dead Queen Elizabeth II

[Windsor 2,143]

 

 

 

 

 

Her dad was only 56...

 

 

As far as I'm aware the Queen isn't smoking a duty free pack a day.

 

Nor does she pickle herself to the same extent as the Queen Mother.

[gcreptile 10,234]

If she really gets 105 years old, she could pass the throne to her great-grandson. That actually happened once before, when French king Louis XIV passed the throne to his great-grandson Louis XV. Louis XIV is, of course, the longest reigning monarch who ever lived, unless you count the pharaoh Pepi II who, according to some, reigned for 94 years. To surpass that, she would have to become 116 years old.

[maryportfuncity 10,017]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Her dad was only 56...

 

 

As far as I'm aware the Queen isn't smoking a duty free pack a day.

 

Nor does she pickle herself to the same extent as the Queen Mother.

 

 

How her health would survive the death of the Duke of Edinburgh is the one real question standing between her and breaking almost all the longevity records she could break.

[Deathray 2,933]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Her dad was only 56...

As far as I'm aware the Queen isn't smoking a duty free pack a day.

Nor does she pickle herself to the same extent as the Queen Mother.

How her health would survive the death of the Duke of Edinburgh is the one real question standing between her and breaking almost all the longevity records she could break.

The one she won't break is her mothers. Can't see her living to 140 odd years. She should be included on the dthlist from next year given she'll be turning 90 and good old prince phil will be turning 95. One of them must be due to topple off the stairs soon?

[Windsor 2,143]

The next big anniversaries will be 65 years on the throne in February 2017 and the 70th wedding anniversary in November 2017.

By that stage she will be 90/91, and he will be 95/96.

 

If I'm honest, after the age of 90 I think its her duty to give serious consideration to abdicating.

[RadGuy 1,605]

The next big anniversaries will be 65 years on the throne in February 2017 and the 70th wedding anniversary in November 2017.

By that stage she will be 90/91, and he will be 95/96.

 

If I'm honest, after the age of 90 I think its her duty to give serious consideration to abdicating.

The thing is Prince Phillip will probably be dead by November 2017.

[Windsor 2,143]

 

The next big anniversaries will be 65 years on the throne in February 2017 and the 70th wedding anniversary in November 2017.

By that stage she will be 90/91, and he will be 95/96.

 

If I'm honest, after the age of 90 I think its her duty to give serious consideration to abdicating.

The thing is Prince Phillip will probably be dead by November 2017.

 

 

 

I see no reason for that statement.

 

He still keeps himself busy, he still seems to have his marbles, and he is still physically fit for his age.

[Fergie86 358]

The next big anniversaries will be 65 years on the throne in February 2017 and the 70th wedding anniversary in November 2017.

By that stage she will be 90/91, and he will be 95/96.

 

If I'm honest, after the age of 90 I think its her duty to give serious consideration to abdicating.

The Queen will never abdicate she will be on the throne until the day she dies, i suppose she could decline health wise if Prince Philip dies which is possible but i still expect her to live to be 105+. There is also no real reason for her to abdicate as lets be honest she has no real say in how the country is run like the Prime Minister, she does bring in a lot of money into the country through tourism though so i suppose she has some use. As long as she is healthy enough to do her Royal wave every now and then she will never abdicate.

[maryportfuncity 10,017]

 

 

The next big anniversaries will be 65 years on the throne in February 2017 and the 70th wedding anniversary in November 2017.

By that stage she will be 90/91, and he will be 95/96.

 

If I'm honest, after the age of 90 I think its her duty to give serious consideration to abdicating.

The thing is Prince Phillip will probably be dead by November 2017.

 

 

 

I see no reason for that statement.

 

He still keeps himself busy, he still seems to have his marbles, and he is still physically fit for his age.

 

 

 

Indeed, his frailties have brought on the odd hospital stay but he's still got his wits, and seems to have the focus and discipline his navy days gave him.

[Deathray 2,933]

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

[Dr. Zorders 1,269]

 

 

 

The next big anniversaries will be 65 years on the throne in February 2017 and the 70th wedding anniversary in November 2017.

By that stage she will be 90/91, and he will be 95/96.

 

If I'm honest, after the age of 90 I think its her duty to give serious consideration to abdicating.

The thing is Prince Phillip will probably be dead by November 2017.

 

 

 

I see no reason for that statement.

 

He still keeps himself busy, he still seems to have his marbles, and he is still physically fit for his age.

 

 

 

Indeed, his frailties have brought on the odd hospital stay but he's still got his wits, and seems to have the focus and discipline his navy days gave him.

 

 

Maybe his navy days gave him something else too? "Blast this syphilis!"

 

BTW the Queen has already started "a transition" of duties to Charlie and announced a slowing down of her own duties. If she's feeling like being a silly old bint she'll retire one day after she beats Queen Victoria's record or something which is a really stupidly Richard Osman-like way of doing things.

 

If she wants to be sensible she should just announce she's handing over to Charles in April or something like that.

[Windsor 2,143]

 

 

 

 

The next big anniversaries will be 65 years on the throne in February 2017 and the 70th wedding anniversary in November 2017.

By that stage she will be 90/91, and he will be 95/96.

 

If I'm honest, after the age of 90 I think its her duty to give serious consideration to abdicating.

The thing is Prince Phillip will probably be dead by November 2017.

 

 

 

I see no reason for that statement.

 

He still keeps himself busy, he still seems to have his marbles, and he is still physically fit for his age.

 

 

 

Indeed, his frailties have brought on the odd hospital stay but he's still got his wits, and seems to have the focus and discipline his navy days gave him.

 

 

Maybe his navy days gave him something else too? "Blast this syphilis!"

 

BTW the Queen has already started "a transition" of duties to Charlie and announced a slowing down of her own duties. If she's feeling like being a silly old bint she'll retire one day after she beats Queen Victoria's record or something which is a really stupidly Richard Osman-like way of doing things.

 

If she wants to be sensible she should just announce she's handing over to Charles in April or something like that.

 

 

Her 90th Birthday seems like a good date for an abdication.

[Ulitzer95 11,083]

She's already said she won't abdicate... What would be the point anyway when most of her duties have already been transferred to other members of the Royal Family? (which actually makes more sense to me given that the monarch's diary is chaotic)

[Windsor 2,143]

She's already said she won't abdicate... What would be the point anyway when most of her duties have already been transferred to other members of the Royal Family? (which actually makes more sense to me given that the monarch's diary is chaotic)

 

In my view she had never stated she will never abdicate. She can still "devote herself to service" without being Queen.

[msc 17,762]

Reminds me of the Spitting Image sketch with the Queen puppet singing I Will Survive: "As long as Charles's next in line, I've got to stay alive..."

[maryportfuncity 10,017]

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

[Cat O'Falk 3,287]

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Aren't you supposed to be on t'radio now or summat MPFC?

[Phantom 2,469]

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

[Magere Hein 1,397]

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

 

With every passing year with his mother alive the chances of that happening grow slimmer. Should he survive her, his reign will be short.

 

regards,

Hein

[Fergie86 358]

 

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

 

With every passing year with his mother alive the chances of that happening grow slimmer. Should he survive her, his reign will be short.

 

regards,

Hein

 

True, for his age Prince Charles looks bad considering the pampered lifestyle he has had, personally think he looks bad for 66, probably won't happen but i wouldn't be surprised if Charles died before the Queen.

[Magere Hein 1,397]

True, for his age Prince Charles looks bad considering the pampered lifestyle he has had, personally think he looks bad for 66, probably won't happen but i wouldn't be surprised if Charles died before the Queen.

Now that I've given this a bit more thought, I realise that it's quite strange that he may get a job at an age most other Brits are retired.

 

regards,

Hein

[Toast 14,845]

Now that I've given this a bit more thought, I realise that it's quite strange that he may get a job at an age most other Brits are retired.

 

Surely there's no real difference. As far as I know he does some sort of public engagement on a daily basis, probably more than one, and has done all his life. That wouldn't change. He'll probably just have some more paperwork to look at and sign every day.

[Magere Hein 1,397]

Surely there's no real difference. As far as I know he does some sort of public engagement on a daily basis, probably more than one, and has done all his life. That wouldn't change. He'll probably just have some more paperwork to look at and sign every day.

I don't know how busy a king or queen is with the paperwork, and I don't care. I agree that Charles does his bit in the ribbon-cutting business.

 

My idea that it's actually a job comes from some bit I read about the results of a UK census in the late 19th century. It totalled all people by occupation, including one entry: "queen 1". It did not include an entry: "prince of wales 1".

 

regards,

Hein

[Bibliogryphon 8,662]

 

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

 

With every passing year with his mother alive the chances of that happening grow slimmer. Should he survive her, his reign will be short.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Certainly less than 10 years.

[gcreptile 10,234]

 

 

 

 

Charles must be fed up by now don't ya think?

 

Dunno, he's got to pensionable age without a proper job, manages to sound off about the stuff he cares about and still gets to hang around with important people. And, he's never tasted poverty or lost sleep over the danger of redundancy.

 

I can think of worse ways to stumble through your seventh decade.

 

Perhaps one day he might get to be king, and the shock of it happening might give him a heart attack.

 

With every passing year with his mother alive the chances of that happening grow slimmer. Should he survive her, his reign will be short.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Certainly less than 10 years.

 

 

Interesting to think about... Yes, Victoria's son also reigned for less than 10 years, but why should Charles have the same fate? He surely has good genes, so what keeps him from reaching the same age as his parents? Yet, I do have the same feeling... Women in general live longer than men, but why? Is it evolution (female animals care for their children, and the lifespan of male animals is often much shorter), or is it the physical work that men do (or used to do), or male neglect of healthy living? Certainly, reasons two and three imply that Charles' life shouldn't be significantly shorter than his mum's.