royal-blue
Courtier
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2012
- Messages
- 629
- City
- Balmoral
- Country
- United Kingdom
Are we likely to see the Lascelles family present at the funeral on Monday? Surely Charles must be in contact with some of them.
Yes, it's vital to make efforts to spend time with family. Unfortunately, it happens all too often that a matriarch of the family passes then the family unit seemingly dissolves.But normal. My mother's family was quite close and I grew up with my cousins - the children of her siblings. However, I barely knew the children of my mom's cousins, and have no idea what any of them are doing now. Because I moved half the US away after I married, I don't know my cousins' kids and grandkids AT ALL - not even most of their names - and if it wasn't for Facebook I'd know even less.
The Lascelles family were private citizens despite their descent from Princess Mary, and they are even more "private" now. What is more unusual is the fact the Gloucesters and Kents ARE still relatively close to the core Royal Family; most likely because The Queen's cousins are still in the "family business." Once that link is no longer there those families will probably slowly drift away too.
Maybe the Lascelles will go. But I’m not so sure. I don’t think Charles is in contact with any of them.Are we likely to see the Lascelles family present at the funeral on Monday? Surely Charles must be in contact with some of them.
I don’t think it has to do with that, but more about the degrees of separation in terms of how closely related they are as well as distance.Yes, it's vital to make efforts to spend time with family. Unfortunately, it happens all too often that a matriarch of the family passes then the family unit seemingly dissolves.
Maybe the Lascelles will go. But I’m not so sure. I don’t think Charles is in contact with any of them.
I don’t think so, as families become larger, the more distant in terms of relation they become. Plus the Lascelles are mostly private and quiet, aside from the few blacksheeps.Sad in fact, George (future Earl of Harewood) and Gerald were closent in age with his mother and they probably played together in childjood.
I’m not referring to age, I’m referring to how closely related they are and also the Lascelles live in Yorkshire, Leeds. A good example is Rowan Lascelles who has serious issues with drugs, lacking respect for people of other races (you type his name, Marlene Koenig has something written). I didn’t mention the Kent’s and Gloucester’s are closer because of their princely titles, but simply because they live closer to the BRF and work with the BRF whereas the Lascelles are female-line descendants of a forgotten Princess and don’t live near the BRF.But King's second cousin, the current Earl of Harewood, is just two years younger than him, so closest in age.
And who is a "blacksheep"? Both late Queen's cousins have been dead for long time ago, what are their sons, grandchildren and great-grandchildren, guilty of?
With Richard, Duke of Gloucester and Kent siblings there is much closer relationship, because of what? Because they are closer to the throne in the line of succession and have Dukely/Princely titles?
But Princess Royal did attend 1953 Coronation. She was unwell at 1947 wedding.The real reason why Princess Mary didn’t attend the Queen’s coronation was because she was unwell.
I should have said the wedding not coronation. Thank youBut Princess Royal did attend 1953 Coronation. She was unwell at 1947 wedding.