#of potential charles funeral and potential william coronation?)

[thetimelordbatgirl]

Someone's Death Note out there must be hard at work.

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

As a Brit who started royal watching with Princess Anne's wedding (!) (I'm old but was very young then), I remember the 80s and 90s very well and I'd say the hierarchy has always been quite strictly adhered to. Of the Queen's children Charles was always firmly the heir in everyone's minds, Anne was the hardworking spare who did a lot of the 'bread and butter' royal work that no one else wanted to do and Andrew and Edward were somewhat non-entities, who tried to have careers away from royal work. Andrew only garnered headlines because he was handsome and a playboy with an interesting lovelife. Unfortunately the separate careers thing didn't work out, as very few royals have the talent to make the sort of money they need to finance their lavish lifestyles without cashing on their royal connections. Only Mike and Zara have been somewhat successful at this and only because they are world level sports personalities. Even the lavish Westminster Abbey weddings that Anne and Andrew had were not exceptional. When Anne was married in 1973 there hadn't been a major royal occasion for a decade or so (no Coronation, Jubilee, or funeral etc.) and the country was grateful to get an extra Bank Holiday and the chance for a bit of a party. And even then there was precedent. Margaret, as a daughter of a sovereign, had had a big WA wedding a decade earlier. George VI's brothers also married/had plans to marry at WA. In Andrew's case the family were cashing in on the royal mania the family had attracted since Diana had entered its ranks (it really was night and day different) and the excitement garnered by Charles and Di's wedding. It was Edward's wedding that was exceptional. By then everyone was heartily sick of royal weddings that started off in pomp and circumstance and ended in scandal and divorce, plus the Windsor fire had shone a huge spotlight on the royal family's finances. The family read the room and the wedding was a much more relaxed affair, that has become the model for all royal family weddings with the exception of William's as a direct heir. I'm sure the Royal Family wanted Harry to become an Anne-like hardworking spare, picking up the slack for William in particular when it came to the military and some Commonwealth events (with his conveniently bi-racial wife). He could have potentially taken over the Prince's Trust (again having a bi-racial wife would have been a real asset) and maybe even have inherited Highgrove. In short following the precedent set by Edward as Duke of Edinburgh, working hard, having a modest wedding by royal standards and inheriting his father's charitable interests and schemes. They reckoned without the narcissism of both Harry and Meghan. Neither had any intention of following in Edward and Sophie's footsteps, instead they looked to the lifestyles of two other royal 'spares' and narcissists Margaret and Andrew and demanded what they had had, without acknowledging that the world and the place of royalty within that world has moved on.

Thanks for sharing!

[tiaramania]

Understanding that the Queen just passed and there’s no mention of her funeral as of yet, much less Charles’s coronation. Do you think Charlotte will wear a coronet to his coronation? Unlike with Elizabeth’s coronation, Charlotte is much older than Anne and could potentially attend the ceremony.

From what I can recall, most British Princesses haven’t worn a tiara until their wedding day correct? Does this standard apply to coronets as well?

I think I remember having seen pictures of Anne wearing a coronet for her mother’s coronation, or at least the official pictures but I could be mistaking that for Elizabeth and Margaret for their father’s coronation. Again, Elizabeth was older than Anne at that time.

I don't have a good answer for the first question because some children have worn coronets at coronations and some have not.

In 1953 for Queen Elizabeth II's coronation, neither of her children wore coronets. Princess Anne didn't actually attend the coronation but she appeared on the balcony and in some of the official photos.

Then if we look further out to the Queen's cousins who were underage. Princess Alexandra was 16 years old and wore a coronet with a larger circumference than the usual female ones and without the velvet cap. The Duke of Kent was 17 years old and he wore a regular child of a son of a sovereign like he was an adult but he had already succeeded his father as the Duke of Kent so that may have changed how he was treated since he had to pay homage to the Queen and everything. Prince William of Gloucester, Prince Michael of Kent, and the Duke of Gloucester did not wear coronets.

In 1937 for King George VI's coronation, Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Margaret had open coronets similar to Princess Alexandra above. They went around the head instead of on top and didn't have a velvet cap. The Queen was 11 and Princess Margaret was 6 years old.

Even if these are still in good shape, Prince George and Princess Charlotte wouldn't wear them because they are alternating crosses and fleurs-de-lys for the children of the sovereign but Prince George and Princess Charlotte would need alternating crosses and strawberry leaves for children of a son of the sovereign.

In 1911 for King George V's coronation, the Duke of Windsor and Princess Mary wore regular adult coronets despite being 16 and 14 years old.

King George V and Queen Mary's younger children attended too but I can't find any pictures of them wearing coronets of any kind. You can see Princess Mary's coronet sitting in front of her and then next to her are King George VI who was 15, Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester who was 11, and Prince Edward, Duke of Kent who was 8. Prince Edward must have been moving around a lot because he is blurry in every photo.

In 1902 for King Edward VII's coronation, his grandchildren that were old enough to attend did not wear coronets. I think the children here are the Duke of Windsor who was 8, Princess Alexandra, Duchess of Fife who was 11, and King George VI who was 6.

This was all a long way of saying that I'm not sure what's going to happen because it seems like a different thing happens at every coronation. Personally, I'd like to see Prince George and Princess Charlotte (and maybe Prince Louis too for some pictures) wear the open coronets like Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Margaret did in 1937 because I always want more shiny things. Also, I really hope I did the math right for all of the children's ages.

British princesses absolutely wear tiaras before they are married. I've got a post dispelling that myth here.

[dwellordream]

“…Inés Vanegas was only one of Catherine’s ladies at court who came to England and stayed. María de Salinas was the daughter of Martín de Salinas, a noble courtier to king Fernando, and Josefa Gonzales de Salas and, some suggest, perhaps related to the royal family. María was part of Catherine’s entourage from Spain but the details from 1501 to 1509 are not well known except that she attended Catherine at her coronation. Her family’s wealth and prestige made her an asset to Catherine’s court and she remained one of the queen’s closest and most loyal friends. Their friendship is well documented in the Tudor historical record, which include letters, payments and gifts, and reports of life at court from the Spanish ambassadors.

María was a very appealing bride, marrying William, eleventh lord Willoughby of Eresby, a baron and the largest landowner in Lincolnshire, on 5 June 1516 at Greenwich, probably in the chapel of the Observant Friars (Franciscans) where Catherine and Henry had married. By all accounts, María de Salinas moved fluidly from the Spanish court to the English. Her ease with the English customs and culture and family connections on the continent had important practical benefits. Her relative, Juan Adursa, a Castilian merchant in Flanders, worked with Juan Manuel, former advisor to Catherine’s brother-in-law, Archduke Philip of Burgundy, giving Catherine access to information about her sister, Juana.

Eustace Chapuys, the resident Spanish ambassador and a man privy to the secret, and not-so-secret activities at court, reports that the: few Spaniards who are still in her household prefer to be friends of the English, and neglect their duties as subjects of the King of Spain. The worst influence on the Queen is exercised by Doña María de Salinas, whom she loves more than any other mortal. Doña María has a relation of the name of Juan Adursa, who is a merchant in Flanders, and a friend of Juan Manuel. He hopes, through the protection of Juan Manuel, to be made treasurer of the Prince of Castile. By means of Juan Adursa and Doña María de Salinas, Juan Manuel is able to dictate to the Queen of England how she must behave. The consequence is that he can never make use, in his negotiations, of the influence which the Queen has in England, nor can he obtain through her the smallest advantage in any other respect.

The word “love” in the later Middle Ages can mean many things depending on context –courtly love, friendship, love of God, lord-vassal relationships, an apprentice for a master– and it could be shorthand for friendly affection. But Chapuys is clearly suggesting that the love has political implications, which further complicates an understanding of the significance of the relations of Catherine and her servants. But later events suggest a deep personal bond. María de Salinas had been forced to leave queen Catherine’s service in 1532 due to the politics of the divorce proceedings and Henry VIII’s marriage to Anne Boleyn, but she remained part of Catherine’s life. She defied Henry’s orders –never a wise thing to do even under the best of circumstances– and continued to correspond with the cast-off queen and sent her news of her daughter, Mary Tudor.

She and Charles Brandon, the king’s brother-in-law and close friend who was sent by Henry on numerous missions, had to impress upon Catherine the reality of her new marital state. In April 1533 Brandon had to tell her that she was no longer queen, and in December 1533 he was ordered to disband some of her servants and move her to the unhealthy home at Somersham. Catherine, defiant, locked herself in her room. María de Salinas told Chapuys that Catherine only relented when Charles admitted how he wished something dreadful would have happened on the road that would have made it impossible for him to carry out his duty to Henry. These are the actions of someone who is more than just a servant.

The depth of this relationship continued to the end. In 1535, when Catherina was seriously ill, María was denied permission to visit the former queen but once again, she defied Henry and traveled to Kimbolton Castle anyway. She was with Catherina when she died on January 7, 1536 and was the second mourner at Catherine’s funeral in February. Catherina had an equally close friendship with another Spanish noblewoman who served in her court. María de Rojas, daughter of Francesco de Rojas, count of Salinas, was one of Catherine’s closest and most intimate of the ladies at court, first in Spain and later in London. She appeared in queen Isabel’s household accounts in 1501 when she was paid 27,000 maravedís and received clothing in payment for service in 1500.

Her relationship with Catherina was as close as that of María de Salinas, a fact known best through her testimony in 1530 before the papal court concerning the divorce. She was asked to give a deposition concerning the consummation of the marriage between Catherina and Prince Arthur, who had died in April 1502, just a few months after their wedding. María de Rojas stated that to comfort the young widow, she had slept in bed with Catherina for the first few days after Arthur’s death: The same questions to be put to the wife of Juan Cuero once waiting maid to the said queen of England, and who is supposed to reside nowadays at Madrid; also to María de Rojas, wife of Don Álvaro de Mendoça, who used to sleep in the same bed with Her Most Serene Highness the Queen, after the death of prince Arthur, her first husband.

This is a remarkable glimpse into Catherina and into the sort of intimacy of life at court that was crucial to Catherina’s transition first from Spain to England and then from bride to widow. María de Rojas’s social rank and closeness to Catherina made her a desirable potential bride, first for the son of the earl of Derby, and later, the son of Elvira Manuel. Neither marriage took place and she returned to Spain around 1504 as señora de Santa Cruz de Campero where she married Álvaro de Mendoza y Guzman, son of Juan Hurtado de Mendoza and his second wife Leonor de Guzmán. It is possible that Maria de Rojas and María de Salinas were related and that when María de Rojas left England to marry, María de Salinas replaced her.

The intensely political life at court was not always conducive to such loyalty and devotion, and was often fraught with dangers. This is best exemplified by the relationship of Catherina and Elvira Manuel, guarda de las damas for Catherina, from 1499 to 1500, and her camarera mayor (chief household officer) from 1500 until 1507. Elvira Manuel de Villena Suárez de Figueroa was the daughter of Juan Manuel de Villena Fonseca, señor de Belmonte de Campos, and Aldonza Suárez de Figueroa. She married Manrique Manuel, Catherina’s chief mayordomo, and together the couple formed a key part of Catherina’s household in England.

Elvira made her first appearance in Catherina’s household in 1501, as Catherina prepared to move to England and on 10 March 1501 she received a payment of 100,000 maravedís: en cuenta de 216,666 marvedís de ovo de aver de su rraçcion e quitaçcion e ayuda de costa de vn año e ocho meses, en que seruio los años pasados de noventa e nueve e quinientos años, por el cargo de la guarda de sus damas. Their son, Iñigo, also came to England, as the master of Catherina’s pages. Elvira kept close contact with her brother, Juan Manuel, who was a servant of Philip of Burgundy.

In December 1505, Elvira was accused of promoting Philip’s interests at the expense of those of king Fernando, Catalina’s father, and Elvira was told to leave England. She departed on the pretext of visiting a doctor in Flanders about a disease that had already caused her to lose one of her eyes, but she knew that she would not be permitted to return. She had alienated not only king Henry but also Catherina. Elvira spent the rest of the life among Spanish exiles in Flanders.”

- Theresa M. Earenfight, “RAISING INFANTA CATALINA DE ARAGÓN TO BE CATHERINE, QUEEN OF ENGLAND.”

[harry-sussex]

I hope it's not yet too late to add my thoughts to the Harry memoir thing! First of all, I sincerely hope that Harry is smart enough to think twice, thrice, or even a thousand times about what he'll put out in his memoir. Unlike Finding Freedom which they were able to deny accountability, although seemingly unbelievable to some given their "relationship" with Omid, all statements, claims, and accusations in the memoir are his to bear and all consequences are his to suffer. He can't pass it off to someone else. The Queen is 95. Sooner but preferably later, Charles will take over and then William. I'm not saying he's not entitled to his own feelings and I acknowledge that the BRF will always be his blood family but family members have been exiled and cut off completely for lesser reasons. I think him going back to the UK and being allowed to stay in Frogmore, for instance, are all thanks to the Queen. I can't imagine what or how his trips to the UK will be like if he has been cut off completely by his family and no longer has the royal machinery to back him up (i.e., being able to stay in Frogmore, the security, chauffeurs, being able to claim they're still on speaking terms). Try as he might to say that he hated his old life, I think it would hurt him if he only gets to go back to the only home he's ever known for funerals. I think it would also hurt as hell if he and his family will be denied invitations to the Jubilee or future coronations, for instance - events that he and his family should have been at the forefront had this been handled properly. Not to mention the negative impact this will have on his "brand". I don't think the remaining royals would do a sit down interview directly addressing Harry but I also don't think we can put it past them to hit back in different ways especially when provoked.

Second, the "scorned royal" narrative could only go so far especially with the Cambridge children growing up. This is also one of my beefs with how this played out. Harry acknowledged that his niece and nephews would soon outshine him and he has a little window to do something worthwhile... and yet he chose to immerse himself fully in the "drama" as opposed to highlighting the causes close to his heart. This "drama" is supposedly aimed to clear the air and misconception surrounding them but it only resulted in them being bashed even more and made fun of.

I saw a post saying he's turning into the male version of Tessy Antony (and I hate that I can see why) and since January 2020, I think I've been the human version of that angry woman saying "I was rooting for you. We were all rooting for you" at Harry LOL. He used to be such a great guy (who I was really proud to say I admired) and I think underneath all these pent-up anger, he still is. I sincerely hope he doesn't end up being a middle aged man who's fallen from grace and would have to resort to embarrassing things to earn money and court publicity. Diana's second baby who grew up to have a big heart and an even bigger personality despite the Diana tragedy deserves so much more than that.

It's never too late to share your perspective around here! I have a stupid amount of messages from ages ago from people sharing their perspectives - I'll get to them, promise! It just might take me a while lol. But I've been trying to get through all of the memoir-related asks because a lot of people have a lot to say, myself included.

I think a lot of favor he still has with the family lies with the Queen, sure. However, I really don't see Charles and William cutting him out of the institution for good, no matter what he does. He'll go to the coronation, maybe even William's investiture as Prince of Wales. He'll go to HM's funeral (where I have no doubt he'll be granted special permission to wear a uniform, because there's no way they'll do the suit thing from Philip's funeral at the monarch's funeral), his father's funeral when the time comes (same with the uniform), and William's coronation, and maybe George's investiture too. Hell, he might even pull a Princess Madeleine and come by for events like Trooping the Colour (like she does for National Day/Victoriadagen sometimes) every once in a while. He'll stay at Frogmore and get invited to tea and be entitled to the same royal machinery. Side note - I really don't think we'll ever see Meghan (and, likely, the kids) on British soil ever again. Maybe, maybe the coronation(s). Not entirely sure about the funerals, I'm not going to lie. Just my opinion - I might be completely wrong.

I just don't see them waking up one morning and stooping to Harry's current level. They're an institution too, and realistically, he's no threat to it. Sure, they theoretically may never speak again, they may cut each other off for good personally, but the institution is the institution and I just don't see them doing anything.

I agree with the second point, though I hadn't considered it. His time in the peak of the spotlight to do as much good as possible is certainly limited, as he fades further and further away from the institution, and as George, Charlotte, and Louis grow up. He has a different grasp on the public than Charles' siblings, for example, because he's Diana's baby, and so he will remain relevant in some capacity for the rest of his life even as the kids start turning into full-grown royals. Either way, it will diminish to an extent, and I wish he'd focus that time on doing the good he's always said he wanted to do, to maximize his impact while he has the greatest reach. The drama only makes money for the media. His charities, instead, could benefit greatly from the resources (time, energy, effort, manpower) that he is wasting on this damn memoir. In the process, he makes money for charities and loses money for the media. A win-win, right? Why does nobody see that?

That was @claireofluxembourg 's anon and it's funny to an extent, but it's also really quite sad. I don't think he's there yet but it could very easily go in that direction and if that happens, idk what I'll do with myself because you know I'll still be here going on about "he can change!" That bitterness is unflattering on anyone.

Finally, I agree with all of your last point. He's a wonderful, beautiful man with so much spark and charm and he's so capable of everything he could ever want to do and more. I do not want to see him fall any further from grace than he already has. He's Diana's baby, sure, but he's a beautiful person in his own right with a big heart and an enormous desire and potential to be everything and more and I just hate that this is what it's come to. I hope it levels out because he deserves so much better, he is so much better, and I refuse to believe that version of him is gone.

[thetimelordbatgirl]

When is the funeral like how today is the king's coronation?

Uh, funeral date isn't fully confirmed but its said to be potentially on Monday 19th of September, though not really going to watch the funeral since unless I have plans made by then, likely going to be asleep or watching DVDs.

And the coronation isn't today, at least an official one anyway, since its just Charles being proclaimed king and such, and for some reason deciding that Wales doesn't get a choice and making William and Kate the new prince and princess of Wales, even though this type of thing isn't automatic and is something Charles chose to do, meaning Wales didn't get a choice at all in the matter.