Report: Big Ben to be renamed Elizabeth Tower

Status
Not open for further replies.

NY Yankee

On Moderation
Joined
26 Mar 2012
Messages
487
Location
New York City
Britain's famed parliament clock tower Big Ben is set to be renamed the Elizabeth Tower in honor of the queen's diamond jubilee, a report said Friday.

Prime Minister David Cameron is among 331 lawmakers who have signed up to a campaign to bestow the tribute to Queen Elizabeth to mark her 60th year on the throne, the Daily Mail reported.

The Guardian also reported the majority backing for the proposal.

It mirrors an honor bestowed on Queen Victoria -- the first British monarch to celebrate a diamond jubilee, back in 1897 -- after whom the square tower at the other end of the Houses of Parliament was renamed.

"It is great news that so many MPs from across the House are backing what would be a fitting tribute to the queen. I hope it will now move ahead," the Mail quoted Cameron as saying.

The 316-foot tower is formally known as the Clock Tower, but it is commonly called Big Ben after the huge bell that it holds, whose distinctive "bongs" sound out the hours in central London.

Lawmakers accepted that the iconic tower, which looms over the 19-century Gothic revival parliament, would continue to be known colloquially as Big Ben, but said that its formal name should honor Queen Elizabeth.

The House of Commons Commission, the governing body of the British parliament, will meet by the end of June and is expected to agree on the renaming of Big Ben, the Daily Mail said.

Big Ben was in the news in January this year when the commission discussed how to manage a tilt affecting the tower.

The tilt is 0.26 degrees to the northwest and has increased very slightly since 2003, although an expert study found it was unlikely to be a problem for 10,000 years.

Britain is holding four days of celebrations beginning on Saturday to mark Elizabeth II's jubilee, including a 1,000-boat river pageant and a star-studded concert.

http://news.yahoo.com/big-ben-renamed-elizabeth-tower-report-232721084.html

On the one hand, the Queen has served for 60 years-she deserves to be honoured. On the other hand, I'm not a fan of name changes, especially iconic structures like Big Ben.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,642
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
I see no reason why this bell should have its name changed for any reason whatsoever. The original bell was cast in 1856 in Stockton-on-Tees, but cracked very soon. The blame was stated to be the increase in weight of the striking hammer which had been increased from its original design weight of 355 kgs to a greatly increased weight of 660 kgs, which was far in excess of the stress design of that bell.

A new bell, slightly lighter in weight, was cast in 1858 at the Whitechapel Foundary, but this too suffered from a stressing problem, which resulted in small cracks being found. However, 1863 saw a final solution being put forward and the bell has had no main problems since then.

The bell has enough history in its life of over 150 years to retain its original name.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,642
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
The Queen has served for 60 years-she deserves to be honoured. On the other hand, I'm not a fan of name changes, especially iconic structures like Big Ben.

Amongst all the coming euphoria, it is quietly forgotten that this country has has no monarchy from within its own peoples for very many years now.

We decided to look to the Dutch House of Orange then to Germanic monarchies to rule here. The current family uses Windsor as its House name, but this was something that was seemed to be more acceptable by King George V in 1917 during the First World War (against Germany with its own branch of Germanic monarchy under their own Kaiser). In blood-lines, it still remains the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, which itself grew out of the House of Wettin, based in Saxony.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
They're not suggesting renaming the bell, just the tower.

MattE2010 has already made a posting of clarification of this matter. You would expect people in the London area to know the name differences..:roll:
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
Paul - the tower is being renamed, I was just trying to clear up the misconception some have over what's called what. The bell remains named as it is now.
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
2,583
Location
Kent
Paul - the tower is being renamed, I was just trying to clear up the misconception some have over what's called what. The bell remains named as it is now.

But you didn't clear it up. You just spread another misconception.

Edit: Oh and an official decision to rename the tower has not been made yet.
 
Last edited:

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,241
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
I guess the article I posted was misleading. I'm still confused.

The building = St Stephen's Tower = potentially being renamed after the current Queen

The big bell inside it = Big Ben = not being renamed

Britain is holding four days of celebrations beginning on Saturday to mark Elizabeth II's jubilee

...except she's Queen Elizabeth the First of Great Britain, isn't she?
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
It is a common misconception that Big Ben is the whole structure. In fact Big Ben is just the bell inside, though the article linked suggests its the whole thing. Only the tower (officially called the Clock Tower or St Stephen's Tower) is proposed to be renamed.
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
2,583
Location
Kent
Am I talking to myself? The building that holds the bell known as "Big Ben" is NOT called St. Stephen's Tower

Q. Is it called St Stephen's Tower or the Clock Tower?

A. The name of the tower is the Clock Tower, not St Stephen's Tower. It was called St Stephen's Tower by Victorian journalists. They referred to anything to do with the House of Commons as news from 'St Stephens', as originally MP's used to sit in St Stephen's Hall.

http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/building/palace/big-ben/enquiries/
 

Eagle

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Messages
7,106
Location
Leamingrad / Blanfrancisco
...except she's Queen Elizabeth the First of Great Britain, isn't she?

That is incorrect, the rule is that whichever number is higher of the English and Scottish (also Irish, but being as they've never had any independent monarchs of their own that's irrelevant) numbers is used, backdated to the Union in 1707. Which is a pretty sensible rule, because it guarantees that there is no confusion in any country.

It just so happens that there hasn't yet been a case where the Scottish number has been higher than the English one. But if the Viscount Severn becomes King, he will reign as James VIII. And if a David comes to the throne he'll be David III.

This is a fact that seems to escape certain Scottish nationalists.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
5,823
...except she's Queen Elizabeth the First of Great Britain, isn't she?

There has been a Queen Elizabeth the first of England, but never of Scotland. Bizarrely in 1953 a court action was brought contesting the Queen's right to style herself "Elizabeth II" in Scotland!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacCormick_v._Lord_Advocate
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That is incorrect, the rule is that whichever number is higher of the English and Scottish (also Irish, but being as they've never had any independent monarchs of their own that's irrelevant) numbers is used, backdated to the Union in 1707. Which is a pretty sensible rule, because it guarantees that there is no confusion in any country.

It just so happens that there hasn't yet been a case where the Scottish number has been higher than the English one. But if the Viscount Severn becomes King, he will reign as James VIII. And if a David comes to the throne he'll be David III.

This is a fact that seems to escape certain Scottish nationalists.

Its an informal rule though, really just Winston Churchill's suggestion.
 

Eagle

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Messages
7,106
Location
Leamingrad / Blanfrancisco
Its an informal rule though, really just Winston Churchill's suggestion.

Well, monarchs can call themselves whatever they want. Elizabeth could have decided to be known as William I and we'd have to accept it.

This rule has the advantage of being backdateable without having to change what any former monarch styled themself (the first numbering collision after 1707 was William of Hanover—fourth in England, third in Scotland, technically second in Ireland—in 1830, by which time Britain had seemingly forgotten that it was different from England).


If I were making a rule I'd've said that all monarchs of any predecessor country count. William of Hanover was the fifth British King William (after Conqueror, Rufus, Lion and Orange) so he could be William V. The 20th-century Edwards pose a bit of a problem because a) do we accept Edward Balliol's reign as legal and b) are we counting pre-1066 kings of England—I'd argue yes to both so they're Edward XI and XII.
 

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
And if William has a crash and Harry gets the throne, Henry IX of England and I of Scotland?

As for the tower, it will match the Victoria Tower down the other end, I suppose. It'll also clear up the naming problem.
 
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
696
The building = St Stephen's Tower = potentially being renamed after the current Queen

The big bell inside it = Big Ben = not being renamed



...except she's Queen Elizabeth the First of Great Britain, isn't she?

Yes, but she's still the second Queen Elizabeth to rule England. Actually, as her mother was called Elizabeth and was the wife of a King that would make her Queen Elizabeth, so the present Queen really is Elizabeth the third...........
 

martinsh

Established Member
Joined
27 Jan 2011
Messages
1,653
Location
Considering a move to Memphis
Amongst all the coming euphoria, it is quietly forgotten that this country has has no monarchy from within its own peoples for very many years now.

We decided to look to the Dutch House of Orange then to Germanic monarchies to rule here. The current family uses Windsor as its House name, but this was something that was seemed to be more acceptable by King George V in 1917 during the First World War (against Germany with its own branch of Germanic monarchy under their own Kaiser). In blood-lines, it still remains the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, which itself grew out of the House of Wettin, based in Saxony.
So you regard yourself as Polish do you, then ? I think the monatchy should be regarded as least partly English based on residence !
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
5,823
Yes, but she's still the second Queen Elizabeth to rule England. Actually, as her mother was called Elizabeth and was the wife of a King that would make her Queen Elizabeth, so the present Queen really is Elizabeth the third...........

Although that Queen Elizabeth doesn't count as she didn't actually rule.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,642
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
So you regard yourself as Polish do you, then ? I think the monatchy should be regarded as least partly English based on residence !

As much as you would regard yourself as being Latvian. Both our own personal nationality is not called into question here, being that neither of us aspire to monarchical positions of any type, but what should be called into question is that of the Germanic bloodline monarchy that "reigns" over us and to which we must be subservient and pledge alliegence to.

Napoleon had a penchant for placing his bloodline relatives as rulers of certain European states.
 
Last edited:

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
25,375
Location
Yorks
As much as you would regard yourself as being Latvian. Both our own personal nationality is not called into question here, being that neither of us aspire to monarchical positions of any type, but what should be called into question is that of the Germanic bloodline monarchy that "rules" over us and to which we must be subservient and pledge alliegence to.

Napoleon had a penchant for placing his bloodline relatives as rulers of certain European states.

HM The (late) Queen Mother was of Scottish aristocratic descent, so I think the whole (Germanic) thing is a bit overdone.

Plus, you forget, there were real advantages to the development of British Parliamentary sovereignty in having Monarchs who were unable to speak English (George I) Barmy and talking to trees (George III) and more interested in the machinations of Dutch politics (William III) in that it allowed the establishment of the time to get on with governing without too much monarchical interference.

PS, HM doesn't "rule" she "reigns".
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
22,670
Location
Redcar
Plus, you forget, there were real advantages to the development of British Parliamentary sovereignty in having Monarchs who were unable to speak English (George I) Barmy and talking to trees (George III) and more interested in the machinations of Dutch politics (William III) in that it allowed the establishment of the time to get on with governing without too much monarchical interference.

That and a civil war or two ;)
 

wintonian

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2010
Messages
4,889
Location
Hampshire
HM The (late) Queen Mother was of Scottish aristocratic descent, so I think the whole (Germanic) thing is a bit overdone.

As much as you would regard yourself as being Latvian. Both our own personal nationality is not called into question here, being that neither of us aspire to monarchical positions of any type, but what should be called into question is that of the Germanic bloodline monarchy that "rules" over us and to which we must be subservient and pledge alliegence to.

Napoleon had a penchant for placing his bloodline relatives as rulers of certain European states.


In reality we have been invaded by the Greek royal family as being 'royals' they must have a nation that is subservient. ;) :roll:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top