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
 
  #2521  
Old 11-11-2014, 12:50 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmirerUS View Post
Thanks Ish. It's what I thought, but I do get tangeled up on this thread. I appreciate the assist!
It's easy to get tangled when it comes to the issue of who is and who isn't royal, as well as the general issues of British titles.

The easy way to remember it is that if they're British and have either an HM or an HRH they're royal. If they don't, they're not royal.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2522  
Old 11-11-2014, 03:24 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
That was exactly what I meant before: the LPs are outdated in view of the new succession rules that will come into force with the Succession to the Crown Act 2013.
That is why I think that the Queen sent a subtle message about her feelings on the issue with these LPs as the agreement of the changes that the Succession to the Crown Act 2013 will bring it were made in 2011, a year before the new LPs were issued.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2523  
Old 11-11-2014, 11:29 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
That was exactly what I meant before: the LPs are outdated in view of the new succession rules that will come into force with the Succession to the Crown Act 2013. Parliament should take the opportunity to repeal the LPs and pass legislation regulating royal titles and styles in line with Continental practice, i.e. restricting HRH status to the monarch's children and children of the heir apparent only. The monarch's consort and the heir apparent's consort could also be made princes or princesses in their own right and the title of Prince/ss of Wales for the heir apparent should also be enshrined in law in line with the titles of Prince of Orange in the Netherlands and Prince of Asturias in Spain. All other members of the Royal Family, including the remaining grandchildren of the monarch who are not born to the heir apparent, would be untitled, or else hold the titles or honorifics to which they would be entitled according to British peerage rules assuming their parents are peers.
This idea comes up periodically, and I have to say I don't think it actually makes sense to do.

First of all, you're claiming that the Continental royals are restricting the use of royal titles and styles... but that's not really true. There are 9 Continental Royal families; the Swedes, Belgians, and Liechtensteiners all grant the same royal titles and styles to the children of the younger sons of the monarch as they do to the heir (actually, the Swedes one up it, as both of the granddaughters of CG are born through female lines, yet both hold royal titles and styles). The Danes allow for the same royal titles but a lesser style (HH instead of HRH), while the Luxembourgers grant a lesser royal title but the same style (they're merely "of Nassau" instead of "of Luxembourg"). The Norwegian king only has one son, and the Spanish king and Prince of Monaco only have sisters. Which means that of the 9 Continental Royal families, the only one that is actually restricting the use of royal titles and styles are the Dutch. That's hardly a huge trend to follow.

Even if the Continentals were restricting the use of royal titles, it still doesn't make sense for the British to do so. I'm not saying that the system in place is perfect - there is sexism at play, and it's going to become a problem when there is a female heir apparent - but it makes sense for the BRF to have a larger family than the Continental Royals. QEII is the monarch of 16 realms and do more than 3,000 engagements a year (according to Bertie's numbers). In order to sustain these kinds of numbers and in order to really pay attention to the 15 realms that the BRF don't actively live in they need more active royals than the Dutch do.

That said, what would happen if Parliament decided to change who has royal titles and styles in Britain (because Parliament has nothing better to do). In stripping the non-direct line grandchildren of the monarch of their titles and styles they would be stripping 9 people of their titles (3 grandsons of George V and their 3 wives, 1 granddaughter of George V, and 2 granddaughters of Elizabeth II, excluding the Wessex children). Of the 6 grandchildren, 3 of them have spent their lives dedicated to the BRF, 2 of whom gave up the possibilities of having their own careers. Do we really need to respond to over 50 years of dedication to the BRF and Britain by going "yeah, okay, that's all fine and dandy, but we're stripping you of your titles." That leaves 3 other grandchildren who haven't served the BRF in a huge capacity, but 2 of them are still in their 20s and who knows what the future may or may not bring.

If the Queen were to issue LPs that granted titles to female line descendants then that would affect, at present, a grand total of 4 people, all of whom are adults, and none of whom seem to actually want royal titles. I am of the opinion that this needs to be addressed, but I don't think it needs to be addressed now - it makes absolutely no sense to grant the children of Princess Margaret or Princess Anne royal titles and styles at this point in their lives. It's something that should be addressed in the future, when a daughter of William or Georges' is pregnant with her first child.

Also, the title Prince of Wales is not a guarantee. It's something that has to be created for each individual heir apparent. The issue of whether or not a female heir apparent can hold it does need to be addressed, but given as there isn't a female heir apparent yet there's no need to rush to it. Likewise, the Duchy of Cornwall (which is actually more important than the Prince of Wales title, as it comes with more than just a fancy name).
Reply With Quote
  #2524  
Old 11-12-2014, 08:21 AM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,367
Doesn't the King of Norway also have a daughter - Martha Louise?

If you are going to make the titles of the heir gender to cover both sexes then the Duke of Cornwall title needs altered to allow for females and non children of the monarch.

For example, if Charles dies today, William becomes the heir apparent. He can be named PoW but is not DoC because the Doc is the eldest son of monarch & heir apparent.
The simplest thing is to change it to heir apparent gets title. The gender doesn't have to change the title. The queen is the Duke of Lancaster not the Duchess.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #2525  
Old 11-12-2014, 01:17 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,952
He does, sorry. I meant precisely that he only has one son, not that he only has one child. It was a poor choice in wording on my part.

You can't say that they're limiting royal titles and styles there on the basis that Haakon's children have them and Martha Louise's don't when it's unusual for titles to pass on through a daughter.

I don't necessarily agree that the Duchy of Cornwall should be changed so that every heir apparent gets it; I actually kind of like the dual requirements, but I do think the wording should be changed so that the eldest child of the monarch who is the heir apparent gets the title to reflect equal primogeniture. They do need to address who runs and gets the proceeds from the duchy in the event of there not being a Duke, but if the heir apparent still gets that they don't necessarily need the title that goes with it.
Reply With Quote
  #2526  
Old 11-12-2014, 04:07 PM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 3,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
Doesn't the King of Norway also have a daughter - Martha Louise?

If you are going to make the titles of the heir gender to cover both sexes then the Duke of Cornwall title needs altered to allow for females and non children of the monarch.

For example, if Charles dies today, William becomes the heir apparent. He can be named PoW but is not DoC because the Doc is the eldest son of monarch & heir apparent.
The simplest thing is to change it to heir apparent gets title. The gender doesn't have to change the title. The queen is the Duke of Lancaster not the Duchess.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
LOL, I know what you mean, but "altered to allow for females and non children of the monarch" struck me funny. I saw a bunch of Corgi's.
__________________
Yes, I said it. No, I won't apologize. Yes, I will say it again.
Reply With Quote
  #2527  
Old 11-12-2014, 04:11 PM
Excalibur's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Posts: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
They do need to address who runs and gets the proceeds from the duchy in the event of there not being a Duke, but if the heir apparent still gets that they don't necessarily need the title that goes with it.
This was addressed in the Sovereign Grant Act. It enables the revenues from the Duchy to be passed to the heir if the heir is not the Duke of Cornwall.
Reply With Quote
  #2528  
Old 11-12-2014, 04:12 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Excalibur View Post
This was addressed in the Sovereign Grant Act. It enables the revenues from the Duchy to be passed to the heir if the heir is not the Duke of Cornwall.
Thank you. I knew it had been brought up, but I couldn't remember when or if it had actually been resolved.
Reply With Quote
  #2529  
Old 11-21-2014, 05:33 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
He was born HRH Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark and confusion existed at court whether he still held those titles

Even before the Queen made it official, Philip was referred to in formal documents as Prince Philip.

The Letters Patent of 19 Nov 1947 granted "Sir Philip Mountbatten, Knight of Our Most Noble Order of the Garter, Lieutenant in Our Navy" the style of HRH .... but then

In the Letters Patent of the 22nd October, 1948, conferring style and title on the children of the marriage of Princess Elizabeth and the Duke, Philip is styled "His Royal Highness. Prince Philip” by the King ... but then

In the Regency Act, 1953, and the Letters Patent of the 20th November, 1953, appointing Counsellors of State during the absence of the Queen and the Duke on their Australian tour, Philip is styled by the King "His Royal Highness Philip, Duke of Edinburgh".

"His Royal Highness Philip, Duke of Edinburgh" is also the style Philip himself used when registering the birth of Princess Anne.

So its difficult to say because there are conflicting documents
Reply With Quote
  #2530  
Old 11-21-2014, 06:23 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,197
There is also the anecdotal story that at Balmoral or Sandringham one year someone wrote in one of the books recording the number of birds/animals shot by each shooter 'Prince Philip xxxx' and George VI crossed out the word 'Prince'.
Reply With Quote
  #2531  
Old 11-21-2014, 06:34 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
Also the official programme of his three-day visit to the Gambia during his tour of 1956-57, he is referred to throughout as Prince Philip

In 1954, a Royal Society of Arts medal, which he chose, was struck with the inscription "Prince Philip, President"

The big issue for courtiers was if he was HRH and not a Prince then what exactly was he? There has never been in Britain a Royal Highness who was not a Prince, nor a Prince who was not a Royal Highness or Highness

Also well before 1957 the Duke of Edinburgh signed as "Philip" which in Britain is the prerogative of a Prince
Reply With Quote
  #2532  
Old 11-21-2014, 06:39 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
There is also the anecdotal story that at Balmoral or Sandringham one year someone wrote in one of the books recording the number of birds/animals shot by each shooter 'Prince Philip xxxx' and George VI crossed out the word 'Prince'.
Sounds like the King was having a little snit over something his son-in-law had said or done.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #2533  
Old 11-21-2014, 07:11 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
At the time there was confusion in the Home Office and the College of Arms over whether Philip was a Prince.

DeBretts said he was a prince, Burkes said he wasn't, even the Garter King of Arms at the time said he remains a Prince of Greece and Denmark.

No wonder the Queen had to settle the matter once and for all
Reply With Quote
  #2534  
Old 11-21-2014, 07:19 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,197
I don't think there is too much doubt that he was a Prince of Greece and Denmark. He could stop using those titles and give up his place in the line of succession to the Greek and Danish thrones (which I don't think he ever actually did - the Danes took that right away from him with the changes they made to their line of succession in 1953).


Without a formal statement from the Kings of Greece and Denmark stripping of his right to be still a Prince of both those countries he remained a Prince of Greece and Denmark even after having stopped using them.


In that case he was still a Prince - but until 1957 he wasn't a Prince of the UK.
Reply With Quote
  #2535  
Old 11-21-2014, 07:20 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
This idea comes up periodically, and I have to say I don't think it actually makes sense to do.

First of all, you're claiming that the Continental royals are restricting the use of royal titles and styles... but that's not really true. There are 9 Continental Royal families; the Swedes, Belgians, and Liechtensteiners all grant the same royal titles and styles to the children of the younger sons of the monarch as they do to the heir (actually, the Swedes one up it, as both of the granddaughters of CG are born through female lines, yet both hold royal titles and styles). The Danes allow for the same royal titles but a lesser style (HH instead of HRH), while the Luxembourgers grant a lesser royal title but the same style (they're merely "of Nassau" instead of "of Luxembourg"). The Norwegian king only has one son, and the Spanish king and Prince of Monaco only have sisters. Which means that of the 9 Continental Royal families, the only one that is actually restricting the use of royal titles and styles are the Dutch. That's hardly a huge trend to follow.


.

Both in Spain, the Netherlands and Norway, the heir apparent's children are the only grandchildren of the monarch who have princely status. That is a trend to me.
Reply With Quote
  #2536  
Old 11-21-2014, 07:23 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,669
I think the mix up happened as Philip was a Prince of Greece and Denmark but in the UK, foreign titles aren't recognized and used within the British system. So in the UK, he went from being Lt. Philip Mountbatten to HRH The Duke of Edinburgh on his marriage and then was made a prince in his own right in the UK by his wife and Queen.

I think I got that right.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #2537  
Old 11-21-2014, 07:34 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I don't think there is too much doubt that he was a Prince of Greece and Denmark. He could stop using those titles and give up his place in the line of succession to the Greek and Danish thrones (which I don't think he ever actually did - the Danes took that right away from him with the changes they made to their line of succession in 1953).


Without a formal statement from the Kings of Greece and Denmark stripping of his right to be still a Prince of both those countries he remained a Prince of Greece and Denmark even after having stopped using them.


In that case he was still a Prince - but until 1957 he wasn't a Prince of the UK.
The Danish Act of Succession 1953 restricted the line of succession to the Danish throne to descendants of King Christian X. Prince Philip descends from Christian IX , who was Christian X's grandfather. He would be excluded from the Danish successiona anyway then under the law.
Reply With Quote
  #2538  
Old 11-21-2014, 07:37 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
And to add to the confusion he was officially a HRH by Letters Patent in 1947 but wasn't a prince by LsP.
This hadn't occurred before and led to the discussion of if not a prince then what?
Reply With Quote
  #2539  
Old 11-21-2014, 07:39 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
The Danish Act of Succession 1953 restricted the line of succession to the Danish throne to descendants of King Christian X. Prince Philip descends from Christian IX , who was Christian X's grandfather. He would be excluded from the Danish successiona anyway then under the law.
Succession would be different from whether he was a Greek Prince. Has any Danish law been enacted since that would strip Philip as a Prince of Greece and Denmark?

Edit: Prince of Denmark

This is a genuine question btw because I have no idea
Reply With Quote
  #2540  
Old 11-21-2014, 07:50 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
. Has any Danish law been enacted since that would strip Philip as a Prince of Greece and Denmark?

Edit: Prince of Denmark
I don't think so.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, consort, spouse, styles and titles


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
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess Prince Harry and Prince William 1353 11-17-2016 02:00 PM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 38 09-17-2016 06:06 AM
Diana's Styles and Titles florawindsor Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 749 06-29-2016 07:02 PM
Non-British Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 729 10-09-2014 05:24 PM
Abdication Beatrix and Inauguration WA: Titles, Names, Succession, Precedence Princess Robijn King Willem-Alexander, Queen Máxima and family 67 05-24-2013 04:14 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece josephine-charlotte kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week pierre casiraghi portugal prince bernhard prince charles princess charlene outfits princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathilde's daytime fashion queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania fashion royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:21 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises