The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 11-18-2013, 07:10 AM
Molly2101's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,672
I agree iluvbertie about children of the eldest child only having titles. I think that is what will happen someday. I feel Charles will explain this to William and he or William will make new LP explaining this. It would naturally slim down the amount of HRH's the BRF has.
__________________

__________________
"I am yours, you are mine, of that be sure. You are locked in my heart, the little key is lost and now you must stay there forever."
Written by Princess Alix of Hesse and by Rhine in the diary of her fiance, Tsarevich Nicholas.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 11-18-2013, 01:28 PM
LadyGabrielle's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: kapaa, United States
Posts: 1,155
Well for crying out loud, I hope so! This is way too complicated. There needs to be a change and I am so looking forward to it. This sexist thing and not wanting titles for children is rediculous. If children are born then let them have their titles. They are a part of the BRF no matter what. Whether they are male, female or anything in between should not matter. I just hope someone changes this title issue in the future before I go completely bonkers trying to figure it out! K. Im done ranting.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 11-18-2013, 02:37 PM
Molly2101's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyGabrielle View Post
Well for crying out loud, I hope so! This is way too complicated. There needs to be a change and I am so looking forward to it. This sexist thing and not wanting titles for children is rediculous. If children are born then let them have their titles. They are a part of the BRF no matter what. Whether they are male, female or anything in between should not matter. I just hope someone changes this title issue in the future before I go completely bonkers trying to figure it out! K. Im done ranting.
If Louise and James were using their HRH style then in years to come they would be in the same predicament as Beatrice and Eugenie, who are now becoming of the age where they need to work to earn money. They have to do this as the general public refuse to pay for them as they don't feel they do anything for the BRF, even though we know they do engagements etc. I think Edward and Sophie did well in deciding their children should not be HRH's as they knew the trouble it would likely cause in the future. I think that they should do it like the Netherland's and Norway (I believe) - the children of the son's of the Monarch, other than the heir, are called Count's and Countess's.
__________________
"I am yours, you are mine, of that be sure. You are locked in my heart, the little key is lost and now you must stay there forever."
Written by Princess Alix of Hesse and by Rhine in the diary of her fiance, Tsarevich Nicholas.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 11-18-2013, 02:54 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,074
Yeah, the whole thing needs tidied up in a formal way ie with new letters patent. I think that if the Queen dosn't do this then Charles will. If it were me I would make Beatrice and Eugenie Ladies and Lady Louise and her brother's existing titles would formally be the only ones they held. I would also give Harry's children the same with only William and Kates being HRH. That would make it all nice and tidy LOL!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 11-18-2013, 02:57 PM
EllieCat's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Invercargill, New Zealand
Posts: 245
i'd like to think, on that far distant day hopefully when Edward and Sophie become Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh, that Louise and james will then be Princess Louise and Prince James of Edinburgh. I too don't like a slimmed down monarchy.

On another note didn't Sophie look stunning at the Dr Who/Buckingham Palace reception; I don't think I've rarely seen her look better.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 11-18-2013, 03:13 PM
Molly2101's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by angela View Post
Yeah, the whole thing needs tidied up in a formal way ie with new letters patent. I think that if the Queen dosn't do this then Charles will. If it were me I would make Beatrice and Eugenie Ladies and Lady Louise and her brother's existing titles would formally be the only ones they held. I would also give Harry's children the same with only William and Kates being HRH. That would make it all nice and tidy LOL!
I prefer the idea of Harry's children being Lords and Ladies. I agree that Beatrice and Eugenie should be made Ladies but that wont happen. Charles will likely create new LP's stating only the eldest child (male or female) and their children shall enjoy the style of Royal Highness. He will not, however, make it retrospective thus the York sisters will still retain their Royal Highness title.
__________________
"I am yours, you are mine, of that be sure. You are locked in my heart, the little key is lost and now you must stay there forever."
Written by Princess Alix of Hesse and by Rhine in the diary of her fiance, Tsarevich Nicholas.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 11-18-2013, 04:20 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Alexandria, VA, United States
Posts: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Age has nothing to do with her being royal. Lady Louise will be royal all her life, whether she chooses to use the title Princess might be up to her when she turns 18.
According to the 1917 Letters patent, children of the Sovereign and grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line are HRH Prince or Princess, as well as the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. The Queen issued a new LP to give the HRH and title of Prince or princess to the children of the Duke of Cambridge. (All would have been upgraded automatically when Charles became king.)

At the time of the marriage, and reiterated when Louise was born, it was announced that Edward's children would be styled as children of an earl. Louise and James are technically royal, but not styled as such. It is not a choice. At age 18, Louise will not be able to say hey, I want to use the HRH and title Princess. Not going to happen. This was a decision made by the Queen and the Wessexes. Eventually, the children will have the title and rank of a duke's children ... after the death of the Duke of Edinburgh and the succession of Charles III - will Charles be able to create a new Duke of Edinburgh title for Edward. If the Duke dies before the queen, Charles succeeds according to the 1947 LP. Philip's male heirs. It will be a new creation for Edward.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 11-18-2013, 05:24 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarleneKoenig View Post

At the time of the marriage, and reiterated when Louise was born, it was announced that Edward's children would be styled as children of an earl. Louise and James are technically royal, but not styled as such. It is not a choice. At age 18, Louise will not be able to say hey, I want to use the HRH and title Princess. Not going to happen. This was a decision made by the Queen and the Wessexes. Eventually, the children will have the title and rank of a duke's children ... after the death of the Duke of Edinburgh and the succession of Charles III - will Charles be able to create a new Duke of Edinburgh title for Edward. If the Duke dies before the queen, Charles succeeds according to the 1947 LP. Philip's male heirs. It will be a new creation for Edward.
Was it though? Because my interpretation is that Edward and Sophie requested their children be styled as that of an Earl and The Queen allowed this to happen. Have they been stripped of their birthright? Has a new LP been issued? Has anyone concretely said they cannot be known as Prince and Princess in the future when they come to understand their situation?

Don't get me wrong, I don't think they will, I just don't think the option has been entirely deprived from them.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 11-18-2013, 06:24 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,667
There is one interpretation that is that is required is for the Queen's will to be made known - that LPs etc aren't needed - and if that interpretation is correct then they have been deprived of the right to be HRH Prince/Princess.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 11-18-2013, 06:30 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
There is one interpretation that is that is required is for the Queen's will to be made known - that LPs etc aren't needed - and if that interpretation is correct then they have been deprived of the right to be HRH Prince/Princess.
So, in that scenario The Queen's say so could deprive anyone of their titles yes? No written law would be necessary at all?

Is The Queen's will approving something her son wishes for his children despite the fact she might not have wanted it?

I hate to complicate the situation but, if this was to be a permanent thing surely LPs could have been done just like they were for the Cambridges.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 11-18-2013, 07:03 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,643
further to Lumutqueen's question/point

Is it a case that LPs must be issued to create a new title - as with the Cambridges, but not required if something is not to be used or taken away (as possibly with the Wessexes) ?

And is it that in reality no one knows re the Wessexes
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 11-18-2013, 11:13 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,373
LPs don't have to be issued to have something not used - they weren't issued to make Camilla not use Princess of Wales - but it's debatable whether or not they have to be issued for a title to be taken away.

Personally, I think this was done so as to be deliberately vague on the issue so that if the Wessexes ever change their mind on the matter, Louise or James could end up using the higher titles without a public uproar. As it stands now, with us being able to debate the matter, If Louise went to her Granny and said she wanted to be a Princess then the Queen could make an announcement that it is her will that Louise be known as a Princess, because of course she always was one - and the fact that this debate has been going on for the past 10 years means that we can't really say she wasn't a Princess.

As for whether or not it's simply sexism that the Phillips don't have titles while the Wessexes and Yorks do, I disagree. For starters, it isn't sexism because when Mark Phillips was offered a title he turned it down. That reason is why Zara is not a Lady. Secondly, in the extent that titles are basically an extension of a family name, there's the argument that within the English speaking world, legitimately born children get typically get their surname from their father. Thus, when John Smith and Jane Doe have a child, it's more likely to have Smith as a surname than Doe. Titles aren't all that different, and by extension they are no more sexist than surnames. The BRF has, in the past, made measures to allow for a monarch's grandchildren to have titles - be they Royal or Noble - but in the case of the Phillips the lack of titles is owing to a decision made by their parents.

As to whether the titles should be limited so that the children of the younger sons of a monarch don't automatically become royals... Personally, I don't see the need. While I can understand the argument from the perspective of the royal parent not wanting their children to themselves be royal - and I think in the case of Edward an Sophie we can see this decision having been made - because of the expectations placed upon the children, but I don't see why there's this huge need to "slim down" the monarchy. It won't change the cost of the monarchy that much - certainly not while the children are growing up or living with their royal parents - but it will have the potential of limiting the royal duties performed. The Kents and Gloucesters continue to perform duties that the Wessexes likely never will, because the Kents and Gloucesters are royal while the Wessexes are (in name at least) not.

While the Wessex children, and even likely the Yorks, not doing duties may not change things too much, by the time William is on the throne and George is starting his family the numbers will be hugely different - once the Queen, her husband, her cousins, and her children (and daughters-in-laws) are gone the BRF will be William, Kate, Harry, his spouse, their children, and the Yorks and Wessexes. That's at most what? 12 people? And how many of them will be full time royals? How many of them will do the 3000+ engagements that the BRF now does? How many of them will travel to the other realms or Commonwealth Nations? Or represent Britain and the BRF abroad in general? And that's assuming that the Yorks and Wessexes count as royals at that point, let alone Harry's children.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 11-19-2013, 01:59 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: central valley, United States
Posts: 421
Thinking ahead by one generation of the Queen's grandchildren:
Peter - if his father had accepted an earldom then Savanna and Isla would have become ladies when Peter succeeded to the title, but as Mark Phillips declined they are Misses.
Zara - if her father had accepted the Earldom she would have been a lady, as he didn't she is a Miss. In either case her children would be Miss or Mr..
William - all children prince or princess.
Harry - unless made a Duke or Earl all children Miss or Mr.(?)
Beatrice - all children Miss or Mr.
Eugenie - all children Miss or Mr.
Louise - all children Miss or Mr.
James - daughter Lady when he succeeds to his father's title and son subsidiary title.
Do I have all of this right?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 11-19-2013, 02:03 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,373
All of Harry's children will be Lords or Ladies at a minimum - either they will be the children of a Prince (and thus Lord/Lady), the children of a Royal Duke (and thus Lord/Lady), or the male-line grandchildren of the monarch (and thus Prince/Princess).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 11-19-2013, 03:09 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
As for whether or not it's simply sexism that the Phillips don't have titles while the Wessexes and Yorks do, I disagree. For starters, it isn't sexism because when Mark Phillips was offered a title he turned it down.
That ignores the very sexist nature of the 1917 LPs - why should the male line grandchildren be royal but not the female line grandchildren?

Had the 1917 LPs said that ALL grandchildren, regardless of the gender of the child of the monarch, then Peter and Zara would have been born a Prince and Princess - regardless of whether or not Mark had accepted a title in his own right.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 11-19-2013, 03:11 AM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,643
Ish, thank you so much for your detailed response ( post#154). i have been thinking for some time that titles were an extension of surnames but I could not have expressed it as well as you.

really great post.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 11-19-2013, 05:53 AM
MAfan's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: N/A, Italy
Posts: 4,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by sndral View Post
Thinking ahead by one generation of the Queen's grandchildren:
Peter - if his father had accepted an earldom then Savanna and Isla would have become ladies when Peter succeeded to the title, but as Mark Phillips declined they are Misses.
Zara - if her father had accepted the Earldom she would have been a lady, as he didn't she is a Miss. In either case her children would be Miss or Mr..
William - all children prince or princess.
Harry - unless made a Duke or Earl all children Miss or Mr.(?)
Beatrice - all children Miss or Mr.
Eugenie - all children Miss or Mr.
Louise - all children Miss or Mr.
James - daughter Lady when he succeeds to his father's title and son subsidiary title.
Do I have all of this right?
Harry's children would be Mr or Miss during the Queen's reign, but would become HRH Prince/Princess after the accession of Charles. This only if Harry isn't given a Dukedom. If he is given a Dukedom by the Queen, during her reign his children would be Lord/Lady X Moutbatten-Windsor (except the eldest son, who would use a subsidiary title) and they would become HRH Prince/Princess after Charles' accession.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 11-19-2013, 06:48 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,667
Not quite - the 1917 LPs allow for the children of younger grandsons to be also Lord and Lady e.g. Lord Frederick and Lady Gabriella Windsor have the Lord/Lady because their father is a male-line grandson of a monarch, even though a younger son and not the heir to the title - so Harry's children would also be Lord or Lady whether he has a title or not - as the children of the younger son of a son of the monarch.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 11-19-2013, 09:15 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
That ignores the very sexist nature of the 1917 LPs - why should the male line grandchildren be royal but not the female line grandchildren?
The answer is very simple. The female line grandchildren inherit titles from their fathers.
It was hard to imagine british princess's husband without a title.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 11-19-2013, 09:19 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
The answer is very simple. The female line grandchildren inherit titles from their fathers.
It was hard to imagine british princess's husband without a title.
But that is not the case now, so the law should be altered to reflect changing times.
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
lady louise, lady louise mountbatten-windsor, louise mountbatten-windsor, styles and titles, viscount severn


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
Countess Of Wessex Jewellery Josefine Royal Jewels 477 02-26-2014 09:09 AM
About the Wessex family iowabelle Forum Announcements and Admin 4 01-31-2008 05:39 PM
Possible names for the new Lord or Lady Wessex Beck The Earl and Countess of Wessex and Family 252 01-04-2008 01:07 PM
Earl and Countess Of Wessex Alexandria Current Events Archive 138 11-19-2004 05:09 AM




Popular Tags
belgium birth brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland pregnancy president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding william winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:59 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]