Belmoral calling Sandringham "Sandy" is the cutest thing they're so married

Happy 60th birthday Prince Edward, Duke of Edinburgh 🎂🎉🎉🥳🎊💪

This is such a gorgeous picture! 🎄🎅❄️

Princess Margaret with Lady Sarah Armstrong-Jones, Prince Edward, Viscount Linley and Princess Anne as they leave Liverpool Street Station, London, for Sandringham on board the Royal Train. 30th December 1966 (x)

‘Many thanks for your card.’

Rare image of a personal Christmas card from Bertie (then the Duke of York), to an unknown recipient. December 1920.

And a bonus photo of the young Windsor family ice skating and playing hockey at Sandringham in the New Year of 5th January, 1908. L-R: Prince Henry held by the Windsors’ tutor, Henry Peter Hansell, Prince Edward holding the hand of his mama, Queen Mary (when still Princess of Wales), Prince Albert/Bertie holding onto an unknown(?) attendant, Princess Mary, papa George V (when still Prince of Wales).

Have a very merry festive season, whatever you celebrate, and a joyful New Year! Thank you if you’ve stumbled across this new, George VI-crazy corner of Tumblr. I don’t know where I’m going with this, but it’s probably only going to get more bizarre as time goes by :)

. Sources: Manuscripts.co.uk and rct.uk

Members of the Royal Family arrived for the service at the church in Sandringham.

The main thing that I have found so frustrating regarding the BRF’s handling of H and M is they always seem to be on their back foot. Seriously, they have courtiers, RPO, M-15 and other people working for them and they didn’t know she was working on a Vogue cover, Gayle King interview at baby’s birth, merching like crazy and the faux royal tour to Nigeria? It makes the RF look weak - especially when Charles puts out his pity PR.

It’s Charles that looks weak on this. The BRF, especially KP and William, look pretty strong by comparison.

Hear me out.

From all the reporting, the BRF at-large was aware of what Meghan was doing. They just couldn’t stop it preemptively (that’s the power of her race card and a spoiled twat for a husband) and had to wait for it to play out publicly first so they could respond publicly with protocols.

They asked her repeatedly about the September Vogue, suggesting they heard something, but Meghan kept lying about it.

They knew she was merching because they sent cease-and-desists and pulled ads down. The palace and their aides know PR. They may not know Hollywood/American PR, but they know the game generally well enough that someone knew what she was doing with the merch. (And don’t forget that Sophie was a PR exec when she married Edward so she knew things as well.)

They knew she was talking to Oprah and Gayle because they asked Meghan point-blank about it once (surprise, she lied) and they refused to let her dial into Sandringham Summit over fears that she’d record it without their knowledge.

They were probably aware she was cooking something up for Archie’s birth. Did they know the true extent? Probably not, but they knew something was up, hence the disorganized media briefings on May 6, 2019 - per Bower, the Sussexes didn’t plan to say or do anything about Archie’s birth until Gayle King had arrived. Reading between the lines in both Bower and Spare, it sounds like the palace caught wind of something and made the usual announcements to take the steam out of the Americans breaking the news about Archie’s birth.

I suspect that William and Kate saw this writing on the wall, and that’s why they worked so hard to get the Sussexes out of the Royal Foundation and out of Kensington Palace as quickly as they did. They were fully aware of Meghan’s “I do what I want and you can’t stop me” attitude from the engagement and knew they had to act quickly to protect not just their future authority but their current reputations. And it appears to have worked: all the blowback for what the Sussexes did landed on Clarence House and now Charles looks extraordinarily weak because he’s always reacting (vs KP, who shows strength through control).

For #WorldBearDay :

Brown Bear by Carl Fabergé

Commissioned by King Edward VII, 1907 (the Sandringham Commission)

Agate, rose diamonds | 2.5 x 3.9 x 1.7 cm

Royal Collection Trust RCIN 40301

Monthly Jewels: April || Diamond

The Star of Africa ~ Cullinan I

The sceptre comprises a gold rod, formed in three sections, with enamelled collars at the intersections, surmounted by an enamelled heart-shaped structure, which holds a huge drop-shaped diamond, Cullinan I, or the Star of Africa, weighing 530.2 carats. 

Cullinan I, which is mounted in the sceptre, is the largest stone cut from the great Cullinan Diamond, the largest diamond ever discovered. It was found in 1905 by Frederick G.S. Wells, at the Premier Mine, about twenty miles from Pretoria in South Africa. The stone, which weighed 3,025 carats, was named after Thomas Cullinan, the Chairman of the Premier (Transvaal) Diamond Mining Company.

The diamond was presented to Edward VII in 1907 as a symbolic gesture to heal the rift between Britain and South Africa after the Boer War. It was formally handed over to the King on his birthday, 9 November 1907, at Sandringham.

Haven't done this in a while but I finished another podcast so here's Victoriocity characters in picrew (I didn't do Julius cause... I didn't feel like it. And yes Sandringham looks exactly like Peter Nureyev cause I pictured them as the same person in my head for some reason. Like they have the same imagination actor for me)

Fleet

Clara

Sandringham

Balmoral

Picrew is Potatolord's Persona Creator

Sip this tea slowly - could burn your mouth!

Saw a comment on YouTube that claims the Queen allegedly threw Meghan out of the country!

"Allegedly MM was scheduled to make an appearance as part of her ‘work’. She refused. The Queen’s aides informed the Queen."

She sent for MM for a meeting with the Queen. MM refused, said ‘she had a prior engagement.’

"This was after she had been busted by PW taking photos of Charlotte while she was sleeping in her bedroom, after Catherine had reported jewelry missing (!), vendors were still sending her expensive gowns as ‘gifts’, etc. MM was on shaky ground already."

"QE II’s aides found out MM was headed to a meeting. They contacted the meeting host and canceled the meeting, ‘By order of the Queen’. MM showed up, no one was there to meet with her, she threw a tantrum. QE II’s security people were there and escorted her to a waiting car. She pitched a fit, ‘take your hands off me, I’m the duchass!!’ And more. They ignored her, stuck her in the car. Inside were Edward and Sophie, with MM’s luggage in the trunk."

"QE II had sent aides to Frogmore who packed MM’s bags. That’s why she ‘left her diary in Frogmore Cottage’ - because she didn’t pack her own things!! Edward/Sophie’s drivers drove them straight to RAF Norfolk, waiting plane. They loaded her on, E and S escorted her onto plane, settled her in, left her there and they flew her to Canada."

"That’s what H wants an apology for!! They called the Sandringham Summit - remember how it was scheduled for several weeks later but H wanted to move it up??!? That’s why H was @ SS by himself!! QE II had flown her to Canada!! If true, I love it !!!"/ End quoted tea.

Ok, I have no idea if any of this is true or even plausible but WHAT? Catherine reported jewelry missing?

Parts of it sound fantastical - The Queen was reported to be non-confrontational, right? Would she really bundle Meghan up and force her to leave the country over refusing the Queen's request to meet? I think we would have heard Meghan loudly complain about it if she had, unless something more criminal took place, and that's why they allegedly deported her. Charity funds or jewelry missing? I can see Meg being willing to keep quiet about that.

But parts of it seem to fit, timeline-wise and storyline wise, based on what we know. Leaving her diary at Froggy Cot, Harry demanding an apology and "they know why", Meghan suddenly absconding to Canada with no notice without Harry, Meghan being oppositional-defiant and refusing to follow orders, throwing tantrums, Sophie seeming to have a special enmity for Meghan, lots of suspicion that the Harkles did something to be kicked out instead of leaving of their own free will, etc.

Here's the screenshot from the original YouTube comment section:

And the link to the video where I saw it in the comments section:

(Interesting reading, by the way. All major arcana, and not looking like Meghan fares too well in the lawsuit brought by her stepsister Samantha. The reading indicates that some major secrets that Megs would rather not be shared will come out in the trial.)

Anyway, not sure what to believe as I sip this tea. Either someone is a very good writer, putting this narrative together - or there was some hot drama behind the scenes of Megxit. But when I saw it, my jaw dropped and I was all

Enjoy your tea, and have a crumpet as you sip.

Like it or not, the one who saved and modernized the monarchy was King George V, not king Edward VII, and this is an undisputed fact that all historians would agree with. After all, It was during the reign of King George V that 13 European Monarchies crumbled to the ground while the british monarchy survived. And it survived because of George V, because of his leadership, his modern statesmanship, his will to embrace and encourage changes, his popularity and the respect that his nation had for him, while he led his country to victory during WW1. He was the FIRST Monarch that brought monarchy close to people, hence why he was nicknamed the People's Monarch or the Citizen Monarch. George reigned during the most difficult times in the history of monarchy and of mankind, but he managed to save his monarchy and to modernize it, setting the path for a Constitutional Modern Monarch*. Your bias cannot change it, because facts dont give a damn about your opinions. A pity that you cannot uplift Edward VII without bringing George down. George wasnt dull, he was quite the character. He was genuine, funny, reproachable, a lover of books and cinema, and most importantly he was a SERIOUS LEADER, who acted exactly as a modern head of state is suppsed to act. Oh and he was a FAITHFUL Husband, he was devoted to his wife and loyal to her throughout their entire marriage. Something that can never be said of Edward VII who was unfaithful and over-indulgent in everything ( Im sure his mistresses would have preferred Handsome George though). If being faithful and family-oriented makes a man dull, than give me dull everyday. Queen Alexandra would've been happy to have married a man like George who never embarrassed and humiliated his wife

Oh my, where does this come from? lmao. Tbh, I deserve this kind of message when it's about Wilhelm. I'm totally biased regarding this rascally young fop (Alexander III said it first!). Badmouthing him is one of my favourite pastime. But George, come on! I never been too harsh with him? EXCEPT, perhaps, when it comes down to the Romanovs, but what can I say? When you don't have a backbone, you really don't…

Yet, I'm a tad puzzled by your message because we are talking about George V right? The one who in April 1905 hadn't seen his children for three months. The one who used to shout at his second son "Get it out" when the poor soul was suffering from stammer. The one who in 1917, while on a stroll in the grounds of Sandringham complained to Nora Wigram that his children always avoided him. Nora retelling this story in one of her letters to her parents said how Mary, David and Bertie became "quite cheerful & entirely flippant, writing their names in the snow" when George and Mary had gone home on said stroll. However, do you know who was ACTUALLY a good father? his cousin *whispering* Nicky.

Faithful yes but let me remind you that their marriage was far from smooth sailing. They lived seperately for months on end. You also must have forgotten the countless letters from George trying to apologise for shutting down, being rude or cold towards May. + May's letters complaining on how he would shut her out. The man was unable to articulate his feelings which led to endless misunderstanding. May who once wrote to George while in Paris : "I quite understand about yr not wishing to come to Paris & am not angry, I only thought it wd be nice change as I find life in general very dull- unless one has a change sometimes." She had wanted him to join her but had received a rebuff instead. May who wrote to his brother in 1900 while she was stuck in the gloomy York Cottage: "It is so dull here & I feel very low & depressed tho' Im pretty well on the whole" (alright she was pregnant at that time, but guess where George was?… out shooting birds).

Led his country to victory during WW1? Hmmm, you really mean George V who was described in 1918 by the Viscount Esher in those terms: "he seems virtually a recluse, steadily devoting himself to good purposes and little works of a good kind, but with not conspicuousness, no assertiveness of the King's position." / "making himself a nonentity" ? While May wrote on 19 november 1916 to her son David about the hospital visits: "They are "assomant" (tiresome) & I dislike them more than words can describe!" and then proceeded to explain how much she enjoyed her shopping trips at Goode's.

I'm teasing because OF COURSE I think George V was a good ruler and perhaps he was the kind of ruler the country needed at that time. He was a great arbitrator and was able to adapt and change despite having conservative views and being very much uneducated. How he dealt with the Irish question is a stellar example! He was an ordinary man who disliked society and suffered from bouts of depression. There is a sentence that struck me in Ridley's book which in my opinion sums up George : "He was a man of disconnected feelings".

I could write PAGES about Bertie's shortcomings and how his shenanigans damaged the monarchy. Yet he was a gifted ruler, very much in tune with his time.

So I guess anon, it comes down to... preference. If you are more into shooting birds and collecting stamps, you do you! I, on the contrary, have a soft spot for cosmopolitan kings with a string of scandals.

Now if you'd excuse me, I'm off painting the town red with Bertie!

King George V and The Prince of Wales, 13 March 1914

On this day in 1936, King George V died at Sandringham House aged 70.

His eldest son, Edward, then ascended the throne to become Edward VIII and reigned for 326 days, making him the shortest reigning British Monarch to date. He abdicated on 10 December of the same year and was succeeded by his younger brother Prince Albert, Duke of York, who took the reign name George VI.

118 years ago on this day, Prince John of the United Kingdom, the youngest child of King George V and Queen Mary was born! He was named after his paternal uncle, Prince Alexander John, who died in infancy. John was said to be a bright, vibrant, healthy child in the first four years of his life. He was very cheeky and loved practical jokes, such as reportedly putting glue on door handles, and once famously referred to his father as the “ugly old man.” Above all, Prince John was part of an incredible royal dynasty. He was related to 20 reigning monarchs in Europe; his grandfather was King Edward VII, who reigned over an empire that was at its most powerful. But life wasn’t exactly easy for John and his siblings as they grew up under the incredibly strict guidance of their father, the future King George V, who was said to have put enormous pressure on his children to behave more like adults than children. “Lord Darby had a famous anecdote, that George V said to him ‘I was frightened of my father and I’m doing to make damn sure my children are frightened of me.’” Prince John's grandaunt the Dowager Empress of Russia wrote to her son Tsar Nicholas II that "George's children are very nice ... The little ones, George and Johnny are both charming and very amusing ..." In 1909, John began having seizures and was discovered to have epilepsy. When his condition deteriorated, he was kept away from the public eye and sent to live at Sandringham House, under the care of his nanny and governess, Charlotte Bill, known by the children as “Lala.” Apparently, all the children adored Lala, who had nursed them all as babies. In 1916, as his seizures became more frequent and severe, John was sent to live at Wood Farm, with "Lala" Bill having charge of his care. Though he maintained an interest in the world around him and was capable of coherent thought and expression, with his lack of educational progress, the last of his tutors was dismissed and his formal education ended. Physicians warned that he would likely not reach adulthood. His grandmother Queen Alexandra maintained a garden at Sandringham House especially for him and this became "one of the great pleasures of Prince John's life." After the summer of 1916, John was rarely seen outside the Sandringham Estate and passed solely into Lala Bill's care. After Queen Alexandra wrote that "Prince John is very proud of his house but is longing for a companion" Queen Mary broke from royal practice by having local children brought in to be playmates for Prince John. One of these was Winifred Thomas, a young girl from Halifax who had been sent to live with her aunt and uncle (who had charge of the royal stables at Sandringham) in hopes her asthma would improve. John's seizures intensified, and Bill later wrote "we dared not let him be with his brothers and sister, because it upsets them so much, with the attacks getting so bad and coming so often." He spent Christmas Day 1918 with his family at Sandringham House but was driven back to Wood Farm at night. On 18 January 1919, after a severe seizure, John died in his sleep at Wood Farm at 5:30 pm. Queen Mary wrote to Emily Alcock, an old friend that "for John it is a great relief, as his malady was becoming worse as he grew older, & he has thus been spared much suffering. I cannot say how grateful we feel to God for having taken him in such a peaceful way, he just slept quietly into his heavenly home, no pain no struggle, just peace for the poor little troubled spirit which had been a great anxiety to us for many years, ever since he was four years old"

She went on to add that "the first break in the family circle is hard to bear, but people have been so kind & sympathetic & this has helped us much." King George described his son's death simply as "the greatest mercy possible" On 20 January, the Daily Mirror said that "when the Prince John passed away his face bore an angelic smile"

John's funeral was at St Mary Magdalene parish church the funeral was attended by Sandringham House staff; "every single person on the estate went and stood around the gates and his grave was absolutely covered in flowers." Queen Alexandra wrote to Queen Mary that "now two darling Johnnies lie side by side" In her final mention of Prince John in her diary, Queen Mary wrote simply "miss the dear child very much indeed." Lala Bill always kept a portrait of Prince John above her mantelpiece, together with a letter from him that read "nanny, I love you."

With the anon’s comment about no one wanting Charles’ medical information, I feel like a lot of the time when things happen in the Royal world anons and bloggers end up going into this in-depth analysis on things when really there’s not as much to it as they’re making it out to be. The theories discussed were about no one caring about Prince Philip’s details or Charles’ but obviously someone was tempted to see if they could find out what was going on with Kate simply because of the public interest and hysteria that’s going on. People have been made curious by the media hype. Plus, Charles made his condition public in the first place. Also, we could look at what happened with the Queen and there was little interest around her specific condition but that’s because the palace firmly went with the story all along (or implied) that it was just old age. Also the fact the Queen and Prince Philip were old so it was expected to see them deteriorating.

But why is there so much more public interest and hysteria about Kate in the first place, when Charles, Philip, and The Queen have gone through very similar things?

All Kate/KP did was make the same statement that they've all made: "The royal is in hospital X for surgery on {body part}. She will be in the hospital for X days. She is doing well."

The statement for the Queen's knee surgery:

The Queen this morning underwent a minor operation at the King Edward VII Hospital in London to remove a torn cartilage in her right knee. The 45-minute operation, which was performed by The Queen's orthopaedic surgeon Mr Roger Vickers, went very well and Her Majesty is expected to leave hospital tomorrow morning. Mr Vickers was assisted by Mr Adrian Fairbank. The anaesthetist was Dr Robert Linton and The Queen's physician, Dr Richard Thompson, was in attendance. The Queen is expected to be fully active again within a few weeks. Her Majesty will rest at Sandringham over the next two weeks and will then resume a limited programme of engagements until she has made a full recovery.

The statement for Philip's hip replacement:

"The Duke of Edinburgh has undergone a successful hip replacement operation. He is progressing satisfactorily at this early stage. His Royal Highness is likely to remain in hospital for several days. He is comfortable and in good spirits.”

The statement for Philip's abdomen surgery:

"His Royal Highness the duke of Edinburgh has been admitted to the London Clinic for an exploratory operation following abdominal investigations. He is expected to stay in hospital for up to two weeks. Further updates will be issued when appropriate. He is in very good health."

The statement for Margaret's lung surgery:

″Princess Margaret underwent an operation at the Brompton Hospital yesterday for the removal of a small area of her left lung which proved to be innocent. Her condition is satisfactory and it’s expected that she will leave hospital within the week.″

The statement for Sophie's emergency operation:

"Her Royal Highness the Countess of Wessex is currently recovering in the King Edward VII Hospital following an emergency operation. The Countess was taken to hospital by air ambulance after feeling unwell overnight. She is expected to stay in hospital for the next few days. The Earl of Wessex has been with the Countess following her operation. I cannot comment on the nature of the operation. Her condition is described as comfortable."

And yet, all this hysteria surrounding Kate. Why?

Misogyny.

It's nothing to do with Charles being more transparent about his condition. In fact, one would argue that Charles had to be more forthcoming because he's the head of state and there's an expectation of duty. Look at how much detail is in the statement about The Queen's knee operation compared to the rest. That's the same amount of detail provided in the first statement about Charles's health issue. He didn't need to provide further detail about the cancer diagnosis; the palace could've just deferred to the original statement that he had to postpone public engagements for recuperation since they never provided a timeline on what that recuperation was supposed to look like other than "short." But "short" can be subjective.

Edit: I fixed the {body party} typo. 🤦‍♀️