Thomas Jefferson Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 So, contrary to popular belief, the Royal Family are as BRITISH as the hills. French hills? Well.....lol....... William I was a Norman and they were not indigenous to France but, rather, Vikings from Denmark. William I's son, Henry I, was born in England, so I suppose from that point you can say they were English. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Yes. That's interesting - just spent ages reading about it thanks to your post. Wikipedia is fantastic. So George III's mother was a Saxe-Gotha. And that Duchy became: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Saxe-Coburg_and_Gotha Yes, George III's mother was Saxe-Gotha. However, Sax-Gotha Coburg didn't enter the British equation until Prince Albert, with Edward VII (his and Victoria's son) being the first British monarch of the House of Saxe-Gotha Coburg; his son, George V, being the last (changing the name to the present-day Windsor). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Border Terrier Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Not for 1000 years - wasn't it mad King George who was the first of them? Queen Elizabeth II is indeed a DIRECT descendant of William I (AKA William the Conqueror) who reigned from 1066. You have to factor in sons and daughters who didn't inherit the throne who then had descendants who did inherit the throne, etc, etc. It's a direct line of biological descent, not a direct line of succession, if you catch my drift. Regarding "Mad King George" (George III), it did not begin with him at all. George I was the first of the House of Hanover. And, although German, he was the great-grandson (via his mother) of King James I (James VI of Scotland). George III (the mad one) was George I's grandson, and he in turn was the grandfather of Queen Victoria. Queen Victoria was Saxe-Coburg via her mother. It was Prince Albert who was Sax-Coburg Gotha, which is the proper name of the current House of Windsor. They changed it during the First World War as it was deemed too Germanic. Now, working backward from George I -- his great-grandfather, James I, was the son of Mary Queen of Scots, who was descended from the House of York, who were descended via one of Edward I's sons from the House of Plantagenet; then it connects back to William I via Henry II, via his mother, Queen Matilda, who was the daughter of Henry I, who was in turn the son of William I. So, contrary to popular belief, the Royal Family are as BRITISH as the hills. >...the Royal Family are as BRITISH as the hills. Apart from the 'next-in-lines' dad, the Duke of Eddy, he's Greek. From the House of Frazer Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg apparently. So if Charlie takes his lineage from his father; likewise William..."the Royal family are as British as" Demis Roussos. In certain lighting, there is a likeness... TBT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Buckingham Palace Press release 9 September 2014: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/11085691/Keep-the-Queen-out-of-the-Scottish-referendum-campaign-Buckingham-Palace-says.html A Buckingham Palace spokesman said: The sovereigns constitutional impartiality is an established principle of our democracy and one which the Queen has demonstrated throughout her reign. As such the monarch is above politics and those in political office have a duty to ensure this remains the case. Any suggestion that the Queen would wish to influence the outcome of the current referendum campaign is categorically wrong. Her Majesty is simply of the view this is a matter for the people of Scotland. I'm not a monarchist, but that's quite a classy response from her. You think that was a response directly from her and not hand-crafted by a legion of advisers and cleared through a government department, probably No 10? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Wonderful news that William and Kate are to have a second child! It seems that the the Dutchess of Cambridge is experiencing severe morning sickness but hopefully she will receive the very best of care to minimise it. It's good to see some really good news for a change! Man has sex with woman = great news. Don't forget that they are married... If William is getting it from his Mrs then he clearly has god given powers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 You think that was a response directly from her and not hand-crafted by a legion of advisers and cleared through a government department, probably No 10? I think she is perfectly capable of writing for herself, unlike career politicians (mostly lawyers) who rely on speech writers. The Queen is very well-educated. She may have sought advice as to content, but I'm sure she ultimately wrote and worded it herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted September 10, 2014 Author Share Posted September 10, 2014 You think that was a response directly from her and not hand-crafted by a legion of advisers and cleared through a government department, probably No 10? I think she is perfectly capable of writing for herself, unlike career politicians (mostly lawyers) who rely on speech writers. The Queen is very well-educated. She may have sought advice as to content, but I'm sure she ultimately wrote and worded it herself. She no doubt is but if she would be allowed to considering what a hot potato this issue is is a different matter. Anything originating from the monarch would absolutly have to through the mill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Not for 1000 years - wasn't it mad King George who was the first of them? Queen Elizabeth II is indeed a DIRECT descendant of William I (AKA William the Conqueror) who reigned from 1066. You have to factor in sons and daughters who didn't inherit the throne who then had descendants who did inherit the throne, etc, etc. It's a direct line of biological descent, not a direct line of succession, if you catch my drift. Regarding "Mad King George" (George III), it did not begin with him at all. George I was the first of the House of Hanover. And, although German, he was the great-grandson (via his mother) of King James I (James VI of Scotland). George III (the mad one) was George I's grandson, and he in turn was the grandfather of Queen Victoria. Queen Victoria was Saxe-Coburg via her mother. It was Prince Albert who was Sax-Coburg Gotha, which is the proper name of the current House of Windsor. They changed it during the First World War as it was deemed too Germanic. Now, working backward from George I -- his great-grandfather, James I, was the son of Mary Queen of Scots, who was descended from the House of York, who were descended via one of Edward I's sons from the House of Plantagenet; then it connects back to William I via Henry II, via his mother, Queen Matilda, who was the daughter of Henry I, who was in turn the son of William I. So, contrary to popular belief, the Royal Family are as BRITISH as the hills. The Norman's aren't/weren't 'British' - they were Norse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 The Norman's aren't/weren't 'British' - they were Norse The family has been in Britain for a thousand years. They are as British as the most British people in Britain. The Angles were a Germanic people, as were the Saxons. Anglo-Saxons are Germanic. British people are of Germanic origin. If we really want to be pedantic about it, we're all Africans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 The Norman's aren't/weren't 'British' - they were Norse The family has been in Britain for a thousand years. They are as British as the most British people in Britain. The Angles were a Germanic people, as were the Saxons. Anglo-Saxons are Germanic. British people are of Germanic origin. If we really want to be pedantic about it, we're all Africans. Jambo Bwana ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 We Britons - the P & Q Celts - were here long before any of these interlopers.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Good news, haha!?! For whom? Yet more costs for the people, another parasite to feed off of us. Down with the monarchy!!!! It's always good news when a child is conceived. Not really. World is overpopulated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Jampton Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 The Queen Mum was Scottish. We need more British British people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MANANNAN Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 I can't understand the mentality of people who get overjoyed about two people they don't know conceiving a child. Truly baffling! But we do know them. They're Kate and William of the House of Windsor (formerly the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha). William's family has been ruling Britain for a thousand years and their roots go back to at least the time of Charlemagne. So I think we do know the family by now! They're not just some random people. Also, they're likeable people. You don't know them, you know OF them. Have you ever met them? No. Have you ever spoken to them? No. Have you ever even seen them in person? Probably not. They don't give a shit about you, they wouldn't care if you were expecting a child, and they certainly wouldn't be paying for it! I really don't get peoples excitement over a family they've never met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paswt Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 You don't have to know someone personally before you can wish them well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.