Lady Marmalade
Royal Highness
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,629
- City
- Chicago
- Country
- United States
and by Lord Louis Mountbatten himself, whom I suspect never got over the loss if the title 'prince' before his first name......
Marengo said:Well, in other european countries one would not be ashamed when the fiance is a prince of Greece and Denmark, on the contrary I think. The spanish never asked Queen Sophie to change her name in Miss Sophie von Sleswich-Holstein, as the english did of Prince Phillip for example, english snobbery at its worst indeed! I believe in those years Greece was even an ally against communism!
Nathalian said:Yes, I understood...but, he has almost the same power as the Queen....???? I think of Prince Phillip...I now that he hasn´t the same power as the Queen...but, he has a lot right?? Do you have any idea of Princes consorts who became more popular that the Queen it self?
Lady Marmalade said:and by Lord Louis Mountbatten himself, whom I suspect never got over the loss if the title 'prince' before his first name......
I know..I could only wonder what it must have been like to have your princely title taken away and reduced to a peerage under the British system. If that had not happened, Patricia and Pamela would have been their TSH Princesses of Battenberg, as would have the rest of the direct male line descendents and their children.Sean.~ said:No, he never did & lamented about it in his later years.
Lady Marmalade said:I believe Anne signed her first marriage registry using this name.
If I am not correct by this, please let me know.
selrahc4 said:She signed simply "Anne". However the registry filled in with the required fields as to names, occupation, etc named her as Anne Elizabeth Alice Louise Mountbatten-Windsor.
Lady Marmalade said:Thank you, that is what I was referring to in my post. When she filled out the necessary lines, she used both last names.
The Princely title wasn't worth anything after Germany became a Republic. As it was, his title was that of a cadet member of a cadet morgantic branch of the House of Hesse, which itself was a junior state in the German Empire. Thus the argument can be made that a British aristocratic style (and later title, as he didn't become a member of the peerage until later) was much more noteworthy. After WWI the Battenberg titles, if used, would only be ones of pretension.I know..I could only wonder what it must have been like to have your princely title taken away and reduced to a peerage under the British system.
He was full of himself, and it was that kind of commentary that earned him the dislike of QM.I do enjoy the tidbit of his bragging to his cousin the Prince of Coburg, or the Prince of Hanover, can't remember which, that "the blood of Battenberg has risen from the banks of the Rhine and is now head of the most important throne in Europe", after QEII ascended the throne.
But, later on he did have his day when the Queen changed the name to Mountbatten-Windsor for her descendents. She made the comment that if Philip had any last name it was Glucksburg, and not Battenberg (or something along those lines).Apparently Queen Mary was told of this and went straight to Churchill to remind him the name is Windsor and it should stay Windsor.
It was Prince Ernst August of Hanover who heard about Mountbatten's boast and informed Queen Mary.Lady Marmalade said:ref Lord Louis Mountbatten
I do enjoy the tidbit of his bragging to his cousin the Prince of Coburg, or the Prince of Hanover, can't remember which, that "the blood of Battenberg has risen from the banks of the Rhine and is now head of the most important throne in Europe", after QEII ascended the throne. Apparently Queen Mary was told of this and went straight to Churchill to remind him the name is Windsor and it should stay Windsor. If I am not correct by this, please let me know..
Sean.~ said:The Princely title wasn't worth anything after Germany became a Republic. As it was, his title was that of a cadet member of a cadet morgantic branch of the House of Hesse, which itself was a junior state in the German Empire. Thus the argument can be made that a British aristocratic style (and later title, as he didn't become a member of the peerage until later) was much more noteworthy. After WWI the Battenberg titles, if used, would only be ones of pretension.
If that had not happened, Patricia and Pamela would have been their TSH Princesses of Battenberg, as would have the rest of the direct male line descendents and their children. He was full of himself, and it was that kind of commentary that earned him the dislike of QM. But, later on he did have his day when the Queen changed the name to Mountbatten-Windsor for her descendents. She made the comment that if Philip had any last name it was Glucksburg, and not Battenberg (or something along those lines).
.
Warren said:It was Prince Ernst August of Hanover who heard about Mountbatten's boast and informed Queen Mary.
.
Warren said:It was Prince Ernst August of Hanover who heard about Mountbatten's boast and informed Queen Mary.
.
That wasn't the feeling in Britain in 1917. The anti-German sentiment was very strong, and there was even talk of renaming the German Shephard!I don't think anyone would have cared had they been allowed to still use the Battenberg titles. It is not like the world was going to spin off it's axis...
That is really not the case regardless. There are many families whose duchies, or kingdoms have disappeared within Germany over the past 120 years and they still use their titles, and rightfully so.
Uh... maybe the legitimate government of Germany and many of its people care?Who cares if the German government today recognizes or does not recognize their titles?
It's not like such a big deal in the sense of someone trying to stop them from using their titles. Any title with deference to highness in it, be it royal, serene, imperial, etc... is what separates succinctly the line between being royal vs. simply being aristocratic in plain terms.
Firsltly, Serene Highness is not on the "royal higness list". One who bears such a style is not Royal. They are from a Princely or Ducal family. For instance, the Grimaldis and the Lichtenstiens are soveriegn Princely families, not royal families. There is a difference. Secondly, Serene Highness is not necessarily "low" on the pecking order. In some cases it ranked/ranks above Royal Highness -- it all depends on the House and the given situation. Thirdly, it wasn't really a rebuke if one takes into consideration that the the German titles and style had no value after the war, particularly the title of Battenberg, as it wasn't its own fiefdom (so there were no historical ties with a people, etc.).To go from an HSH, which of course is on low pecking order of the royal highness list anway, to a mere peerage in Great Britain was a stinging rebuke. And yes, I do know what happened as to why the titles changed and so forth.
That's harsh! Prince Ernst August was a good friend of Queen Mary, and alerted her to Mountbatten's boast as a friend would.iowabelle said:I wonder why he chose to be a busybody and tell Queen Mary. Hmmm, a little royal intrigue!
I know they did, but thank you for posting that as people may or may not have realized that.Sean.~ said:see post below
Warren said:That's harsh! Prince Ernst August was a good friend of Queen Mary, and alerted her to Mountbatten's boast as a friend would.
Two Royal old-timers keeping the over-ambitious parvenu in his place?
Hopefully this paper will help:Australian said:What title is higher? Lady or Dame?
I know all that already, they do teach world history in the United States.
That doesn't make it rightfully so. It's not a right accorded to them by law. Rather, it's a moral sentiment on your part -- a sentiment that members of the former German houses may or may not share.Rightfully so? According to what criteria?
According to the families' own criteria.
Again, titles are used in Germany only used as a part of ones last name for historical reasons and/or social reasons. Titles are not used offially and legally because titles are *not* legal. And I don't think that you can speak to as to whether members of former houses "care" about the German government's position on the useage of titles. That being said, the German state turns a blind eye to the social use of titles because the situation in Germany was a bit different than in other countries where monarchies have been abolished. More specifically, the various thrones were not abolished so-much by popular revolt, but rather by the terms of peace treaty. Thus many of the families were able to hold on to their properties and wealth because they weren't forced into exile, and there isn't the kind of animosity that there is towards those families that have been expelled from their countries. That being said, there were cases where German peoples in the various states demanded the overthrow of their various rulers.I do not think they really care how the German government feels about titles. I believe the German government has far more important things to worry about. They are not harming anyone by using their titles. Maybe they do not care if their government recognizes or not their titles.
Uh... maybe the legitimate government of Germany and many of its people care?
Again, so what? I do not think many citizens and the government would care if the Princes of Hanover used their titles, which they do, unless they were being nuisances to the government in some way.
You're confused. Highness, Serene Highness, Imperial Highness, etc. are not titles. They are styles. And many noble families who are not royal bore and continue to bear (in Belgium, for example) different variations of Highness.
I am not confused and would very much appreciate not being labeled as such. I may be from a country in which royalty does not exist, but I have studied European history in-depth and am educated.
Firsltly, Serene Highness is not on the "royal higness list". One who bears such a style is not Royal. They are from a Princely or Ducal family. For instance, the Grimaldis and the Lichtenstiens are soveriegn Princely families, not royal families. There is a difference. Secondly, Serene Highness is not necessarily "low" on the pecking order. In some cases it ranked/ranks above Royal Highness -- it all depends on the House and the given situation. Thirdly, it wasn't really a rebuke if one takes into consideration that the the German titles and style had no value after the war, particularly the title of Battenberg, as it wasn't its own fiefdom (so there were no historical ties with a people, etc.).
They are royal. The Royal family of Monaco is royal. Maybe not in the eyes of QEII, who once said they do not count, but they are royal.
.Value or not after WWI or WWII, if they used their titles, God bless them then. It is a small concession to those innocent royals who lost everything during both wars and were just as displaced as many people were
Who are we to define who is royal and who is not? I am just a commoner after all.
. What was considered noteworthy in Britain at the time *is* what mattered because that is where the Battenbergs lived. They didn't live in "the rest of Europe". Moreover, it doesn't really matter what foreign royals/houses thought of the British Peerage at the time because 1). many houses had lost their thrones or were sitting on highly unstable ones; 2). many did not even have titles of nobility in their states; 3). many had been mediatized long ago; and 4). Britain was at the pinnacle of its power and was the pre-eminent state in Europe. The British monarchy and its aristocracy are allive and well, while many others have ende-up in the dustbin of history. The Battenbergs did well to rennounce their German titles, as they accomplished much in Britain by doing so.Finally, in Britain, being a member of the British nobility was far more noteworthy than a minor princeling of a minor, morganaut branch of a minor German House. (During Queen Victoria's time even the more senior German prinelings were referred to disdainfully in England as 'German beggers'). Mountbatten would not had the opportunities he had if had remained a pretend Prince Louis of Battenberg.
Maybe in Britain they think it is more noteworthy, but maybe around the rest of Europe they could not care less. The British peerage system may not have been looked upon as the top level of the social peocking order from any foreign royal's perspective.
And, FYI, the Mountbattens did use their Battenberg title on occassion for social reasons when in Germany.
I know they did, but thank you for posting that as people may or may not have realized that.
michelleq said:Sean:
I love your post. You are quite knowledgable, and when you give info and/or correct, you always do it in a mannerly way. You are very much a gentleman.
Sorry I can't help chuckling at that example considering what a nuisance and a embarrassment the senior Prince of Hanover is to, not only the German government, but the whole Germany...Lady Marmalade said:I do not think many citizens and the government would care if the Princes of Hanover used their titles, which they do, unless they were being nuisances to the government in some way
Idriel said:Sorry I can't help chuckling at that example considering what a nuisance and a embarrassment the senior Prince of Hanover is to, not only the German government, but the whole Germany...
Idriel said:Sorry I can't help chuckling at that example considering what a nuisance and a embarrassment the senior Prince of Hanover is to, not only the German government, but the whole Germany...
I do understand titles and the history as to why they renounced and had to change their titles to sound more English. Please do not insult me on here like that. You implied it by the way your sentences are typed.Sean.~ said:see post below
Oh C'Mon! Sean's a great lad (would never dream of insulting a Lady)!Lady Marmalade said:Please do not insult me on here like that. You implied it by the way your sentences are typed.
Yep! Hence those great forums!Not everything about royalty is black and white, packed away in neat little packages.
You are Lady Marmalade! Don't sell yourself short!None of us, I assume are real royals or aristocrats on here. I know I am not.
I don't think no one ever said that, but the fact is that the UK is one of the very few European countries to still have both a monarchy and an aristocracy (not the case in Japan or Norway for example).Just because the British peerage system is the one most well known, does not make the socially superior one.
Well not. For example in France we have to lads calling themselves duc of Anjou. Ernstie of Hanover would love putting Duke of Cumberland (spl.) on his visit card, etc. I mean, if they are not a minimum of regulation, you end up with ridiculous (and blatantly illegal) situations.Again, these families can call themselves whatever they wish too, legal and official or not.
Maybe, maybe not. There are still strong feelings against some royals (Iran, Greece, etc.). Not to mention the possible ridiculous (I love Pavlos, Crown Prince of a non existing throne ).Whether the country is now a republic or monarchy or communist, or whatever does not matter in the sense if the families wish their titles to pass generation to generation, they probably do not care if they are recognized officially and legally by the governments in the former countries they once ruled.
Well not to be picky (even through I know I am), but governments hardly only concentrate on 'real' problems (whatever you mean). Identity, names, use of titles are legal issues even in Republic.I hardly think any government in Europe will care too much given there are so many real problems to deal with in today's world.