What a crying shame

[tynesideirish]

I agree it is a sorry state of affairs, Thankfully the People of England cared enough to come and pay their respects to a King of England.

As has been said Richard III has no connection to the house of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. I think finding him is an embarrassment to them. That Royal family Represented at the ceromony not by the Queen or a high ranking blood Prince but only by the wife of the youngest prince. Maybe she had a racehorse to look at...

He was a defeated Monarch originally hastily buried in a Greyfriars Monastry without even a coffin, never mind pomp and ceremony. I think he was harshly treated then and now. If it wasn't for the Richard the III Society he would have been quickly and quietly reburied in a corner of some church to be forgotten again.

[William]

If anyone should have given Richard III a state funeral, it would have been his people; the Brits who lived at the time of his death. Instead his officers and ministers decided it was enough to mutilate his corpse and dispose of him without ceremony.

Who are we to try to change history?

[tynesideirish]

Originally Posted by William

If anyone should have given Richard III a state funeral, it would have been his people; the Brits who lived at the time of his death. Instead his officers and ministers decided it was enough to mutilate his corpse and dispose of him without ceremony.

Who are we to try to change history?

Just to clarify, he wasn't a King of Britain, He was a King of England, his people were the English.

The Tudor House of Lancaster was the New Monarchy, they certainly wouldn't have let him have a state funeral. True, we cannot change that history but since he has been found and exhumed he should have been given some sort of proper state funeral befitting a king, not a shuffle to the place he was hacked to death then escorted by a bunch of cadets and re-enactors. We where still bankrupt when that cow Maggie died,who all of Scotland, most of the North of England and Wales hated with a passion but the country managed a send off...

[Hussar100]

Originally Posted by tynesideirish

I agree it is a sorry state of affairs, Thankfully the People of England cared enough to come and pay their respects to a King of England.

As has been said Richard III has no connection to the house of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. I think finding him is an embarrassment to them. That Royal family Represented at the ceromony not by the Queen or a high ranking blood Prince but only by the wife of the youngest prince. Maybe she had a racehorse to look at...

He was a defeated Monarch originally hastily buried in a Greyfriars Monastry without even a coffin, never mind pomp and ceremony. I think he was harshly treated then and now. If it wasn't for the Richard the III Society he would have been quickly and quietly reburied in a corner of some church to be forgotten again.

Sorry to be a bit pedantic mate but Aunty Betty doesn't belong to the House of Saxe-Coburg Gotha. When she married Phil the Greek there was a choice to be made and she chose to proclaim herself and all her descendants to be of the House of Windsor instead of the House of Mountbatten (or House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg if you prefer). Agnatic members of the royal family are known as Mountbatten-Windsor.

[tynesideirish]

Originally Posted by Hussar100

Sorry to be a bit pedantic mate but Aunty Betty doesn't belong to the House of Saxe-Coburg Gotha. When she married Phil the Greek there was a choice to be made and she chose to proclaim herself and all her descendants to be of the [I]House of Windsor[/I] instead of the House of Mountbatten (or House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg if you prefer). Agnatic members of the royal family are known as Mountbatten-Windsor.

Being pedantic is fine. Yes The Royal Family are known as the House Of Windsor, but changing your German family name to appear more English in a time of war, doesn't alter the fact that the real family name is something entirely different. Call themselves what they may, there is still no connection to the Plantagenet line.

The House of Windsor came into being in 1917, when the name was adopted as the British Royal Family's official name by a proclamation of King George V, replacing the historic name of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. It remains the family name of the current Royal Family.

[Hussar100]

Originally Posted by tynesideirish

Being pedantic is fine. Yes The Royal Family are known as the House Of Windsor, but changing your German family name to appear more English in a time of war, doesn't alter the fact that the real family name is something entirely different. Call themselves what they may, there is still no connection to the Plantagenet line.

The House of Windsor came into being in 1917, when the name was adopted as the British Royal Family's official name by a proclamation of King George V, replacing the historic name of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. It remains the family name of the current Royal Family.

I'm not exactly sure of where but I believe there is a blood connection between Elizabeth II and the Plantaganets. It's my understanding it comes through Victoria as a member of the Hanoverian dynasty. A lot of European royals are linked through the intermarriage of cousins which went on for hundreds of years until somebody realised inbreeding wasn't good for any dynasty.

I, like most people, know of the change of name in 1917 when the paternal name of Saxe-Coburg Gotha was dropped in favour of Windsor. In reality that should have changed again when Elizabeth II came to the throne. She and her children should have had the name Mountbatten in keeping with the tradition of a wife taking a husband's name, much as Victoria had done when she dropped her maiden name (Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld) in favour of Albert's Saxe-Coburg Gotha. Elizabeth took advice from Winston Churchill and as a result of this she issued a proclamation which stated that she and her children would retain the name Windsor whereas the agnatic members of the anticipated extended family would have the name Mountbatten-Windsor. For example, Princess Eugenie or Lady Louise Windsor, although there is no consistent formula for this naming convention and it is often seen being used by senior members of the royal family, even up to Prince Charles.

[LONGSHANKS]

The procession was fine, but a disgrace that the nation couldn't foot the bill as he was a King of England........and the last Martial King. Leicester did what they could on a budget.

If they did the opposite, and spent a fortune; we would be posting links on the amount they spent as extravagant. One can never please the Brit's.

[REMEVMBEA1]

Originally Posted by Hussar100

Sorry to be a bit pedantic mate but Aunty Betty doesn't belong to the House of Saxe-Coburg Gotha. When she married Phil the Greek there was a choice to be made and she chose to proclaim herself and all her descendants to be of the House of Windsor instead of the House of Mountbatten (or House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg if you prefer). Agnatic members of the royal family are known as Mountbatten-Windsor.

I don't know if it's supposed to be clever but I find the use of the labels Aunty Betty and Phil the Greek extremely distasteful and am amazed that no-one else has remarked on it. To most people who have served in HM Forces she is and always will be Queen Elizabeth II and he will be The Duke of Edinburgh and incidentally my corps' Colonel in Chief.

The Royal family will remain the House of Windsor until such time as there is no blood link to Georg V or the reigning monarch decides differently..

[Hussar100]

Originally Posted by REMEVMBEA1

I don't know if it's supposed to be clever but I find the use of the labels Aunty Betty and Phil the Greek extremely distasteful and am amazedThe Royal family will remain the Windsors until such time as there is no blood connection with George V that no-one else has remarked on it.

The Royal family will remain the House of Windsor until such time as there is no blood link to Georg V.

I'm sorry you feel that way. It's an old habit from the army.

[NorthStafford]

Originally Posted by Hussar100

I'm sorry you feel that way. It's an old habit from the army.

Having spent 15 years in the regulars and serving with 9 different units it's a habit I have never come across.

[Phil2M]

Originally Posted by NorthStafford

Having spent 15 years in the regulars and serving with 9 different units it's a habit I have never come across.

I have a feeling it was a term used by aircrews, possibly American, and was banned.

[Hussar100]

Originally Posted by NorthStafford

Having spent 15 years in the regulars and serving with 9 different units it's a habit I have never come across.

It was widespread in my time. Bear in mind these are terms of endearment, not insults. I noted, speaking to the occasional sailor that they did it too.

[William]

It's OK to call a former prime minister 'that cow' on a public forum, but not OK to use gentle humour when referring to the royal family?

Best regards to all.

[David Tremain]

Some good pics of Richard's reinterment here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pict...-pictures.html

One or two of the honour guard look like Royal Anglians, with the yellow lion on blue background, but the Staff Sergeant (or should that be Colour Sergeant?) looks like Coldstream Guards, from the shoulder flash and double buttons.

David

[ebro]

Originally Posted by William

It's OK to call a former prime minister 'that cow' on a public forum, but not OK to use gentle humour when referring to the royal family?

But in Margaret's case it is simply quoting one of her ministers .Richard Needam, who said in a mobile phone conversation which was intercepted and rushed to the media by the IRA "The cow should go".
Eddie