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
 
  #1521  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:21 PM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,352
Discussion of the Royal Family Order has been moved to the Royal Orders and Decorations thread.
__________________

__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #1522  
Old 10-14-2012, 03:10 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
I would like to seek the opinions of others regarding King Edward VII's decision of creating his Duff granddaughters British princesses with the style of Highness. I'm fully aware that as granddaughters in the female line of the Sovereign they weren't entitled to princely rank.

However, I feel that Edward did this because up until the marriage of his sister, Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll, daughters & male line granddaughters of the Sovereign normally contracted marriages with other foreign princes entitling there children to princely status, albeit lower(Queen Victoria elevated her grandchildren to the prefix of Highness). Edward as Prince of Wales made it known he disagreed with his sister marrying a non-royal duke. So to have his daughter marry someone other than a prince I'm sure was unacceptable in his eyes, though tolerable. And his reason behind creating his Duff granddaughters Princesses of Great Britain & Ireland was in effect a way to show that they would've held princely styles & titles if his daughter hadn't insisted on marrying a subject.

If possible, could others give any other reason of why Edward VII would've done this? I just can't see another reason.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1523  
Old 10-14-2012, 03:29 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Mayo, Ireland
Posts: 3
Second child of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge

We could soon witness something that couldn't have been envisaged when George V issued letters patent in 1917,
These stated that the style of 'Prince/Princess' could only be granted to the following:
Sons/daughters of the Monarch.
Sons/daughters of the sons of the Monarch.
The eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales.
We now have an eldest son of the Prince of Wales - The Duke of Cambridge, who has been married well over a year. He and his wife are both in their early thirties. It's reasonable to assume that they will have children very soon.
We could easily end up with a situation where second and subsequent sons and/or any daughters are not given the title 'Prince' at birth, even though they are very much in the direct line of succession.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1524  
Old 10-14-2012, 03:39 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
They will be known as Lord/Lady Christian name Mountbatten-Windsor, just like Lady Louise, the Earl of Wessex' daughter. Though that applies only as long as the queen lives and she might issue Letters Patent, like her father did for her children.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1525  
Old 10-14-2012, 03:45 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Mayo, Ireland
Posts: 3
I think the Letters Patent will be issued very soon after the Duchess of Cambridge tells the Queen that she is expecting.
I think it will be a shame if the children receive the title of Lord/Lady. Similarly, I was disappointed that the Earl of Wessex's children received the title Lord/Lady instead of Prince James and Princess Louise.
I wonder what the situation regarding the Cambridge's younger children will be if the Prince of Wales predeceases his mother.
That would have to be rectified very quickly.
If the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge had married a little earlier, we might even be soon looking at a situation of 'the eldest son, of the eldest son, of the eldest son of the prince of Wales'. A situation that would have been beyond belief for George V.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1526  
Old 10-14-2012, 03:58 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Mayo, Ireland
Posts: 3
It's all fascinating stuff.
:-)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1527  
Old 10-14-2012, 04:35 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 601
Edward didn't create his granddaughter Princess Alexandra and Princess Maud until 1905 when he made their mother Princess Royal, until then they were Lady Alexandra/Maud.

He "promoted" them when he promoted his eldest daughter.

How were daughters of other Princess Royals styled? (besides Zara Phillips)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1528  
Old 10-14-2012, 04:45 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post

How were daughters of other Princess Royals styled? (besides Zara Phillips)
- Mary, Princess Royal and Countess of Harewood had two sons.
- Victoria, Princess Royal's daughters were all Princess' mainly due to the fact she was married to the German Emperor and King of Prussia. They were all 'Princess of Prussia'.
- Charlotte, Princess Royal had no children. Same with Anne, Princess Royal (1727)
- Mary, Princess Royal and Princess of Orange had a son.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #1529  
Old 10-14-2012, 05:47 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
Okay... I don't understand why you sent a rebuttal. I knew what there titles were before 1905... my post spoke about the reasons behind his decision to elevate them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1530  
Old 10-14-2012, 06:14 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Proably because once the King made his daughter the Princess Royal, Lady Alexandra/Maud didn't have the appropriate regal and royal 'ring' to it so he made them princesses. Look at the Wessex children. We speculate all the time but no one really knows for sure why HM decided to style them as the children of a non-royal earl.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1531  
Old 10-14-2012, 06:26 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
A king or queen regnant can change styles & titles as they see fit. However, Princess Louise's daughters weren't entitled to any "regal or royal ring"... a fact that King George V pointed out when he refused Alexandra & Maud the wearing of "Princess Robes" at his coronation. And regarding the Earl & Countess of Wessex... I'm very certain The Queen honored the wishes of Edward & Sophie by not styling their children as royal.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1532  
Old 10-14-2012, 06:36 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Things changed under George V. The 1917 LP basically set in 'stone' royal styles and titles (although as you point out, the sovereign can change royal styles and titles at any time and for any reason) and here in for me is the issue. The larger question is why do sovereigns do what they do and the answer for me at least is because it it their Royal Prerogative to do so. End of story IMO.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1533  
Old 10-14-2012, 06:46 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
If that's the case there's no need for The Royal Forums in any capacity for bearing & debating the opinions & comments of others.

Edward VIII's Royal Prerogative was to marry Wallis Simpson, so I guess that should've been the "End of Story" lol.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1534  
Old 10-14-2012, 09:49 AM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHThePrince View Post
A king or queen regnant can change styles & titles as they see fit. However, Princess Louise's daughters weren't entitled to any "regal or royal ring"... a fact that King George V pointed out when he refused Alexandra & Maud the wearing of "Princess Robes" at his coronation.
I've often thought how difficult this may all be for family members who reign. How would one say no to a female line granddaughter who is a princess in your eyes? How could one deny housing to a dear cousin when there are all those empty rooms? It tugs at ones heartstrings.

I am sure it became more difficult as descendents began to "opt out" of the royal choice - as Anne did for her children (and we assume the same for the Wessexes). One ends up with family who want in, but are not wanted or needed in, family who are wanted in but want out and all combinations in between. And that all gets played out on a public stage.

It's no wonder some rulers change the rules, I am sure. I know a lot of grandparents who have trouble denying their little dears a toy every trip to the store - much less the appellation of princess if it were in their power.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1535  
Old 10-14-2012, 10:27 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHThePrince View Post
Okay... I don't understand why you sent a rebuttal. I knew what there titles were before 1905... my post spoke about the reasons behind his decision to elevate them.
I wasn't rebutting you. I only mentioned that when his daughter became Princess Royal. He made each of his granddaughters by her a Princess rather than just Lady.

Her daughters were 14 and 12 before he changed their status, so it did not have anything to do with their parent's marriage nor his coronation. It was the result of Princess Louise becoming Princess Royal.

I ask my question as it was related to another post about Zara/Princess Anne. I researched and I found no other Princess Royal with daughters who status changed except Louise's. (I thought someone with more royal knowledge may have more insight.)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1536  
Old 10-15-2012, 05:58 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
Other than for members of the Royal Family, does The Queen need permission from the Prime Minister to create peerages? I know the Sovereign is Fount of Honour, but I was led to believe she only create titles under the express advice of the PM.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1537  
Old 10-15-2012, 06:01 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHThePrince View Post
Other than for members of the Royal Family, does The Queen need permission from the Prime Minister to create peerages? I know the Sovereign is Fount of Honour, but I was led to believe she only create titles under the express advice of the PM.
I believe HM does need ministerial advice to create a peer outside the Royal Family.
I think HM created three peerages under PM Thatcher.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1538  
Old 10-15-2012, 06:09 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
You'll never see another dukedom created. There are 24 remaining Dukes, from a high of around 40 in Hanoverian times. and they will eventually die out and the last creation outside the Royal family was over 100 years ago.

Since Tony Blair ------- over the House of Lords, another great chapter in British history has been binned by the lefties. I'm not sure the remaining Dukes would care if their titles were revoked. Just my opinion.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1539  
Old 10-15-2012, 07:29 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
Wow... the Queen is basically powerless. Its shameful that if she wanted to honour one of her long standing ladies-in-waiting with a peerage she'd have to consult her PM for approval. I believe the Sovereign of the United Kingdom should not have to seek advice when wanting to bestow a peerage to a non member of the Royal Family. Peerages are now awarded it seems by political merit. If memory serves me right, Her Majesty's father King George VI took back the sole discretion of conferring the Orders of the Garter & Thistle because it became to political. The prestige of the monarchy is declining it seems.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1540  
Old 10-15-2012, 07:36 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHThePrince View Post
Her Majesty's father King George VI took back the sole discretion of conferring the Orders of the Garter & Thistle because it became to political. .
Exactly. Garter appointments were used to curry favour or reward friends.

The Garter and Thistle Orders, along with the Royal Victorian Order , The Order of Merit and The Order of St John are the last remaining honours within the gift of the sovereign.

Winston Churchill was offered a dukedom but he declined. I think it was to be 'Duke of London'
__________________

__________________
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 1110 07-12-2014 10:00 PM
Questions About [non-British] Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 717 05-17-2014 05:44 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 Abdication & Inauguration 2013 67 05-24-2013 03:14 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta sofia jordan kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman picture of the month pieter van vollenhoven pom president hollande prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden wedding william



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:09 AM.

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]