The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #281  
Old 09-16-2016, 04:38 AM
WreathOfLaurels's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLV View Post
Why do they have those Danish titles?
Good question SLV, allow mw to explain.

it's because Philip's grandfather George I was one of the sons of Christian 9 of Denmark and part of the deal which let george become king stated that at the time george and his children could keep their danish succession rights with george coming down lower than his younger brother waldemar, as Denmark was having succession issues at the time and the greek throne wasn't stable. By 1952 the succession in Denmark was amended to make only the descendants of Christian 10 eligible on top of the other requirements (be lutheran, dont marry down etc...) and the royal greeks lost their places in the succession.* However, for reasons of history and prestige they retain the dynastic titles 'prins af danmark' instead 'prins til dammark'. The question of whether Philip's renounciantion of his greek and danish titles' legality in Denmark on the other hand is more complicated. Its similar to the Hannovers still calling themselves 'prince(ess) of hannover, Great Britain and Ireland' - instead of picking a pointless fight sometimes its better to let sleeping dogs lie.

* the norwegian branch of the family rebounded theirs when Haakon 7 took the Norwegian crown.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 09-16-2016, 05:16 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 9,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Besides, I believe the current Danish Law of Succession only applies to the descendants of King Christian X and Queen Alexandrine, which is not Philip's case.



I am not sure what you mean by "stripping all members of the DRF of their royal status", but, since QMII cannot unilaterally amend the Act of Succession, she most certainly cannot unilaterally remove any of her children or grandchildren from the line of succession unless they marry without her consent given in a Council of State.
In theory QMII can strip all members of the DRF of their titles as royals. That's her decision alone. - It would of course cause some, ahem, turmoil! But in theory she can. - With the sole exception of the Crown Prince. Frederik's status is guaranteed under the Law of Succession and cannot be changed. But QMII could, again in theory, decide tomorrow to strip Mary of her title, so she would be Countess of Montpezat only.

All who are in the Line of Succession in DK are officially listed:
Frederik.
Christian.
Isabella.
Vincent.
Josephine.
Joachim.
Nikolai.
Felix.
Henrik.
Athena.
Benedikte.
Elisabeth.

- And that's it.

All of the above are titled Prince/ss to Denmark.
Everybody else, the GRF included, are at best titled of Denmark. I.e. they are not in the line of succession.

QMII could also change the titles of Benedikte's two daughters to Princess to Denmark, but as there is no shortage of spares, alive and well, it would be most odd and cause a number of very raised eyebrows!
But she is the Monarch and head of the family, so in theory...
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 09-16-2016, 05:58 AM
WreathOfLaurels's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 433
Wow, the Danish government are confident nothing will go wring for the RF in the future. That sure is a small sucession pool. Daisy must really be fond of her sister and brother in law, a more sensible person would have told Tino to pull his head in and simply compromise on the surname issue. Common sense would also dictate that republics dont do titles and there's no point in flogging that particular dead horse!

However I remember hearing somewhere that with the Dutch Royals, all the titles from the successive prince consorts (meckelinburg-schwerin, Schaumburg-Lippe-Biersfield, Von Aremsberg) are now part of the titles of the Dutch monarch without changing the family name. Luxembourg has on the other hand gone from being Orange-Nassau to Bourbon Parma (and got an upgrade from HGDH to HRH in the process) due to GDss Charlottes marriage to Prince Felix BP. Im personally of the opinion that if the BRF's 'name' had not been made such a fuss of during WWI (i.e. If george 5 had just stopped using the name saxe-coburg like the belgian cousins and not made such a song and dance about the name windsor) than probably Ph would not have needed to go through the rig morale of renouctions (thus saving everyone a great deal of confusion) and the dynasty's name change would have happened under the radar (thus avoiding all the fuss kicked up by Ph and Mountbatten over the matter).
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 09-16-2016, 06:14 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,893
It should be remembered though that the Germans actually occupied about 90% of Belgium so a King denouncing his German name publicly could have had even worse consequences than the horrific ones they were suffering under the occupation anyway.

The King, wasn't captive of course but he really only commanded in a miniscule part of his nation.

In Britain though there was a lot of anti-German feeling and no real consequences for the public when George V made his decision. Had he not made that decision though there may have been different consequences.
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 09-16-2016, 06:44 AM
WreathOfLaurels's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 433
The point I was trying to make is that a lot of talk about royal names is often arbitrary e.g. The DRF don't have an official surname - they just use 'Denmark' or 'Dane' when they need one - Glucksburg is a dynastic name. This is also the same line taken by a number of other royal families Likewise there is no consensus on the actual name of the BRF pre Windorization, was it Saxe Coburg? Wettein? Brunswick? Hannover? Part of the problem was the families habit of following german practice of all family members in the male line being styled prince regardless of how close to the throne they were or not (think the Hohezollerns) and too many HRH's HH's and so on. The changes were to bring them in line with standard UK aristocratic practice. The GRF took their cue from its Danish/German antecedents and hence have no official surname.Given the amount of sneering about the RF's german ancestry there still is, i'd say that it probably didn't achieve its intended goal. They were trying too hard and so was Philip - given that he is still called 'the hun' and 'Phil the Greek' by sundry snobs and wags. Had the BRF simply stuck with using titles and toponyms only and dropped the saxon arms from their arms, there would have been no to make a fuss about names in the first place. George 5 would still have been toast if the british had been on the loosing end of the war as he would have been a natural scapegoat for someone like Lloyd George regardless of name changes or anything else along those lines.

Here are the usable surnames of the current RFs of Europe

* Sweden - Bernadotte
* Spain - Borbon
* Monaco - Grimaldi
* UK - Windsor

The rest use toponyms ('of *****') as do many of the former families, asian and ME monarchies.
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 09-16-2016, 07:54 AM
SLV's Avatar
SLV SLV is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by WreathOfLaurels View Post
Good question SLV, allow mw to explain.

it's because Philip's grandfather George I was one of the sons of Christian 9 of Denmark and part of the deal which let george become king stated that at the time george and his children could keep their danish succession rights with george coming down lower than his younger brother waldemar, as Denmark was having succession issues at the time and the greek throne wasn't stable. By 1952 the succession in Denmark was amended to make only the descendants of Christian 10 eligible on top of the other requirements (be lutheran, dont marry down etc...) and the royal greeks lost their places in the succession.* However, for reasons of history and prestige they retain the dynastic titles 'prins af danmark' instead 'prins til dammark'. The question of whether Philip's renounciantion of his greek and danish titles' legality in Denmark on the other hand is more complicated. Its similar to the Hannovers still calling themselves 'prince(ess) of hannover, Great Britain and Ireland' - instead of picking a pointless fight sometimes its better to let sleeping dogs lie.

* the norwegian branch of the family rebounded theirs when Haakon 7 took the Norwegian crown.
Thank you for your thorough explanation!
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 09-16-2016, 08:59 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by WreathOfLaurels View Post
* UK - Windsor
For any descendant that doesn't have an of ...., they use Mountbatten-Windsor as a surname. Anne may have used it when she got married to Tim, and Charles and William have used it on occasions.

Windsor is the "dynasty" name if you like.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 09-17-2016, 09:25 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
In theory QMII can strip all members of the DRF of their titles as royals. That's her decision alone. - It would of course cause some, ahem, turmoil! But in theory she can. - With the sole exception of the Crown Prince. Frederik's status is guaranteed under the Law of Succession and cannot be changed. But QMII could, again in theory, decide tomorrow to strip Mary of her title, so she would be Countess of Montpezat only.
I agree that it is very unlikely, but in theory, I think the heir apparent could be stripped of his or her royal title, because the titles of Prince(ss) and Crown Prince(ss) are not used in the Danish Constitution and Law of Succession.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WreathOfLaurels View Post
Here are the usable surnames of the current RFs of Europe

* Sweden - Bernadotte
* Spain - Borbon
* Monaco - Grimaldi
* UK - Windsor
* Netherlands - van Oranje-Nassau
* Luxembourg - de Nassau
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 09-17-2016, 09:53 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
I agree that it is very unlikely, but in theory, I think the heir apparent could be stripped of his or her royal title, because the titles of Prince(ss) and Crown Prince(ss) are not used in the Danish Constitution and Law of Succession.



* Netherlands - van Oranje-Nassau
* Luxembourg - de Nassau

Isn't the usable surname of Queen Elizabeth II's descendants Mountbatten-Windsor rather than Windsor only ?

Likewise, I think the usable surname for the Dutch royals is van Oranje-Nassau van Amsberg for the children of Prince Constantijn and Prince Friso, and van Oranje-Nassau van Vollenhoven for Princess Margriet's children. My understanding is that King Willem-Alexander and his daughters don't use a surname, as I believe it is also the case of all members of the British Royal Family who are HRHs.

The Swedes, on the other hand, confuse me as always. In principle, princes or princesses of Sweden should not use a surname either, but Carl Philip uses the family name Bernadotte in his design company, Daniel changed his legal name to Westling Bernadotte, and Sofia also legally took up Bernadotte as her surname after getting married. It is even more complicated when it comes to Madeleine's children. Leonore's (American?) passport is said to have her listed as "Bernadotte O'Neill", but the Swedish Royal Court insists Leonore and Nicholas are not O'Neill and actually don't have a surname.

I suppose the Belgians are the most consistent in that respect, i.e. not using a surname in the official documents relating to any "prince of Belgium", as is correct IMHO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WreathOfLaurels View Post
However I remember hearing somewhere that with the Dutch Royals, all the titles from the successive prince consorts (meckelinburg-schwerin, Schaumburg-Lippe-Biersfield, Von Aremsberg) are now part of the titles of the Dutch monarch without changing the family name.
They are only titles of the the Dutch royals, I suppose, as long as they are inheritable, which only applies normally in male line. In other words, Princess Juliana was Duchess of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, but Princess Beatrix was not. Princess Beatrix, on the other hand, was Princess of Lippe-Biesterfeld but Prince Willem-Alexander was not. Willem-Alexander, however, was Jonkheer van Amsberg.

When Juliana, Beatrix and Willem-Alexander became queen/king, they stopped using those titles, but Juliana and Beatrix started to use them again upon abdication, together with the legally mandated title of Princess of the Netherlands. I don't quite understand why that is the case.
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 09-17-2016, 11:47 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 9,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
I agree that it is very unlikely, but in theory, I think the heir apparent could be stripped of his or her royal title, because the titles of Prince(ss) and Crown Prince(ss) are not used in the Danish Constitution and Law of Succession.
No, but the title of "Tronfølger" = Heir to the Throne is used. And the heir is by law guaranteed his/her place in the Line of Succession.
Also the heir is the only one who is titled Regent in the absence of the monarch. Everybody else are titled Rigsforstander.
So logically QMII can't strip Frederik of his royal status.

She could elevate Frederik to a royal, I assume, if for whatever reason QMII was the last DRF (suitable) member and the Parliament appointed Frederik to be the next king - in consultation with QMII of course.
But now we are going even further out in the shadowland of really far-out what ifs.
Reply With Quote
  #291  
Old 09-18-2016, 02:08 AM
WreathOfLaurels's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
They are only titles of the the Dutch royals, I suppose, as long as they are inheritable, which only applies normally in male line. In other words, Princess Juliana was Duchess of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, but Princess Beatrix was not. Princess Beatrix, on the other hand, was Princess of Lippe-Biesterfeld but Prince Willem-Alexander was not. Willem-Alexander, however, was Jonkheer van Amsberg.
I guess then that WA's daughters, along with Constantijn and the late Friso's children will also have Jonkheer/[feminine eqv of Jhr] Von Amsberg as part of their titles e.g. Prince/princess of the netherlands/orange-nassau and Jhr von Amsberg? As this has become part of the titles of the male line unlike the MS/SBL ones which stopped with each new male in the family?

Quote:
When Juliana, Beatrix and Willem-Alexander became queen/king, they stopped using those titles, but Juliana and Beatrix started to use them again upon abdication, together with the legally mandated title of Princess of the Netherlands. I don't quite understand why that is the case.
Seems logical, princess of MS/SBL is part of the titles they inherited from their fathers and there's no reason why they should not be discretely allowed to acknowledge their paternal heritage, as long as there isn't a song and dance about it as the use of both maternal and paternal titles if the mother was an heiress is permissible in most cases. I guess that WA if and when he chooses to abdicate (hoping he doesn't die before Catharina Amalia is of age) will probably assume the title prince of the netherlands, Jonkheer von Amsberg, as it seems to be a family tradition of sorts. The Danes came up with a similar solution to Prince Hendrik's kicking up of a stink over his monpezat comital title with the title passing to those not in the direct line of succession.

Bringing all this back to the discussion of the DoE's Greek/Danish titles, compared to contenential practice, the windsors are the outliers. Much of this comes from the anglophone practice that women take their husbands names and titles instead of the practice of the rest of europe where women keep their own names and titles and that children often have the right to use both family names (a widespread practice in the hispanic lands and iberian peninsula), but with the fathers names and titles being the ones that are considered heritable. The exeption is heiresses to titles and arms which become part of the family name (this is where all those vons, undos, eats, las, ys and multibarrelled names came from)

For example if the above practice had been the norm than Ph&E's children could have used their mothers and fathers titles and arms jointly and had both surnames along w Ph using a UK title in conjunction with his birth ones e.g. Glucksburg-Windsor (von Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg und zu Saxe-Coburg und Gotha?), prince(ss) of the UK and NI, Greece and Denmark; but with the provision that those in the direct line of succession would drop the G/D titles and arms without any need for renouciations and other such hooha, this would have spared Philips pride, as well as not having to the bring the whole mountbatten/battenburg thing into it (and it was the mountbatten thing that was the cause of the trouble not the name and title issue within itself - nobody wanted to see uncle dickie going around being that smug)

However this was not a realistic option in the political climate of the time - too mitteleuropean - but the gender customs of the times in which Philip married into the BRF is a large part of all this as well. There was never any seroius suggestion that as part of his naturalization that he simply take his wife's name after the wedding, a solution that would have solved a number of problems but social convention both then and now would not have looked kindly on this. There was also the fact that in the 1950s there was a considerable stigma attached to the use of maternal surnames - normally it was a sign of illegetamacy. This was one of the reasons why Queen Vic was so insistent that Albert should be able to pass his titles to their children, and why QE2 felt the same about her children as well.
Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old 09-18-2016, 02:11 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 6,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Isn't the usable surname of Queen Elizabeth II's descendants Mountbatten-Windsor rather than Windsor only ?

Likewise, I think the usable surname for the Dutch royals is van Oranje-Nassau van Amsberg for the children of Prince Constantijn and Prince Friso, and van Oranje-Nassau van Vollenhoven for Princess Margriet's children. My understanding is that King Willem-Alexander and his daughters don't use a surname, as I believe it is also the case of all members of the British Royal Family who are HRHs.

[...]
There are various surnames:

The children of King Willem-Alexander
Van Oranje-Nassau (prins / prinses)

The children of Prince Friso and Prince Constantijn
Van Oranje-Nassau van Amsberg (graaf / gravin)

The children of Prince Maurits
Van Lippe-Biesterfeld van Vollenhoven (no title)

The children of Prince Bernhard, Prince Pieter-Christiaan, Prince Floris
Van Vollenhoven (no title)

In the Royal House Act 2002 is regulated that the (title and) surname (prince/princess) van Oranje Nassau indicates a close relationship to the person of the Sovereign. This (title and) surname follows the Sovereign, regardless his/her gender. This policy has been followed indeed since only the four daughters of Queen Juliana, the three sons of Queen Beatrix and the three daughters of King Willem-Alexander have this surname indeed.
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old 09-18-2016, 01:54 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 471
British princes and peers ordinarily do not use their official surnames, though Mountbatten-Windsor appeared on Princess Anne's marriage register in 1973. On occasions when they need an unofficial surname, they use their territorial designations, Harry Wales for example.

In spite of the court insisting they have no surname, it was reported that Princess Madeleine's children were listed as Bernadotte O'Neill in their Swedish passports and registered in Sweden as Bernadotte.

Belgian royals and nobles have reportedly been required to begin using surnames in their identity documents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
No, but the title of "Tronfølger" = Heir to the Throne is used. And the heir is by law guaranteed his/her place in the Line of Succession.
Also the heir is the only one who is titled Regent in the absence of the monarch. Everybody else are titled Rigsforstander.
So logically QMII can't strip Frederik of his royal status.
I understand that the Queen of Denmark cannot strip anyone of their place in the line of succession; I meant that the Constitution does not say the Tronfølger must have the title of Crown Prince(ss) or Prince(ss).

Quote:
Originally Posted by WreathOfLaurels View Post
I guess then that WA's daughters, along with Constantijn and the late Friso's children will also have Jonkheer/[feminine eqv of Jhr] Von Amsberg as part of their titles e.g. Prince/princess of the netherlands/orange-nassau and Jhr von Amsberg?
In the Royal Decree of January 25, 2002 declaring the titles of the future children of the Prince of Orange and Princess Máxima, and on the website of the Royal House of the Netherlands, the children of Willem-Alexander and Máxima did not receive the title Jonkvrouw van Amsberg, as opposed to their father and cousins.

Besluit van 25 januari 2002 tot vaststelling van de titels en het predikaat van Máxima Zorreguieta en van de titels, namen en het predikaat van de kinderen die geboren mochten worden uit het huwelijk van Zijne Koninklijke Hoogheid Prins Willem-Alexander Claus George Ferdinand, Prins van Oranje, Prins der Nederlanden, Prins van Oranje-Nassau, Jonkheer van Amsberg met Hare Koninklijke Hoogheid Prinses Máxima der Nederlanden, Prinses van Oranje-Nassau, mevrouw van Amsberg

Titels leden Koninklijke Familie | Titels, aanspreektitels en beschermheerschappen | Het Koninklijk Huis
__________________

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
Royal Roles & Titles for the Spouses of Victoria, Carl Philip & Madeleine Huddo Royal House of Sweden 71 03-05-2016 08:42 AM
Maria Teresa's Citizenship bad_barbarella Grand Duke Henri and Grand Duchess Maria Teresa 24 06-13-2015 02:42 PM
Favourite Danish-Greek Baby Name? carlota Royal Chit Chat 50 03-23-2014 09:16 PM
Current and Former Danish Royal Residences JessRulz Danish Royal Residences 0 11-10-2008 04:49 AM




Popular Tags
albania best gown september 2016 best outfit birthday catherine middleton style child christening of prince alexander crown prince frederik crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit eveningwear crown princess victoria daytime fashion denmark duchess of cambridge duchess of cambridge cocktail dresses duke of cambridge duke of edinburgh earthquakes fashion poll fashion poll december jewels king abdullah ii king abdullah in australia king carl gustaf and queen silvia king willem-alexander monarchy norway november 2016 october 2016 picture of the week prince charles princess mary princess mary casual style princess mary fashion princess mette-marit's dresses princess sofia queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia cocktail dresses queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia eveningwear queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen mathilde hats queen mathildes hats queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queenmother queen rania queen rania casual outfit queen rania eveningwear queen rania fashion queen silvia september 2016 state visit state visit from argentina succession sweden the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats visit to canada


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:45 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises