The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #21  
Old 01-22-2018, 06:32 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 414
While it probably won't happen I do like the sound of HRH Princess Eugenie, Baroness Brooksbank.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-22-2018, 06:35 PM
M. Payton's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,853
IMHO, I don't think either Eugenie or Jack will want a title, in fact looking at them and what they do today with their lives shows how I believe they will continue the same. They both are young working professionals who clearly already have a life set for themselves, so why disrupt it with titles and what nots of a royal life........other then a place to live which I don't believe they have together nothing else is really needed by them.

William will be king someday, a cousin, and Harry and his family will eventually fade into dust so to speak when George and siblings get older, so the York princesses will just go on with their own lives as it should be. I think they are the ones that are more set for life as being on the outside of a royal family then being in the inside of a royal family......they have what money can't buy.........*freedom* to live their own lives!
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-22-2018, 06:46 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyalHighness 2002 View Post
While it probably won't happen I do like the sound of HRH Princess Eugenie, Baroness Brooksbank.
I think it would be HRH Princess Eugenie, Lady Brooksbank if Jack were created a hereditary baron. If he got a peerage though, which most likely won't happen, it would probably be an earldom and then she would be styled
HRH Princess Eugenie, Countess (of) [xxxx].
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-22-2018, 06:47 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,521
I don't see any kind of a title for Jack whatsoever either.

It would be totally different if he was marrying Eugenie and they both were slated to work for the "Firm" representing the Queen but as that doesn't seem to be in the cards or even in the whole deck, I don't see a need for a title.

Eugenie and Jack's children will not have titles nor will they actually be considered members of the royal family. Their mother and their grandfather will be prince and princesses of the United Kingdom but they, themselves, will be always extended members of the family and not considered royal.

I think this is how Eugenie and Jack will prefer it to be.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-22-2018, 06:50 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,968
Nope to the thread question. That is unless they go on to earn something later. But I find that unlikely as they both are doers and not so fond of the irritating bits of protocol. It also happens so rarely these days. But one does not know what needs the future will present; nor who will answer those calls.

I'd add that while Eug seems to have many attributes that the BRF require, the book on her Dad and the POW is that things are not so rosy between them. I think the Queen is past the point where she is making decisions that Charles will have to live with. And I think Charles sees this as a non starter. JMO

Besides, it appears Eug and Jack both seem genuinely happy with the lives that have carved out in the world. I'm not sure that a title is high up on their lists of wants/needs. They seem pretty squared away and realistic rather than dreamy. JMO.
__________________
"And the tabloid press will be a pain in the ass, as usual." - Royal Norway
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-22-2018, 06:53 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
I don't see it really happening either. As I stated, the world is a different place than it was when she offered one to Mark Phillips.

When was the last time she created a title for someone she wasn't related to?

ETA:

Bertie...can you expand on what I bolded? I thought the House of Lords was abolished?
The House of Lords has not been abolished, but the automatic right of hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords was abolished in 1999. There are still 92 hereditary seats in the House though. Two of those are ex-officio; the others are occupied, when they become vacant, by a person elected by the House of Lords itself among hereditary peers who stand for election.

It is intended that, in the future,all hereditary seats will be gone, but we are not there yet.

EDIT: The following Wikipedia article provides more detailed information on how a hereditary peer may be elected to take a seat in the House of Lords.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:00 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
I don't see it really happening either. As I stated, the world is a different place than it was when she offered one to Mark Phillips.

When was the last time she created a title for someone she wasn't related to?

ETA:

Bertie...can you expand on what I bolded? I thought the House of Lords was abolished?
The House of Lords is definitely still there.

What changed in 1999 was the qualifications to be a member of the House of Lords:

The Lords Spiritual - Archbishops of Canterbury and York and the next 12 most senior bishops of the Church of England

The Lords Temporal - ALL life peers and 92 elected hereditary peers.
One additional criteria they put in there was that any hereditary peer for whom the title had been created was also allowed a seat for life - Philip, Charles and Andrew refused that right but Lord Swowdon took it up - although he asked for a Life Peerage to go along with the hereditary one.

One thing I have to correct - a new hereditary peer doesn't have the right to sit - only the first of the new creation created before the reforms came into effect in 1999.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:09 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I don't see any kind of a title for Jack whatsoever either.

It would be totally different if he was marrying Eugenie and they both were slated to work for the "Firm" representing the Queen but as that doesn't seem to be in the cards or even in the whole deck, I don't see a need for a title.

Eugenie and Jack's children will not have titles nor will they actually be considered members of the royal family. Their mother and their grandfather will be prince and princesses of the United Kingdom but they, themselves, will be always extended members of the family and not considered royal.

I think this is how Eugenie and Jack will prefer it to be.

I disagree in part. Eugenie may never become a "working royal", but she will always be a princess of the United Kingdom and an HRH unless some future monarch issues LPs to strip her of that title and style, which I am sure will not happen. So, from my POV, Eugenie will always be royal, whether she works for "the Firm" or not.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:23 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 685
In short - No
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:26 PM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 836
I say there is zero chance that the Queen will bestow a title/peerage on the couple on their wedding day. With Prince Harry marrying and a high chance of future children, Princess Eugenie will be pushed further down the Line of Succession.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:31 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I disagree in part. Eugenie may never become a "working royal", but she will always be a princess of the United Kingdom and an HRH unless some future monarch issues LPs to strip her of that title and style, which I am sure will not happen. So, from my POV, Eugenie will always be royal, whether she works for "the Firm" or not.
I wasn't referring to Eugenie not being royal but that her children will not be considered royal.

My statement said "Their mother and their grandfather will be prince and princesses of the United Kingdom but they, themselves, will be always extended members of the family and not considered royal."
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:39 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I wasn't referring to Eugenie not being royal but that her children will not be considered royal.

My statement said "Their mother and their grandfather will be prince and princesses of the United Kingdom but they, themselves, will be always extended members of the family and not considered royal."
OK, sorry. Yes, their children won't be royal and won't have any title unless they inherit one from their father, which would be the rationale for giving titles to husbands of princesses.

Of course, in the olden days, when princesses only married princes of other royal houses or, at least, married heirs to peerages, nobody had to worry about their children being "titleless".
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:44 PM
cepe's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The House of Lords is definitely still there.

What changed in 1999 was the qualifications to be a member of the House of Lords:

The Lords Spiritual - Archbishops of Canterbury and York and the next 12 most senior bishops of the Church of England

The Lords Temporal - ALL life peers and 92 elected hereditary peers.
One additional criteria they put in there was that any hereditary peer for whom the title had been created was also allowed a seat for life - Philip, Charles and Andrew refused that right but Lord Swowdon took it up - although he asked for a Life Peerage to go along with the hereditary one.

One thing I have to correct - a new hereditary peer doesn't have the right to sit - only the first of the new creation created before the reforms came into effect in 1999.
Just about to say the last point. FYI 2nd Earl of Snowdon has put his name down to be in the ballot for the 92(I think thats the right number) to sit in the House of Lords.

Back on topic - I dont think any title will be offered and I dont think one would be wanted.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:51 PM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,273
There won't be any title for Jack but what I'm wondering is what will happen to the title of Eugenie. Will she remain a princess or will she do a Patricia Connaught and relinquish her title to become Lady Brocksbank?
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-22-2018, 07:53 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 3,060
It seems that Anne sealed the deal for future generations: no title for husbands... (except for the spouse of a (future) monarch; he will certainly receive a title).

That is unless they decide to go a different way for those born after equal primogeniture was adopted (although giving Charlotte herself a hereditary title seems a more likely way to go); and husband at some point would be allowed to use his wife's title(s)...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
There won't be any title for Jack but what I'm wondering is what will happen to the title of Eugenie. Will she remain a princess or will she do a Patricia Connaught and relinquish her title to become Lady Brocksbank?
Why would she want to do that? There are only 2 princes and 2 princesses in that generation... So, even though she is not expected to be a working royal, she seems to be fine with her title, so why give it up now?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-22-2018, 08:05 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
It seems that Anne sealed the deal for future generations: no title for husbands... (except for the spouse of a (future) monarch; he will certainly receive a title).

That is unless they decide to go a different way for those born after equal primogeniture was adopted (although giving Charlotte herself a hereditary title seems a more likely way to go); and husband at some point would be allowed to use his wife's title(s)...
The impact of equal primogeniture (or gender equality) is uncertain IMHO. The Kingdom of the Netherlands now has equal primogeniture in the succesion to throne , but I don't think Alexia's and Ariane's husbands will have titles. In fact, under current Dutch law, they normally could not be made princes of the Netherlands in their own right (as they are not married to the heir to the throne) and there is no precedent for husbands using their wives' titles as a courtesy title. King W-A could make his younger daughters' husbands counts (that is possible under the Wet op de Adeldom), but, again, I don't think he would do it.

It is actually quite ironic that Spain, the only major European monarchy that still uses male preference primogeniture in the succession to the throne, is actually the most liberal country in terms of allowing husbands to use their wives' titles, which is standard practice even for the husband of the Princess of Asturias ! In fact, the husband of the Queen of Spain is the only one who cannot be called "King" now, although that again used to be the case in the past.

In the end, the truth of the matter is that the same people who are extremely vocal about gender equality and the right of women to inherit titles are also normally adamantly opposed to husbands being allowed to use their wives' titles, precisely because they argue that, under that scenario, there would be a "confusion" about who the real title holder is and the wife could appear to be "in a inferior position" to her husband. Honestly, I have given up trying to argue for men's rights in those situations (it suffices to go back to the discussion on TRF about Prince Henrik's wish to be called "King Consort" or "His Majesty" to see what I mean )
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-22-2018, 08:06 PM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,273
Although Lady Patricia is said to have later regretted giving up her title, she kept her position as a member of the Royal Family, it was seen as a way to make it easier for her leading a normal life married to a commoner and as a way of taking the streamlining of the Royal Family started by George V during WWI one step further. The two Fife princesses stopped using their royal titles around the same time.
Both reasons could be seen as valid for Eugenie as well; she's marrying a commoner and will live an increasingly private life during the reigns of an uncle and a cousin who's both said to favour a more streamlined Royal Family.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-22-2018, 08:11 PM
rominet09's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: LIEGE, Belgium
Posts: 4,194
Why should he get a title ? No reason.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-22-2018, 08:12 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 4,733
I find it hard to imagine anyone NOT wanting a title!

Why not??
It costs nothing and it sounds very nice.
If Jack is offered one, I hope he won't be silly enough to refuse.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-22-2018, 08:21 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
There won't be any title for Jack but what I'm wondering is what will happen to the title of Eugenie. Will she remain a princess or will she do a Patricia Connaught and relinquish her title to become Lady Brocksbank?

Not likely - when Patricia married it was at a time when the BRF was actively downsizing - George V had issued his LPs only 2 years earlier, altering the definition of “who” was a British Royal, the British government had just stripped the cousins in Germany of their titles, and the cousins in Britain who had German titles had just relinquished theirs. In that light, when Patricia married the younger son of an Earl it almost made sense for her to give up her title.

With Eugenie, times are different no matter how much talk there is about the BRF downsizing, there has been no active push for that beyond Edward’s children being styled as the children of an Earl. Unless Eugenie personally wishes to give up her title (which I think both her parents would discourage) or Charles does a push to have her give it up (which I only see happening if it is his intention to issue new LPs during his reign), and the Queen supports it, Eugenie will remain a Princess - she’ll just drop the “of York.”
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Jack Brooksbank: Family and Background Zonk The Duke of York, Sarah Duchess of York, and Family 78 12-01-2018 02:15 AM
Engagement of Princess Eugenie of York and Jack Brooksbank: January 22, 2018 JessRulz The Duke of York, Sarah Duchess of York, and Family 229 03-15-2018 09:50 PM
Daniel's Future: Discussion (his role, title, orders, pressure etc.) Yennie Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel and Family 441 01-13-2017 06:38 PM




Popular Tags
administrator aristocracy belgian bonaparte british royal family clothes corruption crown crown prince hussein's future wife current events cyprus denmark duchessofcambridge duchess of sussex duke of edinburgh duke of sussex duke of york earl of wessex extramarital affairs french revolution friendly city future wife of prince hussein genealogy germany greece harry headship her children introduction juan carlos kiko king philippe lady louise mountbatten-windsor lineage meghan markle modernization monaco royal monarchist monarchy monogram naples northampton patronages potential areas prince aymeric prince charles prince harry prince nicholas princess princess anne princess beatrice princesses princess eugenie princess louise prince william public opinion qe2 queen elisabeth queen mathilde rania of jordan relationship sarah ferguson savoy saxony south africa south korea state visit united kingdom viscount severn wivies



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:35 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises