The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #361  
Old 10-28-2011, 10:02 AM
Baroness of Books's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bookstacks, United States
Posts: 5,773
Girl power indeed, as the article says! And, yes, it would be ironic if after all this the first-born child is a boy, but at least legislation will be in place for future monarchs. And I'm also glad that the ban against the heir marrying a Roman Catholic will be lifted. It was interesting to read how the course of British monarchy and history would have been changed if females were allowed to inherit the throne. A very exciting time right now.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #362  
Old 10-28-2011, 10:04 AM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
We now wait for the legislation which has to come from the UK first. But I doubt they'll waste time now they've got agreement. I'm glad to see the Catholic ban dropped as well.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #363  
Old 10-28-2011, 10:09 AM
Nice Nofret's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Zrich, Switzerland
Posts: 411
I like that - but I wonder, what they do about the Titels "Prince of Wales" and "Duke of Cornwall"? Because they are restricted to males only till now.

Very interessting. Also how fast they could move, if they want.

But after Tony Blair abolished the House of Lords there isn't much I believe, they will not change.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #364  
Old 10-28-2011, 10:13 AM
Baroness of Books's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bookstacks, United States
Posts: 5,773
I'm sure the question of the heir's titles may now have to be addressed. I was wondering how this will be handled as well.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #365  
Old 10-28-2011, 10:55 AM
Sister Morphine's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: North Carolina, United States
Posts: 2,726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal_Eagle View Post
Very true. I've thought that if they really wanted to be "fair", that the wife of the reigning King should be titled "Princess Consort", or even use the "Princess Royal" style (I think it's only a style and not a title constrained by LPs?) since it sound better than "Princess Consort". Naturally "Princess Royal" would not be used until the existing holder (Princess Anne) has passed away

Or we can just go with "King Consort", but people will just be a bit confused over who is the real monarch though, as up to now most of the monarches has been a King with the occasional Queen Regina.

The wife of a King is a Queen, not a princess, so I can't see why they would use the style "Princess Consort." Also, "Princess Royal" denotes the eldest daughter of the reigning sovereign, and has been used in that capacity since the 1600s. I doubt very seriously they're going to up and change it to now reflect that of the wife of the King.

I don't see how people would be confused over who is the sovereign and who is not; the word "consort" pretty much says all that needs to be said about that person's relationship to the sovereign. Queen consort = consort to the King. King consort = consort to the Queen. People are smarter than you give them credit for.
__________________
"The grass was greener / The light was brighter / The taste was sweeter / The nights of wonder / With friends surrounded / The dawn mist glowing / The water flowing / The endless river / Forever and ever........ "
Reply With Quote
  #366  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:00 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Morphine View Post
The wife of a King is a Queen, not a princess, so I can't see why they would use the style "Princess Consort." Also, "Princess Royal" denotes the eldest daughter of the reigning sovereign, and has been used in that capacity since the 1600s. I doubt very seriously they're going to up and change it to now reflect that of the wife of the King.

I don't see how people would be confused over who is the sovereign and who is not; the word "consort" pretty much says all that needs to be said about that person's relationship to the sovereign. Queen consort = consort to the King. King consort = consort to the Queen. People are smarter than you give them credit for.
Yes, I'm aware of the history of Princess Royal. It was just a wild idea that I merely threw out, if we really wanted to be politically correct and be "fair" with respect to titles. I'm not actually advocating we change all that, as there's a lot of history behind the titles we have now. I was just pointing out what one can do if we really wanted to go down that road.

And as for giving not enough credit, fair enough--you're probably right.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #367  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:29 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 421
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal_Eagle View Post
To be exact, this apply to all of the offsprings from the current Prince of Wales. Hence Prince Harry and his offsprings, if any, will also be affected.

If by some extremely unlikely reasons, both William and Harry don't produce offsprings and the heir to Prince Wales becomes Prince Andrew and his family or any of Charles' sibling--would the old succession rules come back into play?

Guess we have to wait and see what the exact legislation say.
I doubt it. I think it's being reported the way it is because it is William who it most affects but it would be ridiculous if the rule didn't apply straight through, what's the point then? It is still possible that the crown could drop to the Yorks, if Beatrice has a girl and then a boy how are they supposed to explain that the boy will be King?

"Yes, you see what happened was that we went through all that hubbub not expecting William and his brother to both be sterile so we're going back to the old system. Or better yet we'll go through all the hubbub again."
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #368  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:43 AM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 3,009
At least all the whining will stop re: this subject. So a new tradition is born, no one gets hurt, If the Wales boys are sterile, the Yorks and Wessexes decide to give up their places to earn money, Peter Phillips becomes King and then we'll have Queen Autumn, which will make me giggle a bit.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #369  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:48 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,538
I think this is wonderful and LONG overdue. Good for the Queen for not caring in the sense of if they have a girl then a boy, the boy gets to be ahead in the line. It is 2011, this should have been changed a long time ago.

Now, I will give you Brits credit for this. In this country, we have a saying about family fortunes, houses, wealth, etc. The grandfather builds, the son lives off of it, the grandson destroys it. Hence why the Vanderbilts, as an example, no longer have the immense wealth.

BUT, with your aristocracy....what impresses me, is that many, many of them have been able to maintain their properties, wealth, etc., for hundreds if not thousands of years. I like to read about them online...and as an American to see this, wow. Granted some of the homes have been sold, contents, jewels, etc...but a ton of these families have been able to keep it intact due to primogeniture. I am not trying, as a woman, to sounds sexist...but that is impressive.

As for the ban on Catholics...simply do this, make it clear the sovereign MUST be Anglican...no matter the religion of the parent who is not. This is not difficult to do IMO..and I am a Catholic...lol.
__________________
Lady M
Reply With Quote
  #370  
Old 10-28-2011, 11:54 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal_Eagle

Indeed!! Wouldn't it be funny if the next few generations has first-born sons--it'd be a century or two before a first-born daughter ascend the throne over her younger brothers.

Come to think....it seems like the last few generations more often than not has sons as the first born? The last time a daughter was first-born was when Queen Victoria gave birth to Princess Victoria? Since then every generation with a King/Queen has a boy as the first born. So if this keep up, it may be quite a while before a girl is first-born.
Now you may not count this but, wasn't Queen Elizabeth II a first born daughter who ascended the throne? :)
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #371  
Old 10-28-2011, 12:27 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,324
Yes, I was thinking of Queen Elizabeth as a prime example, myself. And, if one looks at HM's four children's offspring, they are a good example of the fact that, on average, boys and girls are born at roughly the same rate. Prince Charles has a male firstborn, Princess Anne has a male firstborn, Prince Andrew a female firstborn, and Prince Edward has a female firstborn. 50/50

But there are so many interesting thought experiments here. Had this law been passed years ago, before Charles married Diana, and he had married someone else who did not have children or if Diana had not had children, then when Charles died, Princess Anne would become Queen? Fascinating to think about.

Seems they chose a stable moment to make this change, when it seems sure that Charles will ascend the throne upon the death of his mother, and if he predeceases her, he has two male heirs next in line, so plenty of time to get used to the change (if anyone needs time!)

So now the rumors in the tabloids that Kate is already pregnant with a girl will ramp up even more. I wonder if, when she does get pregnant, they'll do as so many celeb couples do these days and announce the sex of the child when it becomes known. I wonder if they have a girl, will they name her Elizabeth??

They could name her Catherine...or Willa.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #372  
Old 10-28-2011, 12:43 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 421
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Now you may not count this but, wasn't Queen Elizabeth II a first born daughter who ascended the throne? :)
lol, I think Royal meant to a reigning monarch. Though Victoria is not actually long ago from a generational standpoint.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi View Post
They could name her Catherine...or Willa.
More than likely Diana will be included in that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #373  
Old 10-28-2011, 12:52 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 7,155
This is indeed wonderful news. The fact that it all came around the time of the Diamond Jubilee makes it all the more significant and exciting. As Baroness of Books stated, 'Girl Power indeed' .
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #374  
Old 10-28-2011, 01:19 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Month Representative - Britain
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach (CA), United States
Posts: 1,404
I'm so pleased that this was approved!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #375  
Old 10-28-2011, 01:20 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Now you may not count this but, wasn't Queen Elizabeth II a first born daughter who ascended the throne? :)
You're quite right--I was thinking of families where babies of both g enderwere born, but didn't say that. It *seems* like the last few generations has seen more boys than girls being born, although with the Queen and her sister, as well as the Yorks seems to offset that somewhat.

Maybe if I have time, I might try to determine the gender frequency and see if there's some to my impression.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #376  
Old 10-28-2011, 01:31 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,260
I hope the changes go as smoothly as everyone seems to suggest but somehow I don't think it will quite that easy.. Remember these changes not only have to be passed by Westminster but also by several Commonwealth parliaments. I hope this doesnt open more questions on the continuation of the monarchy than just changes in succession rules. Each country will have its own rules on how the changes need to be implemented, and some national governments may change before legislation can be passed.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #377  
Old 10-28-2011, 01:37 PM
Sherlock221B's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 171
Women's liberation, that is what this is all about! This is at the top of Cameron's agenda?! THIS! What nonsense! What a maniacal waste of time. The Duke and Duchess do not even have a child yet. Victoria and Carl Philip were born before Sweden adopted absolute primogeniture. To do so on assumption is insane. What if William and Catherine's first born child is a son? This is a political stunt to regain popularity and why not include dukes, earls and barons?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #378  
Old 10-28-2011, 01:48 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,324
Queen Diana someday? That would certainly give the Royal Forums a lot to talk about and mull over for the next few decades.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #379  
Old 10-28-2011, 01:52 PM
Nice Nofret's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Zrich, Switzerland
Posts: 411
Well of course this is a 'political stunt' - as you choose to call it. But do we talk politics in this forum ?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #380  
Old 10-28-2011, 02:16 PM
zembla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Camden, United States
Posts: 875
It's certainly a victory for gender politics and religious ones as well, but I'm not a total fan. The media landscape has changed a lot since QEII took the throne. Any little girl today who would be destined to become Queen is going to face a lot of criticism from her looks to her behavior--looks, especially. She will not get the same pass her father did for youthful hijinks: clubbing, looking drunk in public, and any other sort of behavior that looks messy. I think for a girl, it won't be as easy on her psyche.
__________________

__________________
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
Succession Issues ladybelline Imperial Family of Japan 921 11-03-2014 02:22 AM
The Act of Settlement 1701 and the Line of Succession Elise,LadyofLancaster British Royals 926 04-15-2014 11:41 PM
Rules of Succession CrownPrinceLorenzo Royalty Past, Present, and Future 95 10-25-2012 01:55 PM




Popular Tags
belgium birth brussels 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 germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia 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 pieter van vollenhoven poland pregnancy president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene 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 william winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:51 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]