The Next Big Thing

In honour of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee in 2012 (a celebration of 60 years on the throne), a current town in the UK will be crowned a city. This may sound a bit odd to those of who not familiar with the idea of city status in the UK, but to the cities who have applied this is a big deal.

As you may know, historically, a place in the UK could only call itself a city if it had a cathedral, but now there are a variety of factors (including, but not limited to population) that determine whether a town can be called a city and city status isn't handed out willy nilly.  There are actually only 66 cities in all of the UK (A full list can be found here).  The newest additions to the City Club are Brighton and Hove, Inverness and Wolverhampton which were given the status in 2000 to mark the new millennium, and Preston, Stirling and Newport which were awarded city status in 2002 for the Queen's Golden Jubilee  In total, only 14 new cities were created during the 20th century.

Twenty-six towns are in the running for the Diamond Jubilee City Upgrade (it's not really called that, but seriously, what else do you call it?) including Chelmsford, Milton Keynes, Coleraine, Perth, Doncaster, Croydon, Bournemouth and Reading.

My money is on Reading - literally.  They are the odds-on favourite according to Paddy Power at 11/2, followed by Doncaster and then Bournemouth.   Wait... Whats that?  You didn't know you could place bets on this kind of thing?  You're telling me you've never been in one of the millions of betting shops you see in every town and probably pass by multiple times a day?   Well, listen up -  I'm not normally one to advocate potentially addictive activities such as gambling, but you really haven't lived until you've placed a bet on the colour of the Queen's hat at her next public appearance or the nationality of the next Pope.   

But back to this city thing - what will the winner get?  Well... nothing really, except I suppose they could do a "nanny nanny boo boo" dance in front of the lowly towns, and probably more importantly, I think they can then have a city council which gives them a bit more power which apparently can even usurp the power of the county council (surely another reason to do a "nanny nanny boo boo dance"!).

Go Reading!

Introducing: Prince Philip

So, he's not exactly an obscure pseudo celebrity as the other people featured in my Introducing series, but on this day before his 90th birthday, what do you actually know about Prince Phillip? 

Photo: Daily Mail

Vitals: Official title - Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.  He was born 10 June 1921 in Greece as Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark, but does not consider himself Greek (he says he's Danish) probably because his family was exiled from Greece following the Greco-Turkish war.  Philip spent his early years in France and attended an American school in Paris before being sent to England at the age of seven.   

Relationships With Other "Celebrities": You may know his wife, The Queen of England.  They've been married for 64(!) years and have four children... You may know them too - Charles, Anne, Andrew and Edward.   In order to marry Liz, Philip denounced his Greek and Danish titles, converted to Anglicanism and naturalised as a British citizen. He also adopted the surname Mountbatten from his maternal grandparents.  (learn more about royal surnames here)

Best Scandal: He has a bit of a loose tongue, to put it mildly.  I'll let the Daily Mail recap some of his best gaffes.  Don't skip this bit!  Trust me.

That's a Bit Strange: Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip are actually third cousins through Queen Victoria.

Coming to America?  Somehow I doubt it.

Happy Birthday Old Chap!

Let's get royalized

With the news that Wootton Basset will become the first town in 100 years to be granted the "royal" title, making it known officially as Royal Wootton Basset, it got me thinking what other places have done to deserve their royal titles.

There are only two other towns in England (although there are more elsewhere in the UK) with the "royal" title - Royal Leamington Spa (1838) and Royal Tunbridge Wells (1909).  Both of these recieved their titles "in recognition of their history and royal patronage of their facilities", so basically they are old places that some royals liked the visit.  That's it?  Boor-ing!

So what about the Royal County of Berkshire?  Why does it get to be royal?  It was given the title simply because it is home to Windsor Castle.  But there is a bit (a tiny bit, yes I'm stretching here in a desperate effort to make this a semi-interesting post) of drama surrounding this Royal County: Apparently, the county has been using the "royal" since before the 19th Century, long before it was actually recognized by the Queen in 1958.  How dare you, Berkshire!

There are also a few royal boroughs in England, including what is now knowns as The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea in London (or RBKC to those in the know), which was granted the right to use the royal title by Queen Victoria who wanted to honour her birthplace.  The newest addtion to the Royal Borough Club will be Greenwich in 2012 in honour of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee.

And then there are all those random places with the suffix "Regis" after the town's orginal name.  What's this about?  Well, Regis is latin for King and this title is bestowed on towns frequented by royalty mainly as a holiday destination (how this is different from Royal Leamington Spa and Royal Tunbridge Wells is beyond me).  I know I shouldn't judge(its so insulting!), but I'm beginning to question the Royal's choice in holiday spots.  I've only ever been to Bognor Regis, and surely it was entirely different back when it was Regis-ized in 1929, but I really can't see why members of the royal family would have wanted to spend time there (royals don't go to Butlins, do they?)... surely Brighton Regis would have been a better choice?

On the off chance you're actually interested in this, here's a full list of towns/cities/counties/boroughs in the UK with royal patronage.

Thank you for your comment...

I've just received the best comment of all time and thought it only appropriate that I shared it with you:

From "Anonymous" in response to my post re: Royal Warrants of Appointment: It is not the done thing to refer to Her Majesty the Queen as "Liz" and even the most common of commoners would not refer to her in this way. The majority of the British people are staunch supporters of the Queen. You seem to spend a great deal of blog time criticising the British way of life, this is insulting to the British readers who may happen upon your blog.



Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for solving the mystery of who is marking every one of my posts offensive. I have been wondering about this for weeks!

Being non-British comes with certain benefits, including but not limited to, not being bound by the "done" way of doing things and not subscribing to the British idea of the class system, so I beg your forgiveness when I am not offended by you classifying me below the "most common of commoners".

If you have read more than this individual post in this blog (which do I need to remind you is MY blog?), you may have noticed that it is written in a very casual, often tongue in cheek manner, which would explain why I refer to Her Majesty The Queen as Liz (in MY blog, remember?) If you're honest with yourself, you can admit that she's probably been called worse.

As I can only assume that you have a lot of extra time on your hands, you may want to spend some of it informing the authors of this article, this article, and this one, and this one that they, like me, are bottom feeders and should show more respect.

If you find my writing offensive (and how can you? I haven't even touched on "Booze Britain" or the benefits culture yet!), I can only recommend that you step away from the computer and work on your stiff upper lip.

I claim it is actually you insulting the British people by thinking they would be remotely upset by the ramblings of a nobody blogger. If you are looking for a blog to blow hot air up your British skirt, may I suggest that this site may be more up your alley.

Thanks for reading and God Save the Queen.

xxLadyLiberty

By Appointment to Her Majesty, The Queen...

Anyone with a observant eye who has spent even a short amount of time in the UK has no doubt seen the royal Coat of Arms displayed on shops and products ranging from broomsticks to champagne and maybe you've felt a bit smug that you've chosen the same place to shop or the same thing to buy as the Queen herself.. or maybe you didnt even know that you've just done exactly that! 

Coat of Arms with text underneath

The Coat of Arms is displayed on letterhead, shop fronts and the packaging of products themselves when a Royal Warrant of Appointment has been issued to the supplier of the product or service. Basically, its a way bragging that the Queen (or Prince Philip or Prince Charles depending on the coat of arms displayed) likes your stuff and you supply goods to the royal family. The next time you spot one, take a closer look at it... you will see the fancy coat of arms, then underneath it will usually say "By Appointment to..." followed by the name of the royal issuing the appointment and what goods are provided.  For instance, at John Lewis, the it will read "By Appointment to Her Majesty the Queen as suppliers of haberdashery and household goods"

Approximately 800 individuals and companies hold more than 1,100 warrants to the Royal Family. Suppliers must have had a trading relationship with an individual in the family for at least five years before they can be considered for a warrant. They are awarded for renewable terms of five years, though they can be revoked at any time; some warrants have been held for more than 100 years. 

I suppose its important to mention that just because the Queen issued a Warrant of Appointment for some gin, for example, doesnt mean she actually drinks it - goods can be purchased by the issuer (or the grantor as they are called)  for use by guests as well as personal use. 

So what can you buy to be like Liz?  Here's a few of the more interesting Warrants of Apppointment:  (a full list can be found here or you can search the directory here)

Bacardi-Martini Ltd - Suppliers of martini vermouth

Robinsons Soft Drinks - Manufacturers of fruit squashes and barley waters

Bulmers - Manufacturers of cider (although I am sad to say that Strongbow also has a Warrant. What a shame)
Carphone Warehouse - Supplier of mobile phone communications
Corgi Hosiery Ltd - Manufacturers of hosiery
GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare - Manufacturers of toothpaste for Prince Charles and Lucozade for the Queen.
Pots and Pithoi - Supplier of terracotta pots to Prince Charles. (who knew he was such a fan?)

Oh and do you shop at Boots?  So does Her Maj.   They hold a Warrant for being both her chemist and her dispensing optician (i.e she buys her way trendy glasses there) Who knew you and Liz had so much in common?

Cool Crockery

If you enjoy that this is a Wills and Kate-free zone, you may also enjoy these absolutely fantastic creations.  I must have one (some)!

Buy @  kkoutlet.com

Curtsey Culture

So I'm really shit(e) about keeping my promises... I promised only last week that this blog would be a William and Kate-free zone, a respite from the constant blithering about their wedding, and it still is... sort of.. I do solemly swear to not speak about their WEDDING, but this article about the aftermath of the unmentionable event was too interesting not to mention.  My apologies in advance, but I hope you will agree with me on this one.

When I was a kid, I remember practicing to curtsey.  No, not in dance class or anything, just on my own because I was a nerdy kid (no more teasing please). I dont know when I ever thought I would have a need to curtsey, but it seemed like a valuable skill to have, so I "perfected" it.  Luckily I'm not Kate Middleton or all of that practice would have gone to waste becuase it appears that after that thing we cant talk about she will only be expected to curtsey to one person - The Queen herself. 


Zara Phillips greets her Grandmother,
The Queen with a curtsey

Apparently there is a document called Precedence Of The Royal Family To Be Observed At Court, written up by the Queen's secretary after Prince Charles married Camilla which knocked Camilla down a few notches in the who curtseys to whom list, ensuring that someone like Princess Anne (the Queen's daughter) would never have to curtsey to Camilla (shudder to think!).    Before this document, the wife of Prince Charles would have come directly after the Queen and Anne and Princess Alexandra (the Queen's seemingly very important cousin) would have to curtsey to her, but the Queen's apparent lack of respect for Camilla the Commoner and the fact that Anne and Alexandra have "devoted their lives to the monarchy" sparked the change.

Interestingly, Anne apparently refused to curtsey to Diana and is expected to do the same for Kate eventhough she will technically be ranked above her.  (Me-Ow!)

As the article explains, the wife of a royal takes on the position of her husband unless he is not with her and then she is moved down in rank.  So, without William physically by her side, Kate is actually ranked below Anne, Alexandra and Prince Andrew and Fergie's daughters, Beatrice and Eugenie, since they are technically in line to the throne and royal by blood.  

Confused?  Here's the order as mandated by the Queen:
1. The Queen
2. Kate Middleton (unless she is sans Wills, which will knock her down to #6 just ahead of Camilla)
3. Princess Anne
4. Princess Beatrice
5. Princess Eugenie
6. Princess Alexandra
7. Duchess of Cornwall (Camilla)
8. Countess of Wessex (Sophie, wife of Prince Edward)
9. Lady Louise Windsor  (Sophie and Edward's daughter)
10. Zara Phillips  (Princess Anne's daughter)

 If you'd like to learn to curtsey, here is a young girl's informational video.  (Where was youtube when I was practicing in my bedroom??)

Important Announcement

In an effort to provide a bit of respite from the inundation of the irritating minutia surrounding the Royal Wedding, I am officially declaring this blog to be a William and Kate-Free Zone!  The inescapable media coverage will only get worse as we get closer to the wedding and will continue long after.  I dread the day Waity Katie is spotted at a dress store, and shudder at the thought of all the wannabes who will undoubtedly model their own weddings after someone they have never and will never meet.  A Royal Wedding, while romantic to those who still daydream of becoming a Princess, is entirely inconsequential to the real lives of the majority of the people of this country and I, for one, refuse to be sucked in.

Congratulations to the happy couple, but may I suggest elopement?

Cher, Madonna and Prince William?

What do Cher, Madonna and Prince William have in common?
Unless Prince William has hidden song and dance skills, the only thing which could be said about all three of them is that they don't use a surname (last name). Now everyone knows that Madonna's surname is actually Ciccone, and a few people may know that Cher's surname was (before it was legally dropped) Sarkisian LaPiere, but what is William's surname? Surely he must have one... mustn't he?
I asked my British born husband for clarification and was surprised that he looked perplexed. I assumed this would be an easy answer for a person who'd spent many a year in a COE school and thinks that Liz is the "most beautiful woman in the world", but he did have to do a bit of thinking. His final answer was one I thought was a cop out, but is actually true - Royals don't have legal surnames.   "But what about William and Harry when they are serving in the military?  They can't be called Lieutenant Prince William, can they!?"  Either unsure or not up for a complex explaination to an ignorant American, he told me to look it up.  So I did, and here's the low down:

Prior to 1917 surnames, when rarely used, were those of the father's house or dynasty, so for this reason Queen Victoria's eldest son Edward VII belonged to the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (the family name of his father Prince Albert). Edward VII's son George V became the second king of that dynasty when he succeeded to the throne in 1910.   In 1917, George V, in response to the the anti-German sentiment of many British people during this time declared the official British Royal Family's surname to be Windsor. 

Fast forward to 1960 ...  Queen Elizabeth and Prince Phillip decided that they wanted their direct decendants to be futher distinguished and through an Order-in-Council designated Mountbatten-Windsor as the personal surname of their decendants. To further complicate the matter, according to the Wikipedia entry,  "the only people who would officially hold the surname under the Order-in-Council would be any male-line great-grandchildren of the Queen in cadet branches; i.e., the children of any sons of the Duke of York and Earl of Wessex. Similarly, in the event that any male-line granddaughter of the Queen were to have a child whilst unwed, such a child might have the surname of Mountbatten-Windsor. The surname applies to any male-line descendants of The Queen and Prince Philip who do not hold the style of Royal Highness and rank of Prince/Princess of the UK."

Apparently, William and Harry (whos legal names are Prince William of Wales and Prince Henry of Wales) have at some point used the Mountbatten-Windsor surname, but it appears they too find this a bit confusing (or perhaps pretentious?) and both Princes reportedly used Wales as their surnames and were referred to as Officer Cadet Wales during their time at Sandhurst.  Princess Eugenie of York and Princess Beatrice of York (Sarah "Fergie" Ferguson's* daughters) have also chosen this option and use York as their surnames.

Phew!  Now don't say I never taught you anything.


*Don't let Fergie's surname confuse you - she is a Ferguson because she married into the family.  Same with Diana, who's legal name was Diana Spencer.  You don't get to take the Windsor/Mountbatten-Windsor/York/Wales surname with you after divorce.