Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => The Windsors => Topic started by: grandduchessella on December 03, 2012, 05:53:13 PM

Title: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 03, 2012, 05:53:13 PM
Went to post this photo and noticed the previous thread was over 60 pages--way longer than we normally keep them. So, time for Part IV.

(http://media-cache-ec2.pinterest.com/upload/125045327124350786_xzlAgqy2_b.jpg)

(http://media-cache-ec2.pinterest.com/upload/39969515413353649_HabEPcF0_b.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: IvanVII on December 03, 2012, 10:50:30 PM
A beautiful woman in all ages.

Something that struck me about her reign from a statement made in the Duke/Duchess of Cambridge thread about the pregnancy. There are so many common themes between the reign of QEII and QV. Makes me think queens tend to work out very well for the UK. Not to say their kings have been bad, but it just seems reigning queens do the UK good.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on December 04, 2012, 12:17:14 PM
A beautiful woman in all ages.

Something that struck me about her reign from a statement made in the Duke/Duchess of Cambridge thread about the pregnancy. There are so many common themes between the reign of QEII and QV. Makes me think queens tend to work out very well for the UK. Not to say their kings have been bad, but it just seems reigning queens do the UK good.

I agree completely on all points! I'd also like to point out, with so much of the design/discussions on this website revolving around Russian and British monarchy, that women arguably have had the impressive upper hand on male rulers/leaders.

In Britain you have two very popular and successful female monarchs that combined have ruled for 124 of the past 175 years. Then throw in Margaret Thatcher for good measure...the most successful Prime Minister since the second half of the 20th century most would say. On the Russian side there were four female rulers between 1725-1796 and many would consider Catherine II the greatest of all Russian Tsar/Empresses since Peter the Great.

Funny for all of the egalitarian values being espoused by the socialists where were all the women in the government of the USSR? If they had themselves a few more female voices maybe they wouldn't have been so destructive, eh?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: darius on December 04, 2012, 01:08:18 PM
Unfortunately I can´t say that I agree with this verdict on the current reign.  HM inherited a nation bankrupt by crippling war debts and has watched as the nation turned into the sickman of Europe and became a rather irrelevant post-colonial second rate power on the global stage.  Her country is peopled by many who no longer value the core British values which gave birth to the British bulldog spirit, replaced by a cringeworthy Cool Britannia and celebrity mania.  Her Kingdom is in the throws of a constitutional meltdown with the UK being broken apart by greedy politicans who care for no more than lining their pockets and trying to appear to be "with it".  All in all I think when we consider the 200 years of British growth prior to 1952, the reign of QEII will be considered as the reign when Great Britain lost its way, its place in the world and its very soul.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on December 04, 2012, 08:17:37 PM
Not to disagree with you Darius but just a couple of things to add on your points...

Quote
...and became a rather irrelevant post-colonial second rate power on the global stage.

Sounds awfully harsh, but you may be onto something. Could it not be argued that this downgrade of prestige was not inevitable however? How was a country of 60-million really going to compete with vastly larger economies (United States, Soviet Union, China, etc) once the world became increasingly globalized post-WW2? No one expects Canada, for instance, with a population around 1/9th the size to compete with the US economy, military strength and global influence either...

Quote
Her country is peopled by many who no longer value the core British values which gave birth to the British bulldog spirit, replaced by a cringeworthy Cool Britannia and celebrity mania.

Fair point, but things are rather cyclical don't you think? "Cool Britannia" being the natural response to the doldrums of the 70s and 80s. Plus wasn't that movement technically over by the early-2000s? Sounds like Brit pop culture isn't all that much different from Ameican pop culture...a hodge-podge of clashing subcultures, with blurred lines between them, creating a scene. The only way I can't stand what I see young people wearing and listening to these days is because I realize the "mainstream" has less meaning and relevance than at any time in recent memory.

I'd draw a parallel with the United States by suggesting that while there may be an excess of empty headed fluff, more people are talking about politics and social issues now than probably at any point since the end of the Vietnam War.

Quote
Her Kingdom is in the throws of a constitutional meltdown with the UK being broken apart by greedy politicans who care for no more than lining their pockets and trying to appear to be "with it".

It's bad indeed...but compared with the polarization on a level of historic proportions in the US and the Eurozone economic crisis, I'd say it's rather on par with the 21st century issues being faced by Britain's allies and neighbors.

Quote
All in all I think when we consider the 200 years of British growth prior to 1952, the reign of QEII will be considered as the reign when Great Britain lost its way, its place in the world and its very soul.

Sheesh! Well, has a British monarch ever wielded so little political influence as the current Queen? And I don't that mean that as a criticism but rather a constitutional reality. Because of this how much of what ails England can really be attributed to her?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: darius on December 04, 2012, 11:42:37 PM
Excellent points edubs31.  Of course we can´t attribute the blame for the situation to HM who I am sure looks on in horror at the decline of a nation and a people which she loves so dearly.  My point was simply that this Elizabethan age cannot be compared with the glory of her great-great grandmother´s reign as so many increasingly try to do.  Yes, these things are cyclical but considering the nation since 1952, it appears to be one long decline.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on December 05, 2012, 12:01:50 AM
Excellent points edubs31.  Of course we can´t attribute the blame for the situation to HM who I am sure looks on in horror at the decline of a nation and a people which she loves so dearly.  My point was simply that this Elizabethan age cannot be compared with the glory of her great-great grandmother´s reign as so many increasingly try to do.  Yes, these things are cyclical but considering the nation since 1952, it appears to be one long decline.

Yes I suppose you're correct. Although not really my place to say one way or another being an American. Thanks for your kind words.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Vecchiolarry on December 05, 2012, 12:25:43 AM
Hi,

I think there's a general decline in civilization, empathy and morals around the world in general.  We cannot blame The Queen for any of it;  she herself is a model of ladyhood grace and humanity.

But, I do agree with you in general that things are declining badly.

Larry
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on December 05, 2012, 08:30:36 PM
Hear, hear, Larry.

I'm afraid that the US is headed towards something similar...such as in this movie: "Idiocracy" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: IvanVII on December 05, 2012, 10:42:37 PM
I think that is symptomatic of society as a whole. One thing the Brits have over us though is an apolitical uniting figure in the queen. Both of the last two presidents (no matter what side of the political aisle you're on) have been somewhat polarizing figures pushing the left and right further and further apart. While the UK, politically may also be divided, as a people they have something that unites them in the throne, a job HM has done very well.

And NO I do not want a monarch here, just a president who would unite instead of falling into party politics.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on December 06, 2012, 09:39:48 AM
I agree with Ivan. A national symbol above party is good for the country. Especially since that symbol is a lovely woman who has been around forever now.

The only time people in America (or much elsewhere for that matter) rally around a politician/president is in a time of national crisis. Otherwise Washington continuously plays out as that zero sum game.

I read that the Queen's approval ratings post-Diamond jubilee are 90%, with just 7% disapproval. While that's historically high for her (and President Bush was at or near 90% following 9/11 so let it be a cautionary tale, lol) her approval never measured below the support of 2/3rds of her country. 66% in March of 1998, months after Diana's death and criticism of the royal family's reaction, was her low point. I'd wager that no US President since George Washington has ever been so popular.

Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: CHRISinUSA on December 06, 2012, 11:51:39 AM
Most of my fellow Americans will probably cringe at this, but over the years I have come to believe that the US as a whole might be better served if we had a constitutional monarch like Elizabeth II. 

Not that I would want such a position vested with any of the political authority currently held by our president.  I just like the idea of a "senior statesman" role such as the Crown - disconnected from any particular affiliation and who cannot be painted as the "enemy" - to whom both the President and the leaders of Congress would be constitutionally required to defend their respective positions and agendas.  I wonder how much of the fierce political wrangling that currently goes on in Washington would ease in such a case.  Perhaps not at all - but I wonder.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on December 06, 2012, 12:48:39 PM
Chris,

Strangely enough I don't cringe at this and have often half jokingly (but only half) spoken with my friends about the possible need to create a Constitutional Monarchy in order to save what often seems like the downward spiral of our political system. Not that the system itself is the problem, but the inability of our representatives to legislate effectively and perhaps the lack of wisdom by the voters themselves inches us closer to a crisis point where the only way to reorganize and move forward is perhaps to rally around a single person and idea.

Democracy is pointless for Democracy's sake. As the often attributed Churchill quote "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others" goes. It exists because it's deemed most effective for the greatest number of people. And also exists as something reactionary. The backlash to the what came before it. But if the system doesn't lead to enough positive results ought we not to consider a change?

Quote
I just like the idea of a "senior statesman" role such as the Crown - disconnected from any particular affiliation and who cannot be painted as the "enemy" - to whom both the President and the leaders of Congress would be constitutionally required to defend their respective positions and agendas.  I wonder how much of the fierce political wrangling that currently goes on in Washington would ease in such a case.  Perhaps not at all - but I wonder.

I wonder as well. But in America everything gets politicized, even the non-political. That "senior statesman" you speak of would have a hard getting elected in the first place to their role. And if they did they'd likely receive heavy opposition. This person would have to be perceived as completely centrist and non-partisan. A decent modern example of this would be Dwight Eisenhower. A national hero after WW2 it would have been hard to find a more popular American than Ike. Still however popular he may have been only 55% of the country voted for his Presidency in 1952. Now obviously 55% is quite a bit in Presidential terms but that means nine out of every twenty random people you talk to on the street still said no to Eisenhower for one reason or another. He then has a successful four year run as a moderate non-polarizing figure and still only managed to convince 57.4% of Americans to keep him in his position for another four years...not a lifetime like a monarch...but a mere four years!

The House of Windsor/Sax-Coburg/Hanover is a brand name. There was a time when British monarchs rules as autocrats and then over the course of time they ceded more and more of those powers to the parliament and people. Yet no one alive currently can remember a time when Elizabeth II her father (uncle briefly), or grandfather were not seated on the throne. And aside for a few years in the 17th century England has always had a King & Queen. It's a family and political tradition and not something I can imagine being replicated, and even then taken seriously, by the American public.

Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on December 06, 2012, 01:49:50 PM
Most of my fellow Americans will probably cringe at this, but over the years I have come to believe that the US as a whole might be better served if we had a constitutional monarch like Elizabeth II. 

Not that I would want such a position vested with any of the political authority currently held by our president.  I just like the idea of a "senior statesman" role such as the Crown - disconnected from any particular affiliation and who cannot be painted as the "enemy" - to whom both the President and the leaders of Congress would be constitutionally required to defend their respective positions and agendas.  I wonder how much of the fierce political wrangling that currently goes on in Washington would ease in such a case.  Perhaps not at all - but I wonder.

No cringing here, Chris. I have thought the very same.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 06, 2012, 02:17:33 PM
Before we get too off-track from Elizabeth II, perhaps the current discussion should be carried on here:

Current Perception of the Windsors and the Future of the Monarchy

http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/index.php?topic=6834.540
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on December 06, 2012, 07:34:05 PM
I'm done :-) Long Live the Queen!

GD Ella, would you happen to have a year for the top picture of Elizabeth you posted...and if there is anymore information to share on it?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 06, 2012, 09:19:09 PM
I don't have a year for it. :(  I found it on pinterest. There was no further info given on it.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on December 07, 2012, 05:03:19 PM
Referring to the photo that Grandduchessella posted on pg. 1...

My goodness, HM looks so incredibly young in that photo. However, I must say, the ultra vibrant color of her orange frock is a bit shocking. I'm sure it was hugely fashionable back in the day. Speaking of fashion, I'll never understand it!  :)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 07, 2012, 06:46:10 PM
It is a bright color, isn't it! That's what drew my attention to it on pinterest.

Here's a photo--does anyone remember what it was from? I thought the Jubilee but didn't see Kate or Mike Tindall even though other spouses were there. Autumn Philips is there though so sometime since her wedding to Peter but before William married Kate.

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdrlkxAZNh1rgsfpko1_500.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 07, 2012, 06:54:38 PM
Some of my favorite EII photos--I love her hats. :)

(http://images.forbes.com/media/lists/11/2007/88G5.jpg)

(http://images.forbes.com/images/2001/06/26/queen_elizabeth_II_200x220.jpg)

(http://stars.topnews.in/sites/default/files/queen-elizabeth-ii40.jpg) (http://en.tengrinews.kz/userdata/000_DV1167244.jpg)

Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on December 07, 2012, 07:05:50 PM
It is a bright color, isn't it! That's what drew my attention to it on pinterest.

Here's a photo--does anyone remember what it was from? I thought the Jubilee but didn't see Kate or Mike Tindall even though other spouses were there. Savannah Philips is there though so sometime since her wedding to Peter but before William married Kate.

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdrlkxAZNh1rgsfpko1_500.jpg)

I remember this photo! It was taken at Clarence House in 2002 on the occasion of HM celebrating her Golden Jubilee. Prince Charles hosted a dinner for his mama, the Queen, and invited the rest of the clan. It's a wonderful photo and lovely to see again.

Hmmm, I'm editing this post because now I think I may be incorrect. Camilla is in the photo and the boys (William and Harry) look way too old for this to have been taken back in 2002. My apologies.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 07, 2012, 07:11:24 PM
Peter didn't marry Autumn Kelly until 2008 though. Isn't that her between Princess Anne and Zara?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on December 07, 2012, 07:15:26 PM
Yes. I am totally wrong. But, I do remember this photo. I will be back in a while to do some searching and will post my findings if someone doesn't beat me to it!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 07, 2012, 07:21:01 PM
Cute photos of Charles & Anne:

(http://in2eastafrica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Princess-Anne-and-Prince-Charles-photographed-by-Kenneth-Clayton.jpg)

(http://in2eastafrica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Mr-Clayton-posed-for-a-photograph-with-Princess-Anne-and-Prince-Charles.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on December 07, 2012, 07:21:08 PM
Found it! As printed in The Sun on November 17, 2007:

"THE Queen and Duke of Edinburgh pose with their family as they kick off their diamond wedding celebrations last night.

This snap was taken at a bash thrown by Prince Charles at Clarence House for 25 Royals — plus Peter Phillips’ fiancee Autumn Kelly.

They feasted on lobster mousse, Sandringham partridge and ice-cream cake with Highgrove berries.

The flowers on the table were white cattleya orchids — the same as on the Queen’s bouquet on November 20, 1947.

Today the Queen and Duke will attend a thanksgiving service at Westminster Abbey.

Back row: Daniel Chatto, Lady Sarah Chatto, Prince Michael of Kent, Princess Michael of Kent, Duke of Kent, Princess Alexandra, Viscount Linley, Viscountess Linley.

Middle row: Vice Admiral Timothy Laurence, Peter Phillips, Princess Royal, Autumn Kelly, Zara Phillips, Princess Beatrice, Duke of York, Princess Eugenie, Earl of Wessex, Duchess of Gloucester, Countess of Wessex, Duke of Gloucester.

Front row: Prince William, Prince of Wales, Queen, Duke of Edinburgh, Duchess of Cornwall, Prince Harry"

Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 07, 2012, 07:24:55 PM
Thanks, RW! I had thought it was in the last few years but couldn't place the event. For some reason, I guess because I can't add, I didn't think of their 60th wedding anniversary.

A beautiful photo of the new Queen

(http://in2eastafrica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/The-secret-photographs-were-commissioned-by-artist-Margaret-Lindsay-William-to-help-her-with-her-official-portrait-of-the-Queen-to-be-released-following-her-coronation.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on December 07, 2012, 07:45:27 PM
What a treat! I have never seen these photos before and they are adorable.  :)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 07, 2012, 09:58:17 PM
They were apparently amongst the first group of photos taken after the death of George VI but I don't think they were released. They came to light not too long ago when the grandson of the photographer (in the photo with Anne and Charles) came across them.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lilly on December 09, 2012, 10:05:30 AM
The Photo is from 2007, Diamand Wedding. And yes it is Autumn. Their were engaged.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on December 09, 2012, 12:25:29 PM
Interesting to see the relative heights. The Duke of Kent is much taller than I thought he was, and Princess Alexandra shorter.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Emperor of the Dominions on December 13, 2012, 10:56:34 PM
The Queen questions the financial crisis:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20716299

R.I.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: CHRISinUSA on December 14, 2012, 07:50:31 AM
Interesting to see the relative heights. The Duke of Kent is much taller than I thought he was, and Princess Alexandra shorter.Ann

Just a thought - it's possible some of the people in the rear row are standing on a riser, which might distort relative height a bit.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: heavensent on December 27, 2012, 10:04:15 AM
Just wondering, has the Queen ever visited Israel ?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on December 27, 2012, 12:46:21 PM
According to this web page, no.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_visits_made_by_Queen_Elizabeth_II
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on December 27, 2012, 07:33:55 PM
Just wondering, has the Queen ever visited Israel ?

No. There are only two incidents of British royal family visiting Israel over the past 64 years – Prince Philip at a ceremony honoring his mother, and Prince Charles attending the funeral of Yitzhak Rabin. Both times the British were careful to emphasize that these were private, non-official visits.

Reasons have been speculated on by some historians and professors:

"The reason for this, in Prof. Wistrich’s [of the Hebrew University] opinion, is an unwarranted fear that a visit by the Queen in Israel would hurt the British Empire's business in Arab countries.  As for the possibility that the Queen does not wish to visit Israel because it chose to reject the British Mandate and establish an independent state in 1948, Wistrich said that in his opinion the Queen’s refusal to visit Israel definitely contains an element of de-legitimization and there is no doubt that if she would choose to visit Israel, it would be seen as a clearly symbolic act. He emphasized, however, the Queen's positive attitude to the Jewish people. “She displays no anti-Semitism or prejudice,” said Wistrich, noting that the British palace has a long-standing tradition that every son who is born there undergoes a circumcision by a mohel. Recently it was reported that Prince Charles is likely to visit Israel within the next three years."

"The eminent historian Andrew Roberts has said that the British government had a de facto ban in place on state visits by Queen Elizabeth II to Israel. "The true reason of course, is that the FO [Foreign Office] has a ban on official royal visits to Israel, which is even more powerful for its being unwritten and unacknowledged. As an act of delegitimization of Israel, this effective boycott is quite as serious as other similar acts, such as the academic boycott, and is the direct fault of the Foreign Office Arabists. It is, therefore, no coincidence that although the queen has made over 250 official overseas visits to 129 different countries during her reign, neither she nor one single member of the British royal family has ever been to Israel on an official visit,” Roberts told a gala dinner in London... "Perhaps her majesty hasn't been on the throne long enough, at 57 years, for the Foreign Office to get round to allowing her to visit one of the only democracies in the Middle East. At least she could be certain of a warm welcome in Israel, unlike in Morocco, where she was kept waiting by the king for three hours in 90-degree heat, or at the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Uganda the time before last, where they hadn't even finished building her hotel,” Roberts remarked. "
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lucien on February 06, 2013, 12:47:03 PM
HM and HRH The Duke will pay a visit to Rome on march 6th and 7th by invitation of President Giorgio Napolitano of Italy.

The itinerary will be published later.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on February 07, 2013, 02:37:00 AM
Yesterday, 6 February, was the 61st anniversary of the Queen's accession.

Less than 2 years 8 months to go to out-reign Queen Victoria and become our longest-reigning monarch!

The Queen customarily spends the day quietly at Sandringham, as it is the anniversary of her father's death.

Ann
Title: HM Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lucien on February 07, 2013, 06:40:17 AM
A 41 Gun salute was performed by the Kings Troop in honour of the 60th anniversary.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/9853204/Royal-salute-guns-ring-ot-to-mark-Queens-accession.html
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on March 03, 2013, 02:20:55 PM
 Buckingham Palace announced that the Queen has been admitted to King Edward VII Hospital in London after suffering from symptoms of gastroenteritis. They're stressing that this is a "precautionary measure" and that she is otherwise in "good health and good spirits". She's expected to stay for a couple days. In the mean time, her engagements for the week are all being cancelled or postponed - including a planned official trip to Rome.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on March 03, 2013, 04:06:42 PM
My thoughts go with her and I wish her a speedy recovery.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Jen_94 on March 03, 2013, 06:54:39 PM
I wish our Queen a speedy recovery and my well wishes go out to her.

Believe this is the first time in 10 years she's been admitted to hospital!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lucien on March 04, 2013, 09:29:59 AM
HM left the hospital a short while ago...
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lady of Shalott on March 04, 2013, 02:11:30 PM
Glad to hear this welcome news.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on March 05, 2013, 01:21:17 AM
I agree, that is excellent news.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: darius on March 11, 2013, 01:52:56 PM
Worrying to hear that HM did not attend the Commonwealth Day Service at Westminster Abeey today.  How unusual for HM to miss something so close to her heart.  Let us hope she is better soon!
Title: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lucien on March 12, 2013, 01:24:36 AM
Worrying to hear that HM did not attend the Commonwealth Day Service at Westminster Abeey today.  How unusual for HM to miss something so close to her heart.  Let us hope she is better soon!

Not so worrying,she's well into her 80'ties,and a bug can play up big time especially for the elderly.
Quite understandeble she preferes to be near the loo instead of a minister.
She's strong as an ox,she'll get over it. Old Queen Bess....:)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: IvanVII on March 12, 2013, 03:01:53 AM
The last time she missed that particular church service was 1993, she had the flu then too.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: darius on March 12, 2013, 01:14:49 PM
It is often difficult to grasp that she is soon to be 87 years old!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Jen_94 on March 12, 2013, 06:16:26 PM
Prince Andrew is stepping in and doing her engagements tomorrow.

I do hope she gets well soon, it is such a shame he had to miss the Commonwelth service yesterday, that's the second time she's missed that I believe?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lucien on March 14, 2013, 02:51:19 AM
Prince Andrew is stepping in and doing her engagements tomorrow.

I do hope she gets well soon, it is such a shame he had to miss the Commonwelth service yesterday, that's the second time she's missed that I believe?

The 2nd time in 86 years..?...She should take more care,bugs bite everyone,especially at her age...
it needs more time..
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Jen_94 on March 16, 2013, 06:14:39 PM
Apparently so...She's quite the trooper, our Queen, and the Duke too! Cannot remember what the reason was for the first cancellation though...
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on March 17, 2013, 03:22:40 PM
Quote
It is often difficult to grasp that she is soon to be 87 years old!

And is the second longest serving British Monarch.  A few more years and she'll beat Victoria's record.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Jen_94 on March 17, 2013, 05:38:10 PM
I reckon she'll beat Victoria's record! And plus, I think she looks pretty good for her age also.

I watched an interesting documentry on the Queen tonight on TV. It gave an interesting insight about the 'behind the scenes' stuff that goes on within the palace, and some stuff about the Jubilee too.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on March 18, 2013, 03:27:55 AM
The Queen has about 2 1/2 years to go to out-reign Victoria! who knows, if she keeps on going like this she could out-reign Franz Josef (10 days short of 68 years, and the longest reigning monarch to succeed as an adult - Louis XIV (72 years) was five at his accession).

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on March 18, 2013, 10:10:54 AM
The Queen has about 2 1/2 years to go to out-reign Victoria! who knows, if she keeps on going like this she could out-reign Franz Josef (10 days short of 68 years, and the longest reigning monarch to succeed as an adult - Louis XIV (72 years) was five at his accession).

Ann

As I'm sure has been discussed earlier you almost have to believe that these are records unlikely to ever be broken...unless of course Elizabeth herself can topple Louis XIV's nearly three century old mark. Fewer monarchies in this day and age mean less opportunities but it's also far less likely that a reigning king or queen would die young enough for their young child to succeed. And of course to be able to reach a 72-year reign you pretty much need to be quite young when you begin as ruler.

Using the current British line of succession as an example, were Elizabeth to pass away tomorrow 64-year old Charles would reign. Of course he's not going to spend 72-years as King, so then he would have to die quickly passing it on to William who is almost 31. Very little chance William will live to a minimum of a 103 so it would have to fall to the new baby on the way. I'd hope that William would be able to live a nice long life making it impossible for his eldest child to set any records of their own...
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on March 18, 2013, 11:15:13 AM
The Queen has had the opportunity to reign as long as this because her father died prematurely - at 56. Victoria was the child of a fairly elderly father and then succeeded her elderly uncle.

Franz Josef succeeded when his uncle abdicated and his father renounced the succession. Had this not happened, his reign would have begun when his father died in 1878 and Franz Josef was 48.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: grandduchessella on April 06, 2013, 10:01:17 AM
"The royal matriarch received an honorary BAFTA in recognition of her support of British film and television on Thursday. But BAFTA chairman John Willis also jokingly pointed out that the award was being given to the queen for being the "most memorable Bond girl yet".

"According to the BBC, Kenneth Branagh, who presented the award, also noted that memorable moment, and told the queen, "Several of my colleagues here tonight want you to know that should you wish to take it further into the world of British films that they have a number of scripts with them here this evening. I have to warn you, Your Majesty, not all of these films are fully financed.""

(http://www.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/201335/rs_560x415-130405105041-1024..queen.ls.4513.jpg)

Must be interesting for her to be on the receiving end of a bestowed honor for once. :)

Title: HM Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lucien on April 09, 2013, 12:21:18 PM
HM Queen Elizabeth will attend the funeral of Baroness Thatcher on april 17th at St.Pauls Cathedral London.
Title: HM Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lucien on April 16, 2013, 12:40:10 AM

Happy Birthday to HM!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Jen_94 on April 16, 2013, 11:39:36 AM
The Queen's birthday isn't until April 21st...
Title: HM Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lucien on April 21, 2013, 04:22:37 AM
HM celebrates her birthday today!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Jen_94 on April 21, 2013, 06:37:55 AM
Happy 87th Birthday to HM, the Queen!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 21, 2013, 05:36:28 PM
Happy 87th Birthday to HM, Queen Elizabeth II.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on April 22, 2013, 12:25:41 AM
Anyone know how close she is to topping the list of oldest monarchs in world history? As far as monarchs who have reigned for at least fifty years (since AD 1) Elizabeth, at 87 years, ranks tenth all-time in age. Below is the list I have confirmed of those who are ahead of her...

1) Malietoa Tanumafili II of Samoa - 94 years, 4 months (died 2007)
2) Taejo of Goguryeo of Korea - 93 years? (died 146)
3) Saqr bin Mohammad Al Qassimi of UAE - 90 years? (died 2010)
4) Muhammad Kudarat of the Philippines - 90 years? (died 1671)
5) Paku Alam VIII of Indonesia - 88 years, 5 months (died 1998)
6) Johann II, Prince of Liechtenstein - 88 years, 4 months (died 1929)
7) Albert Azzo II, Margrave of Milan - 88 years, 1 month (died 1097)
8 ) Hirohito of Japan - 87 years, 9 months (died 1989)
9) Qianlong Emperor of China - 87 years, 5 months (died 1799)
10) Elizabeth II of England - 87 years - (born 1926)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 22, 2013, 03:18:20 AM
She has already outlived Emperor Franz Josef (86 years 3 months), but still has some way to go to equal his reign (10 days short of 68 years). but she is now the longest lived major European monarch.

Prince Philip (91 years 10 months) has now outlived the Duke of Connaught (91 years 8 months), to become vthe longest lived male member of the British royal family.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on April 22, 2013, 09:17:36 AM
She has already outlived Emperor Franz Josef (86 years 3 months), but still has some way to go to equal his reign (10 days short of 68 years). but she is now the longest lived major European monarch.

Prince Philip (91 years 10 months) has now outlived the Duke of Connaught (91 years 8 months), to become vthe longest lived male member of the British royal family.

Ann

Interesting Ann, thanks for this. It'll be interesting to see if she can surpass Franz Joseph in years for her reign, but I dare say there is a 'good' chance she can become the oldest monarch ever...which would happen in another 7+ years should she survive that long and not voluntarily abdicate her throne first. In the meantime she'll move from 10th to 5th place if she can just make it another year and a half!

I mentioned earlier that Elizabeth is one of the last of dying breed of those with 60+ year reigns you're likely to see. In order to make it that long you not only have to live a long time but ascend to the throne at a fairly young age. With modern medical science being what it is your predecessors (like the Queen herself) are far more likely to live long on a consistent basis meaning the next in line (like Prince Charles) will be of advanced age by the time they come to the throne. That and the simple fact that since monarchies have continued to rapidly disappear from the world in the 20th & 21st centuries that there are fewer opportunities to reign (old or young) in the first place.

As a side note I made sure to include only those monarchs who reigned AD on that list. There were some pretty wild and unsubstantiated claims of those living to be well over a hundred and reigning for just as long in the centuries before Christ!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Vecchiolarry on April 22, 2013, 09:27:27 AM
Hi,

Where does the King of Thailand figure in on this list?
I recently visited Bangkok and toured the royal palace there;  and he was in the hospital, quite ill.  I think he ascendened the throne before Elizabeth, but am not sure how old he is.

Larry
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 22, 2013, 09:49:49 AM
Erik

I agree that the queen's position is unusual. She succeeded at 25 because her father died prematurely (at 56). Franz Josef is a yet more spectacular example, succeeding at 18  in 1848 when his uncle, Ferdinand, abdicated, and his father, Franz Karl, renounced the succession. Ferdinand lived in retirement until 1875 and Franz Karl until 1878, which would have given Franz Josef a much more modest reign of 38 years.

Of course, if Archduke Otto had succeeded on his father's death on 1 April 1922 he would have had an unparallelled reign of 89 years 3 months!

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on April 22, 2013, 10:22:13 AM
Ann) Didn't he resign from his titles and recognition of 'pretender to the throne' in 2000? Of course that still would have been a 78-year reign and one likely to never be surpassed!

I guess another parallel could be drawn between Franz Joseph / Franz Ferdinand and Queen Elizabeth / Prince Charles. Had Ferdinand survived the assassination attempt he would have been almost 53 when he took over upon the death of his uncle in 1916. Prince Charles would become king at the age of 64 should Elizabeth, God forbid, die tomorrow. Both men are of advanced age and both would probably have be happy with solid 20-25 year reign.

Larry) I believe he is next on the list...at least for those currently reigning. Bhumibol Adulyadej has been King of Thailand for nearly 67-years, longer of course than Elizabeth has been Queen of England...but the Queen is older than him by a little over a year and a half.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 22, 2013, 11:04:01 AM
According to wikipedia, Otto renounced his succession rights and claims in 1961 - so a distinctly modest 'reign' of 39 years.

At the moment, Prince Philip is still behind Carl Johan of Sweden (died at 95 years 6 months) as the oldest male descendant of Queen Victoria.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 22, 2013, 02:20:48 PM
In a couple of more years, Elizabeth will break Victoria's record as the longest serving British monarch.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Jen_94 on April 22, 2013, 05:18:20 PM
That's right!

I wonder if Phillip will eventually become the oldest living male descendant of Queen Victoria? I'm hoping so!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Vecchiolarry on April 22, 2013, 06:05:44 PM
Hi,

Edubs31 - Thank you so much for that information on King Bhumibol...
I neglected to mention that Queen Sirikit is also quite ill;  while The King is in hospital (and has been for months), she was in the palace, but nobody saw her, of course!!

Jen_94 - I hope so too.  I'm hoping both Elizabeth and Philip have another decade (or more!!).......

Larry
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Jen_94 on April 23, 2013, 04:13:26 PM
I reckon they have another decade or so too! I'm fairly certain the Queen will last to her mother's age, or somewhere around there!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on June 21, 2013, 01:41:56 PM
Did anyone else see HM's pure joy and excitement at the Ascot Races this week when her horse and jockey won the gold cup? We don't get to see an emotionally unguarded Queen too often.  It was just fantastic!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Vecchiolarry on June 21, 2013, 05:35:16 PM
Hi,

Yes, it was shown on our news stations last night.

Could someone post pictures of the joyous winner - Her Majesty...

Larry
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on June 22, 2013, 10:04:04 AM
Here is a link to a short video

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/10134201/Queen-beams-a-wide-smile-as-her-horse-Estimate-wins-Gold-Cup.html

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Windsor on July 16, 2013, 10:44:41 AM
I adore the Queen but am frustrated that she wears the same triple strand of pearls most all the time during daytime events.  I want to see more variety!!  With that said, does anyone know the providence of the pearls?  Do they hold some sentimental value?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on July 16, 2013, 01:45:09 PM
Hello Windsor,

Welcome! You can obtain all the wonderful details about the Queen's triple strand pearl necklace from this wonderful blog, From Her Majesty's Jewel Vault:

http://queensjewelvault.blogspot.com/2012/01/three-strand-pearl-necklaces.html

I'm afraid the only variety you will see is when she brings out the "big guns" (jewels) for state visits. Her pearls are her daily wear and I don't think a day has gone by in which she has not worn them.

Regards,

RoyalWatcher (aka Annie)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Windsor on July 17, 2013, 10:36:41 AM
Thank you very much Annie, great link :-)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on July 24, 2013, 03:28:43 PM
Question...in the picture found by clicking the following link...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zswwoXkT1Tk/Ue8JMzlcZvI/AAAAAAAA9cY/OE7T_76nOGs/s1600/Royal+Reception+Queens+Award+Enterprise+2013+9isDWhGn2zjx.jpg

The two ladies flanking HM are wearing what resembles the British Royal Family Order of King George VI (pink ribbon); however, I can't see the ivory miniature of the king. Maybe this is another sore of order one that I am not familiar with.

Is it customary for a sovereign to gift one's family badge to those outside the family?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: CHRISinUSA on July 25, 2013, 07:57:48 AM
Perplexing.  It definitely looks like George VI's order (while we can't clearly see the center pendant, the ribbon is an exact match).  The sources I could find said the orders are given to female members of the royal family and - on occasion - a high ranking lady of the court (such as the Mistress of the Robes).  But those sources also said the only surviving members of George VI's order are the Queen and Princess Alexandria, the Hon Lady Ogilvy.

Also, the British monarchy's own website indicates that only female royal family members now wear them:   A quote:   "The Orders are now worn on formal occasions by female members of the Royal Family only. The Queen and her late sister, The Princess Margaret, were given their awards by their father, George VI, and both wore them as young girls at the coronation of their parents in 1937."

Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on July 25, 2013, 09:43:06 AM
Thank you, Chris. It looks as though diamonds are present instead of the miniature of George VI. This is really interesting. Perhaps this is something the Queen does for her ladies-in-waiting...an order that has never been spoken about? However, the pink silk ribbon is perplexing as it is associated with George VI's reign. As we know, HM's family order is yellow. 
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 21, 2014, 04:25:14 PM
Happy 88th birthday to HRH Queen Elizabeth II.

Just a couple of more years, and you'll overtake your great-great grandmother as Britain's longest reigning Sovereign.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 22, 2014, 06:18:00 AM
Queen Victoria - 63 years, 7 months
Queen Elizabeth II - 62 years, 2 months.

So 17 months to go!

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Emperor of the Dominions on April 22, 2014, 08:35:13 AM
Queen Victoria - 63 years, 7 months
Queen Elizabeth II - 62 years, 2 months.

So 17 months to go!

Ann

I believe the date is 10th September 2015.

R.I.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 22, 2014, 08:48:22 AM
That sounds about right.

The Queen is certainly looking well at the moment. Her most recent full-scale appearance was last Thursday at the Royal Maundy Service, held this year in Blackburn Cathedral.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Vecchiolarry on April 22, 2014, 10:06:24 AM
Hi,

Clarification please:

Does September 10, 2015 equal Victoria's reign or overtake it by a day???

Larry
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 22, 2014, 10:45:42 AM
This could be important, as both their predecessors died in the early hours of the morning!

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 22, 2014, 11:31:51 AM
Elizabeth is closer to breaking Victoria's record than I thought!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on May 08, 2014, 01:29:31 PM
This could be important, as both their predecessors died in the early hours of the morning!

Ann

Ann, what two predecessors are you referring to exactly?

I could be wrong but I thought Victoria died in the early evening hours of 22 January, 1901?

While passing Victoria is obviously a milestone, I think the Queen should have her sights set on conquering all adult monarchs!

Longest Reigning Monarch
Sobhuza II, King of Swaziland - 82-years, 254-days

Longest Reigning European Monarch
Bernard VII, Lord of Lippe - 81-years, 234-days

She'll likely never catch these two, but what if we altered the definition of what it is to rule? Sobhuza was only five-months old when he inherited the throne in December, 1899, and Bernard was all of eight months when he came into power way back in 1429. Obviously these two would have needed some sort of regent to assist them until they came of age. Hard to know what age that is exactly but, for the sake of discussion, lets say one needs to be sixteen in order to act in the capacity of an adult (I believe 16 also happens to be the "qualifying" age to rule independently in several historical monarchies).

This would mean we could knock about 15-years, 7-months off the reign of Sobhuza and 15-years, 4-months from Bernard, bringing their totals to a little over 67 & 66-years respectively. But this is far exceeded by Johannes II of Liechtenstein who was already eighteen when his 70+ year reign as prince began. Christian Augustus, Count Palatine of Sulzbach also reigned for 75-years, 253-days but did not come into power until he was ten-years old. Docking him the 6-years only brings his total up to 69-years, 272-days. Alberico I Cybo-Malaspina was in power for 69-years, 226-days. Heinrich Joseph Johann of Auersperg is at 69-years, 95-days. Franz Joseph as we're all aware reigned for nearly 68-years, all as an adult. William IV, Count of Henneberg-Schleusingen is also higher at an estimated 67-years, 243-days, and Werner, Count of Salm-Reifferscheid-Dyck is right behind at 67-years, 183-days. This tops Sobhuza by about five-months.

I've recreated the list based on that adjusted criteria. Have a look...

Longest Reigning "Adult" Monarchs

1) Johann II, Prince of Liechtenstein - 70-years, 91-days
2) Christian Augustus, Count Palatine of Sulzbach - 69-years, 272-days
3) Alberico I Cybo-Malaspina,  Marquis of Massa & Carrara / Prince of Massa - 69-years, 226-days
4) nHeinrich Joseph Johann of Auersperg - 69-years, 95-days
5) Franz Joseph I of Austria - 67-years, 355-days
6) Bhumibol Adulyadej, King of Thailand - 67-years, 333-days
7) William IV, Count of Henneberg-Schleusingen - 67-years, 243-days (est.)
8 ) Werner, Count of Salm-Reifferscheid-Dyck - 67-years, 183-days
9) Sobhuza II, King of Swaziland - 67-years, 30-days
10) Charles Frederick, Grand Duke of Baden - 66-years, 168-days
11) Bernard VII, Lord of Lippe - 66-years, 141-days
12) Vikramatji Khimojiraj, Maharaja of Porbandar - 65-years, 20-days
13) K'inich Janaab' Pakal, Rules of Palenque - 64-years, 169-days
14) Eleanor of Aquitaine - 63-years, 349-days (est.)
15) Sultan Ibrahim of Johor - 63-years, 338-days
16) Count Anton Günther von Oldenburg and Delmenhorst - 63-years, 219-days
17) Queen Victoria of the UK - 63-years, 216-days
18) Isa ibn Ali Al Khalifa, Hakim of Bahrain - 63-years, 8-days
19) Nawab Hafiz Muhammad Ibrahim Khan Salarzai of Tonk - 62-years, 185-days
20) Maharaja Bhagvatsingh Sahib,  Maharaja of Gondal - 62-years, 137-days
21) Heinrich XI, Prince Reuss of Greiz - 62-years, 102-days
21) Saqr bin Mohammad Al Qassimi, Ruler of Ras Al Khaimah - 62-years, 102-days
23) Queen Elizabeth II of the UK - 62-years, 91-days

So Her Royal Majesty the Queen will surpass Victoria in 1-year and 125-days. In exactly eight-years, should she manage to live/reign that long, she'll match Johann II's current record for longest reigning adult monarch. Problem is that she's also still chasing King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand who is the current longest reigning monarch and continues adding to his total by the day. He definitely has Johann II in his sights and would need to live & reign for only 2-more years and 124-days to set the record.

Good luck to both of them in their longevity quest!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: CHRISinUSA on May 08, 2014, 02:14:46 PM
Quite so, although King Bhumibol Adulyadej has been in poor health for many years and was even hospitalized continuously for four years (2009 and 2013).  Ever since he has lived in semi-seclusion at his seaside palace, appearing in public only rarely such as the service for the 64th anniversary of his coronation last week.  Elizabeth II, by contrast, enjoys remarkably robust health despite being 2 years older than the Thai king.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on May 08, 2014, 02:31:13 PM
Good point and obviously we all wish her well in her pursuit. Not going to be easy though. Healthy as she might be at the moment she has nearly a six year gap to make up between where she and King Bhumibol currently stand, and she'll need exactly eight more years of good health to set the record. Assuming of course the King doesn't set the record first.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Превед on May 08, 2014, 03:22:06 PM
Another criteria is "What is a monarch?".

Before the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 only the electors were counted as immediate / sovereign, something which would reduce Bernard VII, Lord of Lippe, from a monarch to a feudal lord.

The same with Heinrich Joseph Johann of Auersperg. He was in no actual sense a monarch, but just a high-ranking Austrian nobleman, despite a titular claim to imperial immediacy due to the "free imperial lordship" over the small town of Tengen and surrounding lands (70 km²).

Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Превед on May 08, 2014, 04:54:44 PM
BTW if medieval vassals of the Emperor and early modern courtiers are counted as monarchs, then Native American chieftains should also be counted. After all they headed independent nations which concluded treaties with the US government on (theoretically) equal terms, just like immediate and mediatized princelings. (Though I guess that few chieftains reigned that long, considering that chiefdom was a form of elective monarchy.)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on May 08, 2014, 05:51:10 PM
Quote
she'll need exactly eight more years of good health to set the record

Of course, that would put her close to 100.  Mind you, her mother did make it, and just pass, that age, so it's possible.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on May 08, 2014, 10:25:02 PM
Another criteria is "What is a monarch?".

Before the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 only the electors were counted as immediate / sovereign, something which would reduce Bernard VII, Lord of Lippe, from a monarch to a feudal lord.

The same with Heinrich Joseph Johann of Auersperg. He was in no actual sense a monarch, but just a high-ranking Austrian nobleman, despite a titular claim to imperial immediacy due to the "free imperial lordship" over the small town of Tengen and surrounding lands (70 km²).

BTW if medieval vassals of the Emperor and early modern courtiers are counted as monarchs, then Native American chieftains should also be counted. After all they headed independent nations which concluded treaties with the US government on (theoretically) equal terms, just like immediate and mediatized princelings. (Though I guess that few chieftains reigned that long, considering that chiefdom was a form of elective monarchy.)

Good points. We really should eliminate any number of "monarchs" from the list. But then how does one define "ruler". Elizabeth II isn't exactly endowed with much power in post-20th century parliamentary republic England. Who has more actual power? The prince or feudal lord of the 17th century, or the Queen of mid-20th and early-21st centuries?

You're right about those chieftains, but unfortunately it's rather difficult to find much in the way of historical facts regarding the length of their reigns. Further, I think it likely that none of those Native kings lived past the the minimum age of 78+ that would qualify them for this list. No way to know for certain of course.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on May 09, 2014, 02:36:25 AM
Ah, I should have said that William IV, like George VI, died in the early hours of the morning.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: CHRISinUSA on May 09, 2014, 08:02:12 AM
I suppose we could debate which rulers should - or shouldn't - be included in the list of "reigning monarchs" around the dates when Elizabeth II surpasses each one.  But to me, there are only really 2 big milestones for her to pass: the first when she becomes the longest reigning British monarch (passing Victoria's reign), and the next would be longest-ever reigning monarch (Johann II, Prince of Liechtenstein). 
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: edubs31 on May 09, 2014, 09:26:19 AM
I suppose we could debate which rulers should - or shouldn't - be included in the list of "reigning monarchs" around the dates when Elizabeth II surpasses each one.  But to me, there are only really 2 big milestones for her to pass: the first when she becomes the longest reigning British monarch (passing Victoria's reign), and the next would be longest-ever reigning monarch (Johann II, Prince of Liechtenstein). 

I agree. I'll add two more to the list though...

1) To outlive King Bhumibol so she can claim the title, for at least some period of time, of longest currently reigning Monarch.
2) To pass Franz Joseph's 67-years & 355-days. He's really the only other Monarch on the list, other than Bhumibol and Victoria, to actually rule as head-of-state over a substantial empire. Not a Prince or Count, or leader of some partitioned off semi-autonomous state like we see with many of the leaders from India. And also, with all due respect, not a tiny powerless country like Swaziland or Ras al-Khaimah (within the UAE).

If you're quizzing people at random and more can name some obscure Russian Grand Duke than the actual ruler of a small country/principality then you know there is a bit of a legitimacy issue.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Превед on May 09, 2014, 09:26:40 AM
But then how does one define "ruler". Elizabeth II isn't exactly endowed with much power in post-20th century parliamentary republic England. Who has more actual power? The prince or feudal lord of the 17th century, or the Queen of mid-20th and early-21st centuries?

Good point. Speaking of life and death, a common criterion in pre-modern Europe was that sovereignty or at least immediate imperial status was linked to the Blutgerichtsbarkeit, the ius gladii, the right to sentence subjects to the the death penalty.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Превед on June 04, 2014, 10:50:42 AM
Сегодня королева открыла парламент. Один из её четырех пажей упала в обморок во время её тронной речи.
=
Today the Queen opened parliament. One of her four pages fainted during her Speech from the Throne.

See http://ru-royalty.livejournal.com/2189450.html (http://ru-royalty.livejournal.com/2189450.html)

Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: CountessKate on June 04, 2014, 12:50:46 PM
Сегодня королева открыла парламент. Один из её четырех пажей упала в обморок во время её тронной речи.
=
Today the Queen opened parliament. One of her four pages fainted during her Speech from the Throne.

See http://ru-royalty.livejournal.com/2189450.html (http://ru-royalty.livejournal.com/2189450.html)



Both Charles and Camilla appear to be having refreshing naps in the first image.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Forum Admin on June 05, 2014, 07:52:55 PM
Превед : Your last post has been removed as in violation of our Forum rules.  You are not required to like any living person,  however you are to respect living persons, especially members of the Royal Family when posting in the Forum. Your last post was defamatory, inappropriate and not permitted.  I have received complaints about it.  Please refrain from defamatory and inappropriate posts about the living members of the Royal Family, most particularly HM The Queen. She is the reigning Monarch and will be accorded the appropriate levels of respect, decorum, and courtesy as such.

Thank you everyone for your cooperation.

FA
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on January 14, 2015, 04:49:05 PM
Victoria’s reign lasted 23,226 days, 16 hours and 23 minutes.

Elizabeth II is expected to pass that record on Sept. 9, 2015, at around 5:30 p.m., local time in Britain.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on January 14, 2015, 04:51:17 PM
While the Queen is in residence at Windsor, she attends church services at St. George's Chapel. Are services open to the public when she is there?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 21, 2015, 12:01:34 PM
Happy 89th Birthday to Her  Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on April 21, 2015, 04:04:23 PM
Hip hip hooray!!! Many happy returns!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 22, 2015, 05:36:02 AM
The Queen is looking extremely well, and is still riding!

I rather hoped that the Cambridge baby would be born on the Queen's birthday, but nothing is happening at present.

Ah well.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on April 22, 2015, 03:18:00 PM
I was too, Ann. I'm really hoping the new baby will be a princess with Elizabeth as one of her names.

=Annie=
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 23, 2015, 02:38:54 AM
I think it's high time we had a Prince Philip or Princess Elizabeth among the Queen's great-grandchildren.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 23, 2015, 05:20:49 PM
Only a few more months before Queen Elizabeth II breaks Victoria's record as Britain's longest serving Monarch.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on April 23, 2015, 05:52:27 PM
I've got an entry in my calendar for that special day. She is expected to pass that record on Sept. 9, 2015, at around 5:30 p.m., local time in Britain. Victoria’s reign lasted 23,226 days, 16 hours and 23 minutes.

Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 24, 2015, 02:58:33 AM
Thanks for the precise info.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Greenowl on April 24, 2015, 11:21:47 AM
Thanks, I've noted the date in my diary! I also agree that it is a great pity that there is no Prince Philip or Princess Elizabeth among the Queen's great-grandchildren
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 25, 2015, 12:11:19 PM
Well, there might still be in the future. 
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Greenowl on April 27, 2015, 12:03:25 PM
We can but hope! Apart from their significance for the Royal Family I think they are nice names.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 28, 2015, 02:01:04 PM
If they have a girl, they could name her Philipa, named after both Prince Philip and Kate's sister.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 29, 2015, 03:11:22 AM
There is also Edward III's Queen, Philippa of Hainault.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Превед on April 29, 2015, 04:34:46 AM
The Slavic connection:
Philippa of Lancaster, daughter of Henry IV, married Duke Bogislav of Pomerania-Stolp, better known as Erik of Pomerania, King of Norway, Sweden and Denmark. The first ever bride reported to have been married in a white dress.

A contemporary Princes Filippa was Filippa of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn, a German aristocrat and photographer who died in car crash on the M5 near Bristol 21 year old in 2001 after 111 days of marriage to an Italian count and whose posthumous diary became a bestseller in Germany.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Превед on April 29, 2015, 02:42:16 PM
A contemporary Princes Filippa was Filippa of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn, a German aristocrat and photographer who died in car crash on the M5 near Bristol 21 year old in 2001 after 111 days of marriage to an Italian count and whose posthumous diary became a bestseller in Germany.

She was BTW the sister-in-law of King Juan Carlos' mistress Corinna zu Sayn-Wittgenstein née Larsen.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Ortipo on May 27, 2015, 03:45:00 PM
The Queen's Speech: Full Text
published online Wednesday 27th May 2015 - 12:23pm
link to source to follow

"My Lords and members of the House of Commons.

My government will legislate in the interests of everyone in our country. It will adopt a one nation approach, helping working people get on, supporting aspiration, giving new opportunities to the most disadvantaged and bringing different parts of our country together.

My government will continue with its long-term plan to provide economic stability and security at every stage of life. They will continue the work of bringing the public finances under control and reducing the deficit, so Britain lives within its means. Measures will be introduced to raise the productive potential of the economy and increase living standards.

Legislation will be brought forward to help achieve full employment and provide more people with the security of a job. New duties will require my ministers to report annually on job creation and apprenticeships. Measures will also be introduced to reduce regulation on small businesses so they can create jobs.

Legislation will be brought forward to ensure people working 30 hours a week on the National Minimum Wage do not pay income tax, and to ensure there are no rises in Income Tax rates, Value Added Tax or National Insurance for the next 5 years.

Measures will be brought forward to help working people by greatly increasing the provision of free childcare.

Legislation will be introduced to support home ownership and give housing association tenants the chance to own their own home.

Measures will be introduced to increase energy security and to control immigration. My government will bring forward legislation to reform trade unions and to protect essential public services against strikes.

To give new opportunities to the most disadvantaged, my government will expand the Troubled Families programme and continue to reform welfare, with legislation encouraging employment by capping benefits and requiring young people to earn or learn.

Legislation will be brought forward to improve schools and give every child the best start in life, with new powers to take over failing and coasting schools and create more academies.

In England, my government will secure the future of the National Health Service by implementing the National Health Service’s own 5 year plan, by increasing the health budget, integrating healthcare and social care, and ensuring the National Health Service works on a 7 day basis. Measures will be introduced to improve access to general practitioners and to mental healthcare.

Measures will also be brought forward to secure the real value of the basic State Pension, so that more people live in dignity and security in retirement. Measures will be brought forward to increase the rights of victims of crime.

To bring different parts of our country together, my government will work to bring about a balanced economic recovery. Legislation will be introduced to provide for the devolution of powers to cities with elected metro mayors, helping to build a northern powerhouse.

My government will continue to legislate for high-speed rail links between the different parts of the country.

My government will also bring forward legislation to secure a strong and lasting constitutional settlement, devolving wide-ranging powers to Scotland and Wales. Legislation will be taken forward giving effect to the Stormont House Agreement in Northern Ireland.

My government will continue to work in cooperation with the devolved administrations on the basis of mutual respect.

My government will bring forward changes to the standing orders of the House of Commons. These changes will create fairer procedures to ensure that decisions affecting England, or England and Wales, can be taken only with the consent of the majority of Members of Parliament representing constituencies in those parts of our United Kingdom.

My government will renegotiate the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European Union and pursue reform of the European Union for the benefit of all member states.

Alongside this, early legislation will be introduced to provide for an in-out referendum on membership of the European Union before the end of 2017.

Measures will also be brought forward to promote social cohesion and protect people by tackling extremism. New legislation will modernise the law on communications data, improve the law on policing and criminal justice, and ban the new generation of psychoactive drugs.

My government will bring forward proposals for a British Bill of Rights.

Members of the House of Commons.

Estimates for the public services will be laid before you.

My Lords and members of the House of Commons

My government will continue to play a leading role in global affairs, using its presence all over the world to re-engage with and tackle the major international security, economic and humanitarian challenges.

My ministers will remain at the forefront of the NATO alliance and of international efforts to degrade and ultimately defeat terrorism in the Middle East.

The United Kingdom will continue to seek a political settlement in Syria, and will offer further support to the Iraqi government’s programme for political reform and national reconciliation.

My government will maintain pressure on Russia to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, and will insist on the full implementation of the Minsk agreements.

My government looks forward to an enhanced partnership with India and China.

Prince Philip and I look forward to our state visit to Germany next month and to our state visit to Malta in November, alongside the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. We also look forward to welcoming His Excellency the President of The People’s Republic of China and Madame Peng on a state visit in October.

My government will seek effective global collaboration to sustain economic recovery and to combat climate change, including at the climate change conference in Paris later this year.

My government will undertake a full strategic defence and security review, and do whatever is necessary to ensure that our courageous armed forces can keep Britain safe.

My government will work to reduce the threat from nuclear weapons, cyber attacks and terrorism.

Other measures will be laid before you.

My Lords and members of the House of Commons

I pray that the blessing of almighty God may rest upon your counsels."

http://www.24dash.com/news/housing/2015-05-27-The-Queens-Speech-Full-Text (http://www.24dash.com/news/housing/2015-05-27-The-Queens-Speech-Full-Text)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Maria the Beautiful on September 01, 2015, 09:10:38 PM
Does anyone know if the Royal Family, or Great Britain as a whole will be celebrating Her Majesty's reign surpassing that of Queen Victoria's in time length on the 9th in a special way?   Any parties planned?   
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on September 02, 2015, 02:33:43 AM
Not much that I know of. The Queen has let it be known that she 'does not want any fuss', but has been persuaded to open a new railway line and travel on a steam train, rather than stay quietly at Balmoral, which was her original plan.

I am at a conference that day, and have suggested to the chairman that we have a champagne toast as near as possible to 6.30pm, which is the official moment. Of course, the exact moment will never be  known, because George VI had been dead for some hours when his valet found him on the morning of 6 February 1952. The usual estimate is that he died at some time between 1 and 3am.

Now the Queen has just under 4 years and 5 months to go to out-reign Franz Josef (67 years 356 days), and 8 years 4 months to beat Louis XIV (72 years 110 days), but Louis XIV succeeded at the age of 5, which confers a considerable advantage (Franz Josef was 18, but the Queen was 25).

The Queen is already our oldest monarch by some distance, and the world's longest-married monarch (68 years come 20 November). Prince Philip is the oldest royal consort, and was in good form when I met him in July (though he has obviously shrunk quite a bit in recent years).

Ann

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Maria the Beautiful on September 02, 2015, 08:04:57 AM
The Queen has let it be known that she 'does not want any fuss'

Isn't that just like her - all the more reason to make a fuss.   It will be 1:30 pm here in the US, so that's late enough into the day for me to raise a toast (although I doubt I'll be popping the cork on a bottle of champagne) .  I have great admiration for QEII.  God bless her and I hope she breaks many more records!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Maria Sisi on September 02, 2015, 09:23:39 AM
Now the Queen has just under 4 years and 5 months to go to out-reign Franz Josef (67 years 356 days), and 8 years 4 months to beat Louis XIV (72 years 110 days), but Louis XIV succeeded at the age of 5, which confers a considerable advantage (Franz Josef was 18, but the Queen was 25).

The Queen is already our oldest monarch by some distance, and the world's longest-married monarch (68 years come 20 November). Prince Philip is the oldest royal consort, and was in good form when I met him in July (though he has obviously shrunk quite a bit in recent years).

Ann

Ann

Well don't forget with all our modern advancements people do have the ability to live longer lives these days.

Elizabeth lives under far superior medicine and living conditions then Louis XIV and even Franz Josef lived under so that pretty much erases the early starts that the other two had. I cringe at some of the things I read about Louis XIV's time and thank god I never lived in that era. And life during Franz Josef's time wasn't a whole bed of roses either even though it was much closer to our time. Even with their pampered lifestyles its still far below what we have today. Not to mention they actually ruled for the most part which added to their strain while Elizabeth doesn't and lives more calmly.

It's actually more impressive that they reigned that long. The same goes for George III and Victoria. Not to take anything away from the achievement but it was bound to happen.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on September 03, 2015, 01:10:44 AM
All fair points, but a lot of longevity in my view is simply down to genes.

The Queen may not do much ruling, but she still keeps up a busy schedule.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on September 08, 2015, 03:11:32 PM
HM's big day is upon us. Tomorrow at approximately 17:30 (GMT), the Queen will surpass Victoria as the longest reigning monarch!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on September 09, 2015, 11:49:38 AM
This is such a special day. Congratulations to Her Majesty! Longest reigning monarch! Three cheers!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on September 09, 2015, 12:05:15 PM
Quote
Three cheers!

Hip! Hip!  Hooraaayy!
Hip! Hip!  Hooraaayy!
Hip! Hip!  Hooraaayy!

Congratulations to HRH Elizabeth II, now the longest reigning British Monarch!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on September 09, 2015, 12:08:53 PM
Wonderful, TimM ! ! !
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Greenowl on September 09, 2015, 02:38:00 PM
Wonderful record. I have great admiration for Queen Elizabeth II.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: thebelgianhare on September 09, 2015, 02:41:54 PM
Congrats to the Queen! - The real winner of the game of thrones
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Превед on September 09, 2015, 04:01:44 PM
The real winner of the game of thrones

Well said!
Действительная победительница игры престолов!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on September 10, 2015, 02:06:42 AM
When HRH Elizabeth II was born, the telephone was only about fifty years old.  Now, she's sending Tweets!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Romanov_Fan19 on September 10, 2015, 03:48:14 PM
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on September 11, 2015, 02:42:07 AM
Long live the Queen!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on November 24, 2015, 02:05:33 PM
Big birthday celebrations for HM will happen in May 2016 at Windsor Home Park over four consecutive nights. The Queen will attend the final night and it will be broadcast on ITV.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: DNAgenie on November 24, 2015, 04:22:32 PM
Quote
Big birthday celebrations for HM will happen in May 2016 at Windsor Home Park over four consecutive nights. The Queen will attend the final night and it will be broadcast on ITV.
Why in May?  The Queen's real birthday is April 21 and the official one is in June.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on November 25, 2015, 12:08:46 AM
I imagine the Queen will want to spend her actual birthday quietly, and June already has Trooping the Colour.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 21, 2016, 05:51:50 AM
A very Happy 90th Birthday to HRH Queen Elizabeth II!


(http://i1045.photobucket.com/albums/b458/timmccree1966/Elizabeth%20II_zpsi8si2sol.jpg)


Four generations of Windsors.

Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Maria the Beautiful on April 21, 2016, 06:02:26 AM
Congratulations and Happy 90th birthday wishes to Queen Elizabeth II!   May she see many more birthdays.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on April 21, 2016, 06:36:21 AM
Long live our Queen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just listening to the 1200 news on Radio 4, which reports large crowds gathered outside Windsor Castle, where the queen is spending the day, and the arrival of a birthday cake.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on April 21, 2016, 10:39:28 AM
Happy Birthday, your Majesty!!! Many, many happy returns on this day. What a happy day indeed!

For anyone in or around Windsor, Tower Bridge, Hyde Park...did you hear the gun salutes?
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Greenowl on April 21, 2016, 11:36:39 AM
What a wonderful day! Congratulations and happy 90th birthday wishes to Queen Elizabeth II. Hopefully she will remain in good health and enjoy many more birthdays.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Gabriella on April 21, 2016, 12:23:24 PM
Congratulations and happy birthday your Majesty. Many happy returns of this day.

Gabriella
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Romanov_Fan19 on April 22, 2016, 06:12:59 PM
Werent  there Remarks   made   by The Prince of Wales  at the  Beacon Lighting at Windsor  I Have seen a  Photo   but  no Audio
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: DNAgenie on April 22, 2016, 07:48:04 PM
Here is a link to a funny story about the queen.

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/the-best-story-about-the-queen-you-will-read-today--eJYX859rsl
Title: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Lucien on June 22, 2016, 04:56:39 AM

Nothing on HM 90th birthday?Hmm..pity.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on February 07, 2017, 05:05:12 PM
Queen Elizabeth II reached another record yesterday.

She has now been on the throne for 65 years, a feat no other British Monarch has achieved. 
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TheLionandTheEagle on February 08, 2017, 08:11:17 PM
Long live the Queen!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on February 10, 2017, 05:38:51 PM
A few more years and she'll break Franz Josef's record (1848-1916).
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: DNAgenie on February 11, 2017, 03:46:09 PM
Queen Elizabeth II is not doing the job to break records. She said: "my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong."

As she has already achieved long life, the conventional prayer for "Long Live the Queen" may no longer be appropriate. Old age is not for sissies.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TheLionandTheEagle on February 11, 2017, 10:45:09 PM
Queen Elizabeth II is not doing the job to break records. She said: "my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong."

Of course not -- she is doing it to serve her people.  However, there's no reason people can't celebrate these milestones.  Surely, she would have rather had a shorter time on the throne if it meant that her beloved father could have lived longer, but that just isn't what happened, sadly.

As she has already achieved long life, the conventional prayer for "Long Live the Queen" may no longer be appropriate. Old age is not for sissies.

I can't see any reason people SHOULDN'T continue to pray for her health and longevity.  After all, her mother made it to 101.  She certainly doesn't seem so ill that she would be better off dead, which is what you seem to be suggesting, unless I am reading you wrong.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: JGP on February 12, 2017, 12:25:27 AM
Queen Elizabeth II is not doing the job to break records. She said: "my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong."

Of course not -- she is doing it to serve her people.  However, there's no reason people can't celebrate these milestones.  Surely, she would have rather had a shorter time on the throne if it meant that her beloved father could have lived longer, but that just isn't what happened, sadly.

As she has already achieved long life, the conventional prayer for "Long Live the Queen" may no longer be appropriate. Old age is not for sissies.

I can't see any reason people SHOULDN'T continue to pray for her health and longevity.  After all, her mother made it to 101.  She certainly doesn't seem so ill that she would be better off dead, which is what you seem to be suggesting, unless I am reading you wrong.

Agree with you.  I am not sure what "may no longer be appropriate means"; she seems/appears to be in excellent health both mentally any physically (how many 90 year olds ride ponies regularly?).  Her Subjects' thoughts and prayers (for those who practice a religion) certainly couldn't do her any harm.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on April 21, 2017, 06:01:47 PM
Happy 91st Birthday to HRH Queen Elizabeth II :)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Terence on May 04, 2017, 12:31:47 AM
There are rumors tonight that Prince Philip had died.  It's because her staff is being summoned to London.  Who knows.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Kalafrana on May 04, 2017, 02:30:54 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39801908

The Duke was on good form on Tuesday when he declared himself to be the world's most experienced unveiler of plaques.

Ann
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TheLionandTheEagle on May 04, 2017, 05:21:24 AM
He isn't dead, he's just going to be retiring from public engagements this autumn.

https://twitter.com/RoyalFamily/status/860058046592147456
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: Terence on May 04, 2017, 05:59:08 PM
Breaking news...
Generalissimo Franco is still dead,
Prince Philip not so much. :)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: thebelgianhare on June 20, 2017, 09:37:56 AM
Aww he looked a little frail in the recent Trooping of the Colour but still fantastically spritely and full of life for his age!

this here made me chuckle Ann :)

 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39801908

The Duke was on good form on Tuesday when he declared himself to be the world's most experienced unveiler of plaques.

Ann

sounds like something Phillip would say!
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: thebelgianhare on July 14, 2017, 06:34:03 PM
(http://i66.tinypic.com/2ywcosk.jpg)

(http://i64.tinypic.com/detfex.jpg)

(http://i63.tinypic.com/34t791c.jpg)

(http://i68.tinypic.com/2elwj6a.jpg)

(http://i68.tinypic.com/atlxrm.jpg)

(http://i64.tinypic.com/ehgro1.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: RoyalWatcher on August 02, 2017, 03:47:19 PM
Prince Phillip carried out his 22,220th and final official public engagement today. Well done, sir! Enjoy your retirement.
Title: Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part IV
Post by: TimM on August 25, 2017, 05:20:51 PM
He's more than earned it.