Will the past 100 years or so be known as 'The Windsors' in England?
Asked by
cage (
3125
)
January 24th, 2009
Or at least when the royal family have their named changed due to the last Windsor dying or a Queen getting married to someone else etc.
e.g. think of the Tudors, the Victorian ages etc
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
22 Answers
You should have crammed these questions you just asked into one question instead of three.
They’re not related though :D
Places. Time periods. And Royalty.
Just because they contain similar words doesn’t mean they should be in the same question. They give completely different answers in each one.
They are 3 completely separate questions. Yes I’ll admit they lead into one another nicely. I even considered putting them in the same one, but they’re not the same question are they. Thanks for your concern about the fluther servers, but I’m sure they’ll manage.
A queen has already married someone else, Elizabeth II (Windsor) married Philippos of Greece and Denmark. That did not change their name from Windsor, after all they had made it up in the first place so that they were not part of the house of Saxe -Coburg and Gotha during WWI .
When Elizabeth II came to the throne it was hailed (optimistically) as a second Elizabethan age. Elizabeth I being probably the most impressive monarch so far.
There’s no set naming convention for this..
The Tudor, Stuarts etc. were families, while the Vicorian and Edwardian eras were named after christian names.
infact…
“If you could choose to live in a certain place to live self sufficiently where would it be?
Oh and by the way, I’m also interested in knowing if there was a time period you’d like to live in, which one would it be I know that;s not really related to my last question but you know
And I know this has nothing to do with living anywhere or anything or time really or whatever, but you know, Will this era of royalty be known as “the Windsors”
Sorry if that’s all a bit confusing, especially for one question, but I know some flutherites prefer it this way”
@90s_kid They are different questions. cramming all three into one would have been confusing
I think this is a good question, and I’ll follow to see what the others think. My guess would be ‘The Windsors” too.
@lercio thanks. That’s really a really interesting view.
@scamp thanks :)... GQ :( maybe? :(
@cage already did it honey chile!! One more thing… the questions aren’t even similar enough to make it onto the sibling list to the right———————————————————————>
The last two had to do with he past and time before now. Please don’t rub it in.
@Snoopy
No, like specifically when you look back in time, you would call it the Victorian Ages, or the Elizabethan etc
Obviously the current royal family’s name is “The Windsors”...
I’m thinking that it will depend on whether the past 100 years or so in the UK will be seen as having some uniting and defining character so that it makes sense for historians to group them together. It may be that the past century has been a period of such rapid and dramatic change (not just in the UK but around the world) that much shorter intervals will be needed.
Most likely when the present ruling family and/or the British monarchy comes to an end, there will be a flurry of papers, journal articles, and dissertations dissecting and analyzing it, with scholars and commentators vying with one another to be the one to assign the phrase or label that sticks (and thus get cited in all the other papers and the history books). It’ll be called a lot of things before one comes into common and hence standard use.
Just my guess.
Jeruba is probably right the last 100 years were so dominated by 2 world wars I doubt that royalty will be very high on the list of titles.
“The Miserables”
Since that goes so well with Modern England too I think that’d be perfect :)
The influence of the Royals in the lives of the people isn’t what it was, and the mystery and the grandeur of the throne were all but wiped out, I feel, with the documentary that was basically “A Day in the Life of the Mountbatten-Windsors” in 1969. That programme subsumed UK royalty into gossip fodder like everyone else. They no longer set the pace for culture or society, but followed it.
The actual family line goes back to 1714 and George I, who was the German-speaking Elector of Hanover before being chosen as the nearest Protestant successor to the Stuarts. All of the successors to George I have been by direct family line.
I seriously doubt that this period in history will be named after that bunch of inbred, odious, racist buffoons. Elizabeth Windsor is held up as some sort of paragon of virtue on account of living a long life and having a husband and children of such revolting aspect that she looks good in comparison. It’s not as though she’s done anything notable aside from overseeing the celebrification of her brood.
Meiosis, ‘inbred racist buffoons’ is far to strong! However i completely agree with your view. Elizabeth is a figurehead with no inspiration and completely out of touch with modern Britain. In the general view of our current middle/lower class culture the monarchy may aswell not even be there!
It may be time to part with out tradition.
@jasper1890
Inbred – Elizabeth Windsor and Philip Mountbatten were related to each other before marriage
Racist – see Philip Mountbatten and his numerous racial remarks
Buffoons – see Charles Windsor’s enthusiastic support of homoeopathy, his simplistic views on architecture.
I notice you didn’t quibble with odious :)
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
