The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #221  
Old 07-30-2005, 07:04 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
You don't consider going from a Serene Highness to a Marquess a demotion?
No, because their German dignities and styles were meaningless since they were British and the Weimar Republic abolished all of their styles, titles and status anyway after World War I ended and the Prussian Emperor was exiled to Holland. They retained the honour of British peerages under the Sovereign.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 07-30-2005, 08:46 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Not Saying, United Kingdom
Posts: 309
Hi branchq,

Yes, perhaps where we have been posting at cross-purposes:

Quote:
sAs a matter of practice, the Sovereign usually grants each son a dukedom with ubsidiary peerages upon marriage in order to provide a new family line and style for their descendants, who lose the right to carry the prefix Royal Highness after the first generation, but continue to hold a royal peerage through the eldest male with the style of a peer.

They are then addressed by their ducal style "HRH the Duke of York", which is their title, but remain "HRH the Prince Andrew" as well. When they marry, their wives become princesses of the UK with the style of HRH and addressed by their peerage titles
My concern here has not been with princely rights, for I assure you I fully agree with you about the dignity of Prince of the UK, Where we are disagreeing is, I think, on the title or style. The child of the Sovererign under letters Patent has the right to be a Prince(ss) of the UK with the style HRH. Where you and I apparenly disagree, that is if I am reading you correctly which I might not be, is that you are interpreting that grant to read that the HRH/Princely style must include the Christian names of the Prince(ss) in question.

On the contrary it seems from the BRF website that Christian names are only used with the Prince(ss)s style where no higher dignity applies.

It seems that the BRF website very explicitly states in all cases that once the higher title was granted, the style that used the Christian name was retired: Andrew ceased to be HRH The Prince Andrew, certainly it is explicitly stated that Anne ceaed to be HRH The Princess Anne, and Edward ceased to be HRH The Prince Edward.

Thier rights as HRHs and Prince(ss)es of the blood royal under the 1917 letters are not affected. Where we are disagreeing is over the title. the HRH + Christian name ceased to be used, and became incorrect to be used, where a royal ducal or royal earoal (?) dignity, a higher dignity, had been put in its place. That is why we have what we have in the BRF website for the Countess of Wessex, see above. She was not The Princess Edward because he had become HRH The Earl of Wessex, thus, as it says explicitly, she became HRH The Countess of Wessex, and *not* HRH The Princess Edward.

What all this proves is that there is no title HRH The Prince Andrew, Duke of York (and subsquently HRH The Princess Andrew) but that the title is only, and solely, HRH The Duke of York.

HRH The Prince Andrew, Duke of York is not a real title, is not official, and actually does not exist; the Prince in question bears the official title HRH The Duke of York and no other (unless we are talking subsidiary titles).
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 07-30-2005, 08:56 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Not Saying, United Kingdom
Posts: 309
re:styling a male consort of the Monarch. Remember that 'Prince Consort' is not the highest style available to the Queen in question. There have been King Consorts of both England and Scotland. Phillip II of Spain was King Consort of England (Mary I) and Boswell was King Consort of Scotland (Mary, Queen of Scots).


I do not understand given this why the title of Consort (Prince or King) was denied to Phillip.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 07-30-2005, 09:20 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Not Saying, United Kingdom
Posts: 309
Iowabelle,

thanks for the heads-up on Viscountess Althorp, I didn't know. :)

Elspeth

Quote:
It's usually the way things work out when a man is divorced and remarries. The first Mrs Smith is still Mrs Smith; the fact that there's a second Mrs Smith doesn't alter that. It's been traditional for a married woman to be Mrs John Smith but a divorced one to use her own first name, but these days it's much less likely that women wish to be known by their husbands' names, so the distinction is getting less clear. On the other hand, since so many married women are using their maiden names nowadays, it helps distinguish who's who.
Yes - as a married woman, I use my married and maiden names interchangeably depending on the occaision - my maiden as a professional name and my married as a social name. Royal women and men even do the same (Edward).

But I don't see that a divorced woman should be shamed or forced into using her maiden name if she doesn't want to. To use the maiden name would be inaccurate unless it has been her constant choice. She *has* been married and there may be legititimate children of the marriage. Sarah is not Sarah Ferguson, she is Sarah, Duchess of York, correctly greeted as 'Duchess' and mother of two Princesses of York. She has the rights to her ducal style as written because a divorcee is not the same as a single woman. The fact she is mother to two Princesses proves it!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 07-30-2005, 09:53 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
There is no higher dignity than being a prince of the UK, except being HM the King. Being granted a dukedom, or other peerage, is designed to grant an additional title to pass down to your male descendants, who cannot hold the style of Royal Highness after the death of your son, but will continue to hold the royal style as long as there is an eldest male to inherit the title.

The new peerage becomes your new style and you are then correctly addressed and titled as "HRH the Duke of Whatever", but that doesn't mean you lose the dignity of HRH the Prince Christian Name, which is yours at birth under letters patent as a son of the sovereign.

So, for example, Andrew was born "HRH the Prince Andrew", but styled and titled "HRH the Duke of York" upon marriage. Sarah, as his wife, became "HRH the Princess Andrew", but since Andrew held a peerage, was correctly styled and titled as "HRH the Duchess of York". The dignity of Royal Highness is hers because she married a prince of the UK, not because he is Duke of York.

So this is the only point I was trying to make. The dukedom of York is not "higher" than the precedence held by Andrew as a prince of the UK and HRH. It is simply his correct title as a royal duke.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 07-31-2005, 12:25 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,427
Unhappy Battenbergs

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
You don't consider going from a Serene Highness to a Marquess a demotion?
Well, yes! Even worse for Prince Leopold of Battenberg. Not only did he lose his Princely title, but also his style of Highness, and at the stroke of a pen became Lord Leopold Mountbatten. If I had a Princely title and had it taken away and replaced with a mere "Lord" I would be most unimpressed!

I believe HH Prince Alexander of Battenberg who became Marquess of Carisbrooke was rather unhappy with his unwanted change of name and loss of style. I would also guess that Lord Louis Mountbatten would have been very put out with the loss of his Princely title!
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 07-31-2005, 01:08 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
I would also guess that Lord Louis Mountbatten would have been very put out with the loss of his Princely title!
He was and, from what I recall, lamented about it later in life. Not surprising considering his illusions of grandeur and ambitions (Queen Mary was quite put off by him on what particular incident. Interestingly, his daughters signed the guest book while visiting Hesse using their Princely titles. This may have been done for simply sentimental reasons. Who knows.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 07-31-2005, 01:18 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
This is very true, however, with regard to the German ducal and princely families, the Queen has often received them privately at Balmoral via Prince Philip or Lady Pamela Hicks at her home.
Only the ones that are related via Philip or the Battenbergs/Mountbattens ever make it in, and not even always then. There is some relation with some Honhenlohe-Langenbursgs and some of the Hesses, but very little contact with the Badens ( the exception being the Grand Duke's sister). No one from the BRF was even invited to the Hereditary Grand Duke's wedding. There is some contact with the Georg of Hanover's family, but not the entire family (according to Saskia of Hanover). Philip didn't even attend his sister's funeral a few years ago, nor did he attend the funeral of his first Cousin, Olga of Yugoslavia, who was the last of Prince Nicholas's daughters. Conversely, he was at the funeral of Margaret of Hesse back in 96, who was only distantly related to him by marriage.

And you can even forget about the Bavarians, the Wurrtembergs, Leiningens, and Toerring-Jettenbachs (again, close relatives), etc. etc. Conversely, many of these these families (all of the ones listed & then some ) *are* given the time of day by the King and Queen of Spain.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 07-31-2005, 01:21 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by iowabelle
Diana's mother never got to be Countess Spencer. The marriage ended while she was Viscountess Althorp.
Correct. Additoinally, she was never 'plain Mrs. Somebody' as the previous poster wrote. Rather, she was the Honourable Mrs. Frances Shand-Kyd. She was entitled to the "Honourable" as she was the daughter of a Baron -- Baron Fermoy to be exact.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 07-31-2005, 03:33 AM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
No, because their German dignities and styles were meaningless since they were British and the Weimar Republic abolished all of their styles, titles and status anyway after World War I ended and the Prussian Emperor was exiled to Holland. They retained the honour of British peerages under the Sovereign.
Uh, why then is King Constantine still accepted by the British Royal family besides being part of Philip's family?? They never acknowledged Philip's sisters! Why does the King or Romania and the King of Bulgaria still receive acknowledgement?

I stilll would bet everything that they considered themselves demoted. The only one who remained a Royal Highness in Queen Mary's family was HRH Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone. She was born a British Princess through her father, HRH Prince Leopold of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Duke of Albany.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean.~
He was and, from what I recall, lamented about it later in life. Not surprising considering his illusions of grandeur and ambitions (Queen Mary was quite put off by him on what particular incident. Interestingly, his daughters signed the guest book while visiting Hesse using their Princely titles. This may have been done for simply sentimental reasons. Who knows.



Lord Mountbatten was one of the biggest royal snobs you could find. Why do you think he pushed so hard for Philip to marry Elizabeth?? He knew when she ascended the throne, the name of the royal house would change!! When Queen Mary got wind of his bragging, she called in Winston Churchill to have the name remain Windsor!! It was only after Queen Mary's death and the birth of Andrew that the Queen added Mounbatten to the name. I am sure that didn't even completely appease Lord Mountbatten either. I am sure he just wanted the House of Mountbatten to appease his ego, the loss of his princely rights, and get back at the Queen Mum who disliked him intensely.
__________________
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 07-31-2005, 04:40 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 894
Quote:
tiaraprin]Uh, why then is King Constantine still accepted by the British Royal family besides being part of Philip's family?? They never acknowledged Philip's sisters! Why does the King or Romania and the King of Bulgaria still receive acknowledgement?
They receive acknowledgement by *some* courts as former heads of state (they all reigned) . It is a courtesy. They are not treated as reigning heads of states per se.

In the case of Simeon, he was (until recently) PM of Bulgaria and thus treated accordingly. AFAIK he does not have close relations with QE II and family, except for being invited to the odd event. Michael had some relations with the BRF through his mother and grandmother (Greek and British Princesses respectively), but again, I wouldn't say that the two families are close. In any case, he is treated & recognized officially by the Romanian state as a former head of state, thus acknowledgement of the same by the British court is appropriate.

Conversely, none of the cadet or morgantic members of the minor German royal houses under discussion had ever reigned. They were junior members of junior houses who lived in GB. They were British, really.

Moreover, it wasn't George V that demoted them, but the Wiemer Republic. It was better for them to become members of the aristocracy (something many of today's nouveau riche would do anything for, as a title is still considered the pinacle) in the country in which they lived than go back to post-war Germany and try to use their titles of pretension. They wouldn't have been successful in trying to use their German titles in post-war GB, due to the anti-German sentiment. Sure they may have been traumatized or may have felt "demoted", but IMO they got a fairly good deal considering their petty princely ranks & the situation at the time. Better to be a Marquis or a lord than a plain Mr or a pretend prince descending from a morganic branch of of a non-existent state.

Finally, I'm not sure I get your point with respect to Philip's sisters. They were acknowledged as his siblings, and there was never any pretension that they were not related. They were not at his wedding because of their German marriages and the post-war sentiment, but they were at family events later. Indeed, Berthold and Margarita of Baden were quite prominent at the coronation and had high precedence.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 07-31-2005, 05:54 AM
HMQueenElizabethII's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ryde, Australia
Posts: 3,779
The order of precedence for female members of the Royal Family is:
  1. The Queen
  2. Queens Dowager (most recent first)
  3. The Sovereign's daughters-in-law
  4. The Sovereign's daughters
  5. The Sovereign's sons' daughters
  6. The Sovereign's sisters-in-law
  7. The Sovereign's sisters
  8. The Sovereign's father's sisters-in-law
  9. The Sovereign's father's sisters
  10. The Sovereign's brothers' daughters-in-law
  11. The Sovereign's brothers' daughters
  12. The Sovereign's father's brothers' daughters-in-law
  13. The Sovereign's father's brothers' daughters
The Queen recently changed the order of precedence that put the Duchess of Cornwall fourth in the order of precedence, next to herself, the Princess Royal, and Princess Alexandra, the Hon. Lady Ogilvy. [1] This may indicate a change in royal precedence. No further details have been given.

The Court Circular also lists Prince William of Wales
__________________
"God save our Gracious Queen,
Long live our Noble Queen,
God save The Queen"
God save Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 07-31-2005, 08:47 AM
Idriel's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: around, France
Posts: 1,130
Question 1: Did The Prince Consort (Albert) had the British nationality?
Question 2: Isn't a King above a Queen in hierarchy? If yes, If Philip was made King Consort, wouldn't him be "above" his wife?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 07-31-2005, 10:07 AM
ElisaR's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: ., Italy
Posts: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean.~
[...]Philip didn't even attend his sister's funeral a few years ago, nor did he attend the funeral of his first Cousin, Olga of Yugoslavia, who was the last of Prince Nicholas's daughters. Conversely, he was at the funeral of Margaret of Hesse back in 96, who was only distantly related to him by marriage.[...]

I think that Philip and his sister Sophia were close. But I don't know why he didn't attend her funeral: I think that had something to do with security and the fact that her family wanted a low key event. Anyway the whole story is absurd.
__________________
I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.
HRH Princess Elizabeth, Cape Town, 21st April 1947
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 07-31-2005, 10:27 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idriel
Question 1: Did The Prince Consort (Albert) had the British nationality?
Question 2: Isn't a King above a Queen in hierarchy? If yes, If Philip was made King Consort, wouldn't him be "above" his wife?
Prince Albert was German as Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. He became British when he married Victoria.

Yes, the title of King is "higher" than Queen, which is why a male consort will never be allowed to assume the dignity unless (like William of Orange) they already are a reigning Sovereign.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 07-31-2005, 12:05 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
Prince Albert was German as Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. He became British when he married Victoria.

Yes, the title of King is "higher" than Queen, which is why a male consort will never be allowed to assume the dignity unless (like William of Orange) they already are a reigning Sovereign.
Not in today's world, Precedence is derived from the amount of time on a throne. And a consort -- whether a King or a Queen --, is never "higher" than his/her reigning spouse. Ever. In any case, there have been King Consorts in some countries in the past, just not in Britain.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 07-31-2005, 12:09 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElisaR
I think that Philip and his sister Sophia were close. But I don't know why he didn't attend her funeral: I think that had something to do with security and the fact that her family wanted a low key event. Anyway the whole story is absurd.

Depends on ones definition of close. They certainly were not everyday close like my sister and I are (and we too live in different countries), and he certainly is not close with his nieces and nephews from her marriages to Hesse or Hanover.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 07-31-2005, 12:09 PM
Idriel's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: around, France
Posts: 1,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
Prince Albert was German as Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. He became British when he married Victoria.

Yes, the title of King is "higher" than Queen, which is why a male consort will never be allowed to assume the dignity unless (like William of Orange) they already are a reigning Sovereign.
Thank you. I read in wikipedia that Victoria wanted Albert to be King Consort but the parliament did not allowed that because he was a foreigner, which I found strange. Hence my question.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 07-31-2005, 01:03 PM
ElisaR's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: ., Italy
Posts: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean.~
Depends on ones definition of close. They certainly were not everyday close like my sister and I are (and we too live in different countries), and he certainly is not close with his nieces and nephews from her marriages to Hesse or Hanover.
I don't know how much they were close, but I read she went to England every year. Her last visit was in 2001, some weeks before Philip's birthday.
__________________
I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.
HRH Princess Elizabeth, Cape Town, 21st April 1947
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 07-31-2005, 01:45 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idriel
Thank you. I read in wikipedia that Victoria wanted Albert to be King Consort but the parliament did not allowed that because he was a foreigner, which I found strange. Hence my question.
Which was ridiculous since Victoria was a Hanover and had barely a drop of English blood herself.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
order of precedence, protocol


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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
The Danish Orders and Monograms davo Royal House of Denmark 156 08-08-2014 12:36 PM
Danish Royal Family, Current Events 1: April 2003 - March 2008 Julia Current Events Archive 506 03-23-2008 05:56 PM
Princess Madeleine at the Ball of the Order of Innocence: 2003 Josefine Princess Madeleine and Chris O'Neill 62 11-19-2005 04:27 PM




Popular Tags
belgium carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:18 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]