"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 7/6/2014 12:18 PM, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> Don't tell me the Royal Family isn't inbred?! <teasing> That seems to
>>> be
>>> the prevailing stereotype.
>>
>> They used to be far more then they are now. They are allowing commoners
>> in now - albeit fairly posh ones <g>
>>
>>
> I don't really know much about the history of the UK and much of it is,
> I'm sure, obscured simply by what I've see on television or in movies. But
> wasn't Diana, Princess of Wales, technically a "commoner?"

Her father was an Earl so she was a 'lady' Aristocracy, though not
royalty.

> Seems to me Royal marriages way back when were primarily done for
> political reasons. And for the expansion of the kingdom. Again, I only
> know what I've read about or seen on television or in movies. Being an
> American, I tend to take those things with a grain of salt.

You are correct, that is how it used to be. It is very refreshing that Kate
really is a commoner, albeit the daughter of a millionaire.

Time they got some good English blood in there))


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/