Congratulations Queen Elizabeth!

Oafman said:

Warm and hearty congratulations to our supreme leader, who today became the longest 'serving' monarch in our nation's history.
....

Click to expand...

Unless you're a true monarchist, then King James 8th still holds that title.

lismore said:

Unless you're a true monarchist, then King James 8th still holds that title.

Click to expand...

Ah, I see you are a Jacobite. I think I was off sick when our teacher introduced our class to the Jacobites, so I never really did understand their history until recent years. I Googled King James 8th and see our Elizabeth has a bit to go before she catches up with him.

Are any of James's descendants still living?

Gillian

lismore said:

Unless you're a true monarchist, then King James 8th still holds that title.

Click to expand...

Not so. Parliament decides who is the Monarch, and that person is then crowned.

Other people can claim what they like; it ain't them.

NIrelandGillian said:

Ah, I see you are a Jacobite. I think I was off sick when our teacher introduced our class to the Jacobites, so I never really did understand their history until recent years. I Googled King James 8th and see our Elizabeth has a bit to go before she catches up with him.

Are any of James's descendants still living?

Gillian

Click to expand...

Estimates suggest that up to a third of the UK population is descended from royalty; go back far enough and it may well be far higher.

Only one person wears the crown: Elizabeth II.

Catherineanne said:

Estimates suggest that up to a third of the UK population is descended from royalty; go back far enough and it may well be far higher.

Interesting.

Only one person wears the crown: Elizabeth II.

Click to expand...

That's for sure, but I wonder how life would be now if the Jacobites had been successful in taking back their alleged right to the throne or who might have been reigning now if Edward VIII had not abdicated.

Gillian

NIrelandGillian said:

That's for sure, but I wonder how life would be now if the Jacobites had been successful in taking back their alleged right to the throne or who might have been reigning now if Edward VIII had not abdicated.

Gillian

Click to expand...

No point wondering. So many factors would change that it would be meaningless to speculate.

We have what we have.

While I still live in the United States and haven't lived in Canada for 23 years almost now, I still consider myself a Canadian and love this news! I didn't realize her majesty was the longest living monarch in history. That's quite an achievement.

I'm still hoping William becomes king during my lifetime, I think he will make a fine king and a much better king than Charles.

Oafman said:

I think my labrador would make a better king than Charles, but it doesn't matter what we want, does it? We get what we're given.

Click to expand...

Chocolate or black? Lab I mean.

theFijian said:

Chocolate or black? Lab I mean.

Click to expand...

xenophobia is never far away is it!!

Have been reading a book about the kings and queens of England - written for children by Tony Robinson with fun illustrations by Tony Ross, but very informative and easy to read. Some pretty dreadful examples there.

Gillian

I'm loving the series "Victoria" on ITV at the moment. I should imagine that when she came to the throne people saw her as a breath of fresh air - after the reigns of several elderly men.

I always felt sorry for Princess Margaret; not being allowed to marry a divorced man. Yet only a couple of decades later we have Camilla breaking up a marriage.

Oafman said:

Soon to be Queen Camilla.

Click to expand...

Great.
We'll have a divorced man who wants to be defender of faiths as head of the church. Good job I'm a Methodist.

Standards sure have changed.

I think Charles should have been allowed to marry Camilla in the first place, but then we wouldn't have had William or Harry.

Gillian

NIrelandGillian said:

I think Charles should have been allowed to marry Camilla in the first place,

Click to expand...

She was married, so it wasn't even an option. had she been several years divorced, who knows. But you're right, we wouldn't have then had our younger Royals.

I was always amused by the fact that the pope, when he was told the news, said "over my dead body" and their wedding was put back a by a day so Prince Charles could represent the Queen at the pope's funeral. Does that make me a bad person?

Didn't Charles and Camilla know each other in their youth?

Harry was born in 1984. Diana met James Hewitt in 1986.

I understand Harry gets his looks and is colouring from his grandfather, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

Gillian

Charles and Camilla did date/fall in love in their younger days but anything further was constitutionally impossible at that time, as the future king he was not allowed to marry a catholic.
It was only many years later when the constitution was changed that it became possible for them to marry.
In all likelihood Camilla will become his consort, in much the same way as prince Philip never became king but became the queens consort.
As for Diana and Charles it was an arranged marriage, not one born of love, they both had affairs during it.

magicaxeman said:

Charles and Camilla did date/fall in love in their younger days but anything further was constitutionally impossible at that time, as the future king he was not allowed to marry a catholic.

Click to expand...

He was also not allowed to marry an already married woman.
I wasn't aware Camilla was a catholic - but if she was a firm Catholic, she would not believe in divorce.