Royalty Thread #7: Do They Get Frequent Flier Miles?

[Artemis@BC]

This one has been making the rounds.

 

[aftershocks]

The Other Prince William: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SMX5kUDOas

Well worth watching. He was always this little known glamorous figure from the 1960s and early 1970s, shrouded in mystery. The Queen's beloved cousin and a very handsome bloke indeed. In the opening intro to this documentary, it's so poignant to hear this other Prince William say after being asked by a broadcaster, "How would you like to be treated?" William: "Just completely naturally."

Unfortunately for the other William (of Gloucester), he was born at a different time than the current Prince William, who had the good fortune to have a mother in Princess Diana, who was determined for her sons to experience life outside the confines and strictures of smothering Royal etiquette and mothball-like traditions.

 

[skatesindreams]

Prince Albert of Monaco bought the family home of his mother, Princess Grace:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/prince-albert-buys-philadelphia-home-mom-grace-kelly-184207113.html

After some remodeling, he would like for his children to have some of the experiences he enjoyed there.

 

[myhoneyhoney]

The Other Prince William: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SMX5kUDOas

Just finished watching it. Such heartache. The crash did it to me, I started bawling

 

[taf2002]

I'm not bawling. I'm disgusted. Fourth to the throne might as well be 1,000 to the throne, if the throne is occupied by a young woman who is having children. Why couldn't he have a normal life if that's what he wanted? What difference would his marriage to a divorcee make? Unlike Edward, he was never going to be king. Elizabeth II has been queen for my entire lifetime so I have been watching her making these autocratic types of rulings for years.

 

[skatesindreams]

The UK monarchy/government attitude toward divorce was still very much influenced by Edward VIII, unfortunately.

 

[cygnus]

Attitudes have changed a lot since the late 60s/early 70s. It's hard to get into the head space of the time, but divorce was a lot more of an issue then. Had he been born even a decade later, he probably would have been able to marry whomever he wished, especially as he moved down the line of succession as the years went on.

 

[aftershocks]

I'm not bawling. I'm disgusted. Fourth to the throne might as well be 1,000 to the throne, if the throne is occupied by a young woman who is having children. Why couldn't he have a normal life if that's what he wanted? What difference would his marriage to a divorcee make? Unlike Edward, he was never going to be king. Elizabeth II has been queen for my entire lifetime so I have been watching her making these autocratic types of rulings for years.

I think the Queen was following protocol she had grown up with during a time of serious royal crisis precipitated by her irresponsible Uncle David (Edward VIII). Unfortunately, Edward VIII was brought up with a stiff upper-lipped mother and a strict regimental father who were largely absent/ distant during his formative years. As has been reported in recent years, Edward and his brother Albert (George VI) suffered emotional and physical abuse from their nanny as young toddlers which is said to have contributed to Albert's digestive problems, nervous ticks, and stuttering. The story about George VI's stuttering problem (told in The King's Speech, 2010) was kept under wraps for years until his wife, Queen Elizabeth (the Queen Mother) passed away.

Prince William's cousin, Queen Elizabeth is nothing if not dutiful, so she's always bowed to protocol. It's so ironic that Q-E and her courtiers sent Princess Margaret to Japan to speak with Prince William in order to dissuade him from continuing his romance with Zsuzsi Starkloff, the woman he was happily in love with. Wow, Princess Margaret of all people. Margaret surely had a lot of mixed emotions because her 'love rebound' marriage was falling apart. She had led a largely unhappy existence emotionally after being forced to decide against marrying the love of her life, Group Captain Peter Townsend (a divorced man and her father's former equerry). It would be so interesting if both of these tragic love stories would be told on Masterpeice Theatre in a Downton Abbey-type lengthy series.

Here's an article that came out around the time of the debut of the Prince William of Gloucester documentary:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...oucester-fell-scandalised-royals-process.html

ITA that Prince William of Gloucester was so far removed from the throne that his choice of marriage partner should not have mattered. But the courtiers and legislative powers-that-be around the Queen clearly were worried about Zsuzsi being older than William, having Jewish ancestry, being divorced, and having two children. Prince William's devoted parents (Duke & Duchess of Gloucester) maybe did not care who he married, but they apparently had no rights in advising him in the matter. They surely were devastated and likely emotionally never recovered from their beloved oldest son's premature death.

The documentary seems to open up the question of what was in Prince William's mind when he went up in the plane. The fact that he'd asked Zsuzsi (after a long separation) to accompany him on the exhibition plane ride, also brings into question what was going through his mind. However, if he was thinking of suicide, why would he have decided to crash the plane with his eventual passenger, a flight instructor, aboard? Maybe a slight moment of distraction due to ongoing emotional distress was a factor in his losing control of the plane or in making a misjudgement while operating the controls? The footage of the actual crash is so shocking. The story of Prince William is a mixture of sad, romantic and poignant. It pulls heartstrings even more due to the fact that his parents had trouble conceiving for awhile before he was finally born. He was such an attractive, intelligent human being who simply wanted to be normal and to marry the woman he loved. The way he fell in love with Zsuzsi, after meeting her at a costume ball in Japan, is a romantic story you'd think filmmakers would be lining up to receive backing to recreate.

I had heard of this Prince William of Gloucester previously and I'd seen pictures of him, but I knew absolutely nothing about him. The details of his life and death seem to provide missing pieces to the puzzle of the Royal Family's tragic history with broken marriages and unfortunate decisions related to romantic unions. It seems to me that William's death adversely affected many members of the royal family, including Prince Charles, and especially Princess Margaret. She may have felt guilty about being used to encourage William to give up the love of his life. This, after she'd been forced to give up the love of her life. She fell further into alcoholism, and began an affair with a young man half her age, almost as if she was purposely being defiant toward her sister, and the entire system of courtiers and royal protocol.

Princess Margaret had been spoiled as the younger sister of a future Queen. The death of George VI truly changed the course of both Margaret's and Elizabeth's lives. Vivacious, glamorous and talented Margaret became trapped in a royal cage. And the young married Elizabeth was suddenly burdened with the responsibility of the British throne, which placed stresses on her relationship with her husband, the Duke of Edinburgh. Prince William of Gloucester died in 1972, and five years later the Queen ended up allowing her sister Margaret to divorce her estranged husband, Antony Armstrong-Jones (Lord Snowden). Margaret and Snowden had two children who have led relatively quiet lives out of the limelight: Lady Sarah Chatto (an artist), and David Viscount Linley, a furniture maker and current chairman of Christies, U.K. There are plenty of ironies involved in the love life decisions of the British royals historically. The decisions and bloody actions of King Henry VIII changed the course of history in many ways.

In recent years, as a result of all the tragic Royal relationships and broken marriages, the Queen has seemed to relax her strict stance in the sense of allowing the younger generation to marry whom they choose, with the admonishment that they make sure of the solidity of their bond and compatibility (and even live together for awhile) before tying the knot.


In recent news, Prince Harry has been rumored to be dating an American actress, Meghan Markle. I am not familiar with her. After I saw a video clip of her on ET (she has stunning dark-haired, dark-eyed looks), I googled her background. She has mixed ancestry. Plus, she was previously married to a film producer whom she divorced in 2013. She's also about three years older than Harry. In this day and age, does her mixed ancestry and her divorced status preclude any deeper involvement, if in fact she and Prince Harry are actually romantically involved? ETA: Further reading of Daily Mail gossip reveals that royal sources have confirmed the romance, stating that "it's early days." Prince Harry is known to be very private and circumspect about his love life, understandably. It's hard to tell where this relationship might go, but the gossiping and media watch is in full swing. Apparently, Harry and Meghan managed to keep their dating under wraps for at least several months.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/02/entertainment/meghan-markle-prince-harry-dating/

http://www.morningnewsusa.com/megha...friends-prince-harry-notch-belt-23119211.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...weekend-friend-s-Hollywood-Hills-mansion.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rying-3-500-handbag-s-mum-romance-Prince.html (There's a video link in this article, in which Markle addresses an audience at the UN, describing how she became involved with UN Women)

 

[Yehudi]

For Netflix subscribers, the Queen Elizabeth II series has debuted. I can't believe how perfect Matt Smith is as Philipp.

 

[aftershocks]

^^ I didn't see QE I yet. Is it only available on Netflix?

BTW, I wondered if there were any biographies written about Prince William of Gloucester. Sure enough (likely after the recent documentary debuted), a book was written that's available on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Prince-William-Windsors-Modern-ebook/dp/B007ZHZW9A

The Royal Family clearly kept Prince William of G's story under wraps for a very long time. I'd say that they were all heartbroken and devastated after losing such an intelligent, attractive and irreplaceable young family member (who clearly had been experiencing a great deal of personal anguish for no other reason than being a member of a royal family bound by archaic traditions).

After Prince William of G's death in 1972, the ripple effect carried over to not only the ugly 1977 break-up and divorce of Princess Margaret. The after-effects apparently also extended to the Queen's leniency in allowing her cousin, Prince Michael of Kent to marry a Catholic, Baroness Marie Christine von Reibnitz (Princess Michael) one month after Reibnitz' marriage to her estranged husband was annulled, in 1978.

Reportedly Prince Charles had been in awe of his older cousin, Prince William, and was deeply affected by his loss. Charles' son, the current Prince William of Cambridge, was named after the mysterious lost Prince William whose story has finally come out of the shadows.


In more recent news: Hopefully Prince Harry can manage to keep his budding relationship with Meghan Markle out of prying public eyes for as long as possible. It would be sad for them if it blows over before it can fully develop, due to the frantic media attention. I wonder whether Markle's very public career as an actress (currently on the USA network drama, Suits, complete with scantily-clad loves scenes, will impact the continuance of her relationship with Prince Harry)? And seriously, Markle's half-sister, who suffers from MS, really needs to stop trying to capitalize on her younger half-sister's success and notoriety. Why should Markle be responsible for economically bailing out half siblings and her estranged Dad (from whom her mother divorced when Markle was six) as a result of their own bad luck and/or poor life decisions? Apparently, Markle was raised by her African-American mother in Los Angeles, and she maintains a close, loving relationship with her mother who is a yoga teacher (and clearly a positive role model for her daughter). Markle's Dad is a former cameraman who worked behind-the-scenes for many years on the popular sitcom, Married With Children. Apparently Markle's father is now broke and living in Mexico (but so far, he's not publicly whining and begging for help from his daughter).

 

[mag]

The current Prince William is, I believe, Prince William of Wales and received the title Duke of Cambridge just prior to his marriage. His children, George and Charlotte, have the titles Prince George of Cambridge and Princess Charlotte of Cambridge. This is actually a change from the past, made by the Queen prior to Prince George's birth. Because William is not the son of the Monarch, traditionally his children would have been either a Lord or a Lady. I guess because George will one day be King it was decided to make him a prince from the get go.

 

[Skittl1321]

The current Prince William is, I believe, Prince William of Wales and received the title Duke of Cambridge just prior to his marriage. His children, George and Charlotte, have the titles Prince George of Cambridge and Princess Charlotte of Cambridge. This is actually a change from the past, made by the Queen prior to Prince George's birth. Because William is not the son of the Monarch, traditionally his children would have been either a Lord or a Lady. I guess because George will one day be King it was decided to make him a prince from the get go.

Haven't Princes William and Harry been princes since birth? They are not the son's of a monarch. I don't think that is what gets you the title. (Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie are also not children of a monarch, it is just carried out through the male line)


Wikipedia tells me what I'd different is George is permitted to use Royal Highness from birth.

 

[MLIS]

Grandchildren of the monarch through a male line were always entitled to use Prince or Princess (see Princess Alexandra, Prince Michael of Kent, the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester, all first cousins of the queen and grandchildren of George V -- but their children are all Lords and Ladies, not Prince or Princess). So William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise, and James have all been entitled to Prince(ss) since birth (Louise and James, Edward and Sophie's children, are by their parents' choice styled as the children of an Earl, but they are entitled to Prince(ss)). Princess Anne's children are only entitled to whatever titles their father might have, and he and Princess Anne declined any title at the time of their marriage. The change was that in the past only the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales could be styled Prince (so that would be George), but any further children would be Lords and Ladies, but the Queen changed it so all children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would be Prince(ss), meaning Charlotte is a princess instead of Lady Charlotte. I guess in the past you didn't see as many generations living at the same time, so it wasn't as much of an issue.

My question is what that means for Harry's kids. I think if he has kids before the queen dies, they would be Lords and Ladies, as great-grandchildren of the monarch. But if he doesn't have kids until Charles is king, they would be prince(ess)es, as grandchildren of the monarch.

 

[aftershocks]

The current Prince William is, I believe, Prince William of Wales and received the title Duke of Cambridge just prior to his marriage. His children, George and Charlotte, have the titles Prince George of Cambridge and Princess Charlotte of Cambridge. This is actually a change from the past, made by the Queen prior to Prince George's birth. Because William is not the son of the Monarch, traditionally his children would have been either a Lord or a Lady. I guess because George will one day be King it was decided to make him a prince from the get go.

The Cambridge title has historically been given to males who are in direct line of succession to the throne. It is not a new or never used before title. You are probably right though that the correct attribution is Prince William of Wales, the Duke of Cambridge. And not William of Cambridge, as I stated earlier.

I think that in the past there were a bunch of royals who were titled princes and princesses. And then titular rules were adjusted, and readjusted. Lots of back and forth changes. I don't think it's unusual for the children of a future monarch to be titled prince/ princess. Of course I'm far from an expert on these matters, despite my interest in British history and royal biographies.

ETA:
Okay, thanks to previous posters for clarification re prince/ princess designation rights. I just read your posts.

 

[mag]

My question is what that means for Harry's kids. I think if he has kids before the queen dies, they would be Lords and Ladies, as great-grandchildren of the monarch. But if he doesn't have kids until Charles is king, they would be prince(ess)es, as grandchildren of the monarch.

Yes, sorry, I should have said grandchildren of the Monarch. Now for Harry's kids, I can't remember if they were included in the changes the Queen made prior to George's birth, or if those changes just apply to William's kids. Obviously once the Queen dies they can be Prince and Princesses, however, he may, like Prince Edward, choose to have them not have those titles.

An interesting note, Prince William is the first Duke of Cambridge is over 100 years! @aftershocks, according to Wikipedia, it doesn't look like the title is particularly given to those in direct line for the throne. Do you have another source for that info? I am always interested in reading more about this stuff but can't find anything specific.

A little trivia from Wikipedia:

During the period leading up to the 1999 wedding of The Prince Edward, the youngest son of Queen Elizabeth II, experts speculated that the dukedom of Cambridge or Sussex were the most likely to be granted to him, and The Sunday Telegraphlater reported that Prince Edward was at one point set to be titled Duke of Cambridge.[5] Instead, Prince Edward was created Earl of Wessex, and it was announced that he would eventually be created the next Duke of Edinburgh after his father.[6]

 

[taf2002]

The current Prince William is, I believe, Prince William of Wales and received the title Duke of Cambridge just prior to his marriage. His children, George and Charlotte, have the titles Prince George of Cambridge and Princess Charlotte of Cambridge. This is actually a change from the past, made by the Queen prior to Prince George's birth. Because William is not the son of the Monarch, traditionally his children would have been either a Lord or a Lady. I guess because George will one day be King it was decided to make him a prince from the get go.

Charles is Prince of Wales, not William. When Charles becomes king (or dies first) then William will inherit the title Prince of Wales.

 

[mag]

Charles is Prince of Wales, not William. When Charles becomes king (or dies first) then William will inherit the title Prince of Wales.

Yes, but William and Harry are styled Prince William of Wales and Prince Henry of Wales because their father is the Prince of Wales. Just like George and Charlotte are of Cambridge because their father is the Duke of Cambridge. Eugenie and Beatrice are of York because their father is the the Duke of York.

 

[cygnus]

Charles is Prince of Wales, not William. When Charles becomes king (or dies first) then William will inherit the title Prince of Wales.

The title of Prince of Wales in not automatic, though, it has to be granted by the monarch. There are often long gaps when there is no Prince of Wales. When Charles succeeds to the throne, William will probably be created Prince of Wales in his turn. Charles was not P of W as soon as his mother succeeded to the throne in 1952- they waited until 1958 to grant it to him (and he was invested in 1969 in a formal ceremony when he became an adult).

 

[kwanfan1818]

I remember watching that ceremony on TV with my mother.

 

[centerstage01]

I hope when/if William becomes Prince of Wales they don't do that silly ceremony that Charles had. No other POW had that done...it was purely for a tv audience. And if I've pegged William right he wouldn't want that anyway. Just a handshake from Dad and that's that.

 

[kwanfan1818]

The TV audience of the time didn't have much choice besides "off," and I'm not sure audiences of today would have watched the Diana and Charles wedding, which was televised for hours.

 

[attyfan]

The TV audience of the time didn't have much choice besides "off," and I'm not sure audiences of today would have watched the Diana and Charles wedding, which was televised for hours.

Was Prince William's wedding televised? I think people still like to watch the ceremonies, but they probably are shortened quite a bit.

 

[cygnus]

I hope when/if William becomes Prince of Wales they don't do that silly ceremony that Charles had. No other POW had that done...it was purely for a tv audience. And if I've pegged William right he wouldn't want that anyway. Just a handshake from Dad and that's that.

It was done for Edward Prince of Wales (later Duke of Windsor) in 1911 (pre TV)- he was the last Prince of Wales before Charles. But you are right- it is a 20th century creation, brought in when royalty realized that they had to be seen in order to be popular.

 

[Jenny]

The TV audience of the time didn't have much choice besides "off," and I'm not sure audiences of today would have watched the Diana and Charles wedding, which was televised for hours.

The coverage of William and Kate's wedding, 30+ years after Charles and Diana, was similarly feted by television networks who devoted many hours to it. CBC started its coverage at about 2:00 am and continued until about 9:00 am I believe. I think there's still a market for a royal wedding.

 

[Cachoo]

So just how serious is Prince Harry about Meghan Markle? Is this sort of statement something you see a lot: From Daily Mail

In his strongly worded statement this week Harry accused the media of intrusion and lashed out at the 'sexism and racism of social media trolls'. His message, via his communications secretary Jason Knauf, was that their relationship 'is not a game – it is her life and his'.

The statement added that Harry was 'worried about Miss Markle's safety' and 'deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her.' In the circumstances it is rather surprising that she was unaccompanied.

The royal romance was revealed less than a fortnight ago after they were given away by matching friendship bracelets both have worn for months.

Yesterday she was wearing the distinctive beaded bracelet as she strolled back to the palace with her purchases, which included a Whole Planet Foundation bag for life. The bracelet has often featured in photographs Miss Markle, who shares Harry's fondness for Africa and humanitarian work, has posted on social media.

The actress appears to have spent a lot of time in the UK over the summer, posting pictures from London to her one million Instagram followers in June, July, August and September.

 

[mag]

@Cachoo I believe there is also concern about the safety of Megan's mother. Reporters have been very aggressive around her home in LA. I think it is great that this statement was issued. Yes, they are all public figures, but what has been happening really seems to have crossed the line.

 

[Vagabond]

AFAIK, her mother is not a public figure, and invading her privacy doesn't make her one.

 

[mag]

AFAIK, her mother is not a public figure, and invading her privacy doesn't make her one.

Yes, I agree. I didn't mean to infer that she was. Megan and Harry are public figures and so some interest is to be expected, but this certainly doesn't sound like just "some interest."

 

[aftershocks]

Many of the write-ups about Meghan Markle's family background and speculation re the budding romance are absolutely ridiculous. One gossipy reporter mocks and admonishes Harry for essentially telling the press to "lay off badgering his girlfriend and her family." The tabloid gossip huckster acts as if Harry is an adolescent who is beholden to the fourth estate.

It is no wonder that Harry's former girlfriend, Chelsy Davy, reportedly said the constant OTT attention she received while dating Harry was "scary, crazy and uncomfortable." Harry's other former girlfriend, Cressida Bonas, is also said to have bolted her relationship with Harry after a couple of years because she could not stand the rabid intrusions into her privacy. Apparently, both Chelsy and Cressida remain friendly with Harry.

Harry's new relationship with Meghan is said to be serious. It's nice that they were able to keep it under wraps for nearly four months, which has allowed them time to engage with each other out of the view of prying cameras (which could have interfered with their chance to get to know each other better). I think most relationships that survive past 3 months have the opportunity of being on solid ground and developing further. But like most new relationships, there's no way to know how it will develop. I suppose that can be the fun of it for them in the beginning, as long as the British tabloids and international press tone things down (which is asking a lot). Maybe Harry and Meghan could work out an arrangement where they appear together for press photos with the understanding that the press must then back off and give them some space and some privacy.

On the plus side for Meghan is the fact that as an actress, she's used to high profile attention in the public eye. In addition, she has charitable pursuits in common with Harry. She writes a lifestyle blog, and she is actively involved with UNWomen. She recently posted a UNWomen PSA video on her blog, which advocates for encouraging more women in leadership roles. Hillary Clinton seems to be one of Meghan's role models.

Interestingly, Meghan also has a Catholic upbringing, in addition to being American, divorced, three years older than Harry, and of mixed racial heritage. All of those factors fortunately in this day and age amount to a big, 'so what?' The Prince of Wales is divorced and married to a divorcee. Princess Michael of Kent is a Catholic who had her first marriage annulled. Of course, it probably helps that Harry is not directly in line to the throne. Sadly Harry's relative from the 1960s and early 1970s, Prince William of Gloucester, lived during a time when antiquated traditions and fears that cast a shadow from the 'abdication era' of the 1930s and 1940s, still held sway. And thus, that earlier Prince William was forced to give up the love of his life, a divorced beautiful, intelligent older woman from Hungary, with offspring, and a Jewish background.

I had never heard of Meghan Markle previously, so it is intriguing to discover more about her. She appears to be a lovely, outspoken lady who enjoys life and giving back to others. Pictures of her dogs on her instagram are too cute.

http://thetig.com/un-women-psa/ scroll down for PSA video
https://www.instagram.com/meghanmarkle/?hl=en
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyqRSUV2G9A Meghan in Rwanda
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f4deUtB_wk (OTT gossipy ET report)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iB05vGWxSK4 (a more balanced Sky News report)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFYe9hYKPYQ (a British morning show's reaction)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRyArHRok_g Meghan at Kensington Palace
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3-H3CohVQo Another report at KP, with pics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtl9mnEoZUY Meghan talks with Larry King, Feb 2016, about her work with UNWomen
Interesting interview; toward end of the clip Meghan responds: "No matter what you look like, you should be taken seriously ... I think it's really great to be able to be a feminist and to be feminine, to embrace both..."

A correction to one of my earlier posts: Meghan's Dad was a lighting designer on Married With Children apparently, not a cameraman. Although I've also seen him mentioned as having been a cinematographer. In addition: I'm not certain that Meghan is necessarily estranged from her Dad, just that her parents divorced when she was a child.

 

[aftershocks]

Do you have another source for that info? I am always interested in reading more about this stuff but can't find anything specific.

If you checked into it on the Internet, that would be one source. As I recall, I read a book about British Kings and saw a family tree that showed one of the King Georges having had a son who was titled the Duke of Cambridge. I believe one of Queen Victoria's sons might also have been styled the Duke of Cambridge (but I might be thinking of Victoria's third son, the Duke of Connaught).

Okay, in checking Wiki, I see that a former Duke of Cambridge, Prince Augustus, was the son of Britain's George III and Queen Charlotte. He must be the one I recall seeing on the genealogy chart. Augustus was the 7th son of George and Charlotte, so not directly in line for the throne, but the son of a monarch.