The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1261  
Old 04-05-2012, 05:17 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 2,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by EIIR View Post
Prince Friso was able to work here in the UK completely freely because he had no profile here. Beatrice or Eugenie could head to Hong Kong or Singapore or LA and enjoy much the same freedom.

But why should they have to leave their own country?
It seems so unfair.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1262  
Old 04-05-2012, 05:22 PM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,624
That's why I think they're likely to find it easier to undertake employment abroad. The British press have shown that they are willing to go so far as to pay people to pretend to be Sheiks etc. to try and catch a royal, or even a colleague of a royal, saying anything about their family which is then condemned as trying to 'take advantage' of their connections.

They're damned if they do and damned if they don't. It's incredibly difficult for them to find gainful employment that's compatible with the fact that they are grand daughters of the Queen without being accused of preferential treatment, but if they were to become full time working royals they'd be condemned as work shy and lazy.

Given all this, I'd pack up my trust funds and head for pastures new.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1263  
Old 04-05-2012, 07:46 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,491
The problem with working abroard is that the Counsellors of State have to be resident in the UK and Beatrice is one heartbeat away from that position and Eugenie two.

Sure Edward and Anne could take on that responsiblity again but it does set an awful precedent for future generations - e.g. Harry's children having to leave the country as well and eventually CoS's who are 20th+ in line to the throne because those closer are forced to leave their country to gain useful employment.

Currently the following people arefull time working royals with their ages given:

HM The Queen - 85 (86 later this month)
The Duke of Edinburgh (90)
The Prince of Wales (63)
The Duchess of Cornwall (64)
The Duke of York (52)
The Earl of Wessex (48)
The Countess of Wessex (47)
The Princess Royal (61)
The Duke of Gloucester (67)
The Duchess of Gloucester (65)
The Duke of Kent (76)
Princess Alexandra (75)

Part-time royals

The Duke of Cambridge (29)
The Duchess of Cambridge (30)
Prince Henry of Wales (27)


A total of 15 with only 5 under 50 and only 2 under 30.

So in 20 years time the youngest full-time current working royal will be 49 (William) or possibly Harry's wife. Harry will still be in the army I suspect with many of the others deceased e.g. The Queen and Philip, and the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra. So there will still be 12 working royals with the next generation of young royals still some years away from full time duties as they will still be in full time education.

When you look at figures like that there is no need for the York girls at all to take on royal duties but they can have have a real life instead of the phoney life of a royal. They can actually have some control over their lives - even if they have to leave the UK to do it (which I think they should do - they would have privacy and not have to face the vitriolic press every time that appeared in public).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1264  
Old 10-16-2012, 10:35 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
The Queen changed the Order of Precedence for Private Occasions based on blood principles, placing princesses of the blood before princesses by marriage. My question is...

If Sarah & Andrew had not divorced and remained married, would her daughters have precedence before her in the current Order of Precedence for Private Occasions??
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1265  
Old 10-16-2012, 10:43 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHThePrince View Post
The Queen changed the Order of Precedence for Private Occasions based on blood principles, placing princesses of the blood before princesses by marriage. My question is...

If Sarah & Andrew had not divorced and remained married, would her daughters have precedence before her in the current Order of Precedence for Private Occasions??
Not all Princesses by blood have precedence over Princesses by marriage in Private Order of Precedence.. For instance, the Duchess of Cornwall has lower precedence than Princesses Anne and Alexandra, but higher than anyone else. Similarly, it appears that the Countess of Wessex and the Duchess of Cambridge actually have higher precedence than Beatrice and Eugenie.

If Sarah and Andrew were still married, it would have been extremely unlikely Sarah would have lower precedence than her daughters. Sarah's place would most probably be immediately above that of the Countess of Wessex - and as I said, the Countess enjoys higher precedence than the York Princesses in both Precedence lists.
Reply With Quote
  #1266  
Old 10-16-2012, 11:08 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
I'm confused... Buckingham Palace said he was based on blood principles. It seems the blood principle was directed only at Camilla.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1267  
Old 10-16-2012, 11:32 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
I always try and adopt a 'real world' attitude when dealing with precedence, styles, titles and orders. I know there are always official lists and the sort but the fact is in the 'real world' , blood princesses or not, Bea and Eugenie are below the Duchess of Cambridge and for that matter, I think the Countess of Wessex is below Catherine as well. Beatrice and Eugenie can be of great use to the Firm but it is a hard sell with the public because the tabloid press gets to decide who is in and who is out in the BRF and the Yorks, Duke and daughters are out. Personally I would like to see both princesses have their own careers and a part-time role with the Firm
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1268  
Old 10-16-2012, 11:46 PM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,752
Princesses Beatrice & Eugenie are blood royals but since they're not senior working members of the "Firm", I think The Duchess of Cambridge & Countess of Wessex take precedence over them.

I too would've liked to see Bea & Eug take on official roles although I don't think it will happen. We will see them supporting their charities, opening things too.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1269  
Old 10-16-2012, 11:52 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
True, for state occasions Kate outranks the York Sisters. But I believe Beatrice & Eugenie are essential to the future of the Royal Family. The Gloucesters & Kents are getting older & older. Including Anne, Andrew & Edward. It may be sometime before William ascends the throne, but his children & Harry's won't be of mature age to carry out royal duties... and I believe that is where Beatrice & Eugenie come in as a pair of extra hands. Although Prince Charles intends to remove them from royal life, I think Prince William may resurrect their membership in the family as full time working royals. The British Monarchy is the most well known & popular royal family in the world. They're not only associated with the UK... but the Commonwealth realms including hundreds on top of hundreds of charities. I just can't see William, Kate & Harry doing this all alone. Again, they will need help and having Beatrice & Eugenie around will be of much use.

And regarding the precedence issue again... I think Kate marrying William is a great match. However, not to jinx them... Kate is a royal by marriage, not by birthright. Like Diana & Sarah if divorced, the HRH style and privileges that come with it will go as quickly as it came. The York Sisters on the other hand were born royal. They can divorce & marry as many times as they please... they'll always be royal.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1270  
Old 10-16-2012, 11:58 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Princesses Beatrice & Eugenie are blood royals but since they're not senior working members of the "Firm", I think The Duchess of Cambridge & Countess of Wessex take precedence over them.

I too would've liked to see Bea & Eug take on official roles although I don't think it will happen. We will see them supporting their charities, opening things too.
There is what we want to see happen and then what happens according to the rule and all that. So, it is what it is. I don't know if you have seen any of it - but Iluvbertie keeps track of the weekly Court Circular and Engagements and all that. He has also peered off into the future and discussed the needs of the firm going forward. It is engaging reading - so maybe seek that out. I learned a lot from it!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1271  
Old 10-17-2012, 12:07 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHThePrince View Post
.And regarding the precedence issue again... I think Kate marrying William is a great match. However, not to jinx them... Kate is a royal by marriage, not by birthright. Like Diana & Sarah if divorced, the HRH style and privileges that come with it will go as quickly as it came. The York Sisters on the other hand were born royal. They can divorce & marry as many times as they please... they'll always be royal.
That's an odd statement... but the fact that Bea and Eug will always be royal is immaterial. If the public want a slimmed down royal family and the Yorks in general are not popular, their role if any in the Firm will be a bit part.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1272  
Old 10-17-2012, 12:07 AM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,752
Although I fully support the "Firm" in focusing on the the main 7 senior royals. I think the Kents and Gloucesters are doing a fantastic job on supporting The Queen but I think going forward the best way on presenting the Monarchy to a more modern world, is to focus on the main 7 royals.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1273  
Old 10-17-2012, 12:15 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Actually Charles may pull a King George V and issue new LP regarding styles and titles. The Yorks may not always be royal after all. With the stroke of a pen in 1917, 14 princesses and princes lost their royal styles and titles. Who knows what the future King Charles may do
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1274  
Old 10-18-2012, 04:18 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: central valley, United States
Posts: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
Actually Charles may pull a King George V and issue new LP regarding styles and titles. The Yorks may not always be royal after all. With the stroke of a pen in 1917, 14 princesses and princes lost their royal styles and titles. Who knows what the future King Charles may do
That would certainly take some of the wind out of the sails of the princesses' mother.
Being the curious sort I went searching for the 14 princesses and princes who were defrocked and haven't been able to figure out who they were.
I did run accross the letters patent from 1917 and it seemed to contain a grandfather clause in it when it states:
"[S]hall not henceforth be assumed or borne...excepting always any such descendant who at the date of these Letters Patent holds or bears any right to any such style, degree attribute or titular dignity in pursuance of any Letters Patent granted by Ourselves or any of Our Royal Predecessors and still remaining unrevoked..."
I did read that the Connaught's first son was perhaps impacted by this but couldn't find reference to anyone else.
My guess would be that Charles would not stir the pot by 'deprincessing' the York girls, especially as time will inevitably move them further down the succession totem pole once William and Harry have children of their own.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1275  
Old 10-18-2012, 08:51 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
Why would Charles deprive the York Sisters of this right? They were born as male line grandchildren of the British monarch which entitles them to the status of Princess and the style of HRH.... these honours have been held by them for most of their life. If that's your case, Princess Alexandra will lose her title as well. If he does indeed issue new LP I could only see it effecting future members.

And The Queen repays the treasury for the royal duties that her children & cousins perform. Its not like in Queen Victoria's time when royals were paid just because they were "ROYAL". I think Charles is gonna be tight with the purse stings... the less royals the less he has to foot out of his soon-to-be Duchy of Lancaster income. Remember, Elizabeth II supported and gave allowances to the Duke & Duchess of Windsor, the late Queen Mother, the Gloucesters & Kents including her own children from her private incomes. And for a short time she gave an allowance to the late Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent & her family, the original payments were being footed by Queen Mary until her death.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1276  
Old 10-18-2012, 09:31 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
You said... "With the stroke of a pen in 1917, 14 princesses and princes lost their royal styles and titles".

Queen Victoria's LP of 1864 clarified the entitlement to the style & title of Prince/ss and the prefix of Royal Highness to the children of the Sovereign's sons. It never mentioned great grandchildren. George V's letter patent confirmed Queen Victoria's ...two changes being only the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall be entitled to the style of HRH and title of a British prince... all other siblings being titled as Lord/Lady. And secondly, that the grandchildren of the sons of the Sovereign in the male line shall be styled and titled as children of a Duke.... no longer Prince/ss and Highness, though the latter was never formalized through LP of any Sovereign... just a long history of tradition & custom that he wanted stopped.

So the 14 princes & princesses that lost their titles weren't all great grandchildren of Queen Victoria were they? Or was George III explicitly talking about great grandchildren in general? Prince Ernest Augustus III was a great grandson of George III, thus a second cousin of Queen Victoria. It seems some of the fourteen that you are talking about possessed German titles which George V abolished as recognition in the UK in 1917.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1277  
Old 10-18-2012, 09:33 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
Typo:I meant.... Or was George V
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1278  
Old 11-21-2012, 01:29 AM
AnnEliza's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle, United States
Posts: 318
It doesn't seem like there would be much point in denying the York princesses their titles--or would you call them styles? Anyway they are self limiting since their children won't inherit them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1279  
Old 11-21-2012, 03:29 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by McKeen View Post
It doesn't seem like there would be much point in denying the York princesses their titles--or would you call them styles? Anyway they are self limiting since their children won't inherit them.
Beatrice and Eugenie have titles of British Princesses and styles of Royal Highnesses.

I agree with you to a certain degree; it is unlikely Charles or William will ever issue decrees that are specifically targeted at the girls. However, it is possible that Charles or William (during their respective reigns) will issue LPs limiting the style of Royal Highness and title of a Prince/Princess to fewer number of people (for example, only children of the Sovereign and children of the Heir Apparent), meaning that Beatrice, Eugenie and some other royals will automatically lose their styles and titles.
Reply With Quote
  #1280  
Old 02-02-2013, 04:00 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norfolk View Post
The York girls will play an important role in the future of the BRF. Charles and William will make sure of that. Bea and Eugene will be important members of the BRF.
You know this how? All signs point in the opposite direction.
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
career, education, princess beatrice, princess eugenie, royal duties, social life, styles and titles


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie: Old News and Photos Warren The Duke of York, Sarah Duchess of York, and Family 93 09-11-2014 08:01 PM
Duties, Roles and Royal Training of the Princes JOY! Prince Harry and Prince William 214 02-20-2013 08:07 PM
Beatrice and Eugenie : Baby/child Pics: Part 1 Martine The Duke of York, Sarah Duchess of York, and Family 133 03-04-2006 12:25 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympic games ottoman pom president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:16 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]