# Crown Estate
# Prince Charles
# Duchy of Cornwall
Who Owns Britain 1872
Church of England – 2.2 million acres
Duke of Sutherland – 1.4 million acres
Duke of Buccleuch – 460,000 acres
Earl of Breadalbane – 440,000 acres
Lady Matheson – 425,000 acres
Sir Charles Ross – 360,000 acres
Earl of Seafield – 310,000 acres
Duke of Richmond – 290,000 acres
Earl of Fife – 250,000 acres
Sir Alexander Matheson – 220,000 acres
Who Owns Britain 2010
The Forestry Commission – 2.6 million acres
The National Trust – 630,000 acres
Ministry of Defence – 590,000 acres
Pension funds – 550,000 acres
Utilities like water and power – 500,000 acres
The Crown Estate – 360,000 acres
The RSPB – 320,000 acres
The Duke of Buccleuch – 240,000 acres
The National Trust for Scotland – 190,000 acres
The Duke of Atholl’s trusts – 150,000 acres
The top ten aristocratic owners
Duke of Buccleuch - 240,000 acres
Duke of Atholl’s trusts - 150,000 acres
Prince Charles as the Duke of Cornwall - 134,000 acres
Duke of Westminster - 133,000 acres
Duke of Northumberland - 130,000 acres
Capt Alwyne Farquharson - 128,000 acres
Earl of Seafield - 101,000 acres
Countess of Sutherland - 82,000 acres
Baroness Willoughby de’Eresby - 78,000 acres
The Pearson family - 69,000 acres
Just to put things into perspective:
Who Owns Britain 1872
Church of England – 3,437.5 square miles
Duke of Sutherland – 2,187.5 square miles
Duke of Buccleuch – 718.75 square miles
Earl of Breadalbane – 687.5 square miles
Lady Matheson – 664.06 square miles
Sir Charles Ross – 562.5 square miles
Earl of Seafield – 484.38 square miles
Duke of Richmond – 453.13 square miles
Earl of Fife – 390.63 square miles
Sir Alexander Matheson – 343.75 square miles
Who Owns Britain 2010
The Forestry Commission – 4062.5 square miles
The National Trust – 984.38 square miles
Ministry of Defence – 921.88 square miles
Pension funds – 859.38 square miles
Utilities like water and power – 781.25 square miles
The Crown Estate – 562.5 square miles
The RSPB – 500 square miles
The Duke of Buccleuch – 375 square miles
The National Trust for Scotland – 296.88 square miles
The Duke of Atholl’s trusts – 234.38 square miles
The top ten aristocratic owners
Duke of Buccleuch - 375 square miles
Duke of Atholl’s trusts - 234.38 square miles
Prince Charles as the Duke of Cornwall - 209.38 square miles
Duke of Westminster - 207.81 square miles
Duke of Northumberland - 203.13 square miles
Capt Alwyne Farquharson - 200 square miles
Earl of Seafield - 157.81 square miles
Countess of Sutherland - 128.13 square miles
Baroness Willoughby de’Eresby - 121.88 square miles
The Pearson family - 107.81 square miles
Need proportions? Well, New York City is only 468.5 square miles. That means the Crown Estate owns more land than New York City is big! Also, Los Angeles comes in at 502.7 square miles. Again, the Crown Estate remains supreme! Can you imagine owning more land than NYC or LA are big?
# William the Conqueror
# William I
# King William
# King William I
# law code
# Middle Ages
# Medieval Ages
# Medieval Europe
Here is set down what William, king of the English, established in consultation with his magnates after the conquest of England:
1. First that above all things he wishes one God to be revered throughout his whole realm, one faith in Christ to be kept ever inviolate, and peace and security to be preserved between English and Normans.
2. We decree also that every freeman shall affirm by oath and compact that he will be loyal to king William both within and without England, that he will preserve with him his lands and honor with all fidelity and defend him against his enemies.
3. I will, moreover, that all the men I have brought with me, or who have come after me, shall be protected by my peace and shall dwell in quiet. And if any one of them shall be slain, let the lord of his murderer seize him within five days, if he can; but if he cannot, let him pay me 46 marks of silver so long as his substance avails. And when his substance is exhausted, let the whole hundred in which the murder took place pay what remains in common.
4. And let every Frenchman who, in the time of king Edward, my kinsman, was a sharer in the customs of the English, pay what they call “scot and lot”, according to the laws of the English. This decree was ordained in the city of Gloucester.
5. We forbid also that any live cattle shall be bought or sold for money except within cities, and this shall be done before three faithful witnesses; nor even anything old without surety and warrant. But if anyone shall do otherwise, let him pay once, and afterwards a second time for a fine.
6. It was decreed there that if a Frenchman shall charge an Englishman with perjury or murder or theft or homicide or “ran”, as the English call open rapine which cannot be denied, the Englishman may defend himself, as he shall prefer, either by the ordeal of hot iron or by wager of battle. But if the Englishman be infirm, let him find another who will take his place. If one of them shall be vanquished, he shall pay a fine of 40 shillings to the king. If an Englishman shall charge a Frenchman and be unwilling to prove his accusation either by ordeal or by wager of battle, I will, nevertheless, that the Frenchman shall acquit himself by a valid oath.
7. This also I command and will, that all shall have and hold the law of the king Edward in respect of their lands and all their posessions, with the addition of those decrees I have ordained for the welfare of the English people.
8. Every man who wishes to be considered a freeman shall be in pledge so that his surety shall hold him and hand him over to justice if he shall offend in any way. And if any such shall escape, let his sureties see to it that they pay forthwith what is charge against him, and let them clear themselves of any complicity in his escape. Let recourse be had to the hundred and shire courts as our predecessors decreed. And those who ought of right to come and are unwilling to appear, shall be summoned once; and if for the second time they refuse to come, one ox shall be taken from them, and they shall be summoned a third time. And if they do not come the third time, a second ox shall be taken from them. But if they do not come the fourth summons, the man who is unwilling to come shall forfeit from his goods the amount of the charge against him — “ceapgeld” as it is called — and in addition to this a fine to the king.
9. I prohibit the sale of any man by another outside the country on pain of a fine to be paid in full to me.
10. I also forbid that anyone shall be slain or hanged for any fault, but let his eyes be put out and let him be castrated. And this command shall not be violated under pain of a fine in full to me.
What I’ve said about Beatrice:
I have to say that Beatrice’s dress definitely needs adjustments! (LINK)
Yes! If I criticize Kate for this kind of stuff then I have to do the same with the York girls! I think some length at the bottom and some closure at the top would have been nice! (LINK)
She did look beautiful, but I do have to point out that her under-dress was VERY short. So not entirely appropriate. I have to keep this fair! If I talk bad about Kate’s lengths than I have to do that with everyone else! (LINK this one is for the event she did in April)
What I have said about Kate:
Yes to all of this! If it had been in the back I think I would be going gaga over the dress. (LINK)
I’m kind of digging this. The skirt is just a teensy bit short but nothing to cry home about. I think she chose a winner, especially since she adheres to fashion protocol that other attendees are wearing. Usually everyone is dressed up business-like while Kate is in some high street dress, but this is very good. She looks like she belongs with the group of business women. Points for her! (LINK)
According to the Letters Patent issued in 1917,
“Now Know Ye that We of our especial grace certain knowledge and mere motion do hereby declare our Royal Will and Pleasure that the children of any Sovereign of these Realms and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour.
And We do further declare our Royal Will and Pleasure that save as aforesaid the style title or attribute of Royal Highness Highness or Serene Highness and the titular dignity of Prince or Princess shall not henceforth be assumed or borne by any descendent of any Sovereign of these Realms excepting always any such descendant who at the date of these Letters Patent holds or bears any right to any such style degree attribute or titular dignity in pursuance of any Letters Patent granted by Ourselves or any of Our Royal Predecessors and still remaining unrevoked it being Our Royal Will and Pleasure that the grandchildren of the sons of any such Sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have and enjoy in all occasions the style and title enjoyed by the children of Dukes of these Our Realms.”
In modern speak, it means that only the grandson of the PoW is able to hold the title of ‘prince’ or ‘princess,’ everyone else shall be styled or titled by a land title that they inherit from their parent (i.e. lady, lord, duke, duchess, etc.).
# Sad but true
# Prince & Me
# Queen Elizabeth II
# Queen Victoria
I really wanted to do your question justice so I went searching and came upon this. If I had not found this I probably would have simply said to look at what all of her patronages do (like the Major Works Fund) but this is a little more in-depth.
“1. She made the real transition from an imperial organisation to a free association of countries which shared historic links, democratic interests, culture, economic and military interests. Nowadays, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK are everlasting alleys that cooperate in education, economic, military and humanitarian affairs, thanks to the Queen.
2. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have had revolutionary and separatist groups, but the Queen started a reunification of the nation since the start of her reign (she gave a national flag to Wales and invested Prince Charles as Prince of Wales through a worldwide ceremony that highlighted welsh tradition; she has embraced scottish lifestyle, for example, spending all her summers there, encouraging scottish tradition as the 9 am bagpipe, walking Scotland as a commoner… She has given the scottish a scottish head of state. In Northern Ireland the Crown is the ultimate symbol of the union, so they remain in the kingdom pretty much for the Queen. She has always denied the possibility of a deep devolution of powers or separation. So, the UK has remained together thanks to the Queen.
3. She has chosen, advised and supervised 12 different administrations during her reign, and none of them has been deficient. So the continuity of an effective government has been guaranteed by the Queen’s abide.
4. The Queen has become the paradigmatic head of state with her strong commitment to duty. She has never caused a constitutional crisis and she has executed all her responsibilities as head of all branches of power, step by step, without a single mistake. Even now, at 85, she works as hard as 60 years ago, and all prime ministers end up saying we got very lucky to have her as head of state. She is “an anchor of our time”, as Ban Ki Moon said.
5. The Queen is head of more than 500 organisations that work for the benefit of the people of the UK and abroad, which makes her a tremendous force of good and change in the world.
A poll revealed Elizabeth II is considered by the british as one of the greatest britons ever, and constitutionalists as well as common people see her as one of the greatest monarchs the UK has had.”
I am being told off for using the tabloids as sources for my proof for several things.
I am told they are just rumour and never proven right, that they are unreliable and just press.
May I ask where pro Kate’s get all their info from because last time I checked that was all tabloids too
Before you tell me off for using the tabloid for proof, think, are you using tabloids as proof too?
If so, you are being hypocritical