no one really thinks about her anymore..certainly no one under 50 odd.

I've never been a fan. Her tantrums at polo matches, her not allowing staff to teach the boys in their charge consequences or anything of benefit and her manipulation of journalists is the true Diana....let's not forget her dating a sisters ex boyfriend and was so much Lydia in Pride and Prejudice that we could almost see her saying to her sisters "I come before you now" we all knew she loved the Crown not Charles just to be superior to her sisters. Actions speak louder than words.

​​@@highcountrydelatiteA lot of people think about her, that is whyCharles or Camilla are unpopular, and as a result the Crown is very unpopular, especially amongst people between 18-50 years. The popularity of the Monarchy between 18-50 year olds on average is less than 50% across the various age groups. I am 49 years, I remember Diana and I salute her for withstanding the bullshyt thrown her way, ND for fighting back.

​@@sevenwatson5854 Diana's choices weren't made in a vacuum, she was reacting to the abuse from Charles and the royal family. Charles felt insecure and hated her because she easily eclipsed him in popularity, yet it wasn't her fault she was more popular. Instead of working with her he began to abuse her and belittle her. He was carrying on with Camilla, ND when she objected he used his media cronies and aristocratic friends to belittle her in the press. Ross Benson, Ingrid Seward's late husband, Daily Mail columnist, former Gordosntoun alumni, philanderer in chief, accused Diana of deliberately trying to outshine Charles on the 1984 tour of Australia, whilst at a visit to a music conservatoire. In his book, he claims, Diana rose unbidden to show off her piano skills, when in reality, it was the Principal of the Conservatoire who asked Diana to play something on the piano, he had to cajole a reluctant Diana into playing, but you let Ross Benson. Lord Nicholas Soames is another one who went on national TV to besmirch Diana's name; he called her mad. Diana had no choice but to write a book and speak to journalists in order to get her side of the story out there. Even her brother, the Earl, has said, he doesn't object to the fact that she told her story, he objected to how she was coerced to give permission for the Panorama story. It's off putting how you minimize the abuse she was subjected to, and prop up her cheating husband who is arrogant and entitled. Moreover, Diana did a better job of teaching the boys about their role and heritage. Harry who is like her in spirit continues to serve and build rapport with all manner of communities, whilst William who was taken under the wings of the queen is clearly imploding.

​​@@sevenwatson5854 Also, Diana didn't force herself on Charles, he's the one who deliberately pursued her for his own selfish reasons; him and Camilla figured she was young and timid enough not to interfere in their relationship. Diana, unlike her sister Sarah, was besotted with him and failed to understand the depth of his unhealthy attachment to Camilla. Hiscattemots to ensnare her sister Sarah failed, because she was savvy enough to extract herself from his clutches; she deliberately gave a revealing interview to a journalist, forcing Charles to dump her, leaving her free to marry her real love; Neil MaCocordale. Fact is, the royals were complicit in luring Diana into that sham marriage. They deliberately targeted her, because they were looking to anchor themselves on these shores- through her lineage,, William will be the 1st King in 400 years related to the Stuart kings, the last English and Scottish kings to rule England, Scotland and N. Ireland. Camilla was most unsuitable because, although related to Charles I, and his sons, she was also rumoured to be a descendant of Edward VIII. A marriage between Charles and Camilla wouldn't have been suitable, more so considering they were potentially related. At the time royal family was actively looking to expand their gene pool/stop inbreeding in order to avoid perpetuating certain diseases and conditions eg Downs Syndrome (Queen Mother's family); Haemophilia (Victoria) and Porphyria (George III and Prince William.of Gloucester). Camilla was written out because she had Hanoverian blood, and not because of her wayward ways. They besmirched her reputation to justify their decision. Then again, she never loved Charles, APB was her 1st love. Sadly, APB didn't love her, he stayed cheating on her, when they were dating and throughout the marriage. He never loved her, that's why he was in bothered about her affair with HRH. Diana was the victim of great manipulation involving the Queen Mother, Camilla, Charles and even Andrew Parker Bowles (he never loved Camilla, he married as a favour to the royal family- to get her away from Charles so he could move on with his life. It helped that she had some money inherited down her maternal line, thanks to her great grandmother's liaison with Edward VIII.

Yep. And when “half of his family” begged for help, for entire year while it was still possible - they refused to help them.

@@milanamughal It was Parliament that refused to help, really.

​@@carlbirtles4518Based solidarity between Public Classes against the Noble Caste

@@carlbirtles4518 It wasn't just Parliament. George V ordered them to rescind the offer of safe passage due to fears of an uprising in Britain for harboring the Romanovs.

@@carlbirtles4518 Someone answered below, the king got cold feet, and dumped the cousin and his family. Honestly, I am not surprised. But for them making such statements is simply ridiculous.

The dialogue is awful. Trying to condense such a complex chemical and historic situation into two exposition dumps just doesn't work.

@@zacmumblethunder7466 The dialogue is indeed awful, so I suggest that people read about the finding of the Romanov remains and the DNA testing to which Prince Philip contributed in Robert K. Massie's book, "The Romanovs: The Final Chapter". Massie was the author of "Nicholas and Alexandra".

The history of Russia is one of continued gross incompetence at the highest levels of government. That’s why they’re always behind the west and seen as backwards. Always poorer, always less developed. Even though Russia experienced the industrial revolution before China, Mexico, Japan, S Korea etc. These countries have all surpassed Russia in both GDP Per Capita and in the size of their overall economies. You know your country is badly run when Mexico is richer than you per Capita 😂

@@zacmumblethunder7466 Why it is awful?

@@user-pb7ch5kl8x I'll try to keep it brief. This is purely from the point of view of the drama and the story telling. One of the principles of good scriptwriting is "Show, don't tell". There is _a lot_ of telling in this. We've also got the Queen stating the blatently obvious to the Duke. He knows who his grandmother was, and at the moment, we don't care, we can google her in the ad break. The writers are also trying to make a comment about the difference in the Duke's relationships with the Queen and with Penny. Cramming that into two scenes already bulging with exposition is too much. At best, it looks like they can't think of a less clumsy way to make their point, at worst, it looks like they can't trust the viewers to pick up on more subtle clues laid down over a longer period. Apart from anything else, it refuces the Queen to a cipher for an information dump. From a purely personal preference, I would say that a better approach would have been to have the furst conversation be between The Duke and one of the researchers. This would avoid the very clunky way in which the Queen told the Duke who his maternal grandmother was. We might be safe in assuming he didn't need to be told. Avoiding lines like "Your Grandmother, Princess Victoria of Hesse", in an exchange of dialogue the Duke and the researcher _briefly_ fill us in on the details of how mitichondrial DNA links the Duke to the Tsarina. When the Duke asks what they need, segue into the researcher in voiceover explaining "We take a sample of your blood..." As he explains the process we see the Duke giving the blood sample, see the laboratory, the centrifuge, etc. We see the printout being produced and as the researcher holds it, we cross fade to the Duke holding it and showing it to Penny. This would give a tighter, more visually interesting scene, rather than the really dated style of very old Sunday night serials. This reminds me very much of how historical dramas were done before "I, Claudius" blew the cobwebs out of the genre.

Also, his maternal aunt, Louise, was the Queen of Sweden. Fascinating woman. His grandmother you mentioned was equally fascinating.

100% agree with you! Elizabeth had no right to feel jealous or insecure about Penny’s friendship with Philip when she kept Porchey around knowing that he was in love with her. One could argue that the age difference between Penny and Philip was inappropriate, but they were two people who bonded over their mutual grief in familial losses and their love of carriage driving.

@@ShiningFriendship87 I think Penny had the misfortune of being an attractive young woman who presented an intellectual profile more in line with Philip and that unleashed the old insecurities that Elizabeth had in the past when Philp had those mysterious parties with company like beautiful and talented women who almost put on the edge of a very thin line their marriage. Elizabeth didn't care if Penny was helpless or if Philip was not sexually interested in his godson's wife, her physicality and intellect were potential threats especially when she was no longer a young woman anymore.

@@ShiningFriendship87 Another argument is that Philip constantly cheated on Elizabeth. I'm not condoning that, but he had to give up more than he hoped for and that can lead to restless behavior. Also, did Elizabeth ever consider how Porchey's wife must've felt with their intimate friendship?

@@lordalessan cheated? what nonsense

@@perperson199 I agree. All rubbish. However, some believe it and it is an embedded rumor in real life.

you're basing this on a show thats has inaccuracies all over the place? lol. imagine taking a show as fact

@@MrSandman96 No I'm not basting it on anything. Chill!😔

Gonna go out on a limb here and say that they were able to have lots of conversations, considering how long they were married. Her book education may have been limited in some areas, but her world view education was on a level that would outclass most of us.

And he always maintained his youthful enthusiasm for anything new.

I see your point, though I disagree on the matter that it was "intellectually". I think that's all their discussion was, intellectual. And I think Phillip wanted more excitement in his life and we know with Elizabeth ,it was all about HER, even when she tried to make it about him. Penny sort of gave him his masculinity back by making it about him and sharing his interest and Elizabeth knew that she was not in the position to give him that.

yes but as already been explained is that Hollywood likes to reinvent history. Also, it was determined that Philip was the best possible candidate because he was a much closer relation as I explained above.

@@user-bx3hz6wl5m Sorry to be obtuse, but my point wasn't about the efficacy of the test results. This scene made it appear as if the close relation to Alexandra came as a surprise or was somehow linked to a distant past (to me at least, but recollections may differ).

@@josephlogue9175 Oh, I completely agree with you.

@@josephlogue9175 It would depend on if her mother is the niece or father the nephew of Empress Alexandra, if it's the mother then your correct but if it's via her father his mitochondrial DNA does not get passed on.

@@user-bx3hz6wl5mNot… really. The 3rd Duke of Fife and the Tsar’s great-grandniece Countess Xenia Sheremeteva were all also good candidates, and they submitted their DNA for testing. They also cracked open the marble tomb of the Tsar’s brother, Grand Duke George Alexandrovich, to test against the found bones.

Were the soldiers who killed the Romanovs ever referred to as heroes?

@@krashd To the socialists, they were. The Romanovs were deeply hated by then.

@@cainyourkids Which means basically everyone :^)

​@cainyourkids No. One of the things most Socialist hated that the USSR did was the murder of the Romanov Children. Even Mao pardoned the emperor of China that directly collaborated with Japan during WW2 because of how bad the fallout of the Romanovs were.

@@peoplesrepublicofliberland5606 Yes, and the murder was a spontaneous thing by the local leadership in part due to the Czechoslovak Legion closing in on the city, but my point was that the Romanovs weren't liked.

Good thing they already found Richard III's most recent descendants; they just need to haul them back in.

There were small boy size bones found in the tower during some renovations. But EII wouldn’t allow them to be DNA tested. I think she had them cremated & the urn is in Westminster Cathedral. I wish she had been more open to having their DNA examined.

@@bonnieabrs1003 You might get your DNA wish, since there's a good chance they may be tested. I' hope they test them too. The bones were discovered in 1674, and Charles II had them placed in the urn in Westminster Abbey. They were examined again in 1933, but not cremated. Yes, during Elizabeth II's reign it was decided not to disturb them, but here's also the two mysterious coffins in Edward IV's vault at Windsor, and apparently Charles III is more open to solving the mystery.

None of us! It was uplaoded nine hours ago. Completely agree with you tho

Considering the kings of England, Germany, and Russia were literally cousins, It is one big family. (it's like one of those “degenerate” anime/ manga series where incest is the trope. Tho they, real life ones, are pretty far remove, I suppose, to avoid the issues of inbreeding)

I believe so. I think he went to a service to bury the remains.

​@@emmaconway4274he did. He was the queens representative

Not all of the remains have been buried as of 2024. The ones from Alexei the Tzarevich and most likely Maria are still being held by the Russian government in state archives.

I don't believe he would have been able to--he WAS related to Nicholas on both his paternal and maternal side, but he would not have shared mitochondrial DNA with Nicholas nor y-DNA. Michael's grandmother Grand Duchess Elena, was a Russian grand duchess, whose father, Grand Duke Vladimir, was the younger brother of Nicholas' father. But women don't inherit y-DNA, so Elena would not have had the DNA. Her brothers Kirill, Boris and Andrei would have, as would Kirill's son Vladimir and Andrei's (probable) son Vladimir, but all five died before the Romanov remains were found--Vladimir was alive in 1991 when the bones were discoverd, but died in 1992 before he could offer a sample. So because Elena was female, and because she only had daughters, she and her daughters did not share any y-DNA with Nicholas. Michael's y-DNA came from his father. So what about on Michael's paternal side, then? George V and Nicholas II were first cousins, but it was their mothers that were sisters, so they both had different y-DNA from their fathers. And while Nicholas did have matrilineal DNA from his mother, Michael's matrilineal DNA came from his mother Marina, so it also would not have been a match. As far as I can remember, Philip gave a sample because he shared mDNA with Alexandra as she was his great-aunt and he had matrilineal DNA via his mother and grandmother that would have been shared with her and the children. Nicholas' great-grand niece, Xenia Sheremeteva, the great-granddaughter of his sister Grand Duchess Xenia, was able to give a matrilineal sample with Nicholas. The late Duke of Fife also gave a sample, since he also shares matrilineal DNA with Nicholas because his maternal great-grandmother was the older sister of Nicholas' mother. I believe also at some point, Nicholas' father's remains were exhumed to test as well.

I thought it was Prince Andrew.

You seem to be missing the point. They were trying to prove that the Russian corpses were Romanovs, using Philip ‘s DNA, not that Philip was related to them They already knew that, thus the need to use his DNA

They needed mitochondrial DNA. Hers would have come from her mother. Mitochondrial DNA only comes from the mother.

@@baiemichelle Mitochondrial DNA has nothing to do with Xs and Ys. It's a completely different kind of DNA and is extremely easy to isolate and determine in both men and women.

Because mithocondrial DNA is matrilinear, the Queen's mithocondrial DNA was thus much more distant to that of the Romanov children than the Prince's.

No doubt you’re right but then barely anyone in the audience would have caught on. Most would have probably incorrectly guessed she meant Queen Victoria.

It's for audience's sake. After all, this is fiction.

Interesting fact, Princess Victoria of Hesse and the Queen’s grandfather, King George V, were first cousins. Victoria is depicted in photos of Prince Charles’ christening (to the left of him) along with Queen Mary, another great-grandmother of Prince Charles.

They were explaining the family tree to the audience.

Absolutely agree with that. That was something that always annoyed me with the series. Also, her ladies in waiting were all her cousins. In the show it shows that she never even talks to them. They are treated merely as servants. They were here relatives she knew her whole life.

Penny Knatchbull, I assume

It's Dr. Halsey from the Halo TV show

First comment got it right on the name, I suppose, but the actress is quite well known. Her most well known role, to me at least, is the girl that Truman falls in love with in The Truman Show, though. Seeing her in anything at all always takes me back to that role

@@SR-iy4gg How did she get to meet Prince Philip please? Was it just some kind of interview or was she a friend of him?

@@ulefab7503 She was the daughter in law of his cousin Patricia Mountbatten.

They both did.

Very little compared to Phillip, which is why they did not have much in common.

Mitochondrial DNA is inherited from the mother only.

Because she didn't share matrillineal DNA with tsar or his family. Matrillineal DNA passes from mother to her children unchanged. Had queen Elizabeth II been related to Nicholas II in purely female line she would share the same matrillineal DNA as him. Considering she got her matrillineal DNA from her mother (who was not royalty, but scottish and irish nobility) she wouldn't be able to help with it. That is why prince Philip gave his DNA. He was descended from grand duchess Alice of Hesse and by Rhine in purely female line so he still shared the same matrillineal DNA as empress Alexandra and her children.

yes

It's better if it came from Phillip or his brother if he had any.

No, unlike the rest of their genes, mitochondrial DNA is only passed down through the maternal line. Philip's children wouldn't inherit his mitochondrial DNA. They only inherit their Elisabeth's mitochondrial DNA. Everything about mitochondrial is actually pretty fascinating, but here is a relevant quote from Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_DNA: "In sexual reproduction, mitochondria are normally inherited exclusively from the mother; the mitochondria in mammalian sperm are usually destroyed by the egg cell after fertilization. Also, mitochondria are only in the sperm tail, which is used for propelling the sperm cells and sometimes the tail is lost during fertilization. In 1999 it was reported that paternal sperm mitochondria (containing mtDNA) are marked with ubiquitin to select them for later destruction inside the embryo."

@@alisonerekson3292his sister’s sons or daughters would have been fine.

@@alisonerekson3292 But Phillip and his sisters would have the same Mitochondrial DNA as his mother (and the Romanovs). And the children of his Sisters would also have the same wouldn't they? There were several surviving Nieces and Nephews of Phillip alive at the time as well. Philip was one generation closer though.

Mitochondrial DNA could only come from Phillip's side.

@@krashd they all come form Victoria unless I am mistaken ?? I m sure I missed something here thats just what I saw...

He always knew about his connections to the Romanovs. It wasn't a new discovery for him.

That also seems strange. And holding his knife like a pen?

British people also hold their forks upside down. I know, I know, it’s their tradition but when I see Americans do that, it comes off as very pretentious to me. 🥱

@@A2D4as do you, to them. You see, holding a fork, upside down would mean you’re holding it by its tines

You’re right, literally speaking, of course. My mistake. I guess the thing that I don’t understand is that it seems that from a gravity standpoint, the shape of the tines indicates how food should be placed . When a fork is held with the curve on top, food would more easily fall off. Just seems impractical to me but then I wasn’t raised that way.

Meal times are one of the few times that family members are together in one room, it is normal to talk, in fact in some places it's considered rude if you don't talk during a meal. Here in the UK it's common to talk when eating.

I seriously doubt if a royal prince would have held his knife like that. Trivial, sure; but very much a British shibboleth.

Sloppy directing.

Penny, his best friend and niece through marriage.

No Greek, they were “Danish”

@@Duquedecastro His father was "appointed" the king of Greece, but his heritage was Danish.

@@JimMac23 I put Danish is quotations because they were really German from Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Beck and the Oldenburgs, that’s not Danish

@@JimMac23 And it was his grandfather George I of Greece, not his father

all the royal families across europe and eastern Europe were all related. WW1 was nothing more than infighting among male cousins.

That's Penny.

They did actually offer asylum at first but the kids were sick too travel, also WW1 was still going on they had to withdraw their support. Bear in mind that Alexandra was actually German, even in Russia people were very suspicious of her. If the British Royal Family had granted them asylum, they would've been accused of helping the enemy. The show actually covers this.

Why would they risk their lives to save the naughty relatives?

how do you think Tsarina Maria (Dagmar of Denmark) escaped? King George V sent HMS Marlborough to rescue her. Theres many pictures of it in the internet. It was Nicholas and Alexandra not making sure to secure the children thats why the Bolsheviks managed to capture and end them all. They were offered help and asylum discreetly until they got completely cut off. That blunder was another testament how Nicholas II is not fit to be Tsar. He could not even secure his own family.

@@isobelduncan Plus they did not want to rile up socialists in the UK who only needed an excuse to start their own revolution, the government warned the Royals of this as soon as they offered to help the Romanovs.

Buddy, the Romanovs weren't just hated in Russia. All their shenanigans leading up to Nicholas' abdication put a bad taste in the mouth for most of Europe. The reason why the UK or Germany refused to evacuate the Romanovs and grant asylum is because of how up in flames the public would be - sure, George V could have had his cousin Nicky over, but that would mean accepting the possibility of the people revolting to the point of a constitutional crisis...and Parliament will refuse to let the monarch do anything to create such a chaos in the governing.

Interesting premise, but highly doubtful. Having the Czar around even as a puppet or figurehead would have meant the constant threat of counter revolution. Which is why Edward VIII was banished from the UK. Can't have split loyalties for Crown or country. -mikenotpaula.

@@michaelzmudzinski7984 well then sparing them would’ve painted the Soviets in a better light. And allowing them to leave in exile would show their word can be trusted

​@@Inquisitor-Bealsbut itd also leave this hanging thread in their faces of "what if they find a way to come back?" The soviets were paranoid murderous assholes, especially in the early days. Theyd never risk it

While an interesting thought, I find it unlikely. Even in exile, a living Nicholas and/or Alexi could serve as a figurehead for counter revolution. They wouldn't have even had to consent to it, just being alive and visible would have done it. It is, possible, however, that Alexandra and her daughters could have been spared. Russian succession law meant that they had no claim on the throne, so they at least could have been exiled abroad into the care of their relatives.

They did actually offer asylum at first but the kids were sick too travel, also WW1 was still going on they had to withdraw their support. Bear in mind that Alexandra was actually German, even in Russia people were very suspicious of her. If the British Royal Family had granted them asylum, they would've been accused of helping the enemy. The show actually covers this.

Royalty is a fictional construct for money and power anyway. They sit on the pot just like anyone else. They had some money grasping psychopath ancestors. Big deal.

Please don't speak of the late queen in those disrespectful terms

@@clivecowlard7098 Clutch your pearls.

@@clivecowlard7098 Please don't give orders. She wasn't special.

But with a more impressive royal pedigree than his wife, for sure.

I have often looked at Prince Phillip and the pictures of his family. Maybe they need to take DNA of Queens 4 children and fibd their father.. Those 4 ugly children didn't get his family's good looks. Not that it would matter as the so called crown ran through her.

@@reneedaughter Eh. Take a look at Prince Andrea of Greece, Philip's father. He was certainly no looker. The Greek men in general were very hit or miss. Andrea's older brother George was a good looking man, but then their younger brother Christopher was very plain looking, as was the eldest, Constantine. And even among Constantine's sons, the eldest, another George, was no looker at all, while the youngest, Paul, was quite handsome, and Paul's son Constantine was definitely a good looking young man in his youth. Philip is lucky in the sense that he favors his Hesse/Battenberg side more. I think Anne resembles him a bit but unfortunately, the Mary of Teck genes hit all three sons like a brick.

His father is King Charles. Harry looks like Diana's family.

​@@reneedaughterDon't be stupid. It's very clear he's their father and Harry in some ways is a dead Ringer for Philip, just not attractive like him.

@Rumkitty2000 Check YOURSELF and see an optalmologist- Not one of the late Queen children resembles Phillip. They all look like Mary of Tecks' family (great grandmother).

They did actually offer asylum at first but the kids were sick too travel, also WW1 was still going on they had to withdraw their support. Bear in mind that Alexandra was actually German, even in Russia people were very suspicious of her. If the British Royal Family had granted them asylum, they would've been accused of helping the enemy. The show actually covers this.

I think they did pretty well with the three Elizabeth’s, but this last Philip is off the mark for sure. I just don’t see him as Phillip at all.

Of course they won't, because there's no chance in a million years he would ever have done anything like that. It would be like something out of Monty Python.

* silent generation

Ageism strikes again. I am a of the baby boom generation (“boomer” has become such a slur I don’t use it) and have never said “World.wide.web” and I have never heard my peers say it that way either.

@@catherinethibeault6636 no ageism. It's just when older people hear of newly created vocabulary they often put a lot of emphasis on the syllables. Good acting by Imelda.