During the restuffing in 1938, it was discovered that the original stuffing was largely horsehair.
Also c/f "lord privy seal" which is not a lord, nor a privy, nor a seal.
And "down" pillows are often 95% feathers 5% down, unless advertised as 100% down (and will hundreds more)
Not that down is wool, obviously.
So I deem it as all those words you use, impractical, expensive, unnecessary to use PU.
Am not an upholsterer, but I work with one somewhat regularly when a client wants an upholstered piece.
The presence of Charles Windsor in the HoL is an affront to democracy that we should do away with. These chairs represent a fraction of the baggage of tradition that IMO should be carefully unpicked and dispensed with; parliament really needs to continue the slow progression towards sovereignty of the demos and away from the trappings of imperial oppulence and monarchic power. The mace should be smashed, melted down and used to fund a memorial to the Crown.
Even if, as some argue, it is "only symbolic", the kowtowing of the demos to a person of inherited title is a symbolism that we should be rid of.
Similar to the thread from yesterday - amazing what some people just throw away.
I’ve no idea if that dump is still the gold mine it once was - I ended up with several very nice club chairs, some Victorian wingback armchairs, and an absolutely enormous camelhair Persian rug - chairs all needed reupholstering (I became quite good at this quite quickly), and the rug just needed a damned good clean and lasted me a decade before it finally actually disintegrated. Oh, and a few 30’s valve radios which needed nothing other than new capacitors. I’d assume it was always the kids cleaning out dead mum’s place or what have you to refurnish with ikea.
Which one isn't?
Edit: it's stated that the throne is used during only the "state opening of the parliament" so that means it's not used "day to day".
https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/building/pal...
... but I can't find a link to support this.
Notice the seating behind the table in these two images, one of a session with John Berkow prosiding as speaker, I think it is under Cameron's government (noughties [1]); the other of Pitt the Younger addressing the House [2]. Neither shows a vacant seat. Perhaps it is confusing it with the opening of parliament when the Queen wasn't able to attend (2022 [3]) and her throne was left vacant?
The mace represents the king's authority in parliament, you can see it at the front edge of the table in both images ([1], [2]).
The monarch's messenger is Black Rod, they're the one who knocks on the door to call the MPs to go and listen to the "King's" Speech.
[1] https://cdn.britannica.com/25/99525-050-DCC15F00/Chamber-Hou... [2] https://cdn.britannica.com/03/129303-050-05283CEF/William-Pi... [3] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/may/09/queen-to-mis...
Hmm, I guess I was suspicious. It's like the old bloke at the end of the bar, who always wants to have something interesting to say.
Chairs themselves were a status symbol. Commoners would use stools or benches.
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXW-QjBsruE
(Can't believe a half-hour video on ontology has >13M views.)
Of course, I wonder what the rest of the world thinks about this, an individual with no passport. Surely there are some edge cases where it does not fit in procedures.
I imagine Trump isn't accumulating passport stamps or lining up for customs when he flies to other countries in Air Force One.
In practice however... power matters. Eswatini isn't going to pretend it has the power to arrest Putin, but I can certainly imagine if Russia wanted to arrest the King of Eswatini they'd just do it - what's Eswatini going to do about it? If they've got a halfway plausible rationale, nobody wants to start a war over that, at least nobody who might win.
Likewise under the same legal theory neither Ireland nor South Africa could currently arrest Benjamin Netanyahu, despite the warrant for his arrest on a charge of crimes against humanity. But in practice I'm sure Natanyahu would rather not find out the hard way whether that theory holds up, in either Dublin or Cape Town. Israel has a substantial military force, and the Americans might back them, but, neither Ireland nor South Africa are defenceless and this sounds like a bad way to find out for sure.
