The Life of HRH The Duke of Edinburgh: Part III

Tags

Dartmouth, Engagement, House of Mountbatten, King George VI, Philip Mountbatten, Prince Philip, Princess Elizabeth, Queen Elizabeth II, royal wedding

Marriage

The Duke of Edinburgh met his future wife in 1939 when he was 18 and she was 13. In 1939 King George VI and Queen Elizabeth visited the Royal Naval College at Dartmouth. Upon the request of the Queen and Philip’s uncle, Earl Mountbatten, they asked him to escort Elizabeth and Margaret, who were Philip’s third cousins through Queen Victoria, and second cousins once removed through King Christian IX of Denmark, while their parents visited the facility.

Elizabeth said she fell in love with Philip, and they began to exchange letters. In 1946 Philip asked the king for permission to marry Elizabeth. This request was granted on the condition that it would not be announced until after the Elizabeth’s 21st birthday in April of the next year. She was 21 when their engagement was officially announced on July 9, 1947.

The engagement was not without controversy; Philip had no financial standing, was foreign-born (though a British subject who had served in the Royal Navy throughout the Second World War), and had sisters who had married German Royalty with Nazi links. Marion Crawford wrote, “Some of the King’s advisors did not think him good enough for her. He was a prince without a home or kingdom.

Some of the papers played long and loud tunes on the string of Philip’s foreign origin.” Later biographies reported Elizabeth’s mother had reservations about the union initially, and teased Philip as “The Hun.” In later life, however, the Queen Mother told biographer Tim Heald that Philip was “an English gentleman.”

Before the marriage, Philip renounced his Greek and Danish titles, officially converted from Greek Orthodoxy to Anglicanism, and adopted the style Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten, taking the Anglicized version of Battenberg, the surname of his mother’s British family.

The day before the wedding his wedding, King George VI bestowed the style His Royal Highness on Philip, and on the day of the wedding, November 20, 1947, King George VI granted Philip the titles of Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth, and Baron Greenwich. However, he wasn’t made a Prince of the United Kingdom in his own right until 1958 when Her Majesty granted him that distinction.

Elizabeth and Philip were married on November 20, 1947 at Westminster Abbey. They received 2,500 wedding gifts from around the world. Because Britain had not yet completely recovered from the devastation of the war, Elizabeth required ration coupons to buy the material for her gown, which was designed by Norman Hartnel. In post-war Britain, it was not acceptable for Philip’s German relations, including his three surviving sisters, to be invited to the wedding. The Duke of Windsor, formerly King Edward VIII, was not invited either.

Philip left active military service when Elizabeth became queen in 1952, having reached the rank of commander. Philip had four children with Elizabeth: Charles, Prince of Wales; Anne, Princess Royal; Prince Andrew, Duke of York; and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex. Through a British Order in Council issued in 1960, descendants of the couple not bearing royal styles and titles can use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor, which has also been used by some members of the royal family who do hold titles, such as Anne, Andrew and Edward.

March 24, 1953: Death of Queen Mary of the United Kingdom. Born Princess of Teck

Tags

King Edward VIII, King George V, King George VI, Mary of Teck, Princess May of Teck, Queen Elizabeth II, Queen Mary

Mary of Teck (Victoria Mary Augusta Louise Olga Pauline Claudine Agnes; May 26, 1867 – March 24, 1953) was Queen of the United Kingdom and the British Dominions from 1910 until 1936 as the wife of King George V. She was concurrently Empress of India.

Although technically a Princess of Teck, in the Kingdom of Württemberg, she was born and raised in the United Kingdom.

Princess Victoria Mary (“May”) of Teck was born on May 26, 1867 at Kensington Palace, London, in the same room where Queen Victoria, her first cousin once removed, had been born 48 years earlier. Queen Victoria came to visit the baby, writing that she was “a very fine one, with pretty little features and a quantity of hair”.

Her father was Prince Francis, Duke of Teck, the son of Duke Alexander of Württemberg by his morganatic wife, Countess Claudine Rhédey von Kis-Rhéde (created Countess von Hohenstein in the Austrian Empire). Her mother was Princess Mary Adelaide of Cambridge, a granddaughter of King George III and the third child and younger daughter of Prince Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge, and Princess Augusta of Hesse-Kassel. She was informally known as “May”, after the month of her birth.

At the age of 24, she was betrothed to her second cousin once removed Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence and Avondale, the eldest son of the Prince of Wales, but six weeks after the announcement of the engagement, he died unexpectedly during an influenza pandemic. The following year, she became engaged to Albert Victor’s only surviving brother, George, who subsequently became king. Before her husband’s accession, she was successively Duchess of York, Duchess of Cornwall, and Princess of Wales.

As queen consort from 1910, she supported her husband through the First World War, his ill health, and major political changes arising from the aftermath of the war. After George’s death in 1936, she became queen mother when her eldest son, Edward VIII, ascended the throne; but to her dismay, he abdicated later the same year in order to marry twice-divorced American socialite Wallis Simpson. She supported her second son, as the new king, George VI.

In 1952, King George VI died, the third of Queen Mary’s children to predecease her; her eldest granddaughter, Princess Elizabeth, ascended the throne as Queen Elizabeth II. The death of a third child profoundly affected her. Mary remarked to Princess Marie Louise: “I have lost three sons through death, but I have never been privileged to be there to say a last farewell to them.”

Mary died on March 24, 1953 in her sleep at the age of 85, ten weeks before her granddaughter’s coronation. She had let it be known that should she die, the Coronation should not be postponed. Her remains lay in state at Westminster Hall, where large numbers of mourners filed past her coffin. She is buried beside her husband in the nave of St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle.

Is Royalty a Controversial and Complicated subject?

Tags

Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Earl of Chester, High Steward of Scotland, King George VI, Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of Scotland, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Merge with the crown, Prince Charles, Prince Harry, Prince Henry of Wales, Prince of Wales, Prince Philip, Princess Beatrice, Princess Elizabeth of York, Proper usage of titles, The Duke of Edinburgh, The Queen, titles

You would think this was harmless and fun without much controversy… but you’d be wrong!! You wouldn’t know it from reading the comments on this blog because they are 99% very positive. However, I also run my own royal history page on Facebook (link below) and while that page is also pretty civil you will see some squabbling from time to time. If you’re on Facebook you can follow that page if you’d like.

https://www.facebook.com/EuropeanRoyalHistory

I would to mention a few of my observations to why discussing royalty can be controversial.

1. First of all not everyone is following royalty for the same reasons. Plus, some peoples interest in the topic may not be as deep or as intense as others which lead me to this observation. Before I relate what it is I want to say, I imply no judgment at all. It seems there are two groups of people that are interested in royalty. One group, I call royalty watchers, follow royalty like they would follow any celebrity, be they an actor or an actress, singer or musician or sports figure. Often, as I have observed, many of these types of royalty watchers began watching royalty due to the influence of Diana, Princess of Wales. Therefore, there interest may be limited to The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry of Wales, and may be extended to the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh and other immediate members of the British Royal Family. But there is a limited focus and interest.

2. The other group that are interested in royalty are like myself, they are more of an historian than royalty as celebrity watcher. That means often our knowledge and interest is not just with the British Monarchy (although it may be our favorite) or the current British Royal Family; our interests stretch far back into history and across all monarchies of Europe and even the world. Again, both groups are fine. If you’re interest is not that deep, whatever level you enjoy royalty is fine!

The problem, as I have observed, these two groups often clash.

3. It seems as if they clash over two areas. These two areas are Diana, Princess of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall (Camilla) and the knowledge and usage of titles and correctly addressing the members of the royal family. I apologize for generalizing the situation so if you don’t fit in these categories I understand. It seems the more historical minded people have no problem accepting the Duchess of Cornwall (Camilla) into the royal family and seeing her one day being queen along side her husband, future King Charles III. The more casual royalty watcher, those that began watching royalty due to the influence of Diana, Princess of Wales, tend to still hold Diana in very high esteem and cannot stand either the Prince of Wales or the Duchess of Cornwall (Camilla) very much. With some there is outright hated. So that can be a controversial topic and an area of conflict.

Another topic that is surprisingly controversial is the usage of titles. Now, I must admit the proper usage of styles and titles is a bit confusing and can take a while to learn, but it can be done. I have found that the more historically minded the royalty watcher they generally do know this information. What I see in the casual royalty enthusiasts can be divided into three categories: a) There are those who do not understand the proper usage of titles or the laws governing how titles are created and inherited and what happens to some of them when the heir to the throne becomes the sovereign or the title becomes extinct. This group is eager to learn about these things. b) The second group may have some knowledge on the subject but they are grossly misinformed and are often wrong. I find this group to be a challenge to deal with because they often do not like to be corrected when they’re wrong and will often stubbornly cling to their misinformation. c) That last group are the very casual royalty watcher who could care less about this topic!

The proper usage of titles and the rules and laws governing them was a big interest of mine so I don’t think I am being too pedantic about this topic considering how much misinformation there is and given the fact that there are people that do want to understand how the system works. Someone has to set an example or all we get is this misinformation! Even keep in mind often the American media and even the British media gets this stuff wrong!!! (even a King got it wrong once)*

Here is a quick run down about how to refer to the members of the royal family. One thing many royalty watchers get upset about is the fact that the press on both sides of the pond still call the wife of Prince William (HRH The Duke of Cambridge) Kate Middleton!! The proper way to refer to the wife of HRH The Duke of Cambridge is, simply, HRH The Duchess of Cambridge. It is not Princess Catherine or Duchess Catherine. You do not call members of royalty by their first name if they have a peerage title. For example, its not proper to say “Prince Charles” he is to be called HRH The Prince of Wales. It is alright to drop the HRH and call him the Prince of Wales.

We do not call the Queen, Queen Elizabeth or just Elizabeth, it is proper to refer to her as Her Majesty, The Queen or simply The Queen. Her husband is not to be called “Prince Philip”, he is to be referred by his title, HRH The Duke of Edinburgh. Now if members of the royal family are not the sovereign and they do not have a peerage title, you refer to them by their style Prince of Princess, their first name and the territorial designation they would inherit from their father. For example, Prince Harry is officially, HRH Prince Henry of Wales because he is the son of the Prince of Wales. The Duke of Cambridge was HRH Prince William of Wales until he received his peerage title.

Princess Beatrice is HRH Princess Beatrice of York because her father is HRH The Duke of York. The Queen, incidentally, was born HRH Princess Elizabeth of York for at the time of her birth her father, future King George VI, was HRH The Duke of York.

For those Princes or Princess without a peerage title to be able to use the predicate “The” in front of their name is reserved only for the sons and daughters of the sovereign. For example, if tomorrow the Prince of Wales were to ascend the throne as king, HRH Prince Henry of Wales would then become HRH The Prince Henry. He would be known as that until he is given a peerage title. Also, if the Prince of Wales were to be king tomorrow, the Duke of Cambridge would automatically inherit the titles Duke of Cornwall in the Peerage of England and the titles Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, and High Stewardship of Scotland, which are the Heir Apparent’s titles in the Peerage of Scotland. The titles Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester are not hereditary and would merge with the crown when the current Prince of Wales becomes king. King Charles III would then be able to re-create his son Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester whenever he sees fit. Until then he known by his double peerage titles while in England, HRH The Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge.

That is only the tip of the iceberg. I am sure I will type more about this in the future. Suffice it to say whenever the question of titles and its rules and regulations come up there is often some misinformation which leads to debate and conflict. I don’t claim to be the font of all knowledge on this topic for I am still learning myself. I know a few royal authors that know quite a bit more than I.

Even sometimes the sovereign himself doesn’t know the rules! * In 1947, Prince Phillip of Greece and Denmark renounced his Greek and Danish titles to become a British subject (something he already was, but that is another story) in order to marry the heiress presumptive to the throne, HRH Princess Elizabeth of York. He became Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten (taking the Anglicized name of the Princely House of Battenberg that his mother was from). The day before the wedding King George VI endowed Philip with the style His Royal Highness and the titles, Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth, and Baron Greenwich. However, this did not create him a Prince of the United Kingdom as many, including the King, thought! Despite renouncing his Greek and Danish titles (not legally recognized in Britain anyway) HRH The Duke of Edinburgh was not a Prince! But that didn’t stop the press from continuing to refer to him as Prince Philip. I have a book on the royal family from 1951, a year HRH The Duchess of Edinburgh became queen, and it refers incorrectly to the Duke of Edinburgh as “Prince Philip.”

Some say King George VI did this intentionally and that is the point of debate. However, the matter was left unsettled for ten years. Various dignitaries of State suggested titles for the Duke of Edinburgh. They ranged from Prince Consort, the title Prince Albert, husband of Queen Victoria held, to the unusual, Prince of the Commonwealth or  Prince of the Realm. The Duke of Edinburgh himself did not want any elevation of his titles. In the end The Queen, issued Letters Patent on February 22, 1957 giving her husband the style and titular dignity of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. He has henceforth been known as His Royal Highness, The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, with the capitalized definite article “The”normally restricted to the children of the Sovereign.

I guess it can get complicated and no wonder titles can be quite the controversial subject!!!

Titles, Titles Titles! HRH The Earl of Wessex and his title and his children’s titles. Part Deux

Tags

Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Wessex, King George VI, Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Letters Patent 1947, Prince Edward, Prince Philip, Queen Elizabeth II, Royal Prerogative

Part II of this topic on the titles of the Wessex family now turns to the Earl himself and his inheritance of the title Duke of Edinburgh the title his father, Prince Philip, currently holds. There are two camps concerning this issue.

Camp I: This group believes that the titles must follow the 1947 Letter Patent (LP) wherein when HRH The Duke of Edinburgh dies while the Queen is still alive the title will pass to his eldest son, The Prince of Wales. The Prince of Wales will hold this title along with the others he holds until he becomes king. At that time these titles will merge with the crown making them available to be created anew. In the case of the title Prince of Wales, Charles, as king, can create his son, The Duke of Cambridge (the Duke of Cambridge will automatically inherit the hereditary title of Duke of Cornwall), The Prince of Wales any time he desires. Charles will also be able to create his brother, The Earl of Wessex, the new Duke of Edinburgh. If the Queen should die before the Duke of Edinburgh then Charles will be king and when Philip dies his title will automatically merge with the crown. 

Camp II: This group believes that in 1999 Her Majesty bestowed on Prince Edward the title of the Earl of Wessex with the intent he would directly inherit the Duke of Edinburgh’s title upon his father’s death. This was the sole reason why Prince Edward was created an Earl and not a Duke when he married in 1999. Therefore when Philip dies his titles will go directly to Prince Edward instead of the Prince of Wales. This goes against the Letters Patent of 1947 that was issued when King George VI created Philip Mountbatten (ne Prince Philipos of Greece and Denmark) which leaves the title to the eldest son as is traditionally done. However, this camp believes that Her Majesty, as the Font of All Honors, doesn’t always have to issue Letter’s Patent to change things and that her word and will are sufficient to override the 1947 LP. If that is true then Edward will directly inherit the 1947 creation of the Duke of Edinburgh title.

What will actually happen remains to be seen. For a long time I was firmly in the first camp and felt that the 1947 Letters Patent will be followed and that the Prince of Wales will inherit his fathers titles and will not be able to create his brother the Duke of Edinburgh until that title merges with the crown. Now, however, I am questioning this position and I do think that since the creation and governing of titles is part of her Majesty’s Royal Prerogative which remains at her discretion, then her will may be sufficient and Letter’s Patent are not required.

But we shall see how this actually plays out. I personally hope the Duke of Edinburgh lives for many many more years in excellent health and that we do not have this question answered for many years to come.

Is it possible for a royal to be a commoner?

Tags

Buckingham Palace, Commoner, Elizabeth II, HRH The Prince of Wales, King George VI, Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of Scotland, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Peerage, Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh, Prince William, Queen Elizabeth II, Scotland, The Duke of Cambridge, titles

When the Duchess of Cambridge married Prince William of Wales the media spoke about her being a commoner. They were correct. Until her marriage she was indeed a commoner. However, did you know that prior to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, creating her grandson Duke of Cambridge, Earl of Strathearn, and Baron Carrickfergus, that he too was a commoner?

What may be even lesser known is that the queen herself, as young Princess Elizabeth, heiress presumptive to the throne, was a commoner when she married Lt. Philip Mountbatten, former Prince of Greece and Denmark; and that he was not a commoner? You may think I have gone mad! Let me explain.

In the British system, a society historically divided by class,  there are three legal standings, or classes, people can hold and belong to. These positions/Classes are: The Sovereign, Titled Peers/Nobility and Commoners. Therefore technically and legally speaking if you are a Prince or Princess of the United Kingdom and you do not hold a peerage title, and you are not the sovereign, you are in fact… a commoner.

The style His or Her Royal Highness and the title Prince/Princess of the United Kingdom is a courtesy title held at the behest of the sovereign but does not bestow a legal position. Do not confuse this legal and class status with rank or precedence which are different subjects all together. A person may hold a princely title and have more precedence and out rank a peer. 

Therefore only members of the royal family that also hold peerage titles are not, technically speaking,  commoners. The sons of Queen Elizabeth II are all Peers: The Prince of Wales, The Duke of York and the Earl of Wessex. Princess Anne, The Princess Royal, is a commoner because the title Princess Royal is a courtesy title and not a peerage title.

In the next generation, only Prince William, as Duke of Cambridge, is a peer and all of his cousins (his children and brother) are commoners. (at the time of this writing) The queens cousins, The Duke of Gloucester, Duke of Kent are also peers of the realm but their children are neither peers or royal. Two of the queen’s other cousins, Prince Michael of Kent and Princess Alexandra of Kent, are royal, but they are commoners.

Interesting fact is that when the current Dukes of Gloucester and Kent pass on their titles to their children these Dukedoms will cease to be Royal Dukedoms because their children are not eligible for a Royal title. The title of Prince or Princess of the United Kingdom is limited via the 1917 Letters Patent to the male-line grandchildren of the sovereign. The children of the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent will be great-great-grandchildren of the sovereign, in this case the closest sovereign they are descended from is King George V. Though the next Dukes of Gloucester and Kent will not be royal, the will be peers and not commoners.

There are actually five types of peerages. The Peerage of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain and the United Kingdom. These represent those titles that were created at the various times in the history of the country. The hierarchy, or rank, of these peerage titles is as follows: (highest to lowest) Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount and Baron. There is also the hereditary title of Baronet but Baronets are not peers but fit into the social class of the Landed Gentry. It gets confusing doesn’t it? 

I will end my post by keeping it simple. Unless you are the sovereign or a titled peer, even if you hold the style and title of HRH Prince/Princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, you are technically a commoner.

On November 20, 1947 HM King George VI created his future son-in-law HRH Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich. This made the former Prince Philip of Greece a Peer of the Realm. When he married the king’s daughter, Princess Elizabeth, the very next day, she was a commoner because she didn’t possess any Peerage titles, while her husband was not a commoner any longer. 

The Duke of Cambridge and royal genealogy

Tags

Barbara Villiers, Countess of Castlemaine, Duchess of Portsmouth, Duke of Cambridge, Elizabeth II, Eystein Glumra, HRH The Prince of Wales, King George VI, Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Kings of Wessex, Louise de Kérouaille, Prince of Wales, Thierry I of Liesgau, William I the Conqueror

Happy 31st birthday to HRH Prince William Arthur Philip Louis of Wales, Duke of Cambridge, Earl of Strathearn, Baron Carrickfergus, Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Knight of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Aide-de-camp to Her Majesty the Queen. In honor of his birthday I wanted to focus on The Duke of Cambridge and his genealogy.

I began to study a little more of the genealogy of the Duke of Cambridge and it brought up questions of ethnicity, nationality and I quickly realized how complex of a topic it really is!! In an article I wrote about changing the name of the House of Windsor, I touched upon the royal family’s Germanic roots. It is interesting to trace the nationality of the royal family through the decades from its origins as the Saxon Kingdom of the House of Wessex to today’s House of Windsor. Cerdic of Wessex, the first king of Wessex, reign circa 519-534, was of Germanic origins. The reason that the first king of Wessex was an ethnic German was due to the fact that many Germanic tribes invaded England after the fall of the Roman empire which succeeded in supplanting the native Celtic tribes.

The House of Wessex consolidated its kingdom and became the dominant power in England. However, within 500 years the House of Wessex was replaced by the French line of the Dukes of Normandy in the person of William I the Conqueror 1066-1087. William I of England was not from French stock but was from Norwegian stock as a descendant of Eystein Glumra, Jarl (Earl) of Oppland and Hedmark in Norway. The Plantagenets followed the Normans on the English throne and they were from the House of Anjou, a French noble house descended from Ingelger, Count of Anjou (died 888) . During their long tenure on the English throne the Plantagenet dynasty divided into two collateral branches, the House of Lancaster and the House of York. The Plantagenet dynasty was replaced by the Tudors in 1485 and they were of Welsh nationality and Stock. In 1603 the royal Stuart line from Scotland sat on the English throne. The Stuarts were not originally Scottish as they  were descendants of Alan fitz Flaad a man who was a Breton, an ethnic group located in the region of Brittany in France.

The Hanovarians followed the Stuarts on the British throne in 1714. The House of Hanover was a branch of the House of Guelph in Germany which itself was a collateral branch of the House of Este which were descendants of the Roman/Italian Attii family that migrated from Rome to Este and assisted in defending Italy against the Goths. The Family of Elizabeth II, the Wettins, was also from Germany with Dietrich (ca. 916-ca. 976), also known as Thierry I of Liesgau, being the earliest family member that historians can validate. The Wettin family, in the form of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha came to the British throne under King Edward VII, whose father, Prince Albert, husband of Queen Victoria, was a member of. In 1917 the Saxe-Coburg dynasty changed its name to Windsor because of social and political pressure during World War I. The Duke of Cambridge, as a grandson of the Duke of Edinburgh, husband of Britain’s current monarch, Elizabeth II, is from the House of Glücksburg, which is a collateral branch of the House of Oldenburg. The House of Oldenburg was also Germanic in origin  with Elimar I, Count of Oldenburg 1101-1108 the founder of the line. The Oldenburg dynasty spread across Europe and ruled Denmark, Norway, Greece, Sweden and Russia at different times in history.

This shows that in the male or paternal line the genealogy of the Duke of Cambridge is of a diverse stock. On his mother’s side, the Duke of Cambridge is related to both the Spencer family as well as the Churchill family and other prominent noble families of Britain. The Duke of Cambridge is also a descendant of King Charles II of England and Scotland through two of the king’s mistresses, Barbara Villiers, Countess of Castlemaine and Louise de Kérouaille, Duchess of Portsmouth. This makes the future King William V of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of having the distinction of being the only British king who will be a descendant of King Charles I, King Charles II and King Charles III (assuming his father lives to succeed to the throne).

With King George VI having married the daughter of a Scottish Nobleman and the Prince of Wales having married the daughter of an English Nobleman, and with The Duke of Cambridge himself marrying an English woman, the future nationality of the British Royal family is moving away from the foreign dynasties that once sat on the British throne to become more native.

61st anniversary of the accession to the throne

Tags

King George III, King George VI, Louis XIV of France, Queen Elizabeth, Queen Elizabeth II, Queen Victoria, Sobhuza II of Swaziland, the Queen Mother

Ooops! I jumped the gun by posting this yesterday. I was supposed to post this today!!

Today marks the 61st anniversary of the accession to the throne for Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Her father, King George VI, died at the age of 56 in 1952 on this date.  For those of us interested in Royalty this is a day we may honor and celebrate. For the Queen it is the day her father died so I can understand her not wanting to celebrate this day.

On an another interesting note, she is closing in on being Britain’s longest-serving monarch. She surpassed King George III who reigned 59 years. His granddaughter, Queen Victoria, the present queen’s great-great grandmother, still holds the record at 63 years, 216 days.

Here are some interesting facts (courtesy of Wikipedia)

• 11 September 2015, she would surpass Queen Victoria as the longest-reigning monarch in British and Commonwealth history (as well as the longest-reigning female monarch in world history). At that point she would be 89 years,143 days old.
• 6 February 2022, she would celebrate her Platinum Jubilee, marking 70 years on the throne. At that point she would be 95 years, 291 days old.
• 27 May 2024, she would surpass 72 years held by Louis XIV of France as the longest reigning monarch in European history. At that point she would be 98 years, 36 days old.
• 19 October 2034, she would surpass Sobhuza II of Swaziland as the longest verifiably reigning monarch in history. At that point she would be 108 years, 181 days old and would have reigned for 82 years.

I do not think her majesty will live to be 108 (but you never know). However, it does seem plausible that she could break Louis XIV’s record. At age 86 she is still in good health. Although everyone points to the fact that her mother, Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, lived to be 101 (5 months shy of reaching 102) that is no guarantee that her daughter will live as long. But we can hope!