Prince Philip's Former Greek Citizenship and Greek and Danish Titles

[NGalitzine]

It appears we have reached the time to stop feeding the trolls.

 

[branchg]

Phillip is a Danish Prince. He was born a Prince of Greece and Denmark and there is no written record he gave up his titles. He may have decided to stop using them but that doesn't mean he isn't legally still a holder of these titles.

I really do not understand your reasoning here. He renounced his right of succession to the Greek throne on February 28, 1947 and became a British subject, taking the name Lt. Philip Mountbatten, RN, and relinquishing his title as a Prince of Greece & Denmark. That definitively ended his membership in the Royal House of Greece and his rights to be a Prince of Denmark.

All of this was undertaken in order to marry The Princess Elizabeth as a British subject, not a foreign royal. His children would inevitably become members of the House of Windsor and their rank and style would flow from their mother as The Sovereign.

There is no reason to assert he or his agnatic descendants remain Prince/Princess of Denmark when they are British royals!

 

[branchg]

It appears we have reached the time to stop feeding the trolls.

I agree and this whole argument is ridiculous at this point.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

It appears we have reached the time to stop feeding the trolls.

Troll? At least this'troll' provides links and documentation and doesn't proclaim their opinion as fact

I agree and this whole argument is ridiculous at this point.

Troll? At least this'troll' provides links and documentation and doesn't proclaim their opinion as fact
Double for you. Your comments are nothing more than this is my opimion so of course it is fact

 

[branchg]

Everyone has provided you with extensive information to consider, including quotes from biographies, the Royal Family's website, Danish references, etc. More importantly, Philip chose to renounce his rights and membership in the Royal House of Greece to marry the future Queen and voluntarily relinquished his former titles.

He's been a British Duke and Royal Prince for over sixty years and there is no rationale to your points.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Everyone has provided you with extensive information to consider, including quotes from biographies, the Royal Family's website, Danish references, etc. More importantly, Philip chose to renounce his rights and membership in the Royal House of Greece to marry the future Queen and voluntarily relinquished his former titles.

He's been a British Duke and Royal Prince for over sixty years and there is no rationale to your points.

This was in 1947 right?
Because its odd then that the Palace was referring to both Phillip and Charles as Princes of Denmark in 1954 (After his marriage to the Queen)

Because according iluvbertie BP clearly told the British High Commission in 1947 and again in 1952 that he and, in 1953, Charles were in the line of succession to the Danish throne as male line descendents of George I of the Hellenes who didn't ever renounce his claim to that throne but moved himself below that of his younger brother.

In 1954 the information from BP listed both Philip and Charles as still being Princes of Denmark.

I have the copies of the documents that were given to employees working at the High Commission at the time - headed from Buckingham Palace with the wording 'by instructions from HM The King/Queen this is the information to be given to the public if asked'..... The document is numerous pages long and doesn't only concern Philip, but Elizabeth, George VI and The Queen Mum, lines of succession, Charles and Anne (1953 and 1954) Margaret, Queen Mary along with information on how to greet them, how to be involved in a discussion with them etc etc.

I have a lot of confidence in the British Royal Family knowing the status of members of their own family and that they would also not be putting out incorrect information.

That the line of succession to the Danish throne changed in 1953 is irrelevant to whether Philip was ever in that line - that change took him out simply because it denied the right of succession to all the descendents of Christian IX's younger sons and limited to only his eldest son's heirs (like denying the right of inheritance to the British throne to Anne, Andrew and Edward's children and limiting to only Charles'). Until then, the Danes wouldn't even allow a woman to inherit so they took the opportunity to change both the line of succession and open the succession to women.

 

[branchg]

I have no idea, but again, it makes no sense that Philip would be a Prince of Denmark when it was a simply a style demonstrating the Greek Royal House's line of descent from the House of Glucksburg and was relinquished by him.

In 1952, he was HRH The Duke of Edinburgh and nothing else applied.

 

[AnnEliza]

This is just going in circles now. Clearly someone needs to call up The Duke of Edinburgh and ask him! And why exactly is this so important?

 

[Muhler]

So you agree he was a Prince of Denmark but can't provide any information on when he ceased to hold this title? In that case he obviously still holds his Greek and Danish titles

The Danes need to update their information

That's a pretty arrogant dismissal.

This is not a discussion, it's an obsessesion. You are not looking for information, you are looking for anything to back up your opinion and ignoring everything else.

As far as I am concerned this discussion ends here, it's just a waste of my time.

 

[snowflower]

When was Phillip's Greek and Danish titles not acknowledged or recognized?

Actually, when they were acknowlegded? They certainly weren't on his marriage certificate and not during the wedding ceremony. AFAIK they were never mentioned on the Britich Court Circular. They were also never mentioned on the Greek Court Circular, unlike in the case of King Paul's sister Katherine who also became a British upon her marriage and was naturalized as Katherine Brandram, without any of her former titles attached to her name - King George IV gave her the status of a Duke's daughter (like he made his son in law Duke of Edinburgh) and Katherine was " Lady Katherine Brandram" in Gr Britain and " HRH Princess Aikaterini" in the Greek Court Circular. Her First cousin Philip was always revered to as Duke of Endinburgh on the same Court Circular - that must indicate something, most likely Philip's decision not to be considered a Prince of the Greek Dynasty. And I don't think that during any State Visit between Britain and Denmark the Danish Sovereign made any mention about Philip being a Prince of her Realm - our Danish memners might know more about the official speeches during these State Visits. So I would really like to know one person, Greek or Danish, who considered him a Prince after 1947

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Iluvbertie provided this

BP clearly told the British High Commission in 1947 and again in 1952 that he and, in 1953, Charles were in the line of succession to the Danish throne as male line descendents of George I of the Hellenes who didn't ever renounce his claim to that throne but moved himself below that of his younger brother.

In 1954 the information from BP listed both Philip and Charles as still being Princes of Denmark.

 

[snowflower]

Iluvbertie provided a British point of view, and I don't question that what he said did happen - but as I said I 'd like to see a Greek or Danish source aknowledging him as a Prince of those two Realms, because , let's face it , their opinion on this subject does matter

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Iluvbertie provided a British point of view, and I don't question that what he said did happen - but as I said I 'd like to see a Greek or Danish source aknowledging him as a Prince of those two Realms, because , let's face it , their opinion on this subjectdoes matter

I have no Danish or Greek sources but from what people on this thread have been telling me , Philip had to renounce his titles to marry Elisabeth. I can't see the Greeks or Danes caring whether he renounced a title that was his from birth. It appears more a domestic British matter. Was there pressure from the Greeks or Danes for Philip to renounce his titles

Edit: He obviously didn't have to renounce his Greek and Danish titles to marry Elizabeth because in 1954 Buckingham Palace was still referring to him as a Prince of Denmark.

 

[snowflower]

BTW when Princess Marina , The Duke's first cousin married the Duke of Kent in the 1930s, she was a" Princess of Greece " not " a Princess of Greece and of Denmark". I'd like the opinion of people here about this, because after Muhler posts on this thread IMO this is pointing the real status of that generation with the danish titles of their ancestors
Link: http://watermarked.heritage-images.com/1218770.jpg I know it is kind of hard to read , but Marina's title is quite clear here. I found it today and I'll try to discover a bigger image later

 

[Lumutqueen]

I can't really read the picture, but from birth Marina was Her Royal Highness Princess Marina of Greece and Denmark.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

It says Princess of Greece, but it's true that Princess Marina was a Princess of Greece and Denmark from birth (just like her father, Prince Nicholas was).

On another note, that picture is very fascinating. I wish it was larger so it was possible to see all signatures clearly. I love Queen Maud of Norway's signature, so neat. Is it Christian X of Denmark and Queen Alexandrine's signatures right over George and Maud's? Thank you for posting the picture snowflower

 

[snowflower]

I can't see the Greeks or Danes caring whether he renounced a title that was his from birth.

Well IMO both the GRF and the DRF cared about it. It's not logical to state that Christian X and Frederik IX didn't care about the exact number of their succesors. Or that George II of the Hellenes didn't care about whether Philip, who had contracted a equal marriage (big sine qua non back then for being a member of the Royal House) could trasfer his titles to his descendants and if these descendants could claim a historic title of his house. These were important matters among royalty back then when Philip mariied Elizabeth , especially since we talk about two actual monarchies and not just two former Houses carrying their historical traditions

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

So as far as you know, did the Danes and or the Greeks pressure Philip to renounce his titles and if they did can you provide some sort of supporting documentation

Question: Don't most if not all male descendants claim their father's title and House? Why would it be unusual for Phillips descendants to do this

 

[NGalitzine]

^^^^
Probably because since WWI the BRF have gone out of their way to distance themselves from their continental relations. Post WWII this was even more important since Elizabeth was going to marry a man whose sisters had all married Germans who served in the German armed forces. It was important that she be seen marrying a man who was as British as possible. Therefore have him go through the naturalization process, become a British commoner as Lt Philip Mountbatten and adopt the Anglican faith, and renounce what ever foreign names and titles he may have had prior to that. After that make him a British HRH and peer, and later a British prince. Being a foreigner with foreign titles was neither desirable or acceptable in 1947 in a UK still suffering from the damages of WWII.

 

[Kit]

As of now I am dying to hear the official response from the Danish Court. I am really interested what they say about this subject.
Interesting thing is the following quote from the English Version of Wikipedia under the section: Titles, Styles and Arms of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

Philip has held a number of titles throughout his life. Originally holding the title and style of a prince of Greece and Denmark, Philip abandoned these royal titles before his marriage, and was thereafter created a British duke, among other noble titles. It was not, however, until the Queen issued Letters Patent in 1957 that Philip was again titled as a prince.

If you look at this link they state Philip ceased to be a Prince of Greece and Denmark on 18 March 1947 and became a Prince again on 22 February in 1957.
List of titles and honours of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And the following passage is also quite interesting IMO:

Debate on Philip's titles

On the popular, but erroneous, assumption that if Philip had the style of His Royal Highness he was automatically a British prince, media reports after his marriage to Princess Elizabeth referred to a Prince Philip, with or without reference to his ducal title. This may have been influenced by the fact that he had actually been a Prince of Greece and Denmark by birth, the use of which titles he had renounced by that time. Although the princely title was omitted in the British Regency Act 1953, and in Letters Patent of November 1953 appointing Counsellors of State, it had been included in Letters Patent of 22 October 1948 conferring princely rank on children from Philip's marriage to Elizabeth. King George VI, however, appeared to have been clear and intentional in having withheld the title of prince from his future son-in-law.[N 1]

On 3 February 1953, Member of Parliament John Diefenbaker expressed to the Canadian House of Commons his desire to see Philip bear a title that alluded to the Queen's pan-national position and put forward the suggestion of Prince of the Commonwealth.[2] In May of the following year, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Sir Winston Churchill received a written suggestion from the Queen that her husband be granted the title that Diefenbaker had mentioned, or some other suitable augmentation of his style. Churchill preferred the title Prince Consort, but the Foreign Secretary, Sir Anthony Eden, expressed a preference for Prince of the Realm. While the Commonwealth prime ministers were assembled in London, Churchill was requested by the Queen to informally solicit their opinions on the matter of the Queen's husband's title. Canadian Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent was the only one to express "misgivings," while Philip insisted to the Queen that he objected to any enhancement of his title. The Queen thereafter contacted Churchill and told him to drop the matter.[1]

In 1955, the South African prime minister belatedly made it known that the South African Cabinet objected to the title Prince of the Commonwealth. When told, the Queen continued to express the wish that her husband's position be raised, but rejected the British Cabinet's recommendations of Prince Consort or Prince Royal. The British Cabinet then suggested simply His Royal Highness the Prince, but the Queen was advised that if she still preferred Prince of the Commonwealth, her personal secretary could write directly to the Commonwealth governors-general for their response, though warning that if their consent was not unanimous the proposal could not go forward.

The matter appeared left until the publication on 8 February 1957 of an article by P. Wykeham-Bourne in the Evening Standard titled: "Well, is it correct to say Prince Philip?" A few days following, British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan reversed the advice of the Queen's previous ministers and formally recommended that the Queen reject The Prince in favour of Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Her other Realms and Territories. Later he changed this advice, although the Queen had already consented. Letters patent were issued on 22 February 1957 giving the Duke the style and titular dignity of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (omitting the wording and Her other Realms and Territories). According to the announcement in the London Gazette, he should henceforth be known as His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh,[3] with the capitalised definite article normally restricted to the children of monarchs.[1]

Yes I know that Wikipedia is not always reliable but here it seems pretty well informed and several other members posted Wikipedia as their source too. But as I said I am really dying to hear the Danish side.

 

[snowflower]

So as far as you know, did the Danes and or the Greeks pressure Philip to renounce his titles and if they did can you provide some sort of supporting documentation

When I have some free time , perhaps even during this weekend, Ill try to find some documentation about what really happened, starting which Markezinis ' books and mamoirs. But personally I am conviced that all the parties involved paid attention to the validity of Philip's action. To tell the truth I can't rule out the possibility to eventually discover that Philip distanced himself from his titles without formally abolishing them, although from the clues I have until now I don't think this is higly possible. But honestly, I am certain that, at least about his descendants, no one took the matter lightly and he had to make very clear, precise and legally binding declarations to all Royal Houses involved

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

This is my opinion on this matter. Phillip simply stopped using the titles and got on with his British life. I don't think he renounced anything (for the simple reason I can't find the paperwork to indicate he did)

Why BP told the British High Commissioners in 1954 that both Charles and Phillip are Princes of Denmark, is somewhat baffling because of all people they should know the Prince Consort's style and status.Unless he was a Prince of Denmark in 1954. Obviously we are not getting the entire story

 

[snowflower]

This is my opinion on this matter. Phillip simply stopped using the titles and got on with his British life. I don't think he renounced anything (for the simple reason I can't find the paperwork to indicate he did)

Like I said, I can't rule it out until I study this more. But really, do you think that even if he just unceremonially dropped his titles that the Kings involved would not pressure him to make a definite decision about his descendants with Elizabeth? I doubt that they would let him be vague about whether of not he could trasfer any succesion rights or titles to his children, like I said it was not a matter to be taken lightly.

 

[PssKatie]

I have a question that's likely more easily answered than the one that's being discussed, haha. I was reading Prince Philip's Titles & Styles page on Wikipedia today, and it has him listed as:

19 November 1947 – 20 November 1947: His Royal Highness Sir Philip Mountbatten

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_titles_and_honours_of_Prince_Philip,_Duke_of_Edinburgh

My question is, upon being created HRH would one automatically be able to use the style of Sir, or was there another honour Philip received the day before his wedding? Or is Wikipedia wrong?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Artemisia]

Wikipedia article is not in error; "Sir" was indeed Prince Philip's title for one day, before he was created The Duke of Edinburgh.

However, "Sir" was not associated with his style of Royal Highness, but rather with the fact that he had been made Knight of the Order of Garter on the same day. Knights Companion automatically have the right to prefix "Sir" to their name (and Ladies Companion- "Lady"), hence the Sir Philip Mountbatten. Subsequently, the grant of Letters Patent that created the Dukedom of Edinburgh a day later was to Sir Philip Mountbatten KG.

Had Philip not been made Knight of the Order of Garter, his title after he renounced his foreign titles and styles and before he became the Duke of Edinburgh (that is, after 18 March 1947 and before 20 November 1947) would have remained simply Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten.

 

[PssKatie]

Oh, OK. That absolutely makes sense! Thanks so much for the speedy answer, Artemisia!

 

[padams2359]

All of these countries were just coming out of WWII. Do you think Greece or Denmark cared what he did as long as they were closely tied to a Major Allied Power? Neither country was concerned what he had to do, or not do, to get in the door.

 

[AnnEliza]

^^^^
Probably because since WWI the BRF have gone out of their way to distance themselves from their continental relations. Post WWII this was even more important since Elizabeth was going to marry a man whose sisters had all married Germans who served in the German armed forces. It was important that she be seen marrying a man who was as British as possible. Therefore have him go through the naturalization process, become a British commoner as Lt Philip Mountbatten and adopt the Anglican faith, and renounce what ever foreign names and titles he may have had prior to that. After that make him a British HRH and peer, and later a British prince. Being a foreigner with foreign titles was neither desirable or acceptable in 1947 in a UK still suffering from the damages of WWII.

This makes a lot of sense to me, so soon after the war.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

By letters patent of Nov. 19, 1947 Lt Sir Philip Mountbatten was granted the style of Royal Highness, and he was created Duke of Edinburgh the following day. He was in the anomalous position of being a Royal Highness but not a Prince, although the normal association of the two styles led to some confusion on the matter. Garter stated that "I believe he remains a Prince of Greece and Denmark though naturalized here." (Garter, 19 Dec 1947, LCO 6/3559). Letters patent of Oct. 22, 1948 granted the style of Royal Highness to the children of his marriage to Princess Elizabeth. In the text, he is styled "His Royal Highness Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh". In the Regency Act 1953, and in the birth registration of Princess Anne, he is styled "His Royal Highness Philip, Duke of Edinburgh". At the time of the birth of Princess Anne, the General Register Office consulted the Home Office on the proper style that he should receive, and they proposed "His Royal Highness Prince Philip"; but George VI amended himself the proposed entry and replaced it with "His Royal Highness Philip, Duke of Edinburgh" (see the letter from H. Austin Strutt, 28 Feb 1955, LCO 6/3677).

Garter Principal King of Arms, The General Register Office and the Home Office and the Hon. Sir Albert Napier KCB. House of Lords all are the opinion he is a Prince of Greece and Denmark after 1947.
Adding to all of this is Iluvbertie's document from BP dated 1954, in which both Prince Philip and Prince Charles are referred to as Princes of Greece and Denmark.

Most believe Prince Philip did not renounce either his succession rights or his princely titles. They believe that since there isn't any documentary proof showing Prince Philip renounced his titles or his rights these events did not occur. Their argument rests on the fact that no one has been able to cite the text of the renunciation, the date it was executed, the date it became effective, or even the clause in the House laws of the Royal House of Greece permitting a Prince to renounce. (Prince Philip is the only Greek prince who is ever said to have renounced his rights and his titles.)

They view it as a case in which Prince Philip simply stopped using his Greek and Danish titles and that he never formally relinquished them. (Foreign rules and regulation such as British Home Office naturalization procedures did not have any effect on Prince Philip's title or his style of HRH as a Prince of Greece.

Heraldica

 

[Muhler]

Translation of Q&A in Billed Bladet #2, 2013,

Where a Svend Pallesen asks whether Prince Phillip is still Prince of Denmark.

Jon Bloch Skipper replies:
Phillip, who was born as Prince of Greece and Denmark, renounced all his titles when he became a British citizen prior to the engagement and marriage to Princess Elizabeth in 1947.
At the same occasion he took the name Mountbatten after his mother's family and converted from the Greek Orthodox faith to the Anglican church.
Prince Phillip is the great-grandchild of Christian IX, who was King of Denmark 1863-1906.