The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #161  
Old 11-03-2018, 03:27 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,550
I can't remember what event it was but I remember noting at a service at Westminster Abbey or St Paul's all the HRHs (inc Gloucesters, Kents etc) sat upfront with other members of the family sat behind them even though it meant, for example, Anne's children sitting a few rows back from herself.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 11-03-2018, 07:41 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
I have an example which might clarify who’s regarded as a member of the royal family. Would Zara Tindall as an example have to ask permission from the Queen and Foreign office when ever she goes abroad in the line of work? This is because I know members of the royal family have to follow this protocol whenever they go abroad except for private holidays. Therefore, I wonder how many members of the Queen’s family have to comply with this?
None.

The government tried to enforce such a law in the days of George I but he refused to agree saying his family had to be free to move between the UK and Hanover and the government agreed.

Even the Queen can leave the UK for a private visit without ever telling the government she is doing so. She doesn't but she can.

As official visits are sanctioned by the government the royals concerned have government approval - but that is because the government is the one sending them or the government is heavily involved with the planning.

That means that the government has no say when Camilla goes on her annual Greek holiday but does when she joins Charles in the Gambia for the official tour. What she was doing prior to their joint arrival (they didn't leave the country together) is her business and nothing to do with the government who may, or may not, have even known where she was.

Zara isn't royal so she can do what she likes.

Beatrice and Eugenie aren't working royals so again can do what they like when they like - as can Prince and Princess Micheal of Kent.

Harry and Meghan had the government's understanding for their recent trip but if they have now decided to have a few days rest in the south of France they don't have to tell anyone.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 11-04-2018, 04:12 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 105
The only reason I ask this is that when Diana went to Angola in 1997 she had to ask the Queen’s permission for her to go. This was after the divorce when Diana was not a working Royal and all her engagements were done separately from the royal family.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 11-04-2018, 05:14 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,356
She didn't have to ask anyone's permission. She gave the Queen the courtesy of telling her.

She did ask the government in case there were political issues and was advised on what to say and what she wasn't allowed to say.

The main concern was her safety - hence the government were advised.

She could have gone. She didn't need anyone's permission as she was a totally free person. She could have said anything she wanted as she was no longer bound by the 'no political statements' rules as well.

It was this trip that lead to the 'she is a loose cannon' by members of the government as well as she was no longer bound by any of the normal rules or protocols that apply to the BRF. She was even free to run for a seat in the House of Commons (she was a commoner afterall). I suspect had she tried that she would have been given a peerage title in her own right to prevent her standing for parliament. I am not suggesting that she had ever thought about doing that but that it was a possibility.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 11-05-2018, 07:12 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 1,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
Well many many many, but the royal's official has links to bios for the following on their website:

HM The Queen
Philip
Charles
Camilla
William
Kate
George
Charlotte
Louis
Harry
Meghan
Andrew
Edward
Sophie
Anne
The Duke of Gloucester
The Duchess of Gloucester
The Duke of Kent
The Duchess of Kent
Princess Alexandra of Kent
Prince and Princess Michael of Kent

Of course, this really is just a list of HRH's and misses out the Queen's grandchildren (except Will and Harry) and her great grandchildren (apart from Will's children).
I suspect this indicates whilst others from those listed are of course members of the Queen's family they are not considered members of the Royal Family in an official sense.
Didn't Princess Alexandra remove "of Kent" and take the name of her husband on marriage? In the Court Circular she is called Princess Alexandra and Princess Alexandra, the Honourable Lady Ogilvy, even as her brother is called Prince Michael of Kent.

The royal website also has a listing called "List of the Royal Family": https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/f...l_family_6.pdf
THE ROYAL FAMILY
Her Majesty The Queen
His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh
Their Royal Highnesses The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall
Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge
His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge
Her Royal Highness Princess Charlotte of Cambridge
His Royal Highness Prince Louis of Cambridge
Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Sussex
His Royal Highness The Duke of York
Her Royal Highness Princess Beatrice of York
Her Royal Highness Princess Eugenie of York
Their Royal Highnesses The Earl and Countess of Wessex
Viscount Severn
The Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor
Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal and Vice Admiral Sir Timothy Laurence
Mr. and Mrs. Peter Phillips
Miss Savannah Phillips
Miss Isla Phillips
Mr. and Mrs. Michael Tindall
Miss Mia Tindall
Miss Lena Tindall
The Viscount and Viscountess Linley
The Honourable Charles Armstrong-Jones
The Honourable Margarita Armstrong-Jones
The Lady Sarah Chatto and Mr. Daniel Chatto
Mr. Samuel Chatto
Mr. Arthur Chatto
Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester
Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Kent
Their Royal Highnesses Prince and Princess Michael of Kent
Her Royal Highness Princess Alexandra, the Honourable Lady Ogilvy
Sarah, Duchess of York
It appears that they forgot to update the titles of the Armstrong-Jones family following the death of the 1st Earl of Snowdon.
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 11-05-2018, 08:14 AM
loonytick's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Tennessee, United States
Posts: 749
QUITE interesting that they’ve kept Sarah on that list!
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 11-05-2018, 09:22 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,670
That is interesting. They didn't do it for Mark Phillips.

Also interesting that they have included the great-grandchildren of EII and GVI but not the great-grandchildren of GV. They seem to be playing a bit fast and loose. As such I'm not surprised that they haven't bothered to update the Armstong-Jones family.
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 11-05-2018, 01:07 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 105
Do you think this list is correct in terms of actual members of the British Royal Family?
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 11-05-2018, 03:39 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
Do you think this list is correct in terms of actual members of the British Royal Family?
That is the official list from the British Monarchy website.

If the British Monarchy (or BP itself) can't get the list right who can?

Quote:
Originally Posted by loonytick View Post
QUITE interesting that they’ve kept Sarah on that list!
I have heard before that Sarah is kept on the list because she was once an HRH. They did announce that Diana would be regarded as a member of the BRF after her divorce at times and be invited to some royal events. Even her inquest was dealt with as if she was still a member of the BRF. If Diana was still a member of the BRF at her death than Sarah must still be as well.

I have also heard she is still on such a list as she has a personal coat of arms and it is a way of protecting that image from exploitation by others.

I don't know for sure - just repeating different reasons I have seen over the years as to why Sarah is still on that list.
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 11-05-2018, 04:12 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 105
Sarah hasn’t been invited to many royal events after the divorce but I can imagine when it eventually happens she would be invited to the Queen’s funeral.
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 11-05-2018, 04:48 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 1,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
That is interesting. They didn't do it for Mark Phillips.

Also interesting that they have included the great-grandchildren of EII and GVI but not the great-grandchildren of GV. They seem to be playing a bit fast and loose. As such I'm not surprised that they haven't bothered to update the Armstong-Jones family.
They use different criteria than you. All people from this list are:
1) descendants of George VI + their spouses
or
2) princes/princesses of UK + their spouses
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 11-05-2018, 05:01 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
They use different criteria than you. All people from this list are:
1) descendants of George VI + their spouses
or
2) princes/princesses of UK + their spouses
If George V's non-HRH grandchildren were still alive and not on the list then I'd buy your argument. But his only surviving grandchildren are HRH, so to me the list is about relation to the Monarch (past and present), the HRHs aren't the qualifiers.
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 11-05-2018, 05:35 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 1,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
If George V's non-HRH grandchildren were still alive and not on the list then I'd buy your argument. But his only surviving grandchildren are HRH, so to me the list is about relation to the Monarch (past and present), the HRHs aren't the qualifiers.
I see clear system, you don't. Ok. It's your choice.
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 11-05-2018, 05:40 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
I see clear system, you don't. Ok. It's your choice.
Alright. Since your system is clear and undebatable. Then in your eyes if Samuel Chatto were to marry and have a baby in the near future then that baby would be added to the list as a great-great-grandchild of George VI. Correct? I do hope to see your system tested in the near future.
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 11-05-2018, 06:38 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 1,705
The argument could be made for several systems that all would be consistent with the official list (Sarah excepted):

1) descendants of George VI + princes/princesses of the UK + their spouses
2) people within four degrees of kinship in relation to Queen Elizabeth II + their spouses
3) an additional generation of descent for every generation of monarchs since Edward VII (children of Edward VII or one of his successors + grandchildren of George V or one of his successors + great-grandchildren of George VI or his successor + great-great-grandchildren of Elizabeth II) + their spouses
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old 11-05-2018, 06:50 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
The argument could be made for several systems that all would be consistent with the official list (Sarah excepted):

1) descendants of George VI + princes/princesses of the UK + their spouses
2) people within four degrees of kinship in relation to Queen Elizabeth II + their spouses
3) an additional generation of descent for every generation of monarchs since Edward VII (children of Edward VII or one of his successors + grandchildren of George V or one of his successors + great-grandchildren of George VI or his successor + great-great-grandchildren of Elizabeth II) + their spouses
Options 2 and 3 seem the most logical, I lean towards 2. For 3, I think great-great-grandchildren of Elizabeth would be used only for her reign. Under Charles' or William's or George's reigns it would seem unlikely to list the children of Savannah, Isla, Mia, Lena, etc. That list would become jumbo sized.

Part of me wishes all great-grandchildren of British monarchs were listed. It would be priceless to see Astrid and King Harald on the list.
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 11-05-2018, 08:28 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 3,392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
The argument could be made for several systems that all would be consistent with the official list (Sarah excepted):

1) descendants of George VI + princes/princesses of the UK + their spouses
2) people within four degrees of kinship in relation to Queen Elizabeth II + their spouses
3) an additional generation of descent for every generation of monarchs since Edward VII (children of Edward VII or one of his successors + grandchildren of George V or one of his successors + great-grandchildren of George VI or his successor + great-great-grandchildren of Elizabeth II) + their spouses
I am quite sure that princess Mary's children weren't considered part of the royal family. Or did the 7th earl of Harewood show up on this list for example 10 years ago? If he didn't what would be the most likely system in your opinion?
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 11-05-2018, 09:05 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
I am quite sure that princess Mary's children weren't considered part of the royal family. Or did the 7th earl of Harewood show up on this list for example 10 years ago? If he didn't what would be the most likely system in your opinion?
Scrolling through early posts in this thread, the first mention in this thread of the BRF's family list from their official website came in October 2011, after the Earl had passed, so we don't know if he had been included or not. I'd like to believe he was, both as a grandchild of a King (6th-in-line at his birth), and as a former Counsellor of the State. If someone with his credentials didn't rank then many on the current list are bizarre inclusions. Especially since a few other posters believe the great-grandchildren of Margaret will be eventually added to list.
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 11-12-2018, 12:40 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 515
Here's the full list of most popular royals, according to the YouGov poll:
1. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex
2. Queen Elizabeth II
3. Prince William, Duke of Cambridge
4. Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge
5. Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
6. Meghan, Duchess of Sussex
7. Prince Charles
8. Princess Anne
9. Zara Phillips
10. Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall
11. Sophie, Countess of Wessex
12. Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex
13. Princess Beatrice of York
14. Princess Eugenie of York
15. Prince Andrew, Duke of York
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...-a8629906.html
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 11-12-2018, 02:38 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 3,392
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
Scrolling through early posts in this thread, the first mention in this thread of the BRF's family list from their official website came in October 2011, after the Earl had passed, so we don't know if he had been included or not. I'd like to believe he was, both as a grandchild of a King (6th-in-line at his birth), and as a former Counsellor of the State. If someone with his credentials didn't rank then many on the current list are bizarre inclusions. Especially since a few other posters believe the great-grandchildren of Margaret will be eventually added to list.
Him being a counselor of state is indeed an indication that his position was sufficiently prominent to be considered a member of the royal family.
__________________

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
Relationships between Members of the British Royal Family Ava Elizabeth British Royals 1498 10-08-2019 01:19 PM
Relationships between Members of the Spanish Royal Family kil Royal Family of Spain 1497 02-20-2019 07:17 PM
Interviews with Members of the Royal Family SpiffyBallerina Royal House of Sweden 94 12-23-2014 07:06 AM




Popular Tags
administrator archie mountbatten-windsor aristocracy belgian royal belgian royal family birthday celebration bracelets crown crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife crusades current events danish royalty denmark discussão duchess of cambridge duchess of sussex duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of sussex dutch royal family earl of wessex felipe vi foundation french revolution friendly city future genealogy germany greece headship house of bernadotte jerusalem kiko king salman lady louise mountbatten-windsor lithuania lithuanian palaces meghan markle memoir monaco history monaco royal monarchism monogram mountbatten netflix nobel prize official visit pakistan prince charles prince harry princely family of monaco prince peter princess margaret princess royal queen paola rania of jordan rown royal children royal tour russian imperial family saudi arabia savoy saxony south africa spain spanish history state visit state visit to denmark sweden trump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:31 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises
×