The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 58

The British Royal Family and Poland: Any connection?


Lyzko 36 | 8,447
20 Sep 2022 #1
I am curious as to whether there is or was any palpable relationship between the Crown and the government of Poland.

While I am aware that Lech Walesa met the late Queen, I'm frankly not aware of how the Polish people felt about the erstwhile resident of Buckingham Palace and vice versa.
pawian 194 | 19,808
20 Sep 2022 #2
between the Crown and the government of Poland.

Once Prinz Charles visited Poland and he was positively shocked coz he read in Shakespeare`s plays that it was the land where polar bears roamed freely, while he saw none during his visit.



jon357 71 | 21,003
20 Sep 2022 #3
Apparently Prince Louis (The Prince and Princess of Wales' third child) was conceived in Warsaw.
pawian 194 | 19,808
20 Sep 2022 #4
was conceived in Warsaw.

Of course. I wrote about it here the moment it happened.
Alien 12 | 1,952
20 Sep 2022 #5
@pawian,#2
He must have come in winter when the bears were asleep.­čśü
pawian 194 | 19,808
20 Sep 2022 #6
the bears were asleep

:):):): Irresistibly logical conclusion. :):):)
jon357 71 | 21,003
20 Sep 2022 #7
At least ones member of the family has discreetly taken holidays in Poland.
pawian 194 | 19,808
20 Sep 2022 #8
Once Prinz Charles visited Poland

A gift for Prinz from grateful Polish subjects:

PS. I said subjects on purpose. Why???



Miloslaw 14 | 4,634
20 Sep 2022 #9
The Queens husband,Prince Philip had maternal Polish ancestry.
But most European royalty had family links due to inter marriage.
Bratwurst Boy 12 | 13,164
21 Sep 2022 #10
The Queens husband,Prince Philip had maternal Polish ancestry.

Do you have a link to that? I've heard his mother was Alice von Battenberg...and her mother was Victoria von Hessen....that maternal line goes (Wiki) back to Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld.....
GefreiterKania 15 | 1,690
21 Sep 2022 #11
@BratwurstBoy

Elisabeth II was practically Polish.

She was the daughter of George VI who was the son of George V who was the son of Edward VII who was the son of Victoria of Hannover who was the daughter of Edward August of Hannover who was the son of George III of Hannover who was the son of Frederich Ludwig of Hannover who was the son of George II of Hannover who was the son of George I of Hannover who was the son of Sophie Dorothea Wittelsbach who was daughter of Friedrich V who was son of Friedrich IV who was son of Ludwig VI Wittelsbach who was son of Maria Hohenzollern who was daughter of Casimir Hohenzollern who was son of Zofia Jagiellonka who was daughter of Kazimierz Jagiellończyk (Casimir IV Jagiellon)...

wikidata.org/wiki/Q53459

plotek.pl/plotek/7,154063,27520272,krolowa-elzbieta-ii-ma-polskie-korzenie-drzewo-genealogiczne.html

Of course, Lithuanians will tell you that Casimir wasn't Polish but Lithuanian, but you should ignore them.
Bratwurst Boy 12 | 13,164
21 Sep 2022 #12
who was daughter of Casimir Hohenzollern who was son of Zofia Jagiellonka who was daughter of Kazimierz Jagiellończyk (Casimir IV Jagiellon)...

Wow! ­čś«

...what happened to the Jagiellons? Is that Polands royal family?
GefreiterKania 15 | 1,690
21 Sep 2022 #13
...what happened to the Jagiellons?

The dynasty stopped because Sigmundus II Augustus (the last of Jagiellons) and Catherine Habsburg were childless.

Sigmundus died on 7th July 1572, and Poland moved into electoral kingdom era.

Is that Polands royal family?

Poland has no royal family.

On the 17th March 1921, Polish constitution abolished the existence of nobility. So ever since then there are no kings, princes, barons or counts in Poland (there are some still some c*nts though).
Kashub1410 4 | 456
21 Sep 2022 #14
@GefreiterKania
That's quite a stretch to say the least, royalty intermingled between one another quite a lot.

Surname and coat of arms "idzie po mieczu" (male lineage) therefore, female connections are merely a "fancy" it bears no meaning.

So BB can easily ignore it as everyone else, and no Pole is a subject of any secular royalty!
GefreiterKania 15 | 1,690
21 Sep 2022 #15
no Pole is a subject of any secular royalty

And, as I wrote above, nobility was legally abolished altogether in 1921, so if anyone today claims to be a count, he probably uses one letter too many. :D
Bratwurst Boy 12 | 13,164
21 Sep 2022 #16
Oh that......Germans with historical royal connections are still known for it (and still brag about it), abolishment or not! :)

dw.com/en/are-there-any-princes-or-princesses-left-in-germany/a-50006889
Kashub1410 4 | 456
21 Sep 2022 #17
@GefreiterKania
Lol you are mixing things here, noble privilieges were abolished. Can you abolish farmers? Monastic orders? Or taxi drivers? Don't be nonsensical, it merely stated that the nobility have no right to claim anything more from the state then any other citizen.

Noble households didn't just disappear through the night in 1921

Some people just don't get it, being noble is granted for all eternity and goes through blood. No parliamentary decision can revoke that! xD

Besides noble titles among Polish Szlachta is a foreign concept. So not only would he use a few letters too many but, can be considered a traitor and rightfully scorned
GefreiterKania 15 | 1,690
21 Sep 2022 #18
noble privilieges were abolished

Privileges and titles.

"Szlachecki stan społeczny został prawnie zniesiony na mocy konstytucji"

pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szlachta_w_Polsce

Can you abolish farmers? Monastic orders? Or taxi drivers?

It is not me, but you confusing things, Gruni. :) Farmers and taxi drivers are professions - not stany społeczne. LOL :D

And monastic vows can be revoked individually as well as the entire orders can be abolished (as it happened in history).

titles among Polish Szlachta is a foreign concept (...) can be considered a traitor and rightfully scorned

Oh, so you are not talking about those clowns today who claim to be counts, barons and princes? Good. However, at the height of its development nobility encompassed more than 10% of Polish society - mixed marriages throughout centuries could make anyone claim to be of noble ancestry today. This kind of nonsense has no place in modern society (unless it's for popular fun - a royal zoo, like in the UK), that's why it was abolished in 1921.

The fact that szlachecki stan spo┼éeczny zosta┼é prawnie zniesiony means that nobody can claim to be a nobleman today. You can claim (God knows what for) noble ancestry and say that your family comes from some hrabia or ksi─ů┼╝e but you cannot claim that you are a nobleman yourself. So there. :)
jon357 71 | 21,003
21 Sep 2022 #19
the Jagiellons? Is that Polands royal family?

It was one of many. None of them had much staying power.

anyone today claims to be a count, he probably uses one letter too many. :D

I know one. He's a string PiS supporter and Smolenskist. And a twat.

Noble households didn't just disappear through the night in 1921

There was nothing 'noble' about them, if you mean szlachta. They were 18% of e population, rather than an actual noble top 1%...
GefreiterKania 15 | 1,690
21 Sep 2022 #20
an actual noble top 1%

The actual noble top 1% were the worst c*nts, Jon. They were the ones collaborating with invaders (Radziwiłłs for example), blocking all social and economic reforms, and eventually leading to Poland's downfall in the 18th century.

The 10-20% of szaraczki weren't that bad - they were the ones in panzer cavalry banners, fighting and dying for Poland in countless wars, keeping the Polish language and traditions alive in the borderlands. They weren't too bad. But the top 1% were the c*nts of the first order and I would be ashamed to be in any way associated with them.
Kashub1410 4 | 456
21 Sep 2022 #21
@jon357
It seems I need to educate you a bit, you posh son of a horsemouth!

[url=en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/noble][/url]

Seems you are focusing too much about it being closer to the meaning of "highborn" while I certainly see being highborn as a product of excelling one's self which is the essence of being noble (nobility).

One can't ennoble somebody based on their position, (a king doesn't knight kings!)

Seems your looking at the consequences of becoming noble, and their fruit not at the tree itself! Which causes much of the misunderstanding.

Just like a women, foolishly looking at a man's clothes as to judge their standing in society. Utter foolishness

@Gefreiterkania
Their (those you speak of) fight with the nobility was as to increase their own status, influence and privileges wanting it to be more based on their fruits. Which was unacceptable!

Quite true, both the richest and the poorest had a lot of downsides to them. Contributed in their ways. But yeah
jon357 71 | 21,003
21 Sep 2022 #22
@Kashub1410
That means nothing. The szlachta weren't 'noble'; they were at best the only people in a given village with basic literacy skills and who washed their bodies weekly rather than annually.

And what does 'noble' even mean? Character? Background? Behaviour?

In which case it doesn't mean anything at all.

You're going off topic however, since the topic is British royalty (does that mean the monarchy?) and their connection to Poland.
Kashub1410 4 | 456
21 Sep 2022 #23
@jon357
Ugh you are a despicable materialist! No interest in debating with you any longer! You could make my stomach turn!

Regarding the topic, I have a hard time seeing them being connected much with Poland as they were more connected with the opposing forces (the dynasties of Habsburg, Romanov and Hohenzollern).

It changed dramatically after 1939 however when they took an anti-Hitler stance to some degree in solidarity with the British public. Somewhat complicated affair, I wouldn't be surprised if they saw Poles as Eastern European rabble. But, they are their own kind in their own world after all
jon357 71 | 21,003
21 Sep 2022 #24
Ugh you are a despicable materialist

Or a realistic realist. And it's not a debating society.

more connected with the opposing forces

Not that connected that much. There was always an uneasy relationship with the Krauts from about the time of George III.

Poles as Eastern European rabble

What percentage actually were? Not that the ancestors of most of today's Poles saw themselves as Polish until the 1930s
Kashub1410 4 | 456
21 Sep 2022 #25
@jon357
Seems more like a detached materialist, if you lost your eyes and nerves in your body. You probably think the world has ended!

Not that connected at all.

I remember family photoes of pre-war (of ww1) being rather vividly connected.

I can grant it to them that they didn't have much to do with pre Napoleon royal family in Britain (which relatively approved of a French "ally" getting carved up)
jon357 71 | 21,003
21 Sep 2022 #26
if you lost your eyes and nerves in your body. You probably think the world has ended!

It effectively would for someone who lost all the nerves in their body.

family photoes of pre-war (of ww1) being rather vividly connected.

Family photos are nothing compared to duty and responsibility to the nation's they led.

pre Napoleon

Of course. Napoleon was evil, and the Putin of his day. The Bourbons that preceded him were puppets of the Vatican and the Spanish/Austrians.
Kashub1410 4 | 456
21 Sep 2022 #27
@jon357
And here comes the the heretical gibberish nonsense! I am out!
jon357 71 | 21,003
21 Sep 2022 #28
There's more connections betwen the monarchy and Poland. When the Polish President (Kwa┼Ťniewski, the best one) visited London, The Queen showed him a collection of letters sent by Sikorski.

heretical

What heresy is that, then?

I am out!

Congratulations! Are you having a coming out party?
Atch 17 | 4,089
21 Sep 2022 #29
Queen Elizabeth visited Poland in 1996.

euscreen.eu/item.html?id=EUS_058E86DC5F5447F7B0500CDD78450299

She addressed the Sejm while she was here.

And of course she met JP II several times.
jon357 71 | 21,003
21 Sep 2022 #30
Queen Elizabeth visited Poland in 1996.

I wonder where She visited. Probably a huge crowd turned out as they did for Her visit in the 90s.

The actual noble top 1% were the worst c*nts

The 'magnaty', the ones who sold Poland.

Apart from a very few aristocratic titles (like in the Radziwiłł family) which derive from the Lithuanian part of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, any title must have come from a partitioning power and therefore implies a degree of collaboration.

Even Joseph Conrad didn't accept a knighthood despite a knighthood not being an aristocratic title (it's a degree in an order similar to Polonia Resititurta or Order Orła Białego) and not being from a partitioning power or enemy of Poland; he was so convinced of the idea of equality within his caste.


Home / History / The British Royal Family and Poland: Any connection?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.