Monarchy

Forums New posts

Kurt

Well-Known Radge
Joined
Apr 14, 2009
Just noticed that one year today QE2 will become the Scotland and Englands longest reigning monarch.

Just saying, likes!
 
Shades said:
Is it Queen Elizabeth II in Scotland? Is it?
Click to expand...
It is. The convention is that the monarch takes the highest number of either Scottish or English monarchs. So the next King James would be the 8th, Macbeth the second, Colin the second, And so on.
 
Shades said:
Is it Queen Elizabeth II in Scotland? Is it?
Click to expand...

No. In Scotland she's Elizabeth I. The union of the crowns wasn't until after the death of the English queen Elizabeth I when James VI of Scotland, son of Mary Queen of Scots, Elizabeth I cousin, became James I and united the kingdoms.
 
Kurt said:
It is. The convention is that the monarch takes the highest number of either Scottish or English monarchs. So the next King James would be the 8th, Macbeth the second, Colin the second, And so on.
Click to expand...
Convention? Has this been demonstrated in any case apart from the current reference to QE2 as such? If not then it isn't convention. Scotland has only ever had one Queen Elizabeth.
 
Shades said:
Convention? Has this been demonstrated in any case apart from the current reference to QE2 as such? If not then it isn't convention. Scotland has only ever had one Queen Elizabeth.
Click to expand...
It was established as the convention for that very reason when QE2 became Queen. Churchill came up with the concept.

- - - Updated - - -

Beagle said:
No. In Scotland she's Elizabeth I. The union of the crowns wasn't until after the death of the English queen Elizabeth I when James VI of Scotland, son of Mary Queen of Scots, Elizabeth I cousin, became James I and united the kingdoms.
Click to expand...
Not the case see above.
 
Posh bird lives for ages. Fantastic achievement. No, really. Incredible.
 
Kurt said:
It was established as the convention for that very reason when QE2 became Queen. Churchill came up with the concept.- - - Updated - - -Not the case see above.
Click to expand...
QE2 is the title for Queen Elizabeth of the UK. Scotland has only ever had one Queen Elizabeth as it's monarch, despite what the title might say.
 
The numbering is part of the royal prerogative so she is QE2 and your opinion is just that.This was tested in the Scottish courts in 1953 and they ruled that they had no power to designate her QE 1 in Scotland.
 
I was (presented to the Queen once ) (you don't get to MEET her) Lovely woman. I would say, she has given up most of her life in Public service. and deserves to rest in Peace.
 
Kurt said:
The numbering is part of the royal prerogative so she is QE2 and your opinion is just that.This was tested in the Scottish courts in 1953 and they ruled that they had no power to designate her QE 1 in Scotland.
Click to expand...
Yes, and Rangers weren't liquidated, OJ Simpson was innocent and Oscar Pistorious was just having some shooting practice.
 
Kurt said:
The numbering is part of the royal prerogative so she is QE2 and your opinion is just that.This was tested in the Scottish courts in 1953 and they ruled that they had no power to designate her QE 1 in Scotland.
Click to expand...

The understanding is that the higher regnal number will count. Which is why cynics like me don't believe that a Royal Scots name will ever be used again!
 
Kurt said:
It is. The convention is that the monarch takes the highest number of either Scottish or English monarchs. So the next King James would be the 8th, Macbeth the second, Colin the second And so on.
Click to expand...
I think you missed your chance fella :wink:
 
I reckon the queen is alright, she seems to work pretty hard and folk who meet her seem to enjoy the experience, Mikey Fagan included.

But the notion of monarchy is alien to me, being deferential for no obvious reason or celebrating their extended life span simply because they're kept alive through expensive and exclusive treatments is pretty revolting.

That said, I wish her no ill will.
 
southfieldhibby said:
I reckon the queen is alright, she seems to work pretty hard and folk who meet her seem to enjoy the experience, Mikey Fagan included.But the notion of monarchy is alien to me, being deferential for no obvious reason or celebrating their extended life span simply because they're kept alive thru expensive and exclusive treatments is pretty revolting.That said, I wish her no ill will.
Click to expand...
I lean towards a republican stance on the issue but plenty seem to like having a monarchy. The current lot are a pretty benign bunch so I tend to think its best left alone.
 
Kurt said:
That's meaningless in the context.
Click to expand...
What? That the opinion of law can be contrary to common sense and sometimes fact? I know where we are here by the way. Let's just cut the crap. You are leaning on the name and title of the monarch as being Queen Elizabeth II of the UK. I'm saying that she is not Queen Elizabeth II of Scotland. She's not. Scotland has only ever had one Queen Elizabeth. Now you can argue that with Scotland being part of the UK that makes her Queen Elizabeth II of Scotland, but that is still wrong. You can call her Queen Latifah if u like, it doesn't mean she is though.
 
Shades said:
What? That the opinion of law can be contrary to common sense and sometimes fact? I know where we are here by the way. Let's just cut the crap. You are leaning on the name and title of the monarch as being Queen Elizabeth II of the UK. I'm saying that she is not Queen Elizabeth II of Scotland. She's not. Scotland has only ever had one Queen Elizabeth. Now you can argue that with Scotland being part of the UK that makes her Queen Elizabeth II of Scotland, but that is still wrong. You can call her Queen Latifah if u like, it doesn't mean she is though.
Click to expand...
The fact is her title is QE2 even if you don't like it.
 
Kurt said:
The fact is her title is QE2 even if you don't like it.
Click to expand...
Is this where I say that she's not the second Queen Elizabeth of Scotland and that she is not QE2 of Scotland again? ah well, go on then.....
 
southfieldhibby said:
I reckon the queen is alright, she seems to work pretty hard and folk who meet her seem to enjoy the experience, Mikey Fagan included.

But the notion of monarchy is alien to me, being deferential for no obvious reason or celebrating their extended life span simply because they're kept alive through expensive and exclusive treatments is pretty revolting.

That said, I wish her no ill will.
Click to expand...

I don't give enough of a fukk about the royal family to wish them any ill.
 
southfieldhibby said:
I reckon the queen is alright, she seems to work pretty hard and folk who meet her seem to enjoy the experience, Mikey Fagan included.

But the notion of monarchy is alien to me, being deferential for no obvious reason or celebrating their extended life span simply because they're kept alive through expensive and exclusive treatments is pretty revolting.

That said, I wish her no ill will.
Click to expand...

This.
 
When I was a young un singing the Rebs, I could never have imagined being anything other than a republican. However, I have changed my mind on that as with so many things, as I have grown older. Given that the alternative head of state would likely be Richard Dawkins - if the establishment had its way - or David beckham if it was a popular choice, then I am now reasonably happy with the queen as a ceremonial figurehead that affects practical matters not one iota. I'd also be happy with that in Iscotland as an alternative to digging up Nelson Mandela.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, I am exaggerating to make a point, but I fear not my much.
 
Dub said:
We have a winnerWell done Shades
Click to expand...
There isn't a Queen of Scotland.Here:- Though the situation was the same in every one of the Queen's realms beyond the United Kingdom, only within, in Scotland, did the title Elizabeth II cause controversy as there had never been an Elizabeth I in Scotland. In an act of sabotage, new Royal Mail post boxes in Scotland, bearing the royal cypher EIIR, were vandalised, after which, to avoid further problems, post boxes and Royal Mail vehicles in Scotland bore only the Crown of Scotland. A legal case, MacCormick v. Lord Advocate (1953 SC 396), was taken to contest the right of the Queen to title herself Elizabeth II within Scotland, arguing that to do so would be a breach of the Act of Union. The case, however, was lost on the grounds that the pursuers had not title to sue the Crown and the numbering of monarchs was part of the Royal Prerogative, and thus not governed by the Act of Union. It was suggested by Winston Churchill that future British monarchs should be numbered according to either their English or Scottish predecessors, whichever number is higher.[8]Less publicised controversies included the argument that the monarch was addressed as Your Grace in the pre-union Kingdom of Scotland (the monarchs of Renaissance England had been called both "Your Grace" and "Your Majesty"[9]) and that the preferred title had been King/Queen of Scots rather than of Scotland. At the opening of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, Lord Steel, MSP, the Presiding Officer, referred to Elizabeth II as "not only the Queen of the United Kingdom but seated as you are among us in the historic and constitutionally correct manner as Queen of Scots." In 2002 Winnie Ewing, president of the Scottish National Party wrote to the Queen asking her to adopt the title "Elizabeth I" in Scotland.[10]
 
Honestly, the number after a monarchs name ffs. That is precisely why i am voting yes - it's the kind of meaningless pish that people focus on when they are not responsible for real decisions
 
egb_hibs said:
Honestly, the number after a monarchs name ffs. That is precisely why i am voting yes - it's the kind of meaningless pish that people focus on when they are not responsible for real decisions
Click to expand...
Its the same meanless pish that some folk concentrate on when they are. You ever been to a Council meeting?
 
Fair point, the sentiments of which I acknowledge above in my speculation that Iscotland would probably have Mandela's remains as it's head of state if it could. I cling to the hope that both a self-accountable Scotland, and an England not subordinated to an Oxbridge left elected by Scottish catholics they despise, would both be marginally less in thrall to such fudspoutery.
 
Kurt said:
There isn't a Queen of Scotland.Here:- Though the situation was the same in every one of the Queen's realms beyond the United Kingdom, only within, in Scotland, did the title Elizabeth II cause controversy as there had never been an Elizabeth I in Scotland. In an act of sabotage, new Royal Mail post boxes in Scotland, bearing the royal cypher EIIR, were vandalised, after which, to avoid further problems, post boxes and Royal Mail vehicles in Scotland bore only the Crown of Scotland. A legal case, MacCormick v. Lord Advocate (1953 SC 396), was taken to contest the right of the Queen to title herself Elizabeth II within Scotland, arguing that to do so would be a breach of the Act of Union. The case, however, was lost on the grounds that the pursuers had not title to sue the Crown and the numbering of monarchs was part of the Royal Prerogative, and thus not governed by the Act of Union. It was suggested by Winston Churchill that future British monarchs should be numbered according to either their English or Scottish predecessors, whichever number is higher.[8]Less publicised controversies included the argument that the monarch was addressed as Your Grace in the pre-union Kingdom of Scotland (the monarchs of Renaissance England had been called both "Your Grace" and "Your Majesty"[9]) and that the preferred title had been King/Queen of Scots rather than of Scotland. At the opening of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, Lord Steel, MSP, the Presiding Officer, referred to Elizabeth II as "not only the Queen of the United Kingdom but seated as you are among us in the historic and constitutionally correct manner as Queen of Scots." In 2002 Winnie Ewing, president of the Scottish National Party wrote to the Queen asking her to adopt the title "Elizabeth I" in Scotland.[10]
Click to expand...
Did you not say that a post of mine was irrelevant a little further up? Then you post this from wiki? . Bedtime.
 
Dub said:
We have a winner

Well done Shades
Click to expand...

A quote from the first paragraph...

an 15 ither kintras an thair dependencies. Thae kintras
Click to expand...
It goes on to name other countries in the Commonwealth so I get what it's saying.... But what the fuck :surp@


Ignore this whole post! Just read the rest of it and figured it out :banger:
 
I also wish her no ill will, however if she was to pop her clogs anytime in the near future, i wouldn't give it a second thought.

She's lived a very prosperous life living of the taxpayer.
 
I really don't mind if we have a monarchy one way or the other. Nothing I can do to change it, they can't help being born into it.

Ragin likes I never got a MBE though ;-)
 
Jack said:
I really don't mind if we have a monarchy one way or the other. Nothing I can do to change it, they can't help being born into it.

Ragin likes I never got a MBE though ;-)
Click to expand...

Excuse me? Look to the bars under your username Jack.
It says Private Member, Member of the Bounce Ermy

*bows*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Hibs Chat
  • New Posts
  • Just Back
  • Chatroom