royal Palace in England is St. James's palace, and that officially that is Her Majesty's residence and the HQ of her court. It is mostly offices, a few banqueting halls and flats for senior staff members. Why nobody has bothered to change her address I do not know, it is a nice little piece of trivia though. And also I have read that the Palace of Westminster is a royal palace used by the Houses of Parliament at Her Majesty's pleasure, as it were. No wonder, as the Kings of yore lived in the original palace, a small village of cramped and dilapidating buildings spanning seven centuries when it burned down in the 1800s and was rebuilt.

Small correction in st James but it isn't the queen's residence. It has in fact not been used as the residence of the sovereign since WilliamIV was king. Victoria never used it. Yes, it houses many of their offices, and some state functions are held there, but its importance as central home to the sovereign has dwindled. There seems to be a move to have more offices and work move there now as bBuckingham needs repairs.

Buckingham palace has been the official residence since 1837 and is the official administrative castle for the queen. St James is home to Charles, Anne and Alexandra.

Westminster was indeed once a palace, possibly back to Canute. But the Royal privy rooms burned during Henry viii reign. He acquired york palace which he renamed Whitehall, and this became his London home. He gave over the remaining Westminster to parliament to use.

There are many buildings that used to be palaces or Royal homes, the tower of London being one of them. Hampton court another. Sommerset house where I remember skating, housed royals like Elizabeth I and Anne of Denmark.

 

[Iain]

Small correction in st James but it isn't the queen's residence. It has in fact not been used as the residence of the sovereign since WilliamIV was king. Victoria never used it. Yes, it houses many of their offices, and some state functions are held there, but its importance as central home to the sovereign has dwindled. There seems to be a move to have more offices and work move there now as bBuckingham needs repairs.

Actually St James Palace remains the official residence of he monarch and is the most senior royal palace in England even though no monarch has lived there for well over a century. The official title of the British court is the Court of St. James.

Buckingham Palace was rarely used until Queen Victoria moved in in 1837 but with the death of Prince Albert in 1861 she moved to Windsor and the palace was mothballed. Due to the fact that it was hardly ever used someone posted a notice on the gates proclaiming "These commanding premises to be let or sold, in consequence of the late occupant's declining business."
Edward VII moved in when he took the throne and it said that was the first time Queen Alexandra had entered the building. George V and Queen Mary tended to spend most of their time at Sandringham and the present Queen only spends two nights a week there. She arrives from Windsor on Tuesday morning and leaves again on Thursday afternoon. Prince Charles (or King George VII as he intends to be called) has said that he has no intention of living there at all.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Where is the evidence that Charles intends to be called George VII? There have been rumours for nearly 7 decades now but I haven't ever seen any real evidence i.e. a statement from someone close to Charles.

The Queen is often at BP on days other than those indicated in the above post - based on where she undertakes duties as listed in the CC.

Edward VIII did live there but his Queen wasn't Alexandra. Alexandra was the wife of Edward VII and she was given the task of redecorating BP. It was also used in the 40 years after Albert died for some official state events often hosted by Edward and Alexandra so I don't know why you say Alexandra never went there before becoming Queen. It wasn't used that often but it was used (my great-great-grandfather went to events there in the 1890s.

 

[Iain]

Where is the evidence that Charles intends to be called George VII? There have been rumours for nearly 7 decades now but I haven't ever seen any real evidence i.e. a statement from someone close to Charles.

The Queen is often at BP on days other than those indicated in the above post - based on where she undertakes duties as listed in the CC.

Edward VIII did live there but his Queen wasn't Alexandra. Alexandra was the wife of Edward VII and she was given the task of redecorating BP. It was also used in the 40 years after Albert died for some official state events often hosted by Edward and Alexandra so I don't know why you say Alexandra never went there before becoming Queen. It wasn't used that often but it was used (my great-great-grandfather went to events there in the 1890s.

Charles has apparently mentioned it in interviews he has given in the past. There is nothing new in a British monarch taking another name, in fact it's practically a tradition. Victoria was Alexandrina, Edward VII was Albert, Edward VIII was David and George VI was Albert. Apparently it was a presumed that Elizabeth would take the name Victoria II but when Winston Churchill brought up the subject Elizabeth looked at her mother who gave her a dirty kook and she said "my name will be Elizabeth."


I made a typing error with Edward VII and have corrected it. A few years ago there was a series on British Television about Edward. There is a scene after he became king of him and Alexandra entering the palace and Alexandra makes a comment to the effect that it was the first time she had been there. Now that may have been artistic licence but it's a strange thing to put in if it wasn't true.

I'm sure the Queen is there on other days when duties require it but she will leave again after the event. It's been reported many times that she doesn't like the place, and who can blame her? It's an ugly building and was far better before the courtyard was enclosed by the present façade.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

[...] It's been reported many times that she doesn't like the place, and who can blame her? It's an ugly building and was far better before the courtyard was enclosed by the present façade.

I agree 100% with the façade. Besides that: Buckingham Palace has some monstruous sugarcake-and-bonbonnière interiors with frills here and swirls there. Other palaces like Hampton Court or Kensington Palace provide better interiors, in my humble opinion.

This picture gives an idea of the palace minus the façade, just think that grey mammoth away: picture

 

[Curryong]

I think Prince Albert's taste prevailed in some of the Palace interiors, didn't it, and once the Victorians saw a clear plain architectural space they seemed to give in to an urge to add unnecessary and quite ugly additions. You can see the results at BP. Buckingham Palace certainly isn't a patch, inside or out, on some of the exquisite Russian palaces, for example.

 

[AdmirerUS]

If monarchs don't live in royal palaces, what's in them?
Tourists' money. Lots and lots of tourists' money.

 

[JR76]

I believe the Swedish court HQ is at the Royal Palace in Gamla Stan, Stockholm. They spend holidays and weekends at Drottningholm wich is largely a museum open to the public. A Mid sized baroque palace mostly from the 1600s and 1700s and definitley better for raising a family than the grander palace in the capital. This is how it was when I visited in July, anyway.

You're right in that The Royal palace in Stockholm is as you put it the Court HQ but the Royal family doesn't live there at all. The King & Queen live at Drottningholm, which is within an easy commute to TRP, full time & according to themselves have begun to spend as much of their free weekends possible at Stenhammar about a hours drive south of Stockholm.

 

[loonytick]

So, St. James is still used to house royal offices, right? And several members of the family do live there. Are there any ceremonies or such involving the monarch that still happen there instead of Buckingham Palace?

And if so, I'm curious if the Queen has an apartment for her personal use at St. James. I know it's essentially right next door to Buckingham, so I can't imagine her ever wanting to spend the night at St. James. But if she does do business there, it would seem appropriate to keep a place where she could have some privacy; perhaps to change clothes if needed or, in her current stage of life, to take some time alone to rest between meetings or ceremonies.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Charles has apparently mentioned it in interviews he has given in the past. There is nothing new in a British monarch taking another name, in fact it's practically a tradition. Victoria was Alexandrina, Edward VII was Albert, Edward VIII was David and George VI was Albert.

I have seen virtually every documentary every done on or interviews of Charles and have never heard him say he will reign as George VII. That would be in very, very bad taste and totally unacceptable - almost treasonous for the heir to the throne to be talking about what he will do as King.

Edward VIII's first name was Edward. He was called David - another of his names by the family but he used his first name as King. He went from being HRH Prince Edward to HM King Edward.

[quoteApparently it was a presumed that Elizabeth would take the name Victoria II but when Winston Churchill brought up the subject Elizabeth looked at her mother who gave her a dirty kook and she said "my name will be Elizabeth."[/quote]

It wasn't Churchill but one of the staff who was with her in Kenya to whom that comment was made and then her decision was reported back to Churchill. The argument all along had been that Victoria should stand alone as a name and not be used by another monarch as it was 'too soon'.

I'm sure the Queen is there on other days when duties require it but she will leave again after the event. It's been reported many times that she doesn't like the place, and who can blame her? It's an ugly building and was far better before the courtyard was enclosed by the present façade.

She doesn't travel back and forth every day and frequently has engagements there on successive days. When that is the case she stays there - so she is frequently there for four or five nights at a time from March to August and again in October and November. She spends 4 months of the year out of London, August, September, December and January while she spends most of April at Windsor along with a large part of June. Sure she isn't at BP all the time but she is there more than two nights a week for the 6 months a year she undertakes regular duties in London.