Queen Elizabeth II dies at age 96

[1995hoo]

Another thought to ponder: we will never see another queen of England in our lifetime. The next 3 in line for the crown...Charles, William, and William's first born... will be kings. That time period may cover the lives of most of our grandchildren.

As dramatized in The Crown, Winston Churchill addressed the nation in February 1952 on the passing of The King and the accession of HM The Queen and said:

"I, whose youth was passed in the august, unchallenged, and tranquil glories of the Victorian era, may well feel a thrill in invoking once more the prayer and the anthem: 'God Save the Queen!'"

At that time, it had been almost 51 years since the passing of Queen Victoria, so the anthem had been "God Save the King" for a half century. It maybe that long or longer before we have a queen regnant again for the anthem to switch again.

Diving into some hypotheticals, slash open question to anyone who understands the succession lines better than myself:

Should Prince George, at some point in the future, have a daughter as his eldest child, that would most likely be the earliest next Queen, and from what I understand she would not be displaced in line should Prince George have a son after that.  Related to that, was there a change at some point that resulted in the eldest child, and not just the eldest son, being the heir apparent? I note that Elizabeth II was George VI's heir presumptive (rather than heir apparent) and that Anne is below Andrew & Edward in line, but conversely in the newest generation Charlotte is ahead of Louis.

Male-preference primogeniture ended in 2011 as to anyone born after the change took effect.

Edited to add: As a practical matter, had they made it retroactive it would have turned out not to have made a difference at the present time.

[NWI_Irish96]

Another thought to ponder: we will never see another queen of England in our lifetime. The next 3 in line for the crown...Charles, William, and William's first born... will be kings. That time period may cover the lives of most of our grandchildren.

As dramatized in The Crown, Winston Churchill addressed the nation in February 1952 on the passing of The King and the accession of HM The Queen and said:

"I, whose youth was passed in the august, unchallenged, and tranquil glories of the Victorian era, may well feel a thrill in invoking once more the prayer and the anthem: 'God Save the Queen!'"

At that time, it had been almost 51 years since the passing of Queen Victoria, so the anthem had been "God Save the King" for a half century. It maybe that long or longer before we have a queen regnant again for the anthem to switch again.

Diving into some hypotheticals, slash open question to anyone who understands the succession lines better than myself:

Should Prince George, at some point in the future, have a daughter as his eldest child, that would most likely be the earliest next Queen, and from what I understand she would not be displaced in line should Prince George have a son after that.  Related to that, was there a change at some point that resulted in the eldest child, and not just the eldest son, being the heir apparent? I note that Elizabeth II was George VI's heir presumptive (rather than heir apparent) and that Anne is below Andrew & Edward in line, but conversely in the newest generation Charlotte is ahead of Louis.

Male-preference primogeniture ended in 2011 as to anyone born after the change took effect.

Edited to add: As a practical matter, had they made it retroactive it would have turned out not to have made a difference at the present time.

Second in line of succession Prince George is 9, so barring some sort of tragedy, it will be 60+ years until the next possibility of having a queen, and even then it would require George's firstborn to be a girl or for George to be childless, passing the throne to his sister.

Prevailing opinion is that the monarchy will go away by then, and thus we may have heard "God Save the Queen" for the very last time ever.

One item of note is that in the King's first public remarks, he named William as Prince of Wales, which is a created and not inherited title. The current king was not created Prince of Wales until over six years after becoming heir to the throne, though he was only 3 years old when he became heir so there is good reason not to follow that precedent.

[Evan_Th]

Should Prince George, at some point in the future, have a daughter as his eldest child, that would most likely be the earliest next Queen, and from what I understand she would not be displaced in line should Prince George have a son after that.  Related to that, was there a change at some point that resulted in the eldest child, and not just the eldest son, being the heir apparent? I note that Elizabeth II was George VI's heir presumptive (rather than heir apparent) and that Anne is below Andrew & Edward in line, but conversely in the newest generation Charlotte is ahead of Louis.

There was a change in law sometime after 2000 (I forget the exact year and caption of the statute) that removed male preference and also the ban on marrying Catholics.

Yep, the Perth Agreement, enacted 2011-2015.  (It took four years because it had to be separately enacted by seven Commonwealth realms, plus every Australian state, so that they'd continue to all have the same monarch.)

Of course, it remains theoretically possible that Prince George will die young, in which case his younger sister Princess Charlotte would take his place in the line of succession.

[jakeroot]

Hey, if a publication called "The Onion" is real, then why should we assume a publication called the "Daily Stoopid" weren't real?

Define "real". Both the Onion and Daily Stoopid are online "publications".

[kphoger]

Hey, if a publication called "The Onion" is real, then why should we assume a publication called the "Daily Stoopid" weren't real?

Define "real". Both the Onion and Daily Stoopid are online "publications".

Is the Onion not published in actual print anymore?

Does the Daily Stoopid even exist other than memes posted on Twitter?  I don't think there are any "stories" to go along with them.


(Humorous tidbit:  The Daily Stoopid just re-tweeted this from Stephen King:  "Fun fact:  Ants don't catch Covid because they have these teeny little anty bodies.")

[jakeroot]

Hey, if a publication called "The Onion" is real, then why should we assume a publication called the "Daily Stoopid" weren't real?

Define "real". Both the Onion and Daily Stoopid are online "publications".

Is the Onion not published in actual print anymore?

Does the Daily Stoopid even exist other than memes posted on Twitter?  I don't think there are any "stories" to go along with them.


(Humorous tidbit:  The Daily Stoopid just re-tweeted this from Stephen King:  "Fun fact:  Ants don't catch Covid because they have these teeny little anty bodies.")

The Onion ceased physical printing in 2013.

The Onion is certainly the more "legit" of the two. I'm just pointing out that they're both a functioning satirical news "outlet".

[JayhawkCO]

The Premier League has cancelled this weekend's matches and potentially next weekend's. Pretty dumb decision given the fixture congestion already created by the winter World Cup.

I'm annoyed by this. I'm down in Central America and was looking forward to watching the Tottenham/Man City match at a local bar.

[Big John]

If it was English, it would be in £ and not $.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

The Premier League has cancelled this weekend's matches and potentially next weekend's. Pretty dumb decision given the fixture congestion already created by the winter World Cup.

No doubt their decision is based in no small part on Pete Rozelle's oft-stated comment that his biggest regret as NFL Commissioner as not cancelling games the weekend after President Kennedy was shot. Crowds were not the least bit into the games and it was evidently an utterly awkward experience all the way around. Even recognizing that an assassination is fundamentally different from, and far more shocking than, the death of a 96-year-old monarch, it's still fair to recognize that the Queen was a towering figure of a sort Kennedy was not (other than in the mythology that built up after his death). They're just soccer games. It's not that hard to tweak the schedule later to fit them in somewhere, much as the NFL did when it cancelled all games the weekend after 9-11.

It's probably also important to note that nearly all the posters on this board are naturally detached from the situation by not living in the UK, so the reason for the postponements carry little personal interest beyond "well that sucks, no soccer on TV this weekend" or analyzing how it messes up the EPL table. That's not meant to be a criticism of Bruce or jayhawk, just an observation, because I would be privately annoyed too if I was a soccer fan.

[JayhawkCO]

The Premier League has cancelled this weekend's matches and potentially next weekend's. Pretty dumb decision given the fixture congestion already created by the winter World Cup.

No doubt their decision is based in no small part on Pete Rozelle's oft-stated comment that his biggest regret as NFL Commissioner as not cancelling games the weekend after President Kennedy was shot. Crowds were not the least bit into the games and it was evidently an utterly awkward experience all the way around. Even recognizing that an assassination is fundamentally different from, and far more shocking than, the death of a 96-year-old monarch, it's still fair to recognize that the Queen was a towering figure of a sort Kennedy was not (other than in the mythology that built up after his death). They're just soccer games. It's not that hard to tweak the schedule later to fit them in somewhere, much as the NFL did when it cancelled all games the weekend after 9-11.

It's probably also important to note that nearly all the posters on this board are naturally detached from the situation by not living in the UK, so the reason for the postponements carry little personal interest beyond "well that sucks, no soccer on TV this weekend" or analyzing how it messes up the EPL table. That's not meant to be a criticism of Bruce or jayhawk, just an observation, because I would be privately annoyed too if I was a soccer fan.

I mean, yeah, but the NBA didn't cancel games when Kobe died. I get that it's not 100% analogous, but Kobe at least had something to do with the NBA whereas QE2 didn't reeaallly have anything to do with the EPL.

[NWI_Irish96]

The Premier League has cancelled this weekend's matches and potentially next weekend's. Pretty dumb decision given the fixture congestion already created by the winter World Cup.

I'm annoyed by this. I'm down in Central America and was looking forward to watching the Tottenham/Man City match at a local bar.

As a Chelsea fan I 100% support postponing matches for several weeks.

[JayhawkCO]

The Premier League has cancelled this weekend's matches and potentially next weekend's. Pretty dumb decision given the fixture congestion already created by the winter World Cup.

I'm annoyed by this. I'm down in Central America and was looking forward to watching the Tottenham/Man City match at a local bar.

As a Chelsea fan I 100% support postponing matches for several weeks.

Because they can't score just like I said in the other thread?? 

[JayhawkCO]

Also, for the record, this is a sentiment posted on Sports Illustrated which fairly accurately sums up my views on why cancelling was wrong (outside of my own bummer-ment).

[Bruce]

The Premier League has cancelled this weekend's matches and potentially next weekend's. Pretty dumb decision given the fixture congestion already created by the winter World Cup.

No doubt their decision is based in no small part on Pete Rozelle's oft-stated comment that his biggest regret as NFL Commissioner as not cancelling games the weekend after President Kennedy was shot. Crowds were not the least bit into the games and it was evidently an utterly awkward experience all the way around. Even recognizing that an assassination is fundamentally different from, and far more shocking than, the death of a 96-year-old monarch, it's still fair to recognize that the Queen was a towering figure of a sort Kennedy was not (other than in the mythology that built up after his death). They're just soccer games. It's not that hard to tweak the schedule later to fit them in somewhere, much as the NFL did when it cancelled all games the weekend after 9-11.

Except the NFL didn't have to schedule around other concurrent competitions that need teams and players. UEFA isn't cancelling Champions League fixtures and certainly won't delay them for the sake of an English club who has to play league matches after potentially making it to the final. And the players still need to be released to national teams for the international windows, so if the league overruns into them that's another headache.

Also, I really don't think the FA/PL were thinking about an obscure bit of American sports history when this decision was made. They are following the recommended protocols put out by the Royal Family, though ignoring their own history: when King George VI died in 1952, fixtures went on as scheduled but with a minute of silence and the national anthem (source: FFT).

[bing101]

Here is the feed for King Charles taking the crown

[Ted$8roadFan]

Watching the accession ceremony (never heard of it before, either) in which Charles formally became king, I was struck by the odd combination of once in a lifetime spectacle and mundane administration.

[mgk920]

Canada announced awhile back that the mint will change their coins more or less as soon as they get new dies approved by the Crown, but the Queen will remain on the $20 bill until it next comes up for redesign.  I'm going to guess that's a couple of years out, after they finish working on the design of the new $5.

I'm not sure if there's a requirement that the Sovereign be on the $20, and I suppose there's a chance they might choose to become a republic.

I just read that there's no law in Canada requiring the Monarch be on Canadian coins and currency.   Charles III will probably appear on the coins because of tradition, but the new C$20 bill may go with a non-royal, as concerns of diversity/equity make "an old white man" a less-than-desirable choice for the new bill.

For many years HRH The Queen was NOT on many Canadian banknotes.  ie, Wifred Mcdonald as on some in the late 20th century.  King Charles III will be on new Canadian coins when the Royal Canadian Mint (Winnipeg, MB) receives dies that have been approved by the Royal Family.

Mike

[GreenLanternCorps]

Watching the procession transporting Her Majesty's coffin from Balmoral to Edinburgh.  Crowds in every town and village.

(Nice video of the Scottish road network also.)

[kphoger]

the accession ceremony (never heard of it before, either)

Not surprising.  The last one was in 1952, and that one wasn't even televised.  I'm not even sure it was broadcast on the radio.

[Scott5114]

One thing that I find very interesting is that the media–both in the UK and in the US–are portraying the Queen's death as an occasion for widespread mourning, that everyone is universally distraught, the country is basically shut down, etc. Reports on the ground on social media, however, show that it's mostly business as usual; most people are already over it, if they were even grief-stricken at all. I saw a video where some official announced the new king, and the response was a loud chorus of boos that was quickly drowned out with trumpet fanfare.

Of course, the BBC is owned by the British government, so they have a vested interest in showing the monarchy in a positive light, and Sky is owned by a wealthy businessman who is happy enough with the status quo. (No idea who's responsible for Channel 4.) I've seen it summed up as the British media showing the news from the perspective of the upper class; if the proles have a different opinion on the matter it simply goes unheard. The US media doesn't have an excuse for covering it in the same way, other than it's not their clowns/not their circus, so it's easiest to just copy the tenor the BBC is taking.

Still, though, goes to show you that the easiest form of media bias to hide is in what's not reported, rather than what is.

[jakeroot]

One thing that I find very interesting is that the media–both in the UK and in the US–are portraying the Queen's death as an occasion for widespread mourning, that everyone is universally distraught, the country is basically shut down, etc. Reports on the ground on social media, however, show that it's mostly business as usual; most people are already over it, if they were even grief-stricken at all. I saw a video where some official announced the new king, and the response was a loud chorus of boos that was quickly drowned out with trumpet fanfare.

Of course, the BBC is owned by the British government, so they have a vested interest in showing the monarchy in a positive light, and Sky is owned by a wealthy businessman who is happy enough with the status quo. (No idea who's responsible for Channel 4.) I've seen it summed up as the British media showing the news from the perspective of the upper class; if the proles have a different opinion on the matter it simply goes unheard. The US media doesn't have an excuse for covering it in the same way, other than it's not their clowns/not their circus, so it's easiest to just copy the tenor the BBC is taking.

Still, though, goes to show you that the easiest form of media bias to hide is in what's not reported, rather than what is.

What exactly are we expecting, DPRK-style mourning? Of course people are going about their business. It's not a fascist monarchy.

Reminds me of this clip....

https://youtu.be/5Ce_954P20I

[on_wisconsin]

Of course, the BBC is owned by the British government, so they have a vested interest in showing the monarchy in a positive light, and Sky is owned by a wealthy businessman who is happy enough with the status quo.

Nitpick: Sky UK was brought out by Comcast/ NBCU a few years ago...

(No idea who's responsible for Channel 4.)

Channel 4 is owned by HM government but run as a quasi-commercial entity, unlike the BBC.

[Scott5114]

What exactly are we expecting, DPRK-style mourning? Of course people are going about their business. It's not a fascist monarchy.

They've arrested people for protesting too close to the funeral procession, so...

[J N Winkler]

The Guardian is reporting that people have been standing in line for five to seven hours to file past the Queen's coffin in St. Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh, so there are definitely mourners aplenty.

[jakeroot]

What exactly are we expecting, DPRK-style mourning? Of course people are going about their business. It's not a fascist monarchy.

They've arrested people for protesting too close to the funeral procession, so...

I assume that was in the name of "breach of the King's peace". Not exactly a new law.