Quote:
Originally Posted by principessa
Queen Beatrix and her sisters are bearing the name "Princess of Lippe-Biesterfeld" in their names. The sons of Queen Beatrix and Count Claus-Casimir are styled as Jonkheer van Amsberg, her daughers-in-law and her granddaughters (without Amalia, Alexia and Ariane) are also styled as Jonkvrouwe van Amsberg. My question is: Why aren't the sons of Queen Beatrix also styled "Prince of Lippe-Biesterfeld", why aren't the daughters of Willem-Alexander and Maxima also "Jonkvrouwe van Amsberg" and don't have a second family name "Zorreguieta", why aren't the children of Constantijn and Laurentien also named "Brinkhorst" and the Luana and Zaria "Wisse Smit"? Has it something to do that the Queen's daughters-in-law are former commoners?
|
Doesn't it have to do with the fact that titles and surnames usually (with the obvious exception of the titles connected to the Crown) come from the male side? Beatrix and her sisters are Princess of Lippe-Biesterfeld, as their father, Prince Bernhard, was a prince of Lippe-Biesterfeld. These titles go with the male line, so they wouldn't go to either of the children of the sisters.
Similarly, Prince Claus was Jonkheer of Amsberg - but as he only had sons, and not daughters, these titles go from his sons to their children. I don't know why the daughters of Maxima and WA don't have the Jonkheer van Amsberg, though.
Also, Queen Juliana was also Duchess of Mecklenburg, because of her father, Prince Hendrik was originally a Duke of Mecklenburg-Schwerin. This is not a title of Beatrix, if I've understood the elegant video Marengo posted earlier correctly.
To reply to your final question, it doesn't have anything to do with the fact that they're commoners, but rather the fact that they're women. Last names go through the male. If you'll observe the van Vollenhaven family; Pieter van Vollenhaven isn't a royal, but his sons also carry his last name in addition to the of Orange-Nassau.
