PDA

View Full Version : Happy and Glorious: The Royalty Thread #2



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67

Sasha'sSpins
11-17-2011, 12:12 AM
She actually has three (I think? Two for sure). Belgium is first child is the heir regardless of gender, so Princess Elisabeth will be Queen Regent sometime in the future.

As far as her siblings go...At one point, the running joke was that the Crown Prince and Princess just had to look at each other and there'd be an Baby Announcement from the Palace. :D

Thanks! I hadn't realized other countries besides Sweden had changed the succession rules. It's about time for Britain and Spain and Japan ought to get with the program too.


Considering what would have to happen for a Stuart restoration, at that point they could probably say "We're having a Catholic monarch and that's that." As I don't see any more civil wars in the offing, probably not something they have to worry about (poor Stuarts...)

This is true! Ah well-at least Stuarts are remembered in history. :cool:


:scream:

I'm sure William doesn't feel the way you do. DIANA FOREVER! :glamor: Betcha if they have a daughter Will and Kate will include Diana's name somewhere in the little princess's moniker. :P

danceronice
11-17-2011, 03:45 AM
No way would they give the direct heir a chance of being Queen Diana. Unless they're looking to hasten Charles's accession to the throne by giving the queen a heart attack. William's not the type to slap his grandmother in the face like that. Frances somewhere in the name, possibly Spencer if it's a boy, but for the next to be king or queen I don't think they're that politically nuts to use Diana's name.

And isn't In Touch basically a glossy, slightly-less-believable version of the National Enquirer? (If that's not insulting the Enquirer, they get things right sometimes, like breaking the John Edwards lovechild story months before anyone else.)

PDilemma
11-17-2011, 03:51 AM
No way would they give the direct heir a chance of being Queen Diana. Unless they're looking to hasten Charles's accession to the throne by giving the queen a heart attack. William's not the type to slap his grandmother in the face like that. Frances somewhere in the name, possibly Spencer if it's a boy, but for the next to be king or queen I don't think they're that politically nuts to use Diana's name.

And isn't In Touch basically a glossy, slightly-less-believable version of the National Enquirer? (If that's not insulting the Enquirer, they get things right sometimes, like breaking the John Edwards lovechild story months before anyone else.)

I'm having thread de ja vu...didn't we already cover this whole name thing around page 3 or so???:lol:

milanessa
11-17-2011, 03:56 AM
I'm having thread de ja vu...didn't we already cover this whole name thing around page 3 or so???:lol:

Yep - and the heir to the throne thing. :lol:

my little pony
11-17-2011, 04:31 AM
Did you click on that link before deciding to ask that? Because if you had, you would have seen what I was talking about. .

yes i did. not being a poppy expert, none looked like different enough to be described as a canadian poppy, sorry, a VERSION of a canadian poppy.

Sasha'sSpins
11-17-2011, 06:51 AM
No way would they give the direct heir a chance of being Queen Diana. Unless they're looking to hasten Charles's accession to the throne by giving the queen a heart attack. William's not the type to slap his grandmother in the face like that. Frances somewhere in the name, possibly Spencer if it's a boy, but for the next to be king or queen I don't think they're that politically nuts to use Diana's name.

And isn't In Touch basically a glossy, slightly-less-believable version of the National Enquirer? (If that's not insulting the Enquirer, they get things right sometimes, like breaking the John Edwards lovechild story months before anyone else.)

Never say never. We'll see-if they have a girl child. And why should it be a slap in the Queen's face for William to name a child of his after his mother? That's obsurd.

What's In Touch??

victoriajh
11-17-2011, 07:05 AM
InTouch Weekly is reporting that Kate is 6 weeks pregnant

http://www.intouchweekly.com/2011/11/kate_middleton.php

Well then it MUST be so.....;)

skatesindreams
11-17-2011, 03:31 PM
How would they know?
I won't believe anything about the subject without official conformation from the Palace.

PDilemma
11-17-2011, 03:36 PM
How would they know?
I won't believe anything about the subject without official conformation from the Palace.

^^This.

And like Prince William would just tell some staff member that they have chosen names and what they are. Never mind that they don't have staff living with them right now, only at their office at St James. It would have to be pretty deliberate for them to be told and I doubt that staff runs mouths off to In Touch.

This is the couple who kept their engagement from the press for around a month. They can keep a secret.

Also...not seeing a future King Michael or Queen Rose...

AragornElessar
11-17-2011, 06:33 PM
The beginning of National Day Celebrations in Monaco today.

Daylife ~ Prince Albert, Princess Charlene and Princess Stephanie giving out gifts at Red Cross Headquarters (http://news.daylife.com/search/photos/1/grid?__site=daylife&q=monaco+november+17%2C+2011)

danceronice
11-17-2011, 06:58 PM
Never say never. We'll see-if they have a girl child. And why should it be a slap in the Queen's face for William to name a child of his after his mother? That's obsurd.

What's In Touch??

Magazine quoted up thread.

Let's just say Diana was FAR from the "innocent victim of meanie royals" she liked people to think she was. Obviously William loved his mother, but I don't think he's naive about how much hurting was done by both sides. (Likewise I don't think "Margaret" would be a likely candidate, and never mind "Camilla!") Alexandra, Elizabeth, Victoria, etc. at least carry no baggage or mostly positive baggage.

And, of course, if they have a daughter as the SECOND child, they could name her Diana. Just because the PM got the rule changed so it won't matter if there's a boy doesn't mean were guaranteed the first one will be a girl! (I still like "George"...)

Octoberopals
11-19-2011, 07:27 PM
How would they know?
I won't believe anything about the subject without official conformation from the Palace.

I thought the Palace rarely confirmed or denied anything.......they just ignore whatever is said & let nature take its course.

IceAlisa
11-19-2011, 07:42 PM
Here Princess Charlene looks like she's been crying or is about to: http://news.daylife.com/photo/01jg0sJgnM6Pd?__site=daylife&q=monaco+november+17%2C+2011

PDilemma
11-19-2011, 07:50 PM
I thought the Palace rarely confirmed or denied anything.......they just ignore whatever is said & let nature take its course.

They rarely deny. They do, however, announce royal pregnancies. So when Kate is pregnant, they will make an announcement. And announcements of Diana's pregnancies were fairly early.

Kate went shopping yesterday and bought clothes at a non-maternity store. I'm thinking she would not have been doing that if she weren't going to be able to wear them.

skatesindreams
11-19-2011, 08:38 PM
I thought the Palace rarely confirmed or denied anything.......they just ignore whatever is said & let nature take its course.

The Palace usually makes an "official announcement" after the time when the danger of early-pregnancy difficulty is past; expressing the happiness of HM, and the Royal Family about the baby soon to arrive.