January 20, 1936: Death of King George V of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the British Dominions, and Emperor of India.

Tags

Emperor of India, King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, King George V of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, King George VI of the United Kingdom, Lord Dawson of Penn, Prince Edward, Princess Elizabeth of York, Princess Victoria Mary of Teck, Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Queen Mary, Sandringham, the prince of Wales

George V (George Frederick Ernest Albert; June 3, 1865 – January 20, 1936) was King of the United Kingdom and the British Dominions, and Emperor of India, from May 6, 1910 until his death in 1936.

King George V’s relationship with his eldest son and heir, Edward, deteriorated in the later years. George was disappointed in Edward’s failure to settle down in life and appalled by his many affairs with married women. In contrast, he was fond of his second son, Prince Albert (later George VI), and doted on his eldest granddaughter, Princess Elizabeth; he nicknamed her “Lilibet”, and she affectionately called him “Grandpa England”.

In 1935, George said of his son Edward: “After I am dead, the boy will ruin himself within 12 months”, and of Albert and Elizabeth: “I pray to God my eldest son will never marry and have children, and that nothing will come between Bertie and Lilibet and the throne.”

The First World War took a toll on George’s health: he was seriously injured on October 28, 1915 when thrown by his horse at a troop review in France, and his heavy smoking exacerbated recurring breathing problems.

He suffered from chronic bronchitis. In 1925, on the instruction of his doctors, he was reluctantly sent on a recuperative private cruise in the Mediterranean; it was his third trip abroad since the war, and his last. In November 1928, he fell seriously ill with septicaemia, and for the next two years his son Edward took over many of his duties.

King George V and Queen Mary with Princess Elizabeth

In 1929, the suggestion of a further rest abroad was rejected by the King “in rather strong language”. Instead, he retired for three months to Craigweil House, Aldwick, in the seaside resort of Bognor, Sussex. As a result of his stay, the town acquired the suffix Regis – Latin for “of the King”.

A myth later grew that his last words, upon being told that he would soon be well enough to revisit the town, were “Bugger Bognor!”

George never fully recovered. In his final year, he was occasionally administered oxygen. The death of his favourite sister, Victoria, in December 1935 depressed him deeply.

On the evening of January 15, 1936, the King took to his bedroom at Sandringham House complaining of a cold; he remained in the room until his death. He became gradually weaker, drifting in and out of consciousness. Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin later said:

… each time he became conscious it was some kind inquiry or kind observation of someone, some words of gratitude for kindness shown. But he did say to his secretary when he sent for him: “How is the Empire?” An unusual phrase in that form, and the secretary said: “All is well, sir, with the Empire”, and the King gave him a smile and relapsed once more into unconsciousness.

By January 20, he was close to death. His physicians, led by Lord Dawson of Penn, issued a bulletin with the words “The King’s life is moving peacefully towards its close.” Dawson’s private diary, unearthed after his death and made public in 1986, reveals that the King’s last words, a mumbled “God damn you!”, were addressed to his nurse, Catherine Black, when she gave him a sedative that night. Dawson, who supported the “gentle growth of euthanasia”, admitted in the diary that he ended the King’s life:

At about 11 o’clock it was evident that the last stage might endure for many hours, unknown to the Patient but little comporting with that dignity and serenity which he so richly merited and which demanded a brief final scene.

Hours of waiting just for the mechanical end when all that is really life has departed only exhausts the onlookers & keeps them so strained that they cannot avail themselves of the solace of thought, communion or prayer. I therefore decided to determine the end and injected (myself) morphia gr.3/4 [grains] and shortly afterwards cocaine gr.1 [grains] into the distended jugular vein … In about 1/4 an hour – breathing quieter – appearance more placid – physical struggle gone.

Dawson wrote that he acted to preserve the King’s dignity, to prevent further strain on the family, and so that the King’s death at 11:55 pm could be announced in the morning edition of The Times newspaper rather than “less appropriate … evening journals”.

Neither Queen Mary, who was intensely religious and might not have sanctioned euthanasia, nor the Prince of Wales was consulted. The royal family did not want the King to endure pain and suffering and did not want his life prolonged artificially but neither did they approve Dawson’s actions. British Pathé announced the King’s death the following day, in which he was described as “for each one of us, more than a King, a father of a great family”.

On his death in January 1936, he was succeeded by his eldest son, Edward VIII. Edward abdicated in December of that year and was succeeded by his younger brother Albert, who took the regnal name George VI.

July 19, 1553 – Lady Jane Grey is replaced by Mary I of England as Queen of England. Part I.

Tags

1st Duke of Suffolk, Charles Brandon, King Edward VI of England, King Henry VII of England, Kings and Queens of England, Lady Frances Brandon, Lady Jane Grey, Lord Gilford Dudley, Princess Elizabeth of York, Privy Council, The Third Succession Act of 1544

Lady Jane Grey (c. 1537 – February 12, 1554), also known as Lady Jane Dudley (after her marriage) and as “the Nine Days’ Queen”, was an English noblewoman and de facto Queen of England and Ireland from 10 July until 19 July 1553.

Lady Jane Grey was the eldest daughter of Henry Grey, 1st Duke of Suffolk, and his wife, Lady Frances Brandon, the second child and eldest daughter Princess Mary, and Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk. Princess Mary was the daughter of King Henry VII of England and Princess Elizabeth of York. This meant that Princess Mary was King Henry VIII’s younger sister.

Lady Jane Grey

The traditional view is that she was born at Bradgate Park in Leicestershire in October 1537, while more recent research indicates that she was born somewhat earlier, possibly in London, in late 1536 or in the spring of 1537. Jane had two younger sisters: Lady Katherine and Lady Mary. Through their mother, the three sisters were great-granddaughters of Henry VII; grandnieces of Henry VIII; and first cousins once removed of Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth I.

Jane had an excellent humanist education and a reputation as one of the most learned young women of her day.

Contracts for marriage

Lady Jane acted as chief mourner at Catherine Parr’s funeral (the sixth and final wife of Henry VIII); Thomas Seymour showed continued interest to keep her in his household, and she returned there for about two months before he was arrested at the end of 1548. Seymour’s brother, the Lord Protector, Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset, felt threatened by Thomas’ popularity with the young King Edward. Among other things, Thomas Seymour was charged with proposing Jane as a bride for the king.

In the course of Thomas Seymour’s following attainder and execution, Jane’s father was lucky to stay largely out of trouble. After his fourth interrogation by the King’s Council, he proposed his daughter Jane as a bride for the Protector’s eldest son, Lord Hertford. Nothing came of this, however, and Jane was not engaged until the spring of 1553, her bridegroom being Lord Guildford Dudley, a younger son of John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland.

Edward VI, King of England and Ireland.

The Duke, Lord President of the King’s Council from late 1549, was then the most powerful man in the country. On May 25, 1553, the couple were married at Durham House in a triple wedding, in which Jane’s sister Catherine was matched with the heir of the Earl of Pembroke, Lord Herbert, and another Katherine, Lord Guildford’s sister, with Henry Hastings, the Earl of Huntingdon’s heir.

The Third Succession Act of 1544 restored Henry VIII’s daughters, Mary and Elizabeth, to the line of succession, although they were still regarded as illegitimate. Furthermore, this Act authorised Henry VIII to alter the succession by his will. Henry’s will reinforced the succession of his three children, and then declared that, should none of them leave descendants, the throne would pass to heirs of his younger sister, Mary, which included Jane. For unknown reasons, Henry excluded Jane’s mother, Frances Grey, from the succession, and also bypassed the claims of the descendants of his elder sister, Margaret, who had married into the Scottish royal house and nobility.

When the 15-year-old Edward VI lay dying in the early summer of 1553, his Catholic half-sister Mary was still his heir presumptive. However, Edward, in a draft will (“My devise for the Succession”) composed earlier in 1553, had first restricted the succession to (non-existent) male descendants of Frances Brandon and her daughters, before he named his Protestant cousin “Lady Jane and her heirs male” as his successors, probably in June 1553; the intent was to ensure his Protestant legacy, thereby bypassing Mary, who was a Roman Catholic. Edward’s decision to name Jane Grey herself was possibly instigated by Northumberland.

Edward VI personally supervised the copying of his will which was finally issued as letters patent on June 21 and signed by 102 notables, among them the whole Privy Council, peers, bishops, judges, and London aldermen. Edward also announced to have his “declaration” passed in parliament in September, and the necessary writs were prepared. The King died on July 6, 1553, but his death was not announced until four days later.

On July 9, Jane was informed that she was now queen, and according to her own later claims, accepted the crown only with reluctance. On July 10, she was officially proclaimed Queen of England, France and Ireland after she had taken up secure residence in the Tower of London, where English monarchs customarily resided from the time of accession until coronation. Jane refused to name her husband Dudley as king, because that would require an Act of Parliament. She would agree only to make him Duke of Clarence.

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!!!