That’s it! Had enough!

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again;

“As an Englishman, I’m a Royalist!’.

‘As an Australian, I’m a Republican!”.

Just so you don’t forget I’m also a devout atheist and a committed socialist. 

It might be a good idea if my good friend, and Nemesis, Disperser, signs off here and goes takes some photographs; it’s all about Royalty, nobility, and an up an coming Royal wedding in London!

and ej, being of the nobility….

All that being said, on with the motley.

The talking heads, of TV News, are getting themselves worked up, and me down; in a frenzy with the upcoming marriage, of Prince Henry of Wales, and  M/s Meaghan Markle, a young lady, of mixed race, as they like to point out, from one of the colonies.

Trouble is, with these talking heads, they haven’t got enough brains between the lot of them, to get a decent headache! They look squarely into the cameras, and say look at me ,I’m the anchor/star and I know everything ; ooops , I”m sure they are taught by their producers/directors that they are infallible. They’re not! I am! 😀 Only kidding! 😛

 And they’re not the only ones; even a Royals spouse……. keep reading…

The English/British system of  ‘Royalty’  differs from all other systems;.

A fine example is of an Australian girl, Mary Donaldson,   a young lady from            Hobart in Tasmania, married Crown Prince Frederick                                                              of Denmark, and immediately became Crown Princess              Princess Mary           Mary of Denmark. No ifs, no buts, she married a prince,                     she becomes a princess.  


Not so in England. You want to be a ‘Princess’? You have to be born a ‘Princess’; no ifs, no buts, that’s the way the system works.

So Prince Harry’s mum, Diana, was NOT a PRINCESS, she was HRH, Lady Diana, Princess of Wales, Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Rothesay, Countess of Carrick; need I go on; but she was not ‘Princess’!

Whats more she did not become Lady Diana until 1975 when her father inherited the title Earl Spencer, up until then she was just plain Miss. Why do the media keep referring to her as such?

Because they’re thick as bricks, that’s why!

Has it occurred to these morons, fronting the cameras, and appearing on our TV screens, that HRH. Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, Charles & Camilla as the wife of the Prince of Wales  is surely  entitled to the same titles as the late Lady Diana?  So why is she not referred to as Princess Camilla by the media?

Prince William of Wales, son of the Prince of Wales, married a commoner;  Catherine Middleton.             

William & CatherineCatherine is now HRH. Catherine Duchess ofCambridge,  elevated to the nobility but NOT royalty; she is not Princess Catherine, if she wishes, she can be called Princess William of Wales. Why don’t the clowns call HER Princess Kate, they love the Kate thing, even though the Royals have made it perfectly clear that they don’t! 

But all the talking heads still persist, in calling lady Diane, Princess Di. Trouble is, they obviously believe that she was. Ignorant clowns!


In the fullness of time, when William ascends the throne,  she will be anointed, crowned,  and proclaimed Queen , as was Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother,   Bertie and Eliza                        

when Prince Albert, Duke of York ascended the throne          and crowned King George VI back when I was a boy.

By Royal decree, Prince Williams children,  have been granted and given the title Prince  & Princess. The great grandchildren of an English/British monarch are not automatically ‘royals’. indeed they are commoners! 

Any issue, from the union of Prince Harry and M/s Markle, will be commoners, but they will bear the titles Lord and Lady. An eldest son will, of course, be of the nobility and bear the secondary title of the Prince. Harry will become the Duke of Clarence, or Suffolk, or Sussex and have a secondary, title possibly in the form of Marquis of Margate, something along those lines, but the children will not be HRH’s. Miss Markle will be, as the wife of a Royal Duke.


Don’t go away, I haven’t finished this rant yet, plenty more where this lot came from!

I read the other day, where someone had said, within the hearing of the Duchess of Cornwall, that Catherine, when William ascended the throne would be the first commoner to do so, and she piped up and said “no she won’t, I will!”; fair enough; if and when Charles gets a go at the monarchy, as his wife, she has a right to be to be crowned as Queen consort. Just hope she takes another name, Queen Camilla ?? 

Thing is she got it wrong too!  

Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother was the daughter of an Earl; Lady Elizabeth Bowes Lyons, as such, was a commoner, the daughters of Earls are given the honorary title ‘lady; goes back to the days when they were used as marriage fodder. Of course she was an HRH after marrying Bertie, just like Diane was after marrying Charlie, but basically a commoner.

So, as I said HRH the Duchess of Cornwall got it wrong too; there’s been a few commoners wedded and bedded by kings in England. Big Harry, not to be confused with our Little Harry, comes to mind.

Mistress Anne Boleyn was a commoner. Anne Boleyn  she wasn’t the first daughter of an Earl to wed an English king either, but I’ll not bore you any longer, much as I’d like to. 



Just in case Emilio took me at my word, and popped out when this stuff hit the cyberspace, would somebody please let him know, that it’s now okay, and safe to return. 

If on the other hand he stayed, and read right through; you can bet your bottom dollar that I’m in for it, a lecture and tirade like never before seen ; 2000 words at least, and a dozen links to prove that I’m off my rocker.

I can’t wait. 😈







83 thoughts on “That’s it! Had enough!

  1. Fascinating reading, however, where do I fit into all of this.
    You see I have just the right frock, should the powers that be wish to proclaim me HRH Ira, not Ira The Commoner.


  2. It’ll be fun to see what your nemesis has to say.

    In the end, who gives a hoot about all this royalty stuff? It was all just invented in the beginning, wasn’t it?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Of course not, they started as tribal chieftains and then when they got religion told the serfs that god said it was okay to be King. Something along those lines.
      Actually I do believe it’s the best thing for the English, Keeps ’em united, they’d be at each others throats without it.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Yawn … I care less than nothing about English royals. And if the American press can’t get their royal titles right, well, it’s because they’re American. I think King George was the last English royal we cared about. (Athough, truth be told, when I was a girl I did enjoy watching Elizabeth’s coronation.)

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I wouldn’t mind betting that a large proportion of Americans will like the idea of having an American woman married to an English prince, they seem to make a fuss over ‘royal visits”
      It’s actually a very good system for the English and a lot cheaper than having a potus.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I don’t know either. It’s just that you haven’t dropped in to say hello for the last six weeks and knowing how sensitive you are I have wondered whether I had offended you to such an extent.


        1. I haven’t been getting notifications of any posts, I always get an email from all those that I follow telling me that they’ve posted stuff and then I go look, No Notification No Go as Charlie Chan was want to say, And you haven’t been shoved into the spam folder like Why von knee was, cos I check it so where you sending the notifications???

          Liked by 1 person

  4. We Brits have a love/hate relationship with the Royal Family. I cannot understand the fuss about the upcoming Royal wedding, I understand even less the frenzy about Diana.

    In 2002 the BBC conducted a public poll to identify the Greatest Briton…

    The result was a foregone conclusion and Winston Churchill topped the poll with 28% of the votes. The BBC project first identified the top one hundred candidates and the final vote was between the top ten. Second in the poll was the engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel who gave Churchill a good run for his money and received nearly 25% of the votes. These two I fully agreed with but in third place, and goodness knows what the public must have been thinking, was Diana!

    Now, the only thing that I can see that Diana ever did was to whine a lot about having to live in Palaces, wear expensive jewellery, attend gala performances, shag around and try to undermine and destroy the Royal Family. Not so long ago you could have your head cut off for that sort of thing but by some bizarre twist the British have turned her into a heroine.

    As low down as number twenty-seven was Emily Pankhurst who fought for women’s suffrage and much further down the list at number fifty-two was Florence Nightingale and in my opinion these two women’s personal legacy to the development of Great Britain as a nation is much, much greater than that of Diana.

    Howls of protest from Diana fans!

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I’ve always had the greatest admiration for Elizabeth Tudor, she is No. 1 in my book, always. What she went through, had to put up with and to win through like she did to unite England into a great nation was really extraordinary.
      Diana never did anything for me, always seemed a simpering little thing, she’d have gone well in Plantagenet times.
      The thing is with those polls who conducts them, who do they poll, they sex age and education ……… Did the Beeb do their own poll or farm it out?
      No doubt the girls that voted for Diana never received any education

      Liked by 2 people

    2. Hi, Brian,
      Enjoyed your “rant” as always. The title issue always seems to come up. I don’t know why the press can’t get it right after all these centuries. Maybe they assume their reading public is too stupid to understand, or the press is just too lazy to bother. I can’t speak to excitement about Harry and Meghan’s wedding here. I haven’t seen that much, other than overheated speculation about whether the current president will be invited. I hope they’ll be happy; otherwise it’s none of my business. Re Harry’s looks: I always thought he resembles Philip more than anyone (childhood pictures seem to indicate a remarkable resemblance). Since red hair is on Diana’s side, I don’t think that’s a reliable indicator, but again it’s none of my business. Hope you’re feeling better. Judging from this post, I suspect you are! 😀

      Liked by 2 people

      1. The press are only interested in what they think the public want, trouble is they can’t think.
        Harry certainly takes after Prince Phillip, they’re both military minded, I’m sure Phillip would have loved a few extra years in the RN in command of his own ship before settling down to his place behind Elizabeth.; even though it wasn’t that long after when Geo VI died. I do believe that Harry would love to be an active member of the Army still, strange he never seemed to go for the navy, like his father and grandfather and great grandfather. his great great wanted an Army career but Victoria put the Kyber on that.
        I’m feeling quite well of late thank s Lauren, I do have rare days when I’m not up to scratch but that’s to be expected.


  5. Nemesis? I thought I was a mentor of sorts; an educator and teacher of how things should be. Don’t tell me you’ve been taking all my wonderful advice and chucking it as adversarial!

    As for royals and titles . . . Denis Diderot had the right idea but it seems we’re going the wrong way in that regard.

    But, as long as I don’t have to bow to either king or priest, I suppose I won’t worry about what arse, crown, or ring people want to kiss in the name of appearances.

    However, good to see something has got you off from feeling listless and without motivation. Anger — even anger about inconsequential things — is good for getting the blood pumping and the brain stimulated.

    My own lineage is nebulous and all hearsay . . . but, regardless of the blueblood that may be coursing through my veins, I’ll always consider myself a commoner and avoid rubbing elbows with anyone who thinks of themselves as higher-born.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Would you believe, that I just noticed that I hadn’t acknowledge this comment?I wonder perhaps if I was kind of shell shocked at the brevity of said comment.
      Be lucky if it’s a hundred words when I was expecting 2 K at the minimum complete with links.Well if it makes you feel any better and wanted okay you’re now my official mentor, isn’t educator and teacher tautology?
      I have a lot more time for the English/British Royals that I have for the American POTUS’s of the last 20 -30 years. Clinton draft dodger,Geo Dubya got out of the draft by joining the home guard and flying around Texaas in an airplane; at least his dad was a real pilot in a real war. the present potus got out of the draft because of an ingrown toenail.
      whereas, Prince Charles like his father was a RN Officer both saw active service as did the Duke of York.
      King George VI the queens father was a gunnery officer aboard a cruiser at the battle of Jutland. Prince Harry served 10 years in the army seeing active service in George Dubyas war in Afghanistan
      And they don’t cost nearly as much as POTUS does to protect. Too they do pay taxes just like POTUS ?
      They are the right prople for the United Kingdoms and do an excellent job. I think they would be more than happy if Australia was to become a Republic, we can do that and still remain a member of the Commonwealth of Nations,

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Educator of facts and teacher of how things should be . . . I supposed I could lump those together but I see them as two separate things as in teaching kids history, math, etc. and also teaching kids how to behave and to be respectful of wiser persons from Hawai’i.

      Somehow, I got the impression the later generation of royal military service didn’t involve getting to the front lines and in the trenches (so to speak; not aware of actual trenches in the Middle East . . . just bombed-out buildings). I also suspect Harry’s unit was pretty much charged with protecting him even at the expense of others; that’s just me knowing the ways of powerful people but not knowing for sure. I think he flew an Apache helicopter, if I remember correctly. Said he killed himself some insurgents (long-distance, I assume).

      As for the monarchy doing well for Britts, I can’t speak to that and I’m sure those who don’t agree don’t get much of a voice. That’s also the way of powerful people. In a way, Trump is a lot like our own version of Royalty . . . pretty much useless and clueless and with unearned privileged and more likely to muck things up than solve any problems. Also, like royalty, he’s come to believe his own hype. Sad.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Harry was in the front line/trenches. it was the clowns in the media that was making a noise about it that it put the rest of his group in extra danger. Make no mistake Harry was there and I do think you’re letting your prejudices control what you’re saying. Quite frankly I still believe that Harry was the son of that red headed army officer that his mother was having a fling with, Hasn’t been a red headed royal since Elizabeth I as far as I can recall, and he sure as hell hasn’t got any Tudor blood in him, He doesn’t look like any of the Royals either, whereas his brother does

        Liked by 1 person

      2. In all seriousness, flying a helicopter in support of ground operations against insurgents is definitively not the trenches anymore so than helicopters following a police chase are in the chase itself.

        Not taking anything away from the man as helicopters can and do get shot down and the Apache is a difficult craft to fly (especially in that mountainous terrain), but the trenches are on the ground.

        Still, give the man his dues for seeing active service, something that sons (and daughters) of career politicians and wealthy individuals manage to avoid here in the States (not all, but many). And yes, I think any President who may be asked to send soldiers to their deaths should have military experience.

        In fact, I think it should be a prerequisite to any high office to have experienced combat.

        . . . perhaps, then, we’d see fewer wars . . .

        Liked by 1 person

        1. he actually fought on the ground this is what caused the problems with the Home Office, Dept of Defence ( Used to be called the War office, but that sounded belligerent so they changed it, hypocrites) they didn’t want to have the death on their hands of the 3rd or 4th in line for the throne, There is a lot more involved than I think you wish to see because of your dislike/disdain of things royal, But that is your right.


        2. Hmm . . . I see no record of ground action but I’ll take your word for it.

          Also, not so much dislike/disdain as a great reluctance acknowledging special station especially when the result not of merit but accident of birth.

          If it’s any consolation, I’m even less enamored with celebrities. At least royals have a pretense of – if not actual – decorum and class. Certainly, they are taught to fake it.


      1. No disapproval here, certainly. A lot of thoughts. My mind is quite wild today. I often think of Edward and that yank female, and his abdication. I do not think I would let someone do that on my behalf. What a dreadful responsibility. But that isn’t what you’re talking about.


        1. I’m glad she did, Edward VIII would have been a disasterous King, even his father knew that and had said that he wished that Bertie could be King after he died, little did he know that his wish was granted. Edward was a Nazi through and through. They should never have created a Dukedom for him. He should just have been banished to Germany. It is now impossible to give the title Duke of Windsor to anybody, he soiled it forever.
          I’d laugh if Harry decided he’d like that title, he does have a soft spot for Windsor as does his grandmother.

          Liked by 2 people

        2. Yes, perhaps that did work for the best. I am just speaking based on principle. Obviously she did not have the same scruples. Practically, however, yes, it was best overall.

          Liked by 1 person

  6. Ooh! I love history!!! 🙂

    Having never lived in a country with royalty…I find it all so fascinating. To the point that I’ve read books, watched documentaries, and the TV show The Crown. 🙂

    But, I just see everyone in the world as a person…no one better than anyone else based on money, family name, religion, education or politics. People are people to me and I try to treat them all the same…with kindness and respect and interest. I love asking people questions about their lives, feelings, experiences, etc. 🙂 If I met the Queen I wouldn’t treat her any different than I treat homeless people that I meet…kindly, with respect, love, etc. Ha! I’d hug the Queen and then probably get kicked out! 😮 😀

    I’m so glad I was not born into a royal family! I would have said or done something silly soon after my birth and been kicked out!!! 😉 😛 😀 HA! 😈 😎

    Get the theme here?! Me getting kicked out!!! 😛

    I wish Prince Harry and Meghan Markle a wonderful life…long and loving! But, I wish that for any young couple who gets married. 🙂

    Royal-HUGS!!! 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Well you’ve come to the right place if you like history, this site is full of the stuff, and if you tried to hug the Queen she’d probably hit you with her 👑👑👑 wallop wallop wallop, One just doesn’t do such a thing.👎👀👎👀
      I think Prince Harry and M/s Markle make a very nice handsome couple, I just hope that she can learn to live with the great burden that she’s going to have to live with.Harry knows nothing else, and the rigours would just about kill anyone not raised in the ways of the Royal Family of Gt Britain,

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Would she hit me with her purse?!?!
        Or would the guards tackle me to the ground?!?!
        😉 😀 😛 😈 :mrgreen: 🙂

        Yes, I can’t even imagine a person marrying into the royal family and having to learn the ropes.

        HUGS!!! 🙂


        1. I think you would be quietly led outside and shown the gate 🏛 to Buckingham Palace, perhaps Her Maj would look down her nose 👃👃 slightly, it’s just not done to touch the Queen except to shake her hand if she proffers hers first.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. My father once got out of shaking the Prince of Wales’s hand, that was the nazi bloke that married that Yankee woman and abdicated. I wont go into that now though.
          Somehow though I think if you were placed in the position describred you’d be the perfect gentleman and accept it gracefully, I’ll have to ask diem3 what she thinks about that, sure she’d agree.

          Liked by 1 person

        3. Miss Markle will have quite a lot to learn and have restrictions placed upon her that she probably hasn’t realized yet, they don’t have the same freedom as we do.
          Just imagine sitting down to a family dinner and you’re tucking into something delightful, using all the proper cutlery properly and the Queen decides she’s had enough, places her knife & fork on the plate in the finished position,; and you have to stop eating and place your’s in the correct position too. 😕😕😕Don’t make any difference if you are half finished and really enjoying the food, 🍨🍨 Queen stops eating everyone stops.😒😒😒

          Liked by 2 people

  7. The US press is muddleheaded bubble brains writing for consumers who glorify in gossip, celebrity, and revels in others’ misery and downfalls. So no wonder anyone bothers with accuracy around here. The US loves drama and pageantry – only thing that accounts for putting up with Hollywood, reality shows, flashy with questionable talented singers, and professional athletes.
    (Please allow us a glimpse of old era royalty once in a while…and then they can go home…short attention span here…)
    But Camilla’s blurting out? Tasteless, absurd, and ignorant. (Guess she’s be seething and dwelling on the hope for years?)
    The Queen looks happier these past few years. That’s nice – hang in there Lady, until the grandkids get a few years on them and leap the job over. I always worried about the grandsons being near combat. Whew. Military service should be a requirement – it gives maturity that jet setting can’t and a better perspective. Hope they do find a happy family life for as long a possible – as I wish everyone could. The little ones make me smile – they are just kids- let them be.
    (Love the history. I try to know enough to keep up with you and Disperser)


    1. I must admit I have some sympathy for Camilla, The Queen would not let Charles marry her in the first place and of course the house started to crumple after that. The fiasco which was Lady Diana,although she did produce to fine young men she was in over her depth,and didn’t stand a chance.
      Disperser likes to have a shot at me and the Royal family, sometimes I think there’s a tinge of envy there ( watch out for the burst )I have a lot of time for the Royals when I wear mt English hat I must admit that they really are totally irrelevant to Australia, I do believe that their wish is for Australia and New Zealand to become Republics, so they don’t have to pretend anymore. They are English kind of Scottish Irish & Welsh, but basically I think they look upon themselves as English. Most people don’t realize that Great Britain is actually 4 separate countries.


    2. So, by that logic, you must be envious of Americans, people who carry guns, people who speak proper (American) English, Capitalists, the religious . . . the list goes on and on.


      1. The lives and opinions of norteamericanos are as wide and varied as the geography. (Oh I know that the Academy hates that word – but they are waaaay over there)
        Variations of thought in the US used to be such fun – but individuals have gotten so touchy or looking for a chance to be a victim (or to identify a victim so they can show how wonderful they, themselves are for finding one…) it’s difficult to hold conversations – forget civil debating.
        Probably the result of too little free play on playgrounds as children and elimination of school plays. Without the opportunity to be the vegetable or tree on stage…scarred for adult life.
        Maybe it was better when social conversations never include the topics of money, religion, or politics….had to stay up with art, plays, music, literature, and current events (which meant a working knowledge of history, influences and geography)…people were always laying traps to see if one had actually attended the ballet / read the book or just memorized the reviews HAHA.
        Once women cut with words and real men settled things outside with fists….Hmmm still sounds a bit rough, but considering the nature of humans, perhaps less dangerous overall.
        But what do you expect from those who don’t know “to” from “two” from “too”? No brainers are a proper mess. (but hey, the only order is chaos)


        1. An obvious reference to my chum disperser, seriously though I agree completely, I grew up pre TV the wireless and newspapers was where we got our information about what was going on.
          I sometimes wonder how my nose managed to stay in shape, got belted a few times, but I enjoyed what we called a bit of a barney.
          Too, they don’t know the difference between “me myself and I”, even the politicians have no idea which is a big worry to me, because if they don’t know the language how the hell can the pass legislation.
          I grew up in the real good old days. Had an uncle, wasn’t really my uncle my dads best friend, who was an opera buff and as I was the only one in the family who enjoyed music and singing he took me to many operas in London in the years 1945 -50 , left England in Feb, 51. From there it was just a step to ballet, which I now prefer, and my loss of hearing isn’t the reason. I just adore the dance. Loved dancing as a lad.

          Liked by 1 person

  8. Yank here…barely grasp the point of royalty…isn’t Camilla not given the title because she was divorced? Uh..isn’t she divorced?? Guess I don’t know.

    Ha, a month ago a Canadian friend posted a photo of Prince Charles to myself and I thought to myself, “Ah, Prince Phillip is looking good.”. Ouch.


    1. 🙂 Royalty is an excellent system for the English, It suits the system of government perfectly. In the United Kingdoms (note I use plural as it is actually kingdoms not kingdom, separate countries) one has to be born a direct immediate descent of the monarch. A commoner that marries a Prince or Princess of the blood is elevated to an HRH but is not given the title.
      I’m sure Prince Phillip would have been delighted and greatly amused by your thought, the man has a great rakish sense of humour.
      Thank you for dropping by and leaving a great comment. 😀 and the welcoming 🐻

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I do rather like Prince Phillip. There are not many American men that would have let their career go like that. I imagine he is an important part in keeping his wife and the monarchy going.


        1. I admire him greatly, I recall back in 1954 when in the Australian Army, I was part of the guard at Government House in Melbourne when it was inspected by the Duke of Edinburgh, he looked me directly in the eye, but unfortunately didn’t speak to me, he spoke to the bloke next to me. 😦
          He has a wicked wit, that has kept him going, a man of great strength, integrity, and above all else, love for Queen & Country.
          The Queen has indeed been fortunate in having found such a man.


All comments appreciated and acknowledged

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s