How long does someone remain foreign? One generation? Two? Or are they always foreign?.
Er, as a matter of fact the Greeks got their monarchy in 1832 and the king was ā¦ Otto duke of Bavaria (German) he reigned for 30 years and ended up being deposed mainly because like many of the Wittelsbachs he was a bit of a loon, so as another king was needed, various princes were considered andā¦ prince William of Denmark got the job.
He married a Russian grand duchess and one of their sons (German-Russian) married Alice of Battenberg and they were the parents of Philip - (A of B was German and a great-granddaughter of queen Victoria, who was also pretty much as German as German can beā¦) So actually the kings of the Hellenes arenāt Greek at all.
The queen is essentially German and Danish on her fatherās side but British on her motherās, which makes her probably the most British monarch weāve had since Anne and Mary II.
1 Like
how longās a piece of stringā¦?! 
1 Like
Well done Sue more detail. If I recall correctly it was Oliver Cromwell who put Charles II on the throne because he did not want the responsibility. He also was responsible for powers being given to Parliament. Was that 1689? Would have to do some research on this.
You donāt recall correctly, Iām afraid
Cromwell died in office in 1658 and the Royalists returned in 1660, Cromwell absolutely didnāt help put Charles II on the throne, he had intended his son Richard to succeed him as Lord Protector, as Richard was useless, however, Cromwellās death led to a political crisis and the Restoration.
1688/1689 is the Glorious Revolution which kicked out James II (Charlesā brother) and put William and Mary on the throne thus sowing the seeds of the Jacobite risings, because of the warming pan baby etc etc
You may be thinking of the Long Parliament and the hoo-ha which led to the trial and execution of Charles I ( who believed in the divine right of kings and attempted to rule by royal prerogative) in 1649.
@joe_scott Thatās a libellous remark Iām afraid, as well as illogical: times have changed in terms of political alliances being forged via matrimony. Also marrying a monarchās illegitimate offspring was advantageous, historically; marrying some commonerās illegitimate offspring wasnāt.
You may wish to remove or edit this comment since it has been flagged as being inappropriate.
2 Likes
Well done. I knew it was all linked but did not remember the actual detail. I should have looked it up before replying.
History is one of my hobby horses, I spend a certain amount of time boring on to my children so they have a grasp of British and other history as well as French history which is essentially what they get at school. Luckily they love it too, or pretend to convincingly .
Wars of the Spanish Succession, anybody? 
1 Like
Can you explain the libel? and I would believe it is for you to disprove rather than for me to prove, I will happily take any libel case that is brought and request as proof a DNA test, that is why no libel has ever been brought. For a bit of fun, lets do it on Jeremy Kyle. I am sorry but a family living from untold wealth earnāt from nothing more than theft of the poor and a reign brought forward through fear i have nothing but disdain for our supposed ruler. The sooner the German and Greek pop off the better for me.
Edit:
Now i can, As for the forced marriage i believe it would help, if it was to a Muslim Country, it would show unity and that we do not hate them as many of the terrorists believe, the royal family have it all wrong, they get to live in untold wealth in return for a duty to the country, that duty involves the lack of choice in love and the requirement to have no private life, if they donāt like, lets find someone who does
Libellous because doubting the legitimacy of anyone is a slur, assuming it is something they are concerned about. It is something we can assume people ARE concerned about otherwise ābastardā would not still be a common term of abuse.
Illogical because a) Muslim women cannot marry non-Muslims. And b) the worth of an illegitimate (if what you say is true) infidel in the eg Saāudi marriage-market isnāt likely to be high.
As a republican Iām not - personally - convinced that any present monarchy is relevant or useful.
libel and a slur are very different things, however i believe this is neither, if it wasnāt the case why would evidence to the contrary be brought?
illogical aā¦
So harry converts to Islam, why should this be a problem?
illogical bā¦
this is why i would have had William take the duty, but unfortunately it is now too late, however there is one in reserve, maybe it will fall to Williamās son.
If it is not possible to use them for driving peace between nations then what is the point of them?
simply apply the proceeds of crime act retrospectively and let the old dear be queen of a council estate somewhere on the outskirts of bradford
It would appear that this thread has been taken over by the swivel eyed loons. It used to be the rule that we used our real names and posted photos to show what we looked like. We didnāt use avatars or web names. What a shame itās getting like āknuckle-grazer centralā
Yes, I agree. Maybe there should be a āruleā that they canāt post more than twice unless a true name and photo is used ( there must be an automatic way of doing this, you clever website people/magicians!)
1 Like
Weāve also strayed afar from the original question that I posed. I must admit that Iāve enjoyed the history lesson. But I can do without the Royal vs Republican nattering.
2 Likes
Who are you talking about?
Sue Young and Tigger. Also the now deleted anonymous.
Tigger is Marcās username so that one can easily use the mention feature @David_GAY
We have never enforced avatars, they are just encouraged.
Just me being grumpy. Have a Merry Christmas. My best wishes to you and yours.
Message du 24/12/16 14:28
Copie Ć :
james James Higginson Admin
December 24
Tigger is Marcās username so that one can easily use the mention feature @David_GAY
We have never enforced avatars, they are just encouraged.
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
In Reply To
David GAY
December 24
Sue Young and Tigger. Also the now deleted anonymous.
1 Like
My name is real. I donāt use a pseudonym. I chose not to put a photo-as I can since the photo is not compulsary or at keast it wasnāt. Since you donāt know me and donāt know what I look like I could put any photo and you would be none the wiser. My choice unless itās compulsory.
1 Like