Why Are The Windsors More Popular Than Other Royal Families?

[prinz_von_buzim]

I did read your post and I saw you comment about the Empire. I just wrote the comment in a different way.
However, the royals are not popular because they are British. Which was the start of the conversation. Nor do I believe they are popular because they speak English.


At its height the Russian Empire (1866) was 23,700,000 km2, at the height of the British Empire (1922) it was 33,700,000 km2.



One thing you can't say about the BRF is that they are popular because of a spread through movies and music. That ties in with the fact that they speak English and as you proclaim 90% of movies and music are in english or based in the USA or UK.

Hm, but it is connected with popularity of english language and anglo-american dominance in music and movies. Maybe I am mistaking, because i don't know exactly how is situation in other countries, but I know how it is in my country.


I live in Croatia, which was kingdom that joined Habsburg Empire in year 1527. So from 1527 to 1918 it was ruled by Habsburgs. Even today, 100 years after, german language is the widest spread foreign language in Croatia. Between young people, english is number 1, and german number 2, but when you look on entire population, including older people, german is the most spoken foreign language in Croatia. From the other hand, Croatia never had any british influence through it's history.

However, everyone here knows who is british queen and windsors are popular as in every other country. But no one knows who is the head of the House of Habsburg at this moment. Also, no one knows (and even I didn't know long time) that his son has name Ferdinand Zvonimir (Zvonimir was the name of croatian king from 11th century) and that he was baptised in Zagreb Cathedral by archbishop of Zagreb.


So, explain me, how can that be if not because of movies. I am repeating, during history british influence didn't exist here at all, while austro-german was very strong. So how comes?

 

[CSENYC]

The BRF has quite a bit of historical baggage.

Not to my knowledge, at least outside the UK.

Compare the BRF with the Habsburgs, Hohenzollerns, Greek royal family, Italian royal family, etc. The BRF hasn't operated as a dictator; it hasn't taken sides politically in centuries; etc.

 

[AlanR]

I don't believe they are.....

Denmark and holland also have truly amazing Monarchs but I truly believe in the UK we never get news feeds for any other Royal family.

We had no news on the Dutch Prince nor the 40th Jubilee for Denmark...

God bless all Monarchs...........

 

[Lumutqueen]

However, everyone here knows who is british queen and windsors are popular as in every other country. But no one knows who is the head of the House of Habsburg at this moment. Also, no one knows (and even I didn't know long time) that his son has name Ferdinand Zvonimir (Zvonimir was the name of croatian king from 11th century) and that he was baptised in Zagreb Cathedral by archbishop of Zagreb.

Am I right in thinking the House of Habsburg fell in the 1700's? I don't see why anyone would know who the head of the house is when it fell over 200 years ago. Croatia has a president yes? I bet you can tell me his name, and maybe even his sons name if he has one. I personally wouldn't want to know about information that is of little use to me.

So, explain me, how can that be if not because of movies. I am repeating, during history british influence didn't exist here at all, while austro-german was very strong. So how comes?

I am assuming that you know of Queen Elizabeth because of "movies"? (if so which one's because I haven't seen her in any?) I know her obviously because she is my Queen, most of the world knows the BRF because they were once colonies ruled by the previous Monarchs. I don't know how it is in other countries besides Croatia and the UK, how they knew about the British Royals?

Posters from different countries, how did you come about knowing the BRF? Movies, language, magazines? Or did you just "know" them?

Not to my knowledge, at least outside the UK.

Compare the BRF with the Habsburgs, Hohenzollerns, Greek royal family, Italian royal family, etc. The BRF hasn't operated as a dictator; it hasn't taken sides politically in centuries; etc.

It has no "political" baggage, but if take a glimpse into history and see the abdication, the mistresses, the name changes, the (current) divorces, money issues, the general all round scandals that family has baggage and HM has done a grand job of making up for her predecessors errors.

 

[NGalitzine]

The Hapsburgs rules until 1918.

 

[layla01]

this discussion is obviously very US centered

Thanks for all the good answers. I guess the English language and culture is probably part of the answer, not to mention the empire.

However, I still wonder if in other states with royal families you will find such enthusiasm about the royal family as in the UK.

 

[prinz_von_buzim]

Am I right in thinking the House of Habsburg fell in the 1700's? I don't see why anyone would know who the head of the house is when it fell over 200 years ago. Croatia has a president yes? I bet you can tell me his name, and maybe even his sons name if he has one. I personally wouldn't want to know about information that is of little use to me.



I am assuming that you know of Queen Elizabeth because of "movies"? (if so which one's because I haven't seen her in any?) I know her obviously because she is my Queen, most of the world knows the BRF because they were once colonies ruled by the previous Monarchs. I don't know how it is in other countries besides Croatia and the UK, how they knew about the British Royals?

Posters from different countries, how did you come about knowing the BRF? Movies, language, magazines? Or did you just "know" them?



It has no "political" baggage, but if take a glimpse into history and see the abdication, the mistresses, the name changes, the (current) divorces, money issues, the general all round scandals that family has baggage and HM has done a grand job of making up for her predecessors errors.

You are wrong, Habsburgs didn't fell in 1700's but in 1918 (as i mentioned in my post) after WW1. So not even 100 years have passed.


Yes, I know the name of my president as everyone knows the name of his president. But the fact is that british royal family just IS more popular than others. I don't remember exact name of movies because I generally don't watch movies much. But 90% of movies about history are taking place in England. I also know that here on TV was british royal wedding live. On TV were also documentaries about british monarchs, serials too (like the one about Tudors) and so on, and so on... Robin Hood is also english, isn't he? And Mr Bean, maybe one of the most popular comedians, in one episode he is meeting british queen.

 

[cepe]

No one (I think) has mentioned Edward and mrs Simpson. That started real interest. Excuse typing got keyboard probs.

 

[Lumutqueen]

You are wrong, Habsburgs didn't fell in 1700's but in 1918 (as i mentioned in my post) after WW1. So not even 100 years have passed.

That would be the Habsburg Monarchy who ruled Austria until 1918. The Austrian branch fell in 1740, just did some checking. I didn't know Croatia was ruled by Habsburgs until 1918?

Yes, I know the name of my president as everyone knows the name of his president. But the fact is that british royal family just IS more popular than others. I don't remember exact name of movies because I generally don't watch movies much. But 90% of movies about history are taking place in England. I also know that here on TV was british royal wedding live. On TV were also documentaries about british monarchs, serials too (like the one about Tudors) and so on, and so on... Robin Hood is also english, isn't he? And Mr Bean, maybe one of the most popular comedians, in one episode he is meeting british queen.

Robin Hood and Mr Bean do very little to promote the popularity of the British Monarchy.

Yes they are popular, the question was why?
The British Royal wedding was apparently watched by 122 million people, in comparison it was reported that 750 million watched the wedding of Charles and Diana. Popularity might be decreasing?

 

[chelly]

We have more outlets to watch it, so that might be the the reason for the different ratings. I thought I had heard that W/C wedding had higher ratings.


I think part of the popularity is the fact that we import and export alot from each other. Though of course that doesn't explain why the BRF is popular, but it might be part of the reason. That and the history between our two countries.

The problem is also the media I think expects us to only want to know about the BRF, so they don't really give us a chance to learn about the others.

 

[prinz_von_buzim]

That would be the Habsburg Monarchy who ruled Austria until 1918. The Austrian branch fell in 1740, just did some checking. I didn't know Croatia was ruled by Habsburgs until 1918?




Robin Hood and Mr Bean do very little to promote the popularity of the British Monarchy.

Yes they are popular, the question was why?
The British Royal wedding was apparently watched by 122 million people, in comparison it was reported that 750 million watched the wedding of Charles and Diana. Popularity might be decreasing?

Yes, Croatia was ruled by Habsburgs from 1527 to 1918.


Yes, question was why and I responded why. Also, I have described you and explained you why historical power can't be the reason. Croatia is a small state but there are many countries in central Europe that had similar non-english history, and also there british dynasty is the most popular and the best known. So explain me how could british royals become more popular if not because of anglisation through movies and music and general anglo-american dominance in popular culture.

 

[Lumutqueen]

So explain me how could british royals become more popular if not because of anglisation through movies and music and general anglo-american dominance in popular culture.

My answer is you don't have to be ruled by a country to know of it.
I refused to admit that my Monarch is known throughout the world because of movies (based solely on the fact they are apparently based on British history) and music (for which I have no other explanation than the majority is in English).

 

[prinz_von_buzim]

My answer is you don't have to be ruled by a country to know of it.
I refused to admit that my Monarch is known throughout the world because of movies (based solely on the fact they are apparently based on British history) and music (for which I have no other explanation than the majority is in English).

So you deny it as a reason, but you didn't tell what is the reason then.

 

[FanofMonaco]

Before PD, people in the US laughed at the BRF. They were not cool. We loved Princess Grace and her family. After PG died, PC fired her public relations lady. I think PC felt overwhelmed with the papparazzi and still does today. If you want publicity who don't file lawsuits left and right. Monaco has been hiding the Casiraghis from the US. This has been implied in both Vanity Fair and the NY times recently. Some people in the US follow the BRF today because: 1) they speak English 2) they have a big PR department that feeds the American press and 3) people like Will and Kate. They act like normal people. They ARE NOT even close in popularity as American film, tv and rock stars.

 

[Lumutqueen]

So you deny it as a reason, but you didn't tell what is the reason then.

In my very first post in this thread (on page one), I stated my two reasons why I believe the monarchy is the most popular, tradition and Lady Diana Spencer.

 

[lucien]

Hi all,
Celebrating the Diamond jubilee, I wonder how come international media is always covering the british royal family, but hardly mention the other royal families.
Why do you think that is?
Thanks

Because yanks only knew of the Queen E II before Marengo and I joined this Forum...we educated the rest of the world....sort of....No...heck...come to think of it...I´ve hit base there...

 

[CSENYC]

It has no "political" baggage, but if take a glimpse into history and see the abdication, the mistresses, the name changes, the (current) divorces, money issues, the general all round scandals that family has baggage and HM has done a grand job of making up for her predecessors errors.

True, but the BRF's mistresses, name changes, divorces, money issues, etc. are all "soap opera"-type problems that haven't harmed anyone in the same way that, say, the Italian and Greek royal families' involvement in politics did (by supporting dictators), the Habsburgs' rule did (by running countries that wanted to be independent), the Hohenzollerns did (by helping start WWI), etc. I wouldn't think that there would be historical animosity against the BRF for its divorces, money issues, etc. like there would be against the Italian/Greek royal families, the Habsburgs, Hohenzollerns, etc.

They ARE NOT even close in popularity as American film, tv and rock stars.

Polls suggest otherwise- the BRF has approval in the US of around 80%.

 

[doric44]

i think its a number of factors not just any one single thing.. the former British empire and many countries connections to it. i mean they did controll 1/4 of the worlds landmass and like 500 million people
esp rich ones like Canada Australia and New Zealand with lots of their media covering them.
even India i think certain segments still look to the UK. then obviously you have the American fascination with the BRF esp princess Diana.
and now William and Kate their marriage was heavily covered here in north America and throughout the industrialized world .


and i think a big reason is Queen Elizabeth herself she has reigned for 60 years and traveled to countless countries in that time . she is a popular cultural icon. she is one of the most recognized people in the world.
the royal family is a brand and her face is the logo. right up there with coca-cola and MacDonalds and Apple and some may not like that but its true .

you could go to some tiny village in china and i guarantee you show a picture of her and ask who is that... they will say the Queen of England the coca-cola logo they will say coke

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Hi all,
Celebrating the Diamond jubilee, I wonder how come international media is always covering the british royal family, but hardly mention the other royal families.
Why do you think that is?
Thanks

Frankly, I have no idea.

But they are missing some very fascinating and interesting stories in the other Royal Houses, that is for certain!

 

[MissByrd]

This is an interesting topic to contemplate and lots of thoughtful answers. Language, culture, the breadth of the Commonwealth...all seem to be part of the answer. My ancestors came to the US from England in the late 1600's...a long time ago to still feel a "tie". But, we speak the same language, study the same literature, etc.

But, I think another reason is "the Media". Honestly, they are ignorant and insular. They seem unaware that there are other Countries with extremely interesting royal families with fascinating histories. And, much of what they report about the BRF is inaccurate. They would rather report on the boring and trashy activities of the movie and sports types. During William and Catherine's wedding, they must have had one camera devoted to David Beckham, but one little clip of the other European royals arriving. I heard one of our more well-known media saying (in her haughty voice) that here was the Crown Princess of Spain whose name is Patricia.

I have told many people about the beauty of Crown Princess Victoria's incredible wedding and sent them youtube clips. Almost all had little knowledge of Sweden, but loved seeing it.

Lucien, I remember reading Hans Brinker as a child and wanting to know more about your beautiful Country.

For me, it has been a fascination with history, the pleasure of good books and music that made me aware of people beyond my own space.

Thankfully, those of us here on TRF are not limited to one royal family. Smile...

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Miss Byrd, I completely agree with every incredible word...particularly about the insular, unsophisticated and in some cases blatantly ignorant American media.

I will never forget when Prince William was christened and a certain very famous anchorwoman interviewed a spokesperson for Buckingham Palace and actually asked why it was necessary to baptize the Prince.

How I cringed with embarrassment...

In all fairness, the lousy William/Kate wedding coverage wasn't all down to the American outlets. I only watched the BBC, thinking their coverage of the event would naturally be moving and outstanding.

WRONG. The BBC kept their cameras almost exclusively on the Beckhams out of all the other wedding guests. They all but ignored the Continental Royals, only bothering to identify one or two of them..and they even misidentified one!

It was such a disappointment.

 

[Jacknch]

Hi all,
Celebrating the Diamond jubilee, I wonder how come international media is always covering the british royal family, but hardly mention the other royal families.
Why do you think that is?
Thanks

Probably the same reason why the British media are apparently ignorant of all the other royal families - I have no idea why though.

 

[Tyger]

But the fact is that british royal family just IS more popular than others.

Popular is different from being well-known. I think the BRF is well-known - she is Head of State, correct? So that means when anyone's president or dictator or ruler or whatever - Head of State - comes to England on a State visit, they meet the Head of State, the Queen - correct? Do I have this right? Its not the same in other countries like Sweden or Spain or such-like.

Anyway, I think its a mistake to equate being well known with being popular. It sounds odd to say that the BRF is popular in the US. Is it? Do people really think in those terms about the BRF? It just is. A fact. People don't really turn out here for British royal visits the way they do in the Commonwealth countries - except perhaps the Queen/King - but even then the turn-out is not impressive - pretty marginal - people have to be urged out there and even then don't bother unless they happen to be in the area when an event happens near them. How this idea got started that they are popular, I don't know.

 

[royalistbert]

If the French Monarchy still existed I think it would be even more popular. It certainly be more grand IMO.

 

[Tyger]

If the French Monarchy still existed I think it would be even more popular. It certainly be more grand IMO.

I agree.

In fact, just as a point of interest - when I was growing up I had a fascination with old films, particularly one's from the 1930's, and they most often had as a focal point continental or Russian nobility and royalty - if they were about royalty or dealt with characters that were royal or noble. Never do I recall the British nobility or monarchy coming into the frame. For lushness and grandness the Russian aristocracy was a staple, in fact.

Even in the 1950's we had Audrey Hepburn as a continental royal in 'Roman Holiday'. We had Ingrid Bergman as a questionable Russian Grand Duchess in Anastasia. We had Grace Kelly as a continental royal in 'The Swan'. Then there were the early - and not so early - film versions of 'Anna Karenina' and 'War and Peace'.

The Abdication in the 1930's - because it involved an American - certainly was news here and the films and talk of it in archival footage cannot be avoided. The Duke and Duchess of Windsor were a staple of society news reports right through into the 1970's - probably because the Duchess was American, though so was Princess Margaret and all her doings noted. In the end, scandal and reprobate behavior always garners interest.

 

[Meraude]

Popular is different from being well-known. I think the BRF is well-known - she is Head of State, correct? So that means when anyone's president or dictator or ruler or whatever - Head of State - comes to England on a State visit, they meet the Head of State, the Queen - correct? Do I have this right? Its not the same in other countries like Sweden or Spain or such-like.

If a visit by a foreign head of state is to be considered a State visit, they have to meet the head of state in the country they are visiting, and the monarch is the head of state in every monarchy, be it the U.K., Sweden or Spain.

 

[EIIR]

It's not only the American media who pay no attention to other royal families, it's also the British media. In all honesty, if you asked the average Briton which European countries have monarchies, let alone the names of any of the European royals, I think 90% wouldn't have a clue.

Part of the reason for the huge interest in the BRF is the English language. With the exception of Wikipedia, it's very difficult to find newspaper articles or documentaries about the other royal families that are in anything other than their own native tongue. There are no documentaries on the Danish royals, for instance, that are not in Danish; or at least there are very few. This immediately makes it much more difficult for the average non-Danish speaker to learn anything other than the Wikipedia basics on the Danish RF. With English being the international language, so many people around the world have some English, so learning more about the BRF is much easier. Plus, if Brazilian TV want to air a documentary on the BRF it's very easy for them to find linguists to translate the contents of such a programme from English, than it would be to translate a Danish documentary from Danish to Brazilian Portugese.

I think Americans have a particular fascination, and as seen in recent polls, a certain affection for the British monarchy because, had the US not declared independence from the UK, they would be their royal family too. Had things been different, QEII could be Queen of the US as well as Canada, Australia and NZ etc. I think that engenders a curiosity about the royals, and I think Americans are interested to look at the royals and think about how their nation would be different in that scenario.

 

[Tyger]

If a visit by a foreign head of state is to be considered a State visit, they have to meet the head of state in the country they are visiting, and the monarch is the head of state in every monarchy, be it the U.K., Sweden or Spain.

Thank you. So I guess that doesn't factor in. Though I have to say, I recall pictures of our presidents at Buckingham Palace with the Queen - but not with other monarchs. Strange blank.

 

[CSENYC]

Thank you. So I guess that doesn't factor in. Though I have to say, I recall pictures of our presidents at Buckingham Palace with the Queen - but not with other monarchs. Strange blank.

Google Obama bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia and the Emperor of Japan.

Maybe lack of Royal popularity is a West Coast thing? When the BRF comes to where I've lived, it's been a major event.

 

[Mirabel]

Before PD, people in the US laughed at the BRF. They were not cool. We loved Princess Grace and her family. .

I disagree entirely; I don't know a single person who laughed at the BRF. There has always been lots of interest.

As for Princess Grace, she was much admired, but after she died no one paid much attention to the Grimaldis except when the tabloids mentioned the latest scandal. But press coverage was restricted to only tabloids once Grace was gone. None of the respectable papers mentioned them.