You claim, Daniel, that the "Bottom line there is a recognized group who make up "The Royal Family" which is currently limited to the Queen, her husband, her children & their spouses, the children of her sons (Harry & Meghan's inclusion is a bit up in the air at the moment), the children of the Duke of Cambridge, the Dukes/Duchesses of Gloucester and Kent, and Kent's siblings and living spouse. Whether YOU choose to recognize that or not is completely up to you, but this is who the Palace, the "Firm", or whatever you want to call the organizational structure that surrounds the monarchy, recognizes, which is all that really matters."
Do you have any evidence, Daniel, any at all, to support your claim that "this is who the Palace, the "Firm", or whatever you want to call the organizational structure that surrounds the monarchy, recognizes"? Or are you again relying on "on-line sources"?
Or are you just asserting it?
And it's not a matter of who I chose to recognise as a member of the Royal Family. I am simply suggesting that, in the absence of any more specific definitive authority, we follow what has been HM's practice for my (and probably your) entire life, a practice that YOU seem determined to ignore.
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index