header-logo header-logo

14 December 2018 / Michael L Nash
Issue: 7821 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Commoners & kings

​Michael Nash explores how far the customs & conventions of the Royal Family have evolved

Two weddings and two royal biographies* this year seem to have lifted the Royal Family into yet another circle of democratisation, a movement which began in the last third of the nineteenth century. But the question remains: does the public want the Royal Family to be like the rest of us? Surely their whole raison d’etre is to be different, to be other, to be ‘on another planet’?

In modern times the question has not gone beyond marriages to the aristocracy, something begun by Queen Victoria in 1871 and confirmed by George V in his various Letters Patent in 1917. The marriage of Princess Louise to the Marquess of Lorne in 1871 was the first non-royal marriage since Stuart times, if one excludes various mésalliances of the Hanoverian princes. It was popular though, simply because the princess was not marrying yet another German. The princess was given away by her own mother, the queen, her father being dead. Queen Victoria was

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Heavyweight patent litigator will bolster Carpmaels Ransford’s rapidly growing Litigation team as firm marks its 250th anniversary

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll