House of Tudor

Post by **PeteC** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 12:32 pm

OK you scholars. I'm reading up on some things concerning British history that I don't remember studying in school. See below chart.

Is the current Queen Elizabeth II directly descended from that line, or is she from some other branch that developed after James I? Pete

Post by **Wanderlust** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 12:58 pm

It's a bit complicated Pete, because James I and Anne of Denmark had 3 children, one of whom was Charles I who was executed in 1649. Another of their children, Elizabeth Stuart, married Frederik V, King of Bohemia, and their grandchild became George I (1714 - 1727), and there is direct lineage from then on through the House of Hanover through to the House of Windsor. The Cromwell period is probably the cause of your confusion as there was no monarch between 1649 and 1660.

Post by **dtaai-maai** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:40 pm

But of course the original name of the House of Windsor was the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha

. George V changed the name in 1917 because apparently there wasn't a great deal of sympathy with things Germanic at the time...

Most European royals are related to each other in some way.

Prince Philip comes from the Danish-German House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, although he was Greek... sort of.

The accession of Elizabeth to the throne brought up the question of the name of the royal house. The Duke's uncle, Louis Mountbatten, advocated the name House of Mountbatten, as Elizabeth would typically have taken Philip's last name on marriage; however, when Queen Mary, Elizabeth's paternal grandmother, heard of this suggestion, she informed the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who himself later advised the Queen to issue a royal proclamation declaring that the royal house was to remain known as the House of Windsor. The Duke complained,"I am nothing but a bloody amoeba. I am the only man in the country not allowed to give his name to his own children."

And he remains a stroppy git to this day!

Post by **PeteC** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:31 pm

Thanks, I'm still reading. Do the kids in British school have to commit all of this to memory?

Pete

Post by **Wanderlust** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:01 pm

Only the ones who have to pass an exam on that period of history! I would imagine the general population would struggle to name the monarch before our current Queen...

Post by **dtaai-maai** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:12 pm

Wanderlust wrote: I would imagine the general population would struggle to name the monarch before our current Queen...

Unfortunately, I suspect most Brits these days would struggle to know what the word 'monarch' means...

Post by **margaretcarnes** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:33 am

Hi Pete, when I was at school (50's/60's) some basic history was taught up to the age of 11. But then in High School it was largely a matter of syllabus choice, and what group of subjects you aimed to take for exams at 16. (GCE O levels then.) So if you wanted to concentrate on sciences for example you would be unlikely to need history as well.
The only mandatory subjects in any syllabus were English Language and Maths.
I do remember though that the emphasis was on British, rather than global history, and suspect that will have changed now.
Probably like you it's a subject which many people develop more of an interest later in life, when it becomes easier to understand the relationships and politics involved.

Post by **MrPlum** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:48 am

The majority of children get their Royal education from Disney.

I bought a collection of 24 children's' books last year to read to my 7yr old 'daughter'. Very flash, with an accompanying CD. I was surprised that EVERY book included references to Kings, Princes and Princesses. I didn't matter whether they were naughty Kings and Queens it just mattered that the idea of Royalty was firmly implanted in the child's mind. After reading 4 books of this, the rest stayed in their wrappers. I wouldn't really care but it's just so damn blatant. Anyone who wants them for their own offspring, feel free to pm me. Cost me 10,000 THB. I'll pay you to take them off me.

Brits have all had this education. The stories, after all, are fascinating. For example, the Jean Plaidy books on historical royalty.

I met Diana in Hong Kong a few years back, doffed my cap to the Queen Mother and was lining the Mall for Diana's funeral, along with 2 million others. Watching all the Royal males, grim-faced walking behind the carriage was compelling. Philip and Charles looked totally dischuffed with having to go through this ordeal in front of the great unwashed. I know they were cringing at every 'Good on yer, Charlie!'. (It's the breeding, you see).

Something a little less hallowed was watching two Monty Python films this week. In the The Holy Grail they spoofed royalty... 'What's a King?' said Eric Idle. In The Meaning of Life it was financial pirates & bankers!

Same concerns we have today.

Pete. I take it you aren't British. What do you think of the subject overall and the British Royals?

Post by **PeteC** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:43 am

Right you are, I'm a colonist.

There are only two things that interest me about British Royalty: 1) Untangling the roots and reading about all the intrigue which was involved during those periods. 2) I was a big fan of Princess Diana, and subsequently very interested in her two boys and how their lives are progressing. Other than these, nothing else.

I'll make a small comment about the late Lord Mountbatten. Interesting man and life. Recently reading how he made a mess of the India/Pakistan partitioning which is an aspect I wasn't aware of. His haste appears to be at the core of many of the problems experienced even today. Pete

Post by **charlesh** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:06 am

Maybe an urban legend but I remember watching a program several years back which named and traced a man to outback NSW who should be the "rightful" King of England and is traceable if my memory serves me to a bastard of a start in the Arthurian ara.

I also remember reading a bit which suggests that the blood of the Prophet runs through the veins of the house of Windsor via the Bourbon link (not the drink as that was Churchillian).