So who is in 21st position for the Royal Crown

Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
15,066
Location
SE British Columbia, Canada
I thought y'all ( you guys) might like to see the 21 people currently in line to inherit the British Crown. Don't get me wrong, I'm not some Royalty worshiper. Perhaps you have a family member who might be interested. The thing about the succession of the Crown is that the brothers and sisters get bumped when kids get born. The chart is a bit boring but take a look at the ordinary contemporary photos of who's who in the zoo, starting with Charles who is in line after Liz. For instance, Prince William's kids bumped Harry down the line. Harry is currently # 6. You got to like Harry. He was in the British Army and was a Apache helicopter pilot, seeing combat in Afghanistan. He's the dude living in the States and is married to American Meghan Markle. Enjoy.

 
Last edited:
So, if they left the UK to escape the press.... how come they get themselves in the news so much????$$$$$
 
  • Like
Reactions: pbm
Most of the European Royals are "cousins" of each other anyways..... I'll stop here before some people start getting offended.
Exactly, there was that dip into German ancestry through marriage and then the embarrassing episode of being at war with his cousins. ( are y’all all at peace with your cousins? ) There was a large skip in the hereditary fashion of rule explained by this article. America’s history is strongly affected by the British, the French, the Spanish, the Mexicans and the indigenous people. Britain’s was strongly effected by several other countries as well and even the Italians ( through the Romans.)

B545F82E-1E4F-43B8-A161-BC4D104D553D.png
 
Last edited:
It's interesting how things work. I actually pity the poor souls who are siblings to the heir. That awkward dynamic between the heir and his/her siblings as they grow up. Then the decision of either working for the crown as a glorified show piece having to act the part for years or decades OR striking out on your own.

An interesting tidbit is on how the Monarch is funded. IIRC the sitting monarch is funded via landholdings which pass through the UK Treasury rather than direct taxes. The immediate family members are funded via two investment portfolios. The remaining family generate income via "normal" jobs combined with any sort of inheritance*.

*Prince Harry's wealth is from his late mother's estate.
 
I respect Harry’s military service, even if an entire platoon of SAS had to deploy with him (the MOD spent more effort to deploy him than they got out of his flying). Willing to serve earns my respect.

His subsequent life choices have been a train wreck. He comes off as a complete spoiled brat.
 
I respect Harry’s military service, even if an entire platoon of SAS had to deploy with him
Is that true ? I know the British military did everything they could to keep his deployments secret but otherwise, he himself didn't want special treatment. Reports from other soldiers said he was a very good soldier too. Just being who he was though made him a special target so precautions had to be taken there.
 
From what I understand the 2nd to crown (i.e. non crown prince of his generation) has a duty to serve in active military in UK. It really isn't Prince Harry's choice whether he likes it or not. Sending a platoon for his safety really isn't a choice either, but part of the Royal's obligation to the nation. Had a monarch never send active member of their families to serve in high risk position, they would be in a big political disaster.

Regarding to his life being a train wreck or not, I see him being about equal to how a non secret service protected and locked down kid normally behave in his age. He obviously isn't filtered and followed like Prince William or Prince Charles, but he wasn't in as big of a trouble as Prince Andrew.

Plus the fact that he lost his mom at a young age, and the conspiracy that it may be an inside job (I think even he and Prince William would ask this question once in a while, but we know we will never know the answer), definitely would increase the amount of rebellions in young people his age.
 
For instance, Prince William's kids bumped Harry down the line. Harry is currently # 6. You got to like Harry. He was in the British Army and was a Apache helicopter pilot, seeing combat in Afghanistan. He's the dude living in the States and is married to American Meghan Markle. Enjoy.

I believe his primary responsibility was as the gunner, and secondarily as the co-pilot fully capable of flying if necessary. The pilot is supposed to concentrate on flying while the gunner is concentrating on the weapons systems.
 
I believe his primary responsibility was as the gunner, and secondarily as the co-pilot fully capable of flying if necessary. The pilot is supposed to concentrate on flying while the gunner is concentrating on the weapons systems.
Yes, I think you are right. I believe he is a capable pilot but in Afghanistan we was the gunner or co-pilot.
 
Yes, I think you are right. I believe he is a capable pilot but in Afghanistan we was the gunner or co-pilot.

My limited knowledge is that either seat can control flight and/or weapons. But if the gunner has to fly, it’s because the pilot has been incapacitated and it’s not really the ideal situation.

In the US Army I believe they allow warrant officers to serve as p8lots or gunners.
 
The queen served in WWII. She was married to her husband for around 70 years. Both are impressive.

That said, the Royals are a joke. They just play house on the tax payers back.. I can’t believe they get so much press here in the US. I don’t get it.
 
The queen served in WWII. She was married to her husband for around 70 years. Both are impressive.

That said, the Royals are a joke. They just play house on the tax payers back.. I can’t believe they get so much press here in the US. I don’t get it.
At some point the monarchy will probably be extinguished. However, England has had a King or Queen for over 1,000 years and the majority of their population supports it. It’s big business over there. The power of the British Royalty ended in about 1700, a little before the USA became a country.

I don’t get the Kardashians. ;)
 
They just play house on the tax payers back.. I can’t believe they get so much press here in the US. I don’t get it.
Not really.


 
The royals keep our attention as they are a vestige to times long ago when kings and queens were prevalent and powerful.

ARTHUR: I am your king!

WOMAN: Well, I didn't vote for you.

ARTHUR: You don't vote for kings.

WOMAN: Well, 'ow did you become king then?

ARTHUR: The Lady of the Lake, [angels sing] her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. [singing stops] That is why I am your king!

DENNIS: Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
 
At some point the monarchy will probably be extinguished. However, England has had a King or Queen for over 1,000 years and the majority of their population supports it. It’s big business over there. The power of the British Royalty ended in about 1700, a little before the USA became a country.

I dont get the Kardashians. ;)
Neither do I. Do people in England/ Canada follow them?
 
Back
Top