Another great informative video from The Royal Grift.
I love the Royal Grift! She rocks!!
Claire Keane

No title available

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
dirt enthusiast
we're not kids anymore.

pixel skylines
almost home
No title available

shark vs the universe

No title available
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
taylor price
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
Today's Document
i don't do bad sauce passes
d e v o n
Cosmic Funnies
$LAYYYTER

★

seen from United Kingdom
seen from T1
seen from Germany
seen from Malaysia

seen from Germany
seen from Germany

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Malaysia

seen from Germany
seen from Belgium
seen from Chile
seen from Philippines

seen from Spain
seen from Germany

seen from Malaysia

seen from Chile
seen from Saudi Arabia

seen from United Kingdom
seen from France

seen from United States
@pawlers
Another great informative video from The Royal Grift.
I love the Royal Grift! She rocks!!
Okay, we get a coronet in some way. Progress. Lovely, thank you for sharing.
I would love to see an investiture. Don’t they understand MOST people love that stuff?
Me ❤️❤️❤️ reblogging
Wow! Not surprised she gives to herself and not charity but that moron burns truly every bridge.. reblogging
So on Easter Monday I met up with an old friend of mine. She’s kinda known due to her work but it’s unimportant to me tbh. But due to her work she has some friends, contacts and colleagues across the board and industries.
What I’ve heard is that Doria and Harry do not get along, not one bit. She and Meghan are awful and downright abusive to him, my friend knows one of their close friends who is also very shocked by it all. But Doria and Meghan know to not leave visible marks. But they are not stupid and have sneakily got evidence of him being threatening and attacking back - drunk Meghan has loose lips.
Doria acts like it’s her house in Montecito and is a little dictator who thrives on drugs. My friend says that what she heard is that Doria deliberately got Harry into things like ayahuasca and it’s because of her that he’s so dependent on drugs. Meghan just does things like coke, marijuana etc.
Nobody sees the kids. My friend has kids and her friend in Montecito has meet-ups and play dates with each other. No sign or sighting of Archie and Lili playing on swings or slides at the playground or mixing with other kids in the neighborhood. Many kids do this and also mix with kids from their kindergartens, schools etc. but apparently Archie isn’t allowed to do so or even go to birthday parties. Some of the kids attend the same school and teachers hate Meghan, Harry and Doria for what they’ve done to Archie and thankful for the nannies looking after him 24/7. There has been nothing said about a birthday party for him either this year with little school friends.
Meghan is away a lot, my friend has a link to the Getty family and is looking into that affair thing. She is in Los Angeles a lot and Harry goes to San Francisco and the Bay Area a lot leaving the kids with nannies and nurses alone in the house as Harry doesn’t want Doria living there without him there. There was an incident with a cook or maid though, that’s become quite well known in Montecito and everyone laughs at it in a way. But they are definitely finding it harder and harder to find not just nannies but also cleaners, pool boys, gardeners etc. although it’s not just money troubles but the close friend of theirs that my friend knows says that Meghan has been dropping hints of them sleeping separately, not together and divorcing.
It’s also true that the school that Archie goes to has been instructed to call him HRH Prince Archie of Sussex. Lili is apparently at an ultra exclusive daycare in Los Angeles funded by Tyler, who my friend knows. The kids seem to be kept apart from each other and not just other kids.
So the rumors were that Meghan has been living in LA or close to because SB is a couple hours away right? So if Lili is going to school there then she has to be close.
I think all three of them are toxic and abusive.
I really wonder how much they pay out for their staff to sign NDA’s.
Thanks! Tea alert!
Hmmm reblogging
This is the first photo the person posted.
Reblogging
Coronation Timings
Queen Victoria
Ascended the throne: 20 June 1837.
Coronation: 28 June 1838.
Crowned 12 months after her ascension to the throne.
Edward VII
Ascended the throne: 22 January 1901.
Coronation: 9 August 1902, planned for 26 June 1902 but deferred because the King had appendicitis.
Crowned 19 months after his ascension to the throne. The coronation was originally planned for 17 months after ascension.
George V
Ascended the throne: 6 May 1910.
Coronation: 22 June 1911.
Crowned 13 months after his ascension to the throne.
Edward VIII
Ascended the throne: 20 January 1936.
Coronation: Never happened; he abdicated on 11 December 1936.
George VI
Ascended the throne: 11 December 1936.
Coronation: 12 May 1937.
Crowned 5 months after his ascension; the coronation was planned for his brother Edward VIII and was held 16 months after the death of George V.
Elizabeth II
Ascended the throne: 6 February 1952
Coronation: 2 June 1953
Crowned 16 months after her ascension to the throne.
Charles III
Ascended the throne: 8 September 2022.
Coronation: 6 May 2023.
Crowned 8 months after his ascension to the throne.
He just can't wait to be king crowned.
Missing the most important thing here: coronations are traditionally held in May or June for the weather, which is right there in the post! Also pay attention to the ascension dates compared to their coronations.
Victoria: June. She has to wait a year, you can't rustle one up overnight.
Edward VII: January. 5 months is also not enough time, especially with travel times back then, so next year it is.
George V: May. Again, it's a year to plan it, not overnight.
Edward VIII/George VI: Edward's is the same as EdVII - January - not enough time, and George just took his brother's already-planned event for 1937 as he should have.
Elizabeth II: February. Not enough time for May/June that year, so she had to wait.
Charles III: ascended in September. The outlier. 8 months is enough time to plan a coronation, especially in a world where travel is so easy and the coronation is smaller than all the others. He's being crowned in a vastly different world to his predecessors, including his mother.
There are many things to hate Charles for, but this is a reach. Especially when the government are the ones who gave him the dates. Nobody wants a coronation in an election year, which 2024 is, and our elections are usually in May. What, are we going to have a coronation and election within two months of each other?! No way.
It's just not that deep.
I love seeing common sense in action
Interesting reblogging
Photo 2
I think working royals will get the front seats where the people are standing, unless they will be seated where the wooden chairs are aligned (I actually think they would be for the clergy though…). I’m just throwing out hypotesis.
However, front row with robes and glitters and right after the second row in day dress? 🥶
I could see working royals lumped together so when filmed is just them with a dress code and then the others with day dress.
I’m really curious about how Charles and his team worked this out
—
I think your idea makes the most sense
Beautiful.. reblogging
Prince Harry
Prince Harry is the most talked about Royal on social media – but the majority of mentions are negative
Camilla Tominey
By Camilla Tominey
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Every day, journalists like me receive emails from PR companies trying to cash in on the Coronation on behalf of their clients.
So far today my inbox has been bombarded with missives carrying such headlines as: “Coins, Cutouts and Queen Camilla: Ebay reveals top Coronation Collectables Causing a Frenzy”, “Mintel: Coronation patriotism boost inspires young Brits to buy into ‘made in Britain’”. My personal favourite is from South Western trains: “Royals & The Railway – Windsor station prepares for the Coronation”.
Yet occasionally the odd subject line does catch the eye. This week it was from a PR agency representing YouScan, which describes itself as “an AI-powered social media listening platform with industry-leading image recognition capabilities.”
The company has conducted a study analysing social media mentions and sentiment towards the members of the Royal family since January this year. They trawled through content from YouTube, Pinterest, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok, analysing each post to reveal if it was generally positive or negative towards the Royal mentioned.
The research found that, perhaps unsurprisingly, Prince Harry was the most talked about Royal on social media with 3.9 million total mentions. However - as the study points out - the majority of those mentions were negative, primarily due to his autobiography, Spare, which made up 21 per cent of all mentions.
Overall, negative publications exceeded the positive ones: 593k vs 239k.
So far, so uncontroversial, but the report also found that the King’s reputation had suffered - not due to his son’s tell-all memoirs but because of famous musicians declining to perform at the Coronation and his cancelled visit to France (124k negative vs. 59k positive mentions).
French social media users were particularly critical, complaining about the cost of the visit to the taxpayer. Camilla, the Queen Consort, was also found to have been on the receiving end of negative comments - again, not due to Spare despite Harry describing her as a “villain” but because of leaked plans for a lavish coronation ceremony amid economic struggles. She was also pilloried for having a celebratory Christmas lunch with the likes of Jeremy Clarkson and Piers Morgan after they’d been hugely critical of the Duchess of Sussex.
Speaking of whom: there was a spike in negative mentions of Meghan, the second-most talked about Royal on social media with 3 million mentions, after the couple were parodied on the American animated comedy series South Park.
Overall negative mentions about the Duchess were almost four times more numerous than positive ones: 384k vs 98k. Comparatively, the Princess of Wales - who is the third most talked about Royal on social media with 2.2 million mentions - fared much better in the study with the number of positive comments twice as high as negative ones (105k vs 48k).
The Prince of Wales may be put out at the notion of being less talked about than his brother, sister-in-law and wife, but the good news for William is that of his 659k mentions, 44K were positive and 14K were negative.
Oscar Wilde famously said that the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about, but this study appears to show that the only thing worse than that is being talked about negatively.
There have been several opinion polls suggesting that the young aren’t interested in the Royal family. Asked by YouGov how much they care about the forthcoming Coronation, only 12 per cent of 18 to 24 year olds said: “a fair amount” compared to 32 per cent of over 65s.
But social media appears to tell a different story. This research suggests that younger generations, who tend to frequent the likes of Twitter and Instagram more than “boomers”, are spending a lot more time thinking and talking about the Royals than they’d care to admit.
Now this is interesting. Very interesting.
Thanks so much for sending it to me
“My wife, the Duchess”
Awwww Edward 🥹
Aww 🥹🥹🥹
❤️🥰❤️
A very sweet clip. I hope this helps to bring him peace and healing.
So sweet - still really happy for the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh.
That was adorable. I am so happy that the Edinburgh’s were rewarded for their loyalty and service.
Me love!!
Welcome back Helena!
I was missing you and your Blog, i was looking forward to your opinion on this title shenanigans which happened this week. As you are the one of the few who can give a logical and rational opinion about the recent events with being chaotic.
Thank you
My opinion is that H&M made the first semi intelligent move of their lives.
They stopped waiting for Charles to announce that their kids had the titles and just started using them. That put Charles in the position of either removing the titles or agreeing.
I also think that the palace negotiated this with them. In exchange for Harry moving out of Frogmore (and giving up UK residency, which means giving up his Counsellor of State position) Charles agreed not to fight him on the prince and princess issue.
Since A&L having the titles doesn't cause any damage (just look at all the other princes and princesses living in the US, there is at least a thousand, including one Romanov who became a mayor) I think it was a clever move. Besides, I suspect Charles likes the thought of all his grandchildren being titled prince/princess. And as a king, its rather appropriate.
I don't think the palace planned for it to be announced the day before Edward's title was to be announced. But I do think they are connected. I'm not sure if Charles was waiting for the issue to be settled before granting Edward the title, or if H&M decided to announce Lilibet's title the day before Edward was granted his because it wasn't really settled and they knew that granting Edward a title a day after removing Lili's would have been a terrible look, and thus the timing put pressure on the king to confirm Lili's title, rather than remove it. I'm sure he would have preferred to simply ignore the issue, but his hand was forced.
Helena you are the best.. reblogging
Merry Christmas to you all!
Joyeux Noël
Feliz Navidad
Feliz Natal
행복한 크리스마스 되십시오
Buon Natale
Prettige Kerstdagen
Frohe Weihnachten
メリー クリスマス
聖誕快樂
Merry Christmas everyone! 🙏❤️🎄
I love your proposed tiaras for the foreign royals and the coronation. Have you already posted which tiara you would want Catherine to wear? Or which one you think she will wear? I know Charlotte won’t wear one but will the Yorks or Zara?
I did their tiaras first thing! I might re do that later, because I'm already rethinking some choices.
And in a proper coronation, every woman attending wears tiaras. I'm hoping it will be a proper coronation. I'm even planning tiaras for Camilla's daughter and the Middletons. (And trying to figure out if her son actually got divorced.)
What tiara would you pick for Kste, Anne and Sophie for the coronation? What color of robes will they be wearing? If George and Charlotte go
Me love! Reblogging
Very important video
So so sweet
The King has hosted a banquet for South African president Cyril Ramaphosa at Buckingham Palace.
– Sky News
Me love
Crowns and Coronets
Crowns are worn by kings and queens, coronets by princes, princesses and the nobility. All women are entitled to wear any coronet her husband wears, except for the wife of the king of arms. No man gets a coronet because of who he married, unless he married the monarch. People wear the highest ranking coronet they are entitled to.
They are only ever worn for the most formal of occasions, and are made according to a very precise and well understood formula. They are also displayed on the coat of arms of the person who possesses it,and can be used in place of a monogram.(Or rather, monograms were invented by people who didn’t have coats of arms or coronets,but wanted something on their linen, papers, silver….)
Crown’s are made of gold or, in one case,platinum, and are covered in jewels. Coronets are made of silver gilt, and have no jewels, except that of Charles III,when Prince of Wales, which had a few diamonds.
The coronet of a man, and all crowns, cover the entire head.The coronet of a peeress is smaller, and made to perch on top of the head, behind her tiara. If a coronet is being worn by a princess, it has a purple cap. If worn by a peer,or by a prince who is also a peer, it has a red cap. Basically, the cap matches the robe.
Each of the different elements of a crown or coronet has its own level of prestige. The higher the rank,the more high prestige elements.
The elements are, in order of importance:
Cross Patte
Fleur de Lys
Strawberry leaf(generally referred to simply as a strawberry)
Ball or pearl, which is just a big silver ball
Crowns and Coronets of children of the monarch have alternating Cross Pattes and Fleur de Lys. Prince Philip also had this.
(Harry and Meghan,Anne,Andrew,Edward and Sophie)
Coronets of a child of the heir apparent have alternating Cross Pattes, Fleur de Lys and Strawberries
(George,Charlotte,Louis)
Coronets of a child of the monarch’s son have alternating Cross Pattes and Strawberries
(Archie,Lili, Beatrice,Eugenie,James, Louise,Duke and Duchess of Kent, Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, Prince and Princess Michael of Kent)
Coronets of a child of the monarch’s daughter have alternating Fleur de Lys and Strawberries. I can find no proof that these exist except Wikipedia, and perhaps the granddaughters of Edward VII,who he made princesses , wore them,but I’m not sure anyone will wear them.
(Peter Philips,Zara Tindall, Earl Snowdon, Lady Sarah Chatto)
Coronets of a Duke have Strawberries
Coronets of a Marquess have alternating strawberries and balls
Coronets of an earl are the most interesting, having strawberries and a line of balls on spikes above them
Coronets of a viscount have a complete circle of small silver balls
Coronets of a Baron have a few larger balls spaced far apart
There are also Arches. These are the main difference between coronets and crowns.
It used to be that only the Holy Roman Emperor had an arch on his crown, and it symbolized his rule over other monarchs.
As a sign of independence, other European monarchs began adding arches to their crowns during the renaissance. In James V of Scotland’s case, he literally had 2 arches welded onto an already existing crown (It was worn with a red cap in it, but I chose the photo with the cap removed so you can see how the arches were an afterthought.)
Most European crowns have 8 half arches,or 2 arches .(Here’s the crown of Louis XV of France.French crowns had only fleur de lys, the symbol of the French monarchy. French coronets had strawberries,pearl triangles, and pearls on sticks. )
Most British monarchs content themselves with 4 half arches, or 2 arches , seeming to feel no need to compete with the others in the arches game.
This is except Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary, who did want 4 arches, probably because it actually looks better.The Queen Mother went back to the traditional English style.)
(Queen Alexandra,the Queen Mother, Queen Mary)
(There are also miter crowns,like the Austrian and Russian crowns but since these are based on the clothing of bishops, its a completely different topic. Also, those are mostly worn by emperors, and emperors of new empires at that.)
There are two coronets that have arches,one still used, one abolished. These are the cornets of the Prince of Wales, Heir Apparent of the UK ,and the Dauphin, Heir Apparent of France.
The Prince of Wales has a single arch, The Dauphin has two arches, or 4 half arches shaped like dolphins. I highly suspect that the French had their heir use the same amount of arches as the British monarch in an one up-manship game, but admit that there exist no grounds for my suspicion, other than that is exactly the sort of thing they would do.
There are other elements in the coronets of continental nobles. However, these coronets don’t actually exist, but are merely drawn on their coats of arms.That is because coronets are only worn to coronations, and to sit in the House of Lords during a state opening, and only the UK has coronations, and a House of Lords.
There are two other British crowns, but they are not worn by royals.They are worn by the king of arms, the chief herald of the monarch, who also wears the monarch’s coat of arms.
The crown, or cornet of the British King of Arms is unique in that, instead on any of the usual elements, it has shafts of wheat
The crown of the Scottish King of Arms is even more shocking in that it has arches,something only the king’s crown has.It also is pretty much a copy of the king’s crown, just without the jewels.
Oh, and there is the multipurpose “cap of state” that was designed by Norman Hartnell for the coronation of Elizabeth II. He designed a robe and cap that any peeress of any rank could wear. Almost no one bothered getting it.
Re: Henry 8's inability to have kids with Katherine of Aragon. - I think the problem may have been a joint one. Or possibly Katherine more than Henry coz of her 7 pregnancies, she had 4 still births, 1 lived for afew weeks, another afew hours and one sickly adult daughter (Mary) Meanwhile Henry had many healthy (rumoured) illegitimate kids, one healthy illegitimate kid ( Richmond), 2 healthy legitimate kids (Elizabeth and Edward). Mary was not always in the best of health + too stressed 1/2
2/2 out plus probably at the lower percentile of fertility in terms of age that she finally married and tried for a baby so hard to know for sure if she had fertility problems as she never tried when she was young. I always feel that Elizabeth refusing to marry was a strategic political decision that touched upon her personal AND country's security. She played the marriage game long after she was too old to have any kids, but it gave her potential leverage for allies.
---
I'm not so sure all those illegitimate children were his. Anne Boylen had issues after Elizabeth was born. Carherine Howard and Parr never had kids with him, and Catherine Parr was definitely fertile.
Richmond wasn't that healthy, as far as I know. He died rather young. Edward was always quite sickly and weak.
Even George Boylen said that "was no good in bed with women, and that he had neither potency nor force” though he said it when on trial for incest, and when he knew Henry was about to kill him for a crime he had not committed.
Furthermore, a growing body of research suggests that deficient sperm function in a male partner can predispose couples to recurrent pregnancy loss (rpl) or miscarriage, which is commonly defined as three or more consecutive pregnancy losses prior to twenty weeks’ gestation, affecting 1 to 2 percent of couples. Recent studies highlight that damaged sperm from men may be the reason why women suffer repeated miscarriages.3
Abstract. Although fertility has traditionally been viewed as the responsibility of women, recent studies suggest that reduced sperm functio
This article from The telegraph has important and interesting information about the Waleses, I will leave here a link for you to read it for free. But the important points are:
Move to Windsor Castle
The Prince and Princess of Wales will delay moving into Windsor Castle in order to avoid more upheaval for their children after moving house just a week ago, according to royal sources.
There is an expectation that the Prince and Princess will eventually move into Windsor Castle or one of the larger houses on the Windsor estate, something which has become more pressing with their change in status and seniority.
But they have indicated to courtiers that they want to give their children a chance to settle into school and avoid any more upheaval for as long as possible, meaning that decisions on who lives in which property will be put on hold for now.
They are very happy right now at Windsor and for the next decade or so everything will be pretty much dictated by what is right for the children.”
Invested in Wales
The Prince must also decide on arrangements for his investiture as Prince of Wales, which is scheduled to happen after the King’s coronation and is likely to be next year.
William will become only the third Prince of Wales to be invested in Wales itself, and is said to favour a more low-key ceremony than the one at Caernarfon Castle for his father in 1969.
One possibility is that the investiture could take place at Cardiff Cathedral, and a decision must also be taken on the role of the Princess of Wales in the ceremony, as no Prince of Wales in recent history has inherited the title while married.
One source familiar with the discussions said: “They want to make sure that any ceremony is about celebrating Wales, rather than focusing on them as individuals. They have lived in Wales and they have spent a lot of time going back to Wales and they want to make sure anything they do is in keeping with the wishes of the Welsh people.”
Royal version of levelling-up Britain
The Prince and Princess of Wales have been given their instructions to carry out a royal version of levelling-up, by making frequent and high-profile visits to the people and the areas that have for many years been left behind.
But the Prince and Princess are also likely to spend more time on official visits to some of the most economically depressed areas of the country, not only to lift awareness of their needs, but also to use their convening power to get communities, politicians and businesses together to find new ways of rejuvenating such places.
Unlike meetings convened by politicians, who might only be in their jobs fleetingly, members of the Royal family can set “homework” for community groups, businessmen and councils who will feel added pressure to show progress.
Because the Royal family are not party political, and will not be replaced by someone else, any taskforce they convene will know it will have to come up with results - or face the embarrassment of having to explain to the King or the Prince of Wales why nothing has been done.
Love it and them. Reblogging