The Monarchy after Elizabeth II

[BeatrixFan]

I don't think the title is the issue. They could have 50 HRHs, it's more about who carries out engagements and who gets paid.

[ysbel]

But the title adds visibility and an association to someone which they would otherwise not have. Just look at Peter and Zara Phillips' lives compared to their cousins.

I think right now a title without a workload that provides some controlled amount of the right type of visibility can generate press coverage that the royals didn't account for.

In earlier times with strict social structures, the social codes of the day dictated people's behavior but now that the class structure and what it means to be royal is changing, the royal family doesn't have as firm a grip on its members' behaviors as previous generations did. At the very least, they don't have control of the press that they once did and that's a real issue with there are a lot of HRHs running around with no responsibilities.

[Tzu An]

This sort of out of control royals situation is so similar to that of the Romanovs. They were eager for the privileges, reluctant about the duties, and didn't care about presenting a proper public image in order to protect the dynasty and the prestige of the monarch. They did what they wanted and also ran rampant. And then divorce....*shudder*

[ysbel]

Well one big difference between the Romanovs and the Windsors was that the czar was an absolute ruler. Accountability to the people didn't exist in principle or in reality for the Imperial family.

The modern model of the the monarch being accountable to the government and the royal family being accountable to the monarch has somewhat fallen apart too. Over the last 20-30 years, we've seen how little control the Queen has over the behavior of some of the royals.

Right now, Charles has his own press office which I don't think of as a good idea. The monarch has traditionally controlled the Buckingham Palace publicity machine and other members of the royal family didn't build their own public relations campaigns unless they cleared it with the monarch.

[chrissy57]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Well one big difference between the Romanovs and the Windsors was that the czar was an absolute ruler. Accountability to the people didn't exist in principle or in reality for the Imperial family.

The modern model of the the monarch being accountable to the government and the royal family being accountable to the monarch has somewhat fallen apart too. Over the last 20-30 years, we've seen how little control the Queen has over the behavior of some of the royals.

Right now, Charles has his own press office which I don't think of as a good idea. The monarch has traditionally controlled the Buckingham Palace publicity machine and other members of the royal family didn't build their own public relations campaigns unless they cleared it with the monarch.

Actually if you study the history of the Princes of Wales and the monarchs since the start of the Hannoverians one thing that jumps out is the two courts - monarch and POW. The Queen is the only one who didn't have this double court idea - but if she had to wait another 20 years or so who knows.

In fact in the early years of the Hannoverians the POW would support the opposition party in direct opposition to the preferred party of the king. Even though Edward VII didn't do that he did operate separate court structure during his long period as POW.

Two press offices has become necessary due to the demands of the press - I am sure that CH wouldn't have set up its own press office without the consent of BP (specifically Charles would have the Queen's approval to do this).

[selrahc4]

Originally Posted by chrissy57

Actually if you study the history of the Princes of Wales and the monarchs since the start of the Hannoverians one thing that jumps out is the two courts - monarch and POW. The Queen is the only one who didn't have this double court idea - but if she had to wait another 20 years or so who knows.

In fact in the early years of the Hannoverians the POW would support the opposition party in direct opposition to the preferred party of the king. Even though Edward VII didn't do that he did operate separate court structure during his long period as POW.

Two press offices has become necessary due to the demands of the press - I am sure that CH wouldn't have set up its own press office without the consent of BP (specifically Charles would have the Queen's approval to do this).

Seeing your comment (with which I agree) "The Queen is the only one who didn't have this double court idea - but if she had to wait another 20 years or so who knows." reminded me of an anecdote that I want to share.

This is from God Save The Queen (published in Britain as The Crown and the People) written by Alan A. Michie in 1952.
From the book, page 224

...the late King took a long time to adjust himself to the realization that she was a grown girl, with a household and children of her own. One day when driving past Elizabeth's home, which was bedecked with flags, including her own standard which he had given her, George VI turned to a friend and said testily: "What is she trying to do --- set up an Empire of her own?"

[muriel]

I am in no doubt that in time you will see a slimmed down monarchy, especially after Charles accedes to the throne. The York girls should really be encouraged to develop independent careers and to not carry out many public engagements (other than the occassional appearance on the balcony etc). The future of the BRF is Charles and his boys - and assuming they find suitable partners and settle down, in a few years you will have another generation of royals actively carrying out royal duties. Here again, Harry and his wife will have a much smaller role to play - not dissimilar to the one played by the Wessex´s now. That said this will clearly depend on how the wives of William and Harry get on.

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by muriel

I am in no doubt that in time you will see a slimmed down monarchy, especially after Charles accedes to the throne. The York girls should really be encouraged to develop independent careers and to not carry out many public engagements (other than the occassional appearance on the balcony etc). The future of the BRF is Charles and his boys - and assuming they find suitable partners and settle down, in a few years you will have another generation of royals actively carrying out royal duties. Here again, Harry and his wife will have a much smaller role to play - not dissimilar to the one played by the Wessex´s now. That said this will clearly depend on how the wives of William and Harry get on.

Not to forget Charles's brothers & sisters, some of them already do a lot, some could do more. For those who only play a smaller role I would be pleased if they'd do something substantial and don't hit the headlines for their partying, eg as Zara Phillips, a great ambassador not only for Britain but also for the Royal Family.

[muriel]

Anne does a lot of charitable work and is recognised as being a haredworking royal. Not sure the same can be said of "Air Miles Andy" and to a lesser extent, the Wessex´s (though they have managed to keep out of trouble). Once William, Harry and their wives are up and running, Andrew and the Wessex´s should be pensioned off (from HMs personal resources) and should not take on any substantial roles

[chrissy57]

Originally Posted by muriel

Anne does a lot of charitable work and is recognised as being a haredworking royal. Not sure the same can be said of "Air Miles Andy" and to a lesser extent, the Wessex´s (though they have managed to keep out of trouble). Once William, Harry and their wives are up and running, Andrew and the Wessex´s should be pensioned off (from HMs personal resources) and should not take on any substantial roles

I think that William and Harry should replace the generation of Her Majesty - the Gloucesters and Kents rather than Prince Andrew and Prince Edward. What would you have these men do remembering that they have no training to do anything else and are currently only 47 and 43 respectively - far to young to be pensioned off?

[jcbcode99]

I disagree--the Earl and Countess of Wessex do a great deal of charitable work. I would write the lists of the organizations they each are patron of but it would take too long.
Here is the Countess' list of 55 organizations (and please note how many children's organizations there are--she is very keen on working with children's needs and communication disorders):
The Monarchy Today > Queen and public > Charities and patronages > Search results

And the Earl of Wessex, just because he was never one to constantly have his name in the papers does not mean that he is unnecessary. He supports 49 organizations, mostly youth related. Here is that link:
The Monarchy Today > Queen and public > Charities and patronages > Search results

Remember, they do have a young child and until recently, did try to have careers outside of the royal family. I think they are a true asset to the Family.
As for the Duke of York, he supports 127 organizations. Here is the link:
The Monarchy Today > Queen and public > Charities and patronages > Search results

It seems to me that all the royals support important causes that cater to their individual interests and that many people benefit from their patronage

[muriel]

I appreciate that Andrew "supports" 127 organisations, but he certainly does not come across as either most qualified to support British trade, or somebody who appears most committed to it. It is through sheer hard work over a sustained period of time that the Press have stopped picking on Anne. Andrew still has a long way to go - not helped when he is regularly photographed eihter playing golf or being on holiday!

[jcbcode99]

Well, I have to say that I cannot disagree with you about Prince Andrew! I, too, have wondered how a man who was a Navy Pilot has the credentials to be the figurehead for supporting British trade. Interestingly enough, Princess Anne is very busy with her organizations, a lot of them being equine related.

[branchg]

Once he is King, I believe Charles will issue new letters patent limiting the HRH to the children of the Sovereign and the eldest child of the current heir to the throne. While I doubt Anne, Andrew and Edward will lose their royal rank, I think Beatrice and Eugenie will be required to relinquish it.

Harry will likely follow his uncle's lead and request his children not hold royal rank, but rather be styled as the children of a Duke. This will facilitate the notion of a downsized monarchy that is closer to a modern society.

It will be interesting to see what happens, but I do think the royal family needs to be limited in the future.

[Elspeth]

I think it'd be very unpopular for Beatrice and Eugenie to be required to relinquish their titles on Charles's accession. Maybe encouraged to do so at the time of their marriage or something, but we don't have a precedent of discarding royals just because of a change of monarch, and I don't think it'd be a good one to start. It looks insensitive and churlish, and for what it actually matters, I don't think it'd be worth the bad publicity as well as, no doubt, the hurt it'd cause Prince Andrew.

[love_cc]

The Queen's children are all doing a good job, but Prince Charles is the one who should lead the team in the future as heir to the throne. But royals all have their own spealised areas and they are a team. I agree with Branchg that the BRF needs to limit its size after Prince Charles asecend the thorne. His own family is the core royal family but other royals can retain their titles to support the royal family as a whole.

Prince Andrew is doing a good job,but he is a fun-loving person and I am glad at least he can enjoy his life because I always find Prince Charles used to be too serious and too sad.

[jcbcode99]

Are we discussing children and grandchildren losing their HRH? I totally disagree with that, if we are. As grandchildren of the monarch, they should have the HRH to use, if they so desire. The issue here is how many of them the Monarchy should be supporting. The HRH is hereditary, it can't be stripped away. Even the Duke of Windsor was accorded to his right to that (even if the Duchess was not).

[Missyjojo88]

I don't see the point in cutting back the HRH titles. The Kents and the Glos are not going to pass their royal titles down and their title will die with them. I argee that they may need to cut them back in terms of doing royal duties, but I don't think the Kents do that much royal duty in the first place to make much difference. The Kents do a lot of personal work, but since they are not on the civil list there's not that much that needs to be change. The Glos are not even seen much so its not a big deal to leave them alone and just cut back of their work. But I don't see the need to get rid of their HRH. I also disagree with the Princesses of York losing their title. What difference does it make when they are not able to pass down their titles in the first place? I do agree that they should be made to represent the monarchy in charity work and such, but let them have the title. However I do agree with cutting back the civil list. When all is said and done the only new HRH titles will be made for William and Harry's children so the HRH will be cut back dramatically by then assuming the Will and Harry don't have a lot of children.