Anthony Blunt and the Cambridge Spies

Originally written for ^ | 1988 | Tracy R. Twyman

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks robowombat, this would appear under the GGG Digest header "Oh So Mysteriouso" if the weekly digest were still a going concern. This topic is easily the most freaked-out tripped-out fringe piece I've read on FR in a while.

[Bernard Marx]

After establishing himself as a French tutor, art historian, and advisor to Queen Elizabeth (for which he was knighted), he joined MI5, Britain’s domestic intelligence service, in 1939.

Big problem here. In 1939 George VI, father of Elizabeth II, was King of England. You know -- the one with the speech impediment. He reigned until his death in 1952. Elizabeth II's Coronation as Queen didn't happen until 1953 when she was 25 years old. She would have been 13 years old in 1939.

[naturalman1975]

Big problem here. In 1939 George VI, father of Elizabeth II, was King of England. You know -- the one with the speech impediment. He reigned until his death in 1952. Elizabeth II's Coronation as Queen didn't happen until 1953 when she was 25 years old. She would have been 13 years old in 1939.

Possibly a confusion of Queen Elizabeths - the article is referring to the wife of King George VI - later (after George VI died and their daughter assumed the throne) known as Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother. He was distantly related to her (third cousin) and their families still had a fair degree of contact. He did advise her on art purchases previous to the war (as Consort, part of her role was to decorate the palaces). He formally became Surveyor of the King's Pictures in 1945, and carried on in the role as Surveyor of the Queen's Pictures after 1952.

[robowombat]

Not the least weird juxtaposition in this article.

[Bernard Marx]

Your interpretation is no doubt right as far as it goes. But George VI’s wife Elizabeth was never “Queen” and that sort of factual sloppiness sets off loud credibility alarm bells.

[Bernard Marx]

True dat!

[naturalman1975]

Your interpretation is no doubt right as far as it goes. But George VI’s wife Elizabeth was never “Queen” and that sort of factual sloppiness sets off loud credibility alarm bells.

She most certainly was Queen. Her formal style and title after George VI's accession to the throne was Her Majesty The Queen, and she was correctly, though less formally, known as Queen Elizabeth. She was not a Queen Regnant (as her daughter is) but a Queen Consort - but nonetheless a Queen.

The article refers to her as Queen Elizabeth and that is how she was known at the time. There was a need to distinguish between her and Queen Mary, George V's Consort, who was also still alive at that time.

There are plenty of mistakes in this article - but this is not one of them.

[Bernard Marx]

You’re right — keeping track of royalty has never been my strong point. But I’m keeping a close eye on the guy in the White House who’s acting like a king.