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
 
  #741  
Old 07-30-2010, 02:22 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Why is it unlikely that they will have four kids?



Actually Michael and his wife do a lot of work for the royal family, check the current events thread.
You talking like I said take them out now? I said they will probably loose them, when they are no longer needed when William and Harry's wives come along.

I don't see them doing that, they have been brought up with out an HRH, to change when they are older IMO would be silly.
People have less kids nowadays that's why I think it's unlikely that they would have more than a couple kids.

I didn't say anything about you claiming that they would lose them now. I'm pointing out that it makes less sense to strip them of their titles considering how much more they can do over the next few decades than anyone else.

A wife would have to be groomed for such a job and even then they wouldn't be able to take on the many things on their own faster than the York girls would.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #742  
Old 07-30-2010, 02:44 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliver_bic View Post
People have less kids nowadays that's why I think it's unlikely that they would have more than a couple kids.

I didn't say anything about you claiming that they would lose them now. I'm pointing out that it makes less sense to strip them of their titles considering how much more they can do over the next few decades than anyone else.

A wife would have to be groomed for such a job and even then they wouldn't be able to take on the many things on their own faster than the York girls would.
A wife could be taught, during her engagement and IMO she could take on as many things as she wanted to when she was not pregnant. Beatrice and Eugenie are unlikely to do that much IMO.
But in a few decades, there will be other people to do the jobs for them, people like William and Harry's wives, you say that they need to be groomed for the job, well in a few decades i'm sure they will be doing just fine.
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #743  
Old 07-30-2010, 03:26 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,594
How do you figure that Beatrice and Eugenie will do less?

According to the British Royal website, the Royal Family current has over 3000 patronages. The Queen alone has 600. The Duke of Edinburgh has798 , Prince Charles has 467, Prince Andrew has 129 and Princess Anne has 281. This of course does not include real actual engagements.


The Duke of Gloucester has 128, the Duke of Kent has 126 , the Duchess of Gloucester has 67, and Princess Alexandra has 116.

In the next 7 to 10 years the BRF faces the possiblity that the Kents and Gloucesters or God forbid the Queen and Prince Phillip will not be around to do any royal duties. If anything, I would expect them to lessen their work load (and rightfully so as teh Queen in 84, Anne is 60, Edward of Kent is75 , Alexandra of Kent is 74, Richard of Gloucester is 66).

So you are basically saying that if the royal family loses five people, Harry and William's wife can pick up all of that slack?
They can certainly pick up some but I would expect somewhat of a learning curve (hopefully the TRF has learned not to throw people in the water) and what if they have children, do we expect them to perform duties past the 6 month period or while the kids are less than a month or two?

And yes, the Royal Family certainly does not need to have all these patronages but their presence brings attention to certain causes that are as well known as others. And for those who suggest that celebrities can pick up patronages, they certainly can, but celebrity life is hot and cold. I mean, 10 years ago I could name a different hot and well known British actress that probably for a variety of reasons might not be as well known today.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #744  
Old 07-30-2010, 03:38 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,350
I never said they would do less, I said they weren't going to be excedding anyones expectation. IMO neither of them really have a sense of drive in the form of royal work, they seem fine being who they are. That's going to change when they hit the spotlight.

I'm not saying to cut them out the minute William and Harry have wives, but they could more than likely live a comfortable out of the spotlight life and still partially participate in events.
That's one of my points, the royal is going to loose five people and only gain two, surely they have to realise they need to down size what they do.

Celebrities running patronages that was belonged to a royal, wouldn't feel right IMO.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #745  
Old 07-30-2010, 04:23 PM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 3,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
Err, where exactly is thingumabob
I would say that "thingamabob" equals "wotsit."
Reply With Quote
  #746  
Old 07-30-2010, 04:54 PM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 3,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
So, it was an agreement between Philip and the King of the Hellenes? Weren't there any documents at all?

There is no such thing as renunciation of peerage titles in the United Kingdom. You inherit the title, you bear the title. I'm afraid Edward will just have to wait for both of his parents to die to get the title.
Hummmm....if Philip predeceases HM The Queen, she would have every right to bestow the Edinburg on whomever she wanted on the day the current Duke is pronounced dead. Right or not?
Reply With Quote
  #747  
Old 07-30-2010, 04:56 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,594
KittyAtlanta....the Duke of Edinburgh and what happens when the current Duke passes is being discussed The future of the Duke of Edinburgh title
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #748  
Old 07-30-2010, 05:26 PM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 3,116
"whlist married to her former husband andrew parker- bowles, whom is a catholic, did she convert over to his faith, and if so, did she (on her divorce) covert back to the church of england ? ."

Camilla was always a Catholic. That is why the union with Prince Charles didn't take place 40 years ago. HM would not grant permission.

"Technically, the Line of the Succession is discriminative only towards the Catholics."

That needs to be --- Technically, the Line of Succession is discriminative only towards ROMAN Catholics.
Reply With Quote
  #749  
Old 07-30-2010, 05:51 PM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 3,116
Thanks Zonk...had not seen that category.
Reply With Quote
  #750  
Old 07-30-2010, 06:58 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittyAtlanta View Post
"whlist married to her former husband andrew parker- bowles, whom is a catholic, did she convert over to his faith, and if so, did she (on her divorce) covert back to the church of england ? ."

Camilla was always a Catholic. That is why the union with Prince Charles didn't take place 40 years ago. HM would not grant permission.

"Technically, the Line of the Succession is discriminative only towards the Catholics."

That needs to be --- Technically, the Line of Succession is discriminative only towards ROMAN Catholics.
Camilla has never been Catholic. When she married Andrew Parker-Bowles, they were married in the Church of England. Andrew PB was/is a Roman Catholic and both of their children, Tom and Laura, were raised in the Catholic faith.

From Wiki: The couple had two children: Tom, born in the year after the marriage, who is a godson of Prince Charles, and Laura, born in 1978; both Parker Bowles children were raised in their father's Roman Catholic faith.

Just made me realize an interesting tidbit. If Tom Parker-Bowles was baptized in the Catholic faith and the PoW is his godfather, then that should the "need" arise, Charles had promised to continue to assure that Tom was raised Catholic.
Reply With Quote
  #751  
Old 07-31-2010, 04:24 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
It's doubtful that Eugenie or Beatrice would lose their royal rank as HRH. Even if Charles decides to issue letters patent replacing the current guidelines from 1917, anyone currently holding the rank and style of HRH Prince/Princess of the UK would keep it for their lifetime.

Being female, Eugenie and Beatrice are likely to marry and take their husband's name eventually. They cannot pass on their royal styles anyway, so that would take care of that. Most of the remaining HRHs are headed towards the grave or old age. So, the number will dwindle naturally from attrition.

The real question is whether Harry's children will be HRH Prince/Princess of the UK. That seems questionable, given that Edward and Sophie's children are not using their royal styles, which signals change is eventually coming after The Queen dies.
Reply With Quote
  #752  
Old 08-01-2010, 03:10 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Richland Center, United States
Posts: 108
Yes, but the reason why Edward's children are not using their titles is because Edward and Sophie specifically asked the Queen for permission for their children to do that.
Reply With Quote
  #753  
Old 08-01-2010, 03:54 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 9,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmkrcwi View Post
Yes, but the reason why Edward's children are not using their titles is because Edward and Sophie specifically asked the Queen for permission for their children to do that.

The next question though is why would they do that and there are a number of answers to that question:

1. That they know that there is an intention to reduce those eligible to by HRH Prince/Princesses to just those of the eldest son/child and so they made a pre-emptive decision

2. They know that with William, Harry, Beatrice and Eugenie their children won't be needed to do royal duties so why burden them with the titles etc - afterall Peter and Zara have all the benefits and none of the burdens namely wealth and position but no duties to perform.

3. They won't their kids to have a private life and upbringing that using the HRH would mean that they don't have.

4. Who knows but I am sure that there could be other reasons for asking for that and that the Queen approved that decision.
Reply With Quote
  #754  
Old 08-01-2010, 04:34 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
4. Who knows but I am sure that there could be other reasons for asking for that and that the Queen approved that decision.
OK.. this is an odd idea and its very late here and my brain is doing odd things.

Picture this... Charles becomes King and declares a republic. He'd still be "King" but like his father's people.. deposed. Then he can still go about with opinions on how things should be done environmentally.

Weird thought eh?
Reply With Quote
  #755  
Old 08-01-2010, 08:19 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,594
That is never going to happen.

Charles has waited his entire life to be King and I dont' believe he can declare Britian a Republic, only Parliament can do that.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #756  
Old 08-01-2010, 08:26 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,350
He wouldn't do that, not after everything his mother has taught him. There would have to be a Referendum on the issue, if the people called for it.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #757  
Old 08-01-2010, 09:59 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,440
Lumutqueen: He wouldn't do that, not after everything his mother has taught him. There would have to be a Referendum on the issue, if the people called for it.

Zonk: Charles has waited his entire life to be King and I dont' believe he can declare Britian a Republic, only Parliament can do that.[

I said it was odd.. just wanted to keep y'all on your toes.

But thinking seriously.. I read the report in the PoW forum AFTER I'd posted this silly thing. Where Charles believes he was born to Save The World (good gods.. please save me from bad journalism). This man doesn't look druish.. I know I posted it as a joke (you'd have to know Mel Brooks movies) He is so much of an activist to help and preserve our earth... This man as a PoW has done more than any other royal has to try to make an impact on us... to drive home that its up to us to make a difference.

What happens if/when he does become king and he can no longer have an opinion about the environment and what the government is doing to aid/hinder things? Will he just potter around the gardens at BP, Windsor and Highgrove and not say a word?

I did forget to mention something. Charles is passionate about what he believes. No one call call him a cold fish on the issue.
Reply With Quote
  #758  
Old 08-01-2010, 11:04 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,350
I posted that Daily Mail article, and I didn't really read it because I have no interest in Charles' workings for the environment.
However I do know that he has does a lot to convince the world leaders to work towards finding a solution, and even before GW was around, he was doing other things.
There is no if about it, when he becomes King Charles won't be allowed to shout out his opinion like he does nowadays, he will have to keep it to himself, else he will be accused of having an interest in the politics of the country. He can talk in private to whoever the PM is at the time, and express his thoughts on the matter and "advise" about it. That's all. He might potter around Highgrove if he still can when he becomes King, but he will have to just be King.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #759  
Old 08-02-2010, 03:32 AM
RoyalistRiley's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 502
I know this is probably in the wrong thread - but wouldn't he be bound to sign himself out of existance if a Republic Bill ever passed the Parliament or a referendum to that effct was successful?
__________________
God Save the Queen! Advance Australia Fair!
"Life is a game in which the player must appear ridiculous" - The Dowager Countess of Grantham, Downton Abbey
http://twitter.com/FutureSirRiley
Reply With Quote
  #760  
Old 08-15-2010, 12:40 PM
kbk kbk is offline
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toruń, Poland
Posts: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg View Post
It's doubtful that Eugenie or Beatrice would lose their royal rank as HRH. Even if Charles decides to issue letters patent replacing the current guidelines from 1917, anyone currently holding the rank and style of HRH Prince/Princess of the UK would keep it for their lifetime.
Why do you think if Charles decides to limit the Princely status to his children and further descendants only, Beatrice and Eugenie could not lose their titles? When George V changed the rules in 1917, several Hanoverian princes, including Ernst Augustus, Duke of Brunswick, who was born as a Prince of Great Britain and Ireland, and his children, lost their British titles...

Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg View Post
The real question is whether Harry's children will be HRH Prince/Princess of the UK. That seems questionable, given that Edward and Sophie's children are not using their royal styles, which signals change is eventually coming after The Queen dies.
Today, as Harry is a Sovereign's male-line grandson and is not the Prince of Wales's first son, his children would not be titled Princes and styled Royal Highnesses by birth. They would be known as Lords and Ladies, just like the children of Prince Michael of Kent, also a male-line grandson of a Sovereign. I do not think that the Queen could grant them any higher titles and style in this situation, when her grandchildren from The Prince Edward do not enjoy Royal titles and style.

I have an additional question about British royal titles..I've read that by Royal Warrant of 17 June 1914, George V granted the eldest son and any children thereafter born to Prince Ernest Augustus of Hanover, then reigning Duke of Brunswick, the title of Prince (or Princess) of Great Britain and Ireland with the style Highness. That's okay, but, on what legal basis Ernst Augustus himself was a British prince? He was a male-line great-great-grandson of George III, so he could not be a British prince, as Queen Victoria limited the title only to a Sovereign's children and male-line grandchildren and great-grandchildren!

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 1115 01-14-2015 03:50 PM
Questions About [non-British] Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 729 10-09-2014 04:24 PM
Diana's Styles and Titles florawindsor Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 573 11-14-2013 11:59 AM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 36 08-08-2013 12:05 PM
Abdication Beatrix and Inauguration WA: Titles, Names, Succession, Precedence Princess Robijn King Willem-Alexander and Queen Máxima and family 67 05-24-2013 03:14 PM




Popular Tags
abdication belgium best outfit brussels carl philip crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events death fashion fashion poll funeral germany grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg maxima official visit ottoman picture of the week poland president gauck president hollande president komorowski prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess astrid princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess madeleine princess mary princess mette-marit princess of asturias queen fabiola queen letizia queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sonja royal royal fashion sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:00 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2015
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]