More 1909 portraits -
Left 1909 Juliana Armour Ferguson by Joaquín Sorolla y Bastida (Smith College Museum of Art - Northampton, Massachusetts, USA). From oceansbridge.com/shop/artists/s/soe-spe/sorolla-joaquin-y-bastida/juliana-armour-ferguson?utm_source=pinterest 654X1280.
Right 1909 Margot Asquith by Philip Alexius de László (Chtistie's - Live auction 8020 15Dec11 Lot 33). From their Web site) 3272X4261.
Left 1909 Mrs. Charles B. Alexander by Joaquín Sorolla y Bastida (private collection). From joaquin-sorolla.blogspot.com/2015/06/mrs-charles-b-alexander.html 997X1280.
Right 1909 Mrs. Ira Nelson Morris y sus Hijos by Joaquín Sorolla y Bastida (Hispanic Society Museum & Library - New York City, New York, USA). From joaquin-sorolla.blogspot.com/2009/06/mrs-ira-nelson-morris-y-sus-hijos.html 1236X1600.
Left 1909 Mrs. William H. Gratwick, Emilie Victorine Piolet Mitchell Gratwick by Joaquin Sorolla y Bastida (location ?). From fleurdulys.tumblr.com/post/83297159756/william-h-gratwick-emilie-victorine-piolet 802X1280.
Right 1909 Mrs. Winthrop W. Aldrich (Harriet Alexander) by Joaquín Sorolla y Bastida (Metropolitan Museum of Art - New York City, New York, USA). From Wikimedia 771X1012.
Left 1909 Patricia of Connaught postcard. From eBay fixed spots with Photoshop and removed mono-color tint 952X1486.
Right 1909 Portrait of Countess Sophia Vladimirovna Panina by Ilya Repin (State Russian Museum). From the discontinued Athenaeum Web site 622X885.
Left 1909 Réjane by Ramon Casas (location ?). From verbinina.wordpress.com/2014/08/27/portraits-of-french-actresses-of-la-belle-epoque/ 2330X3000.
Right 1909 Señora de Urcola llevaba una mantilla de negro by Joaquín Sorolla y Bastida (auctioned by Christie's). From Wikimedia 1500X3033.
1909 Emilie Flöge by Atelier d'Ora/Arthur Benda/Madame d'Ora (Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe - Hamburg, Germany). From tumblr.com/fashionsfromthepast/743745372176957440? 743X1200
1909 (22Feb issue) Jugend - Die Raffinierte by Xavier Gose. From tumblr.com/mote-historie/744226861686685696/xavier-gose-paris-die-raffinierte-jugend? 1016X1865.
1 note
·
View note
“Patricia of Connaught is an interesting personality. She was born into the most powerful monarchy in the world, the British, during her youth she rejected several marriage proposals that included, from heir princes to grand dukes, but in the end she chose to marry a commoner, Alexander Ramsay, and at an advanced age for the time, 33 years old. During his lifetime, he followed the reigns of several British monarchs, as well as world transformations.” - Submitted by cenacevedo15
34 notes
·
View notes
Celta, my apologies if I’m overstepping “Tumblr protocol,” but here’s an excellent anon submission from another Tumblr blog that addresses the issue of who has authority (the Crown or Parliament?) to issue/remove UK royal and peerage titles. This was submitted to cat-with-the-emerald-tiara tumblr. (I don’t have an active tumblr…hope it’s ok to submit this to you this way…)
Anon Submission
A rebuttal to defence of Charles.
The matter of titles has been a very curious one to investigate. Parliament has repeatedly rejected all attempts to discuss the titles, nevermind doing anything about them whether at public request via petitions or private members bills. At the height of title stripping fervour by petitions, parliament famously requested legal council and paperwork on the matter.
Each time, they send out the same response: Royal titles are a matter for the monarch NOT parliament.
This goes against the accepted understanding that titles are the purview of parliament so what gives?
Constitutional / legal experts have began to discuss the matter. The most recent published opinion from such a scholar was illuminating.
Here is link to read for yourself:
https://middletemplar.org.uk/to-strip-or-not-to-strip-prince-harrys-titles/
To summarise his opinion:
ALL titles held by members of the royal family are the gift of the monarch and given by royal perogative without oversight of parliament, privy council, Prime Minister or UK government.
This includes birthright titles.
To be clear: HRH, Prince, Duke, Earl, Baron, Knight.
Since they are given without parliament, privy council, Prime Minister or UK government oversight, they are are NOT in the purview of parliament, privy council, Prime Minister or UK government and therefore can’t be removed by those bodies. This explains parliament’s repeated response to all those petitions and private members’ bills.
The Scholar goes on to explain that ALL titles held by members of the royal family are granted by LP. Whether this is the famous 1917 LP or a more recent LP eg the one written to grant William and Edward their titles of Wales and Edinburgh.
Any title granted by LP can be removed by LP. No need to check with parliament.
He doesn’t mention it, but we have a historic example of HRH Princess Patricia of Connaught ( Queen Victoria’s granddaughter from one of her sons) who was stripped by LP in 1919.
Scholar explains removal by LP point by explaining a fundamental misunderstanding of the 1917 LP.
It famously sets out the criteria of who can hold the HRH/ Prince titles, but in doing so it also stripped many, many Princes of both UK and Germany of HRH/ HSH/ HH Princes titles that they already had.
If Queen Mary wasn’t already Queen and married to George V, she would have been stripped because her maiden title was HSH Princess Mary of Teck. Her claim to the UK throne came via her mother who was a first cousin to Queen Victoria. Under the new 1917 LP rules, Queen Mary had no right to Prince of the UK or any Highness style and would be stripped of it by the 1917 LP.
However, the scholar reiterates that the only thing Charles has no power to effect is the Line of Succession and the Counsellors of State because these have parliament, privy council, Prime Minister or UK government oversight. He can make suggestions as he fid to add Anne and Edward, but it is not in his purview to remove or block anyone from these 2 bodies. Only Parliament can do that.
Finally, anon mentions that Harold sued or threatened to sue Charles to get Prince titles for the Sussex children.
Without researching this, i can tell you categorically that this did not happen. Charles as Monarch is literally above the law. His royal perogative is both un-justiceable and un-reviewable as the scholar reminds us. In regular language that means Charles can not be sued. Nor can he be arrested. No subjected to the law of the land. There is no lawyer who would attempt to try because of this ironclad law. And no judge or court will take the case.
All lawyers and courts act on behalf of the Monarch and justice is carried out in his name so how can he sue himself?!
What is more likely to have happened is that the Sussexes grabbed the titles, and Charles allowed it to keep the peace which is a frequent excuse given by the Palace for their inaction when the Sussexes step over the line.
Notice that unlike William and Edward, there was no acknowledgement, BP announcement or publication in the London Gazette which are 3 required formal processes for new titles. Instead BP just updated website.
With their ingrained victimhood, it’s curious that the Sussexes didn’t dare grab or complain about their kids’ HRH styles. No one is at war with the kids so if they are Prince then they are also HRH, but the Sussexes only grabbed Prince.
In conclusion, Charles as monarch absolutely had the power to strip Harold completely to become plain Mr Henry Mountbatten-Windsor, but he chooses not to do it. Just like he allowed the Sussexes to grab Prince titles for their kids without objection when he knows that they can’t sue him if he withheld said titles.
*
Hi Nonny,
Thank you for sending this in.
This is the link to the post: https://the-cat-with-the-emerald-tiara-1.tumblr.com/post/749747114107600897/anon-submission
Cat’s blog is discussing the topic right now and there have been various posts on it, all of which are illuminating.
My understanding is that parliament can not remove royal titles. I believe they have said this when they rejected a petition to remove Harry’s titles.
I also think that parliament can remove normal peerage titles, but only for cases where it is specified in the law.
Harry’s Duke title is, I think, classed as a royal title and as such can only be removed by the King.
I appreciate the link to the scholar in the post above. I like to see what other people who know more than I do think about this.
The hard thing for me is to remember that there are two tiers of titles in the UK, the peerage (normal duke, earl, baron etc) and the royals (HRH, Prince, Princess but also royal Duke, royal Earl, royal Baron etc - titles with the normal names but which are held by royals.).
23 notes
·
View notes