Cite? I recall reading in a biography of the Queen Mother that they were. Having put much of the royal estates over to farming probably helped, but those estates had to feed all the estate workers and their families too.
I’d be okay with Canada severing all official and ceremonial connections with the British Monarchy upon the death of QE2. Not because I have any particular animus about Charles, but because it’s about damn time, already, and I want to see the Republic of Canada in my lifetime.
In fact, I think I’ll drop a line to my M.P. about this…
I imagine it’s because the title is simply an Anglicization of the Old French duc, which has no feminine form, rather than the word duke as we know it in English (which derives directly from the Latin dux).
I can’t back that up though.
Duchesse.
And, yes, as with Normandy, the queen is duke, not duchess, of Lancaster.
Pick one; either it comes directly from French or directly from Latin, it cant do both.
(Sounds like one of those ages long debates with Brits bent on denial of any French import in English language, “But it originally came from Latin!!!”).
Game wasn’t rationed, for a start.
Yeah, debates with imaginary Brits tend to drag on.
Brits in drags? Now, that would be something new.
So? You can’t survive on venison alone. Never mind the difficulty of transporting it when petrol is rationed.
Game wasn’t rationed, nor was fish, nor were vegetables. Rationing affected urban dwellers more than country people (or those with fucking huge estates), and the poor more than the rich (because there were many off ration items). Given that, I think it significantly likely the Windsors were less affected by rationing that the Smiths from Toxteth, don’t you?
Parliamentary democracies without monarchs often have a ceremonial President who doesn’t actually do much governing, while the Prime Minister or Chancellor who leads the majority party or coalition in Parliament is the real leader.
nm
The English word duke comes from the Latin dux. The title of duke as used in the Channel Islands came from the Old French duc. Think of them as cognates in the same language.
Canada has a highly effective and powerful Charter of Rights as part of its constitution, despite being a monarchy.
Ah, thanks for the answer.
To go back to the O.P.,no there isn’t a large amount of opposition to Charlie becoming king.
Diana who wasn’t IRL a very nice person, was an expert at self promotion and very effective at spreading poison about the R.F. that had absaloutly no basis in fact.
Why did she do it?
Some people are just born that way.
She did however manage to convince those of the gullible, easily led nature, who pay more credence to ham acting and a pretty face, then those who are not naturally of a disembling nature.
Those whom she convinced tended to be of an almost fanatical nature, and make up for their small numbers and lack of credibility by sheer noisyness and down right lying.
Charlie ISN’T sexy in any way, let alone in the way his sons are, and he’s not a looker.
But those are not the qualifications for the job that it is his duty to take on when Liz cashes in her chips.
He cares very deeply about the environment and actually does things about it instead of just talikng about it.
He also ares very deeply about young people and once again actually takes practical steps to help them instead of just participating in talking shops about them as so many others who profess to care, do.
He’s an ex serving Royal Naval officer, has taken the British Armys military parachuting course, which he was not even expected to take, let alone was pressured into taking and which is considered to be pretty tough.
(He even did an unauthorised water jump which Liz was apparently livid about)
He has scuba dived under the Arctic ice cap and survived a particulary grim time at Gordonstoun public school as a kid, where he was bullied relentlessly and no action taken because it would look like favouritism if anyone intervened.
So despite appearances he is no wimp.
Before anyone asks, I am not connected to him in any way either socially or otherwise though in the past I have been, as it were, co located with him while working.
I get sick of the tired sniping at an easy target who is by the conventions of his role unable to answer his critics back.
Charlie will make a good king and Camilla a good queen, no matter what bitchy remarks are made about them.
They’ve both got broad shoulders and good luck to them.
I know next to nothing about the Canadian constitutional set up - to whom does the military swear an oath of allegiance? Is the Queen sovereign or just head of state?
Her Majesty is the sovereign of Canada, as set out in the Constitution Act, 1867. She has much the same prerogative powers as in the United Kingdom, as modified by our constitutional structure and subsequent statutory provisions.
Similar provisions apply to each of the ten provinces, making the Queen the head of the provincial executive and a component of each provincial Legislature.
I don’t know about the members of the Armed Forces and their oaths (RickJay or Bryan Eckers may be able to comment on that), but all members of the Senate, the House of Commons, and the provincial Legislatures are required to swear allegiance to Her Majesty as a condition of taking their seats:
Getting back to the subsidiary question in the thread title, there was a rumour five years ago that the Prince was considering adopting George VII as his regnal name: Call me George, suggests Charles:
However, that news item was followed just a few days later by a “pained denial” from the Prince that he had been been planning to take that name: Charles denies planning to reign as King George:
So, trial balloon that was a dud? inaccurate gossip by royal chums? indiscreet gossip by royal chums (which is not necessarily the same thing as inaccurate…)? you decide.
When I was in the Canadian Reserves from 1989 to 1992, my oath was sworn to Lizzie.