#we will call them “charles” and “catherine”

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

I read Robert Jobson's biography, Catherine, Princess of Wales this week.

The anon was right - if you've followed William and Kate closely, there's very little new information or big reveals. The book reads more like a research survey/review of all the articles and public records available about Kate rather than his own work or investigative journalism about Kate. And because there aren't many real reveals, it feels a little unauthorized to me. Let me explain - usually when the rota writes a book like this or a major piece in honor of a milestone event, the writer will typically contact the palace and the palace will give them a list of names they can interview or use on background. So because there's really nothing new, I'm not sure that this book had that kind of cooperation from the palace.

I'd call it a great book if you're not very familiar with Kate and would like to know more about who she is, the work she does, and how she fits into the BRF. But also make sure you read it with some salt because Jobson does pass off Harry's book as fact (i.e., I'm pretty sure the only people who believe that William and Kate were fans of Suits is Harry. Given the few TV shows we know they've watched, Suits doesn't strike me as something in their repertoire.).

Some new-to-me reveals:

William and Kate lived on their own for their third and fourth years at St. Andrews. (I thought they'd always lived with their friends.)

Michael Middleton also had health challenges in 2024 that also required surgery, which led to William and Kate leaning more on Pippa and the Jameses for a bit till Michael was back on his feet.

Charles was diagnosed with his prostate issues in 2022 but felt he couldn't undergo treatment then because Her Late Majesty had just died and it would've caused a public crisis. (I'm really side-eyeing him/BP now for this, and I'm also wondering if the delayed treatment means his cancer spread/is more complicated than initially reported.)

Harry and Meghan were offered Adelaide Cottage when they were moving to Windsor but chose Frogmore Cottage instead.

KP drafted a statement about photogate to be from both William and Kate but William refused to release it since he had no part in it so the statement was amended to be just from Kate. (Which is honestly kind of fucked up of William. Dude, your wife just got a diagnosis that rocked her world, she's undergoing chemo, and you can't take one for the team?)

In the chapter about Kate's work, Jobson does confirm that she and William do a lot of behind-the-scenes work with their charities and patronages and that they work a "regular" schedule even on days they're not making public appearances (obviously YMMV), to which I say again: William and Kate need to be showing us that work more. They don't need to take a Wales version of the red box photo, but at least start reporting these calls and work events to the Court Circular.

Anyway, like I said - good book if you're not very familiar with Kate, but otherwise it's not really worth it. Really needed more pictures, too.

[c0smic-coral]

FUCK LOVE AND ROMANCE, I’M BETTER WITHOUT ANYONE!!!

See tags for story

[trexalicious]

What we all suspected...🤬 Additionally visitors on an A-1 visa cannot be tried under US law for a crime...

If true, this would explain so much. It would explain damn near everything.

[bethanydelleman]

To be frank, I find the introvert/extrovert discourse online insane and completely ridiculous. People will fight to the death about if a character, Elizabeth Bennet, is an introvert or an extrovert, and people: they are opposites. If I/E aren't easy to tell apart for a main character of a novel, the categories are meaningless. But then oddly, considering that no one can tell I/E apart, extroverts are also some weird totally different species from introverts.

But Elizabeth Bennet is an extrovert and checks every single extrovert box and the reasons real internet people keep giving that she isn't are bonkers:

She takes solitary walks. I have some crazy news for you, extroverts can walk. I, a certified extrovert, take solitary walks nearly every day because I have a dog, whom I adopted knowing I would take her on these walks. It's shocking I know; I don't even die of loneliness at all! Consider for a moment that Elizabeth Bennet spends all day surrounded by four sisters and a very talkative mom, not surprising she takes walks alone occasionally. You'll also notice that she does invite her sisters along most of the time.

She reads. More shocking news: extroverts can read. Some of them read a lot. You know enjoying being around other people doesn't exclude reading. In fact, in the Regency you could even read aloud as a group activity! That is something we see in the novel. And Elizabeth also puts down her book when she finds a conversation more interesting.

She processes issues internally. That is not her preference, she likes to talk it out with Jane. When she's leaving Hunsford, Elizabeth is desperate to finally talk with Jane about all the crazy stuff that has happened to her, but she is forced to conceal a good deal of it because it's about Jane. She can't discuss Darcy with the Gardiners because his proposal is a secret, but she is eager to talk about the Lydia thing and learn her uncle's opinion. Also, extroverts are fully capable of processing internally, because again, not a different species.

She has trouble talking/feels awkward after the second proposal. Who wouldn't be awkward? Do people honestly think extroverts never feel awkward??? Not even when they love a guy that they verbally destroyed a few months ago? Not even during a confession of love? We uh... do. We get awkward too. In fact, sometimes when an extrovert talks rapidly, they are trying to talk their way out of an awkward situation. I have to work myself up to making phone calls.

Anyway, it drives me totally up the wall. Elizabeth Bennet is an extrovert, she thrives around people. Both end couples, Jane & Charles and Elizabeth & Darcy, are introvert/extrovert pairings, which is fun. If you want an introverted heroine, Jane Austen wrote five of them and they are all excellent: Elinor Dashwood, Marianne Dashwood, Fanny Price, Jane Bennet, and Anne Elliot. Catherine Morland, Emma Woodhouse, and Lady Susan round out the extroverts. It's awesome that Austen had such range in heroines.

[mizgnomer]

Behind the Scenes of The Giggle - Part Six Excerpt from Benjamin Cook's DWM #597 Interview with Catherine Tate (with guest appearance by David Tennant)

"Do you know, we went to an escape room with Neil? He loves them. It was his birthday while we were here…” [ Neil Patrick Harris ] celebrated his 49th while filming Doctor Who in Bristol last month. By day, he donned the Toymaker’s tux and shimmied gleefully on the streets. By night, he took David and Catherine out to dinner, then on to Worlds Collide, Bristol’s best – and only – Doctor Who-themed escape room. Players are given 60 minutes to work out how to close a tear in the fabric of spacetime, before the Cybermen break through (the Toymaker has fought the Cybermen!!). “He’d booked it out,” says Catherine. “He’d shut down the whole place [for the night] and they let us in.” “Proper Hollywood,” says David. “Innit, though! That’s old money, that is,” she laughs. “And Jodie [Whittaker’s Doctor] turns up,” says David. “She was on a PA. As if –” “– as if she’s calling you. And there was a scarf. And a sonic screwdriver.” “And a Cyberman.” “A Cyberman head, yeah.” Aren’t Catherine and David… you know, overqualified for a Doctor Who escape room? “I was quite hopeful,” he says. “I thought, these are puzzles I’m going to be able to solve. But then–” “There were chess pieces,” says Catherine, in much the same tone of voice in which Donna once informed the Doctor that Santa’s a robot. “I mean, oh my God! Sorry, but how the hell –?” Neil was brilliant at it, though. “He was annoyingly good.” The Toymaker and his games are quite notorious. “Yes, because then he went, ‘Let’s do another one! We’re gonna do the World War Two room.’ That’s when I came to life.” “It’s true,” says David. “I loved that one. It was great. We were spies and we’d infiltrated a Nazi bunker.” “It involved a bit more role play, didn’t it? Very Toymaker. And zome outrageous ack-sents!” “But after the Doctor Who one,” says Catherine, “it was clear that Neil and David were better at it. There was a clear division between the coulds and the could-nots. So Neil and David went into one room, and me, [executive producer] Phil Collinson, and Charlie [De Melo], who plays… is it Charles Banerjee? [glimpsed in last year’s Christmas Day trailer, rushing through the rain towards Mr Emporium’s toyshop] – went in another room. I’d said to Phil and Charlie, ‘Let’s cut the deadwood and go into a room on our own.’ You do it against each other, and see who gets out first. “So me, Charlie and Phil had a right old laugh,” recalls Catherine, cracking up, “while David and Neil went off and… got out much quicker. Midway through ours, they’d already finished and were watching us scrabble around trying to get out of our German bunker.” She chuckles at the memory. “Then suddenly through the PA comes: ‘DONNAAA!!!’” David says nothing, but he looks very pleased with himself.

Also, from Charlie De Melo's Instagram:

I'm struggling to think of a stranger evening than one, last June, doing a @bbcdoctorwho themed escape room, with The Doctor, Donna and the Toymaker. David and Neil, it turns out, are *very* good at escape rooms. The rest of us, less so. They rushed around the room, picking up clues and turning switches and all manner of other things, whilst the rest of us looked on, utterly bemused (& a little tooty in my case). So on they powered. Leaving us scratching our heads in a room full of disembodied Cybermen ones. Before confusion could give way to frustration, the tannoy crackled. It was David. They'd somehow managed to finish the entire thing whilst we all had stood still where we'd been left. Although he'd lost his lilting, melodic, Scottish brogue. He was now The Doctor. And in the Doctor's voice he began barking orders at us, talking us through the puzzles and guiding us out of whatever wibbly wobbly mess we were in and back to the safety of Bristol. "Donna! Quick! You have to get them out of there, the Cybermen are coming!"

For other posts in this set, please see the #whoBtsGiggle tag. The full episode list is [ here ]

[inky-duchess]

Fantasy Guide to Royal Orders

Royalty usually seem weighed down by a lot of medals, badges, chains, ribbons and sashes but each of these little details means something. How can we write them accurately and create our own versions for our worlds?

What exactly is a royal order?

A royal order is an honour bestowed on a person by the monarch. A royal order is an exclusive reward for those who have provided exemplary service to the nation or monarch or are simply honoured by the monarch for any reason from being close personally. Royal orders can be granted to other monarchs, members of the Royal family or aristocracy or even commoners.

Rank and File

Most orders have certain classes with the order. The Monarch is always the head of the order, there's usually a Commander of the Order along with every me member being assigned into First Class, Second Class etc. Being a member of the order actually entitles the member to certain privileges, such as a member being able to request the use the home chapel.

Pomp and Circumstance

A royal order can be bestowed in a grand ceremony or even privately. Some royal orders, including the Order of the Bath and the Order of the Garter, include annual rituals of the recipients meeting all while wearing their acquired medals, sashes and accessories. Being a part of an order would entitle you to attend certain events.

Rules of Wearing a Royal Order

Orders can be worn at many events. Usually the whole ensemble is worn to Order-centric events such as an investment or a celebration. The sash or riband can be worn at White Tie events or even as part of military uniforms along with the star. Smaller badges and pins can be worn at black tie events.

Family Orders

Royal family orders are bestowed upon female members of the Royal family to wear at formal events. These are comprised of a diamond encrusted portrait of the current monarch (or any past monarch who granted them the order) worn suspended on a coloured ribbon.

Details of a Royal Order

Sash or Riband: The sash or Riband is the length of coloured fabric that lies across the chest, secured at the shoulder and hip. These can come in an array of colours to differentiate between each order.

Star: The Star is the diamond pin that is a fixed next to the sash. This will usually be encrusted in diamonds displaying the symbol of the order or the initials of the monarch.

Collars and chains: some orders come with chains of the order that are worn around the neck, usually displaying the symbols of the order. These are usually worn over a cape or with a military uniform.

Badges: Are pins worn at the shoulders usually depicting the symbol or motto of the order.

Medal: Some orders come in the form of a medal suspended on ribbon depicting either portrait of the monarch as worn in family orders or initials of the monarch or just the symbol of the order.

Cape/Cloak: Some orders call for a wardrobe change as well. Some orders require the members to dress in large heavy embroidered cloaks stitched with the insignia of the order. These cloaks were seen most recently at the English Coronation of Charles III.

Lists of Royal Orders for Inspiration

Order of the White Elephant (Denmark)

Order of Dannebrog (Demark)

Military Willem Order (Netherlands)

Order of Orange-Nassau (Netherlands)

Order of St Catherine (Russian)

Order of St Olav (Norway)

Order of the Garter (UK)

Order of the Bath (UK)

Royal Family Orders of George V, George VI, Elizabeth II etc. (UK)

Royal Victorian Order (UK)

Order of the British Empire (UK)

Order of Merit (UK)

Order of Leopold II (Belgium)

Order of the Lion (Belgium)

[isadomna]

Margaret of Austria was warmly welcomed in Spain despite a certain clash of cultures. The seventeenth-century Jesuit author Pedro Abarca, in his Reyes de Aragon, wrote that although Margaret was allowed all her habitual servants, freedom and diversions, she was warned not to treat grandees ‘with the familiarity and openness usual with the houses of Austria, Burgundy and France but with the gravity and measured dignity of the kings and realms of Spain’.

Princess Margaret charmed them all with her wit, intelligence and looks, especially the eighteen-year-old John, who fell passionately in love with her. The wedding ceremony took place on 3 April 1497 in Burgos Cathedral. Six months later Prince John was dead of an unspecified wasting illness, although some attributed his waning strength to the ardour of the young couple. Pedro Martir had written to Queen Isabella in July suggesting that they should not be allowed to spend so much time together, but this advice had not been taken.

Margaret had become pregnant early on in the marriage but she miscarried her child and plunged into intense grief. Her court poet Jean Lemaire, in Couronne Margaritique, later wrote that she endured a labour of twelve days and nights without food or sleep. Margaret told her father that Queen Isabella never left her and that she would have died were it not for her mother-in-law’s care. Ferdinand and Isabella wrote to Maximilian that Margaret was ‘as strong and full of courage as you would wish her to be and we try to console her . . . we have and will have as much care of her as we would have if her husband were alive’.

Margaret of Austria now had no real role in Spain, any more than she had had in France after Charles VIII abandoned her. Again, however, Margaret stayed for a time in her new country. After her husband's death Margaret became so popular that she was often obliged to wait in the fields under the shade of the olives till night fell, as she dared not enter the towns and cities by day, because the people pressed with affectionate tumult round her litter to see her face, crying aloud that they wished for her alone, for their lady and princess.

Her departure was delayed while her father-in-law and her father haggled over her dowry, her future marriage possibilities, her best deployment in the ongoing tug-of-war with France, and finally over the route and timing of her journey. But early in 1499 – crossing by land the France of which she had once been called queen – she returned to Flanders. Nineteen years old and once again cheated of married life.

Isabella of Castile and Margaret of Austria

Sources:

Sylvia Barbara Soberton, Golden Age Ladies: Women Who Shaped the Courts of Henry VIII and Francis I

Amy Licence, Catherine of Aragon: An Intimate Life of Henry VIII's True Wife

Eleanor E. Tremayne, The First Governess of the Netherlands Margaret of Austria

[celticcrossanon]

Hi Celta,

Thank you for expressing how you truly feel about Camilla. I’m glad that she’s being revealed for the person she is.

I got into a disagreement with a tarot reader on here because I called out her bias against the Wales. Her opinion was that William and Catherine were destroying the monarchy because they’re lazy, don’t want to work, are on ego trips against the King, especially Catherine all of last year, and they don’t want to take on assignments as ordered (which I suspect has a lot to do with reconciling with Harry, and bringing him back into the fold). She wanted to nitpick every decision and ongoing project the Wales have, and every single one was baaaaaad and destructive. All of this amid the worst health crisis they are facing, I thought it was highly unfair.

I challenged her to look at Charles as POW and asked what HIS plans were for the monarchy at William’s age (42), when he was newly married to Diana. Besides playing hide the sausage with Camilla at her sisters estate, ruminating about plants and architecture, I’m not aware of what his long term plans for the monarchy were. His decisions about the Duchy of Cornwall I’m sure were based on solid financial advice given to him by the best advisors. He’s had the better part of fifty years for his Princes Trust and Duchy to gain value on the stock exchange. What were his future plans for continuation of the monarchy really?? She got angry with me, and instead of answering the question, she blocked me, and called me a Wales worshipper and being delusional about William and Catherine.

Here we are in 2025, Charles is King and things are falling apart. It seems to me no one was asking Charles the same hard questions being asked of William. There was no accountability then and throughout Charles’ life, yet some people ( I strongly suspect Sussex sugars) are turning the screws on William and demanding the accountability they never asked of Charles. All of this to say, if you can turn back time, can you look at Charles when he was William’s age now, and ask what were his plans for the long lived continuation of his line?? It seems that’s the point of the monarchy, and Charles seemed only into having the best time, and not on thoughts of future. The future has now arrived with a bang, and now Charles seemed only to be interested in status quo. If you fail to prepare, prepare to fail.

I wish only the very best for the Wales, they have their work cut out.

Hi AnonymousRetired,

I think my main gripe with Queen Camilla is that for me, she is not acting like a queen. All the gloating and self glorifying PR is not what a Queen does, at any time, in public, and neither is showing disrespect for the country's main religion, the one of which her husband is head. It's just wrong, and it rubs me the wrong way, and then I get blunt in my assessments as I'm too irritated to be charitable.

I know a lot of people like Queen Camilla, and I am glad that she has supporters. I don't blame people for liking her. I wish I could - I wish I still had the grudging respect that I had for her before she opened her mouth and showed what she was really like - but I can't, and that is all there is too it. I wish her supporters well but I can no longer be one of them.

Some royal watchers are biased against the Prince and Princess of Wales. I have noticed that. There is no point in arguing with them as they are not open to reason or logic in that area.

They have built up their own community and their place in that community by abusing and bullying The Prince and Princess of Wales, and they are not going to change now. Part of that abuse is holding one standard for the King and Queen that is filled with excuses for their behaviour, and another, much higher standard for The Prince and Princess of Wales, where everything they do is torn apart and criticised to the nth degree, especially if there was nothing wrong with it in the first place.

What those royal watchers say about others is what they are guilty of themselves - their comments are projections of their own behaviour.

I ignore them, as what they say is of no interest to me. IMO their comments are driven by dislike, if not hatred, and/or intense envy and jealousy, and I see no reason to engage with that.

Other royal watchers prefer to focus on The King and Queen, and that is fine. I have no issue with that at all. Everyone can follow their own interests on their own blog, and others can engage or not as they wish. There is always the option of scrolling by if you don't like what another person says.

As for accountability, that I think goes back to the media. They were fine letting King Charles do whatever he wanted and covering his activities in various ways, and the closer it got to the time King Charles would ascend the throne, the more flattering their coverage became. On the other hand, the media have a definite bias and against and, in some cases, hated for Prince William and Princess Catherine, because the two of them do not play the media's games, and the media takes it out on the couple in their coverage, including holding Prince William responsible for things that were never his responsibility in the first place and comparing him unfavourably to his father. Certain royal watchers have picked up on this trend and they follow it and apply it to everything done by Prince William and his wife.

Your arguments about comparing The King to his heir make very good points. My own preference is not to compare the two but to judge each one on their own merits. So far Prince William is winning in my eyes, but that could be my bias showing (every time I think King Charles has shown that he can be a good king he stuffs it up in some way, most recently by shoving Camilla down my throat).

[tallteenturtle]

Nancy Drew: Curse of Blackmoor Manor

I fell down a bit of a heraldry rabbit hole recently and decided to spend several hours compiling info about the Penvellyn family off the wiki and then used online heraldry resources to analyze their individual coat of arms. Did the game devs intend the shields to be interpreted this way? Probably not. But if I dont over-analyze 20 year old childrens computer games what else am I going to do with my life??

Here are all the people whose portraits hang in the great hall along with info we learn about them from Jane (and occasionally Nigel), their coat of arms, and my amateur interpretation of the symbolism.

Randulf ( - 1401)

“Randulf the Red, so named for his bright red hair, was considered a hero at the Battle of Poitiers. For his heroism, King Edward III awarded him with the lands in the region called "Penvellyn". That's how we got our name.”

Randulf's coat of arms says "IN HOC SIGNO" which translates to "in this sign (you will conquer)"

Comet; unknown in heraldry but refers to the family treasure

Red; Military might, warrior.

(putting the rest under the cut to save you much scrolling)

Odo (1354 – 1404)

“Yeah, he isn't very exciting, really. Liked farming and cows. His son Milo is much more interesting.”

“Those Manuscripts are very old and brittle. They date back to the 14th century. Odo Penvellyn collected most of them. His father Randulf and son Milo were rather more interested in military victories than in book collecting.”

Odo's coat of arms says "PROSPERITAS" which translates to "success".

Milo (1376 – 1423)

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

Deer/hart; One who will not fight unless provoked, peace and harmony

“Milo inherited not only his grandfather's red hair but his military prowess. Milo was instrumental in the Siege of Caen and was awarded even more lands by Henry V.”

Milo's coat of arms says "VICTUM INVIDEO SILENTE" which translates to "the conquered shall envy the dead".

Hugo (1401 – 1466)

Comet; unknown in heraldry

Red; Military might, warrior

Teardrop; “One who has endured torrents”

“Um, he had a lot of kids, and his dates were 1401 to 1466.”

Hugo's coat of arms says "CITO FIT QUOD DEI VOLUNT" which translates to "what the gods want happens soon".

Albert (1427 – 1508)

Bee; Industrious, diligent

Acorn; Antiquity, strength

Red; Military might, warrior

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

“He was very mysterious and the people of Blackmoor were afraid of him because he knew all these scientific things. No one knows much about him, though.”

Albert's coat of arms says "TIMENDI CAUSA EST NESCIRE" which translates to "ignorance is the cause of fear".

Edmund (1447 – 1499)

Book (open); Manifestation, knowledge

Blue; Truth, loyalty

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

“He was into cows. He did a lot of breeding of cows and sheep and got some kind of award from the King.”

Edmund's coat of arms says "UT SEMENTUM FECERIS ITA METES" which translates to "As you sow, so shall you reap".

Charles (1478 – 1553)

Hawk (Falcon): One who does not rest until objective achieved, purpose, goal-oriented

Red; Military might, warrior

Blue; Truth, loyalty

"Ooh, ooh - Charles was a very famous judge and wrote very important books on law. But his boy, Garrett, drowned when he was really young.”

Charles's coat of arms says "MINIMA MAXIMA SUNT" which translates to "The smallest things are the most important".

Thomas (1526 – 1584)

Rainbow; Good times after bad

Moon; Serene power over the mundane

Sun; Creativity and enlightenment

Blue; Truth, loyalty

“He was Charles's grandson and wrote a lot of poetry. He also had 3 wives: Catherine, Anne, and Mary. But not like at the same time. They died and he just remarried.”

Thomas's coat of arms says "AGE PRO VIRIBUS" which translates to "in all that you do, do your best".

James (1560 – 1650)

Eagle (2 heads); Joining 2 strong forces

Purple; Nobility and justice

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

T is presumably for Thomas, no heraldic meaning

“He never married but one day, when he was very old, a baby was found on the doorstep to the manor. He took her in and raised her as his own. That was Elinor.”

James's coat of arms says "ARS LONGA" which translates to "art lives long" (from the phrase, ars longa vita brevis - art is long, life is short).

Elinor (1626 – 1650)

Maltese cross; Blessings, protection

Red; Military might, warrior

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

Blue; Truth, loyalty

Purple; Nobility and justice

“Just that she was burned as a witch but it wasn't true and her father, James, died when he saw her die and then the family fled to France. I don't want to talk about this.”

Elinor's coat of arms says "AUDACES FORTUNA IUVAT" which translates to "fortune favors the bold".

Corbin (1670 – 1741)

Lion rampant; Courage, integrity, strength

Red; Military might, warrior

Purple; Nobility and justice

“Uh…I dunno. He doesn't have a coat of arms in the Great Hall because he didn't live here; wasn't even a British subject. That's all I know.”

Corbin's coat of arms says "NUNQUAM DEDISCEO" which translates to "never forget".

This shield is notably absent from the great hall, and also is the only one to feature decoration on the outside of the shield.

Sun; Fountain of life, intelligence, innovation, creativity, enlightenment

Wheat; Faithful

Vines/Ivy; Strong and lasting friendship, academia

Philippe (1689 – 1777)

“He made a fortune in the New World and bought back most of the lands that were confiscated by Cromwell.”

Philippe's coat of arms says "NOVUS MUNDUS" which translates to "a new world".

Penelope (1714 – 1783)

Fleur de Lis; Symbol of France

Purple; Nobility and justice

Blue; Truth, loyalty

“I don't know very much about her, except that she was very loved by practically everyone in England, and there were a million poems written about her.”

“Those are mainly Penelope Penvellyn's collections of French novels. She was a patron to a raft of artists, and her salon was quite popular. She was quite the libertine, even kept her maiden name after her marriage.”

Penelope's coat of arms says "PULCHRITUDO IN OMNIA" which translates to "there is beauty in all things".

Martha (1739 – 1791)

Pegasus; Poetic genius and inspiration

Fleur de lis; Symbol of France

Lion rampant; Courage and integrity

Wheel; fortune, cycle of life

Purple; Nobility and justice

Red; Military might, warrior

“She was completely daft - she'd wear really bizarre outfits and she was one of the first women to ride on a steam train.” (This is particularly impressive as the steam train did not exist until 10 years after her death. Oops!)

Martha's coat of arms says "SINE SCIENTIA ARS NIHIL EST" which translates to "without understanding, art is nothing".

Brigitte (1759 – 1833)

Unicorn; Extreme courage, virtue, strength.

Teardrop symbolism; “One who has endured torrents” gold means generosity or elevation of the mind.

The gear and atom are not traditional heraldic symbols but can represent progress and science.

Red; Military might, warrior

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

Blue; Truth, loyalty

Purple; Nobility and justice

“She never married and was bonkers for astronomy; she adopted her sister's son, Richard, who later got killed at Waterloo."

Brigitte's coat of arms says "LUDI SINE GAUDIO LUDI NON SUNT" which translates to "sport without fun is not sport."

"Brigitte with her eyes so bright, looks toward heaven at midnight on the longest night of year, that's the one she holds most dear. 'Starry friends,' she's often heard to say, 'how I wish that I could make you stay.' She knows though they can't remain, time will bring them 'round again."

Only shield to have white decorations on the colored background

Star; Divine quality from above

Dove; Loving constancy and peace

Compass; Direction

Purple; Nobility and justice

Richard (1787 – 1815)

“He died in Waterloo fighting against Napoleon.”

Richard's coat of arms says "SI SIC OMNES" which translates to "if only this could last forever".

Edward (1809 – 1904)

Banner down center shield (the Pale); Military or defensive strength

Star; Divine quality from above. The specific star (nautical star) is not traditional heraldry but symbolizes finding way home.

Red; Military might, warrior

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

Purple; Nobility and justice

“He was a big explorer and went all over the world. He wasn't very close with his son, who was also an explorer. They'd only see each other by chance in weird remote places like Samarkand or Walla Walla.”

Edward's coat of arms says "BIS VIVAT QUI BON VIVAT" which translates to "Whoever lives well lives twice".

Knight (especially on horseback); The soul guiding the body; man’s journey through life

Lightning Bolt: Swiftness and power; spiritual enlightenment.

Unicorn; Extreme courage, virtue, strength.

I dont know what the warrior with the spear and sword means

Scepter; Emblem of Justice

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

Blue; Truth, loyalty

William (1833 – 1901)

“He was an explorer, just like his father. He was kind of a whiner, so I heard.”

William's coat of arms says "DIES PERDIDI" which translates to "another day wasted".

John (1873 – 1954)

Bend Sinister (the band across the shield); Sometimes used to indicate illegitimacy. If that is the meaning here that would be very interesting and explain why he wasnt close with his father

Red; Military might, warrior

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

“He was this huge naturalist and did a lot of exploration in the Amazon. I think there's a plant named after him. Or maybe a monkey; I forget.”

John's coat of arms says "PER AURES AD ANIMUM" which translates to "through the ears to the spirit".

Malachi (1894 – 1972)

Parrot and mouth not traditional symbols but probably represent interest in wildlife and linguistics.

Green; Hope, joy, loyalty

Blue; Truth, loyalty

“He was a doctor of medicine and did a lot of research on icky skin diseases.”

Malachi's coat of arms says "NUMEN LUMEN" which translates to "divine light is my guide".

Alan (1923 – 1993)

Sun; Fountain of life, intelligence, innovation, creativity, enlightenment

Purple; Nobility and justice

“He was my grandfather but I didn't know him because he died when I was little. I guess he was nice.”

Alan's coat of arms says "PURGAMENTUM EXIT" which translates to "garbage out" (referencing part of a programmers' saying "garbage in, garbage out").

Serpent; Wisdom

Red; Military might, warrior

[nthspecialll]

how do you feel about mr pearson being a rat theory? i watched a youtube video about it and while i genuinely dont think rockstar made pearson a rat or even intended he be relevant in conversations about the rat, i still found it super interesting and almost convincing if i didnt already know it was micah!

I read up on it and there are some interesting points, but most of it is very circumstancial.

The main points are:

The name Aunt Cathy that he wrote a letter to being similar to Catherine Brathewaite.

Jack going missing so easily

Pearson leaving the camp and not staying.

Pearson being able to afford a shop in the epilouge.

Pearson asking for John's location and in the cut scenes of the credits you see the agents by Rhodes and then by Beecher's Hope.

I think the Aunt Cathy/Catherine is so circumstancial that it is stupid, it raises more questions that cannot be answered than it solves. Liek how did he know her before? Did he know Jack was going to get kidnapped? What is the letter code for? What does it say?

Jack going missing so easily. The video I saw by Waxy said it was so weird Jack could go missing from a small group of outlaws and suggested that Pearson might have somehow done something? But then again we literally have Kieran's testemory of what happened because he saw it.

Kieran does not leave camp, he hangs around the edge but he still sticks close so he can be seen, the fact he saw what happened means that the perpetrators was fairly close to camp and could draw Jack's attention to them while everyone else were focused on Bill and Micah coming running into camp with Sean's dead body.

Kieran also identifies the Braithewaite boys, although I don't know how he knows what they look like, he must have had some reason for thinking it was them and he was right. He thought they were just there for business so they must have acted fairly casually.

Now when it comes to Pearson leaving, the man is literally sobbing and crying in fear, he isn't a fighter, he is a cook, and he ain't the only one that left. Using him leaving as evidence is kind of silly seeing as so many others leaves as well.

As for the shop, it has been eight years and he has been through two wives, in the same timespan Tilly got married and pregnant, Mary-Beth became a bestselling author, Charles was between Canada and USA at least once, Sadie became a fairly known bounty hunter so on and so forth. Eight years is a long time, a lot can happen.

Now to the last bit, Pearson had a picture of the gang with John on it hanging on his wall and he did know John's exact location and could have told because he was scared of being hurt, but there are also a trillion other ways the Pinkerton's could have found John. They could have tracked him from his bank account, they could have tracked him from Strawberry where he made a mess, a random civillian could have ID'ed him or Pearson "ratted" of course, they are all equally possible but I think even if Pearson did tell the Pinkerton John's location, I wouldn't call him a rat.

The Pinkerton's would have found John either way, and the timing of them finding him does not really matter, they gonna wait until 1911 either way, it would have been the exact same result.

[florart98]

Jackson Lamb in season three.

I just finished my rewatch of the third season for a fanfic I'm thinking about. And I can't stop thinking about Lamb and his whole reaction to Standish's kidnapping.

Lamb is the first to realize that Standish didn't show up for work, and he quickly understands that this means something bad happened, because she never arrives late without warning, nor does her cell phone run out of battery, nor does she take the tube to come. He is worried, even angry at River for not following Donovan when he bumped into him the previous afternoon. (Although it is normal for him to get angry with River, in this case it is more exaggerated than normal, how would River know that they wanted to kidnap Catherine)

Throughout the season Lamb is violent about getting Catherine back, from the first moment when River doesn't dare to tell him that he saw Donovan before and Lamb says:

Or when Louisa calls him to tell him that everything indicates that Catherine was kidnapped, she asks why anyone would do that, and Lamb responds:

And when they release River, he asks him what you would have done if you got this photo and he says:

There's a great moment where he and Chapman are in the laundromat, Chapman offers him a drink and Lamb declines.

Chapman's face when he tell him that they took Standish seems perfect to me, because he knows Lamb, he knows how he defends his people, and, of all his people, they took Catherine. This is big. Catherine is not just anyone.

Then, when he discovers that Catherine is not in real danger, he is visibly calmer, at least for a few minutes, until he discovers that the Tiger Team has revealed itself and now Catherine really is a hostage.

We have that great moment where he gets into Sly's car and then into Judd's lunch. He is so angry that he talks to more and more powerful people until someone brings Standish back to him. But that doesn't happen and he has to go look for her himself. Thanks to the help of Standish herself, who pointed to the wall in her kidnapped photo, Roddy is able to discover where they are keeping her locked up.

So Lamb spends all day doing everything he can to get to Standish back. And he himself is going to rescue her

And he arrives and she's sitting there playing scrabble. After he home-aloneing the house and getting out of there, comes the big fight and the big reveal.

When they are in the car with Standish, just before the fight at the gas station starts, she talks to Roddy and tells him that she knows how to read people and Lamb makes fun of her. (referring to how he has no idea what Charles did)

When they park at the station, Lamb is upset, not angry, he's not yelling like he usually does, but instead he's silent, which is why she says he never wants to talk about anything.

I think Lamb is upset because he spent all day trying to find her but when he gets there she only talks about Charles. And I understand that he hates Charles, the man betrayed them and because of him his companions died. But you have to understand that Catherine doesn't know anything about that, in her eyes he is the perfect man who extended a hand to her when everyone abandoned her.

Catherine has no idea that Charles was worse than Ingrid or Diana, for her he was an honorable man, and Lamb hates that, he hates that she has him on a pedestal, so, knowing that he is going to hurt her, he tells her the truth that he had been hiding from her for years. And not only does he tell her that Charles betrayed them all, but he also used her.

Also, it really bothers him that she says Charles was an honorable man, because he wasn't. And Lamb may be many things but he truly has honor, he will never betray his people, and he would do whatever is necessary to save them.

So, in my opinion, Lamb didn't think about it, not really, he was tired, he was angry with Charles's betrayal and with Standish for admiring him so much, that he needed to break that illusion in her. I think at the end of the day he regrets doing it. He really does, as he tells Judd, Standish runs my diary, now I don't know what he'll do without her. He did everything to find her and when he finds her, he loses her.

Special mention for Marcus saying what we all think:

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

On the one hand, I get it. It's what they use to promote themselves and their work. But on the other hand, I don't get it. All the artwork they have in the collection, all the charities they work with, all the staff that they have, the exhibitions and galleries they support, the patronages they have that they could highlight or promote during Women's History Month or International Women's Day, and they choose to put themselves front and center.

See, this isn’t the first time that BP ‘forgets’ Catherine on a post and I honestly just did an eye-roll and didn’t give much attention until I see how many people were calling them out and really complaining for not seeing the PoW there

But I was more confused as to why they chose photography as their way to celebrate, I get it, they wanted to celebrate the female artists, and I know it would have been odd but maybe putting the face of the photographer next to the photography they took of the royal would have been a nicer idea or at least wouldn’t have been seen as ‘me, me, me’. Because it was a huge contrast the way KP’s celebrated the day in comparison to BP.

I mean, Sophie and Camilla have very nice initiatives supporting women and by focusing on the royal photographers was very simple and empty.

I had the same thought too - why not include the photographers themselves? Why just the royal women? It was well-intentioned but poorly executed.

It reminds me of when we used to complain a few years ago that KP’s social media was well-intentioned but poorly executed - remember when the then-Cambridges went to Wales and they used “Watermelon Sugar” audio on their IG post? Cringe.

At that time, there were a few leaks that KP couldn’t keep good social media people on staff because Charles and CH kept poaching them since technically KP worked for and was funded by Ch. Now that KP is “independent” the way CH was back then, maybe KP has been able to hire (and more importantly, keep) social media experts on staff. So now BP/CH is getting well-intentioned poorly executed while KP gets much more credit.

[the-empress-7]

What irritates me is that the more the BRF is showing publicly that he is still family, especially William and Catherine, the more the traitors will use it to their advantage. The timing is so bad especially now that the MSM is actually calling the Harkles out and this "he's still family" optics being put out by KP is almost like an invisible hand stopping them from going further with more exposures because The Palace is still protecting him.

Just a few days back the mayor of Porreres very sadly said he can't fight The Crown when Rachel very obviously plagiarized his town's coat of arms. And we have the documentary today. I don't know, it's just that I feel so sorry for everyone who is bullied by those two but they never had to face any consequences till now sigh.

There is a huge chasm between how Charles deals with Harry and how William deals with Harry. It's why BP still keeps putting how PR about how William is the one standing in the way of Charles' olive branch to Harry. William has not budged. The last time William faltered was the walkabout after The Queen's passing. He has held the line since then. Firmly. That's the thing about William, he simply does not make the same mistake twice.

As for what the Mayor of Porreres said, one can blame Charles and only Charles. He continues to list the Harkles on the working royals page and continues to direct the public to their website. That alone is all the ammunition and protection they need. and Charles is the only one providing it.

[grits-galraisedinthesouth]

Meg's Doing It ALL Wrong!

"the most ass backwards, shocking, antisocial fail I've seen possibly ever."

If you've ever had a desire to eavesdrop on any business school course or psychology of business course, Ibble Dibble's most recent case study on Meghan Markle's business scams is not to be missed. Please forgive my use of gifs as I salute her 1,2 knock out punch to MM, Omit, NOprah & Sparry's ridiculous allegations of waycism. No one has come close to telling it like Ibble Dibble.

I salute you #1 I.D., take a bow! Your quote should be etched on the Duchess's future Frogmore Cottage tombstone because you did something no one else has been able to do: nail her waycism insanity in 1 intelligent sentence.

Friends, help me show our support for the female content creators on YT who are actually saving intelligent women from following in MEgain's footsteps.

Please follow the link to LIKE & SUBSCRIBE to Ibble Dibble's YT channel. At one point the megbots had her YT channel demonitized, but ID fought back and won. ID is an intelligent threat to MM's low class megbots. Also follow the Duchess of Suss who called out the aroscam in a hilariously funny video.

Meg's Floptastic Flaws #3: Meg is a Terrible Snob

there are good snobs like Prince Charles, Princess Margaret & Martha Stewart, bad snobs, and snobs who are just very bad at snobbing

Meghan is a narcissist who is actually an

ARCH SNOB : a snob who is a bad bad snob

"Meghan's snobbery is so appalling because SHE is BAD at snobbing."

"She is literally labeling and ranking people. Her big product launch is at best a freudian slip, at worst a passive aggressive power play...it is the most ass backwards, shocking, antisocial fail I've seen possibly ever."

A passive agressive power play:

audicity to think she can buy those celebs as friends for a jar of jam

poach their followers

insult them personally by numerically ranking them from most to least important on the very labels

the celebs are too dumb to know she's negging them

thinks we the public will admire her behavior & line up begging for the next batch of worthless nonsense she danes to sell

simply to posture on social media... gross but also ineffective

on some level Meghan always knows she's shooting herself in the foot

Meghan exhibits High Social Dominance Orientation: a genuine belief that some groups of people are innately superior to others and should therefore hold more power in society.

Meg's fury, jealousy & resentment for being scorned by Hollyweird & British high society in turn, snubs the only people who pay attention to her--you, US potential customers

a narcissist harboring true malice & intends to arrive at her rightful place upon the social ladder by any means necessary

believes she is due limitless revenge for being snubbed and immediately commences enacting it by any means necessary (a la her sewer squad & digital justice)¹

believes she has the right to exploit & abuse perceived inferiors

Meg is a bad snob. She does not judge in a qualitative measure but snobs purely to service her own delusions of grandeur OR at worst to entertain herself by upsetting her victims and creating chaos

meg has a following who wants to be like her & we know bc they leave insane comments

"Meghan Markle can't present herself as the loveable villain because she has NO sense of humor! She's just a bad bad snob." Case in point:

"Meghan (unlike a good snob), flipped what was likely a single joke about a little orphan annie ginger fro, (she heard 2nd hand), into an international incident with legal and diplomatic repercussions."🎯🎯🎯

Meg's fury, jealousy & resentment for being scorned by British high society...she believes she has the right to exploit & abuse (Catherine & William) perceived inferiors

"Another Rip Off"

¹comparisons to Mao's (actress) wife and the biblical queen Jezebel are accurate. Mao's wife jailed & murdered all who had rejected and/or criticized her during her climb up the greasy pole. Queen Jezebel sought to murder and silence all the true prophets or outspoken truthers. Meg's mission for "digital justice" is to criminalize criticism.

[nesiacha]

166 Years Ago, Empress Marie Claire Bonheur of Haiti Passed Away

Marie Claire Bonheur (1758-1858)

166 years ago, on August 8th (or August 9th, according to other sources) in 1858, Marie Claire Bonheur, the first Empress of Haiti at the time of its independence, took her last breath.

In anticipation of this post for the anniversary of her death, I had already created three portraits of revolutionary women from Haiti or overseas here: link.

Marie Claire Bonheur was born in Léogâne in 1758 into a poor but free family. Her education was provided by her aunt Elise Lobelot, who was a governess within a religious order. As can easily be imagined, at the time of her birth, Haiti, then called Saint-Domingue, was marked by cruel inequalities, the cruelty of the colonists, and the horrors of slavery.

She married Pierre-Lunic, a master wheelwright, but he died in 1795. It was especially during the Haitian Revolution that Marie Claire Bonheur would distinguish herself.

During the siege of Jacmel in 1800, during the conflict known as the War of Knives between Toussaint Louverture and André Rigaud, which led them to clash in Jacmel, Marie Claire Bonheur tirelessly helped the wounded and the starving. One of her notable actions was convincing Jean-Jacques Dessalines, who was then a lieutenant under Toussaint Louverture, to open the roads so that people in the city could receive more aid, such as food, clothing, and medicine while he was besieging the city. She was in the streets, tirelessly organizing meals, among other activities. She was considered a fighter and, above all, an effective nurse for the wounded soldiers.

In 1800, she married Dessalines, and they had seven children in total. However, she insisted on legitimizing her husband's children from previous relationships, including Catherine Flon, who is considered one of Haiti's four national heroines alongside Sanité Bélair, Dédée Bazile, and Cécile Fatiman.

After Napoleon sent an expedition to Saint-Domingue with the aim of reinstating slavery, Jean-Jacques Dessalines joined the insurgents fighting against the French soldiers. He surrendered to them as a strategy, only to fight them again, especially when the reestablishment of slavery was ordered. After the victory at the Battle of Vertières, following Haiti's restoration of independence, he proclaimed himself emperor, and Marie Claire Bonheur became empress.

When Jean-Jacques Dessalines ordered that the white inhabitants of Haiti, including children, be killed in 1804 (an episode I will detail very briefly in the next post, but let’s not forget that while this massacre was horrible and absolutely condemnable, we must also remember the atrocities committed on the other side against black Haitians before the Haitian Revolution and by Bonaparte's troops with shocking orders, whose executions remind us of the atrocities of Carrier’s drownings), Marie Claire Bonheur opposed it. Some say she fell to her knees before her husband to plead for the lives of the French in Haiti. She, along with other Haitians, saved white and French people.

She is known for saving those who would become known as the "orphans of Cap," Hortense and Augustine Javier, two little girls aged 8 and 5. They first lost their father in the massacre. A former black servant tried to hide and protect their mother and the two girls, but they were discovered on the fourth day, and the soldiers killed the mother. However, General Diakoué, a friend of their father, managed to save them and sent them to safety among former black slaves, who showed them great affection. Marie Claire Bonheur took them in in 1806 and moved heaven and earth to send them to France to be with their family. She succeeded, and the two girls were in France by 1810. They devoted their entire lives to expressing immense gratitude to the Haitians who saved them, and apparently, they and their family managed to have King Charles X in 1830 reward General Diakoué with the Cross of Honor.

When her husband Jean-Jacques Dessalines was assassinated in 1806, she refused the hospitality of Henri Christophe. The former empress lived in poverty until 1843 when she was granted a pension. In 1849, the emperor of Haiti, Faustin, wanted to increase her pension due to his admiration for her husband, but she refused. She died in poverty in August 1858 at the age of 100.

This woman, who had an extraordinary destiny, lived for at least a century. Her memory is very present in Haiti, and she left a great legacy alongside other Haitian women.

[saintmeghanmarkle]

Timing of Jane Pauley interview and Richard Eden comments by u/Winter-South-7448

Timing of Jane Pauley interview and Richard Eden comments Wow! The timing of Richard Eden's massive attack on the dumb prince just now, and almost at the same moment the announcement of the Harkles shock interview with Jane Pauley, the first big TV interview since their Oprah Lie-Fest.I'm really interested in these two things happening at almost exactly the same time; a really severe attack on the idiot prince by Richard Eden for Harry using Her Majesty QEII to get what he wants, and the announcement of Jane Pauley interview.I think its fair to say all we sinners are much more sophisticated and educated now about how the media works, and the timing of annoucements, and general attempts to manage, manipulate and spin stores.This latest piece by Richard Eden is the most out-there he has been in critisizing the idiot prince. He obviously feels he has licence to do so now, because while normally critical of the wicked duo, he is usually quite restrained and understated, gently suggesting possible opinions people might have about them.Sounds to me like someone in the RF has given Richard Eden the go-ahead to take off the gloves. The idiot prince trying to use Her Majesty QEII for his own ends, exploting her good name and legacy to get what he wants, when she is not in a position to defend herself, may just have been the final straw for The King. Claiming that HMQEII is supporting the idiot prince, looking down on him from heaven and approving his conduct which has been publicly and relentlessly critical of The King, and telling Harry to "see it through to the end" is tastless, vile and exploitative behaviour by the idiot prince.And Eden has taken his criticism to a new intensity, acknowledging the grief Harry caused the dying Monarch, by just coming right out and saying "Shame on Harry for now trying to use the memory of a grandmother he did so much to hurt in her final years.".The unexpected announcement that the Harkles are talking to Jane Pauley smells to me of the wicked duo trying to get ahead of negative news. Forget all the nonsense about their so-called anti-bullying campaign. They are doing the interview because they want to get a message out.Could it be that they have been told by the RF of changes to their status, of the loss of some of their prestige or titles, or some other final action by The King, and they are trying to get ahead of the story, by making the announcement themselves as though it has been their decision? As in, we have decided to relinquish our titles, or we have decided to break all contact with the royal family, or Harry and the two doll-children are relinquishing their place in the line of succession?Harry made those comments about HMQEII one week ago (last Thursday), and there may have been immediate consequences behnd the scenes for the wicked-duo, which saw them making a quick decision to arrange the Jane Pauley interview to try to spin any forthcoming negative annoucement about them by the PalaceJust seems to me that Richard Edens story is laying some useful PR groundwork, finally calling out in no uncertain terms Harry's shocking behaviour, and helping to justify action by the RF to punish or finally cut-off the Harkles.The idiot Prince has exploited, used and abused William's good name, that of Catherine, Camilla, and The King. Maybe going after The King's late mother HMQEII was too much for Charles, and he has finally had enough.Am I wrong? Is this just wishful thinking? post link: https://ift.tt/m2uIvcB author: Winter-South-7448 submitted: August 01, 2024 at 04:34PM via SaintMeghanMarkle on Reddit disclaimer: all views + opinions expressed by the author of this post, as well as any comments and reblogs, are solely the author's own; they do not necessarily reflect the views of the administrator of this Tumblr blog. For entertainment only.