Marguerite
Active Member
Something I meant to mention - during WWII, George VI was king, with his consort Queen Elizabeth (later the queen Mother). Their two daughters grew up during WWII and did a lot of work for the war effort. During the London Blitz, when many people were leaving London and especially children were being removed, the Queen Mum (or Queen, as she was then) was asked if perhaps it would be wise to send the two princesses to the country, to keep them safer.
"The children won't leave without me," she said. "And I won't leave without the King. And he won't leave London."
So they stayed, and visited bombed out buildings, even after the palace was bombed too. The people of London needed this for morale.
When the war ended and Armistice was declared, the two princesses slipped out and mingled with the crowd, incognito. No security contingent - nothing. They were wearing their uniforms. They would have been late teens/early 20s by then. So our current Queen really understands what it is like to live through war, and got a first-hand experience of the joy of the people when the war ended.
Some republicans were complaining about the cost of the royal wedding, but forgetting a few things:
First, the tourism it has brought in is far more than the cost.
Second, morale - it is always up with such an event.
Third - a lot of the cost was borne by private income of the Queen's and Prince Charles. Charles actually is self-funded, the Duchy of Cornwall brings in a tidy income. And he paid for the second reception.
Not that I'm a monarchist - increasingly, the monarchy is less relevant to us in Australia. But I do wish the couple well.
Marg
"The children won't leave without me," she said. "And I won't leave without the King. And he won't leave London."
So they stayed, and visited bombed out buildings, even after the palace was bombed too. The people of London needed this for morale.
When the war ended and Armistice was declared, the two princesses slipped out and mingled with the crowd, incognito. No security contingent - nothing. They were wearing their uniforms. They would have been late teens/early 20s by then. So our current Queen really understands what it is like to live through war, and got a first-hand experience of the joy of the people when the war ended.
Some republicans were complaining about the cost of the royal wedding, but forgetting a few things:
First, the tourism it has brought in is far more than the cost.
Second, morale - it is always up with such an event.
Third - a lot of the cost was borne by private income of the Queen's and Prince Charles. Charles actually is self-funded, the Duchy of Cornwall brings in a tidy income. And he paid for the second reception.
Not that I'm a monarchist - increasingly, the monarchy is less relevant to us in Australia. But I do wish the couple well.
Marg