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
 
  #1641  
Old 11-19-2012, 04:29 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 9,219
I don't think Charles would strip them of the HRH.

The number of HRHs will decrease naturally over time anyway - unless William and Kate have masses of kids and I can't see them doing that these days.

In 30 years assuming William and Harry each of two children there will be the following HRHs in all likelihood:

Andrew, Edward, Beatrice, Eugenie, Harry, and four children plus spouses of males - so 9 (I am assuming that in 30 years time that all those currently 60+ in years will be deceased).

Currently there are 12 born plus spouses (not including Louise and James) which isn't all that many anyway.

Of the 4 children I am giving William and Harry only their sons can currently pass on HRH for one generation (except a first born daughter of William's after the new legislation is passed and the 1917 LPs adjusted as I expect them to be).
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1642  
Old 11-19-2012, 07:31 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post
I would definitely agree that it was a measure to distance the British Royal Family from their German relatives. At about the same time as the Letters Patent 1917, Titles Deprivation Act 1917 was passed (unlike the former, it was not an LP but an Act of the Parliament), which ordered those who had born arms against the United Kingdom and/or its allies during World War I to be deprived of their British titles (peerage and royal alike).

At the same time, the Letters Patent of 1917 was one of the first documents which very clearly defined who was entitled to which titles and styles. Just think of it, before the LP, a great-great-great-granddaughter of a Monarch (such as Frederica of Hanover and Brunswick-Luneburg) was entitled to the title of a British Princess.

While I doubt Charles will actually strip his nieces of their royal titles, I think some sort of Letters Patent will be passed though; downsizing the Royal Family is not just a whim of Charles - it is a necessity in our times. Perhaps the changes will not concern living members of the Royal Family but only Charles' own descendants.
George V issued a royal warrant in 1914 granting the style and title of "HH Prince and Princess of Great Britain and Ireland" to Frederica and her siblings as male-line descendants of George III, through their father, The Duke of Brunswick-Luneberg, a son of The Duke of Cumberland. They were not entitled to this style otherwise. This grant by George V was automatically revoked with the issuance of the 1917 Letters Patent.

I think it's highly likely Beatrice and Eugenie will, in fact, lose their right to be HRH Princess of the UK. Their cousins, Louise and James of Wessex, are not using their royal rank and it would be consistent with a "downsized" royal family. I also think Harry's children will not become HRH.

It makes sense Charles will issue new Letters Patent limiting the HRH to the children of The Sovereign, the children of the heir to the throne and the eldest child of the eldest child of the heir.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1643  
Old 11-19-2012, 08:20 PM
padams2359's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 416
I don't think KC3 will change any of the existing titles as far as the Yorks go. Correct me if I am wrong, but the children of PE & PB will not be HRH because they will not be the male line grandchildren of a Monarch? I think KG5 thought this threw and planned that the titles will just fall off as time goes by, and the subsequent generations will just move into the peerage. The only issue is the male line children of Prince Edward, and he has taken care of that voluntarily. I don't think there will be this big shake up that people are anticipating.
Reply With Quote
  #1644  
Old 11-19-2012, 08:26 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by padams2359 View Post
I don't think KC3 will change any of the existing titles as far as the Yorks go. Correct me if I am wrong, but the children of PE & PB will not be HRH because they will not be the male line grandchildren of a Monarch?
Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie's children will be just female-line great-grandchildren of the Monarch and thus would not not be entitled to any styles or titles unless they inherit them from their fathers (that is to say, if either or both girls marry noblemen/royals). Their children .

I'm not sure whether the York sisters will actually be deprived of their titles (any potential changes could be implemented for future generations only), but like branchg, I'm fairly certain that in times to come the style of Royal Highness and title of a British Prince/Princess will be limited to the children of the Sovereign and children of the Heir Apparent.
Reply With Quote
  #1645  
Old 11-19-2012, 09:38 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
I can foresee Richard, Edward and Alexandra all remaining HRH for life, as well as the royal duchesses Katharine and Brigitte (Katharine already has dropped HRH informally), and Princess Michael. Of course, so would Anne, Edward and Andrew.

Beatrice and Eugenie should not be allowed to remain HRH when Louise and James are not using it. That makes no sense to me. William's eldest child would become The Sovereign and pass on royal rank, but Harry's children should not hold royal rank unless they are next in-line (i.e. William does not have issue).
Reply With Quote
  #1646  
Old 11-19-2012, 11:38 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 9,219
I see no reason to deprive Beatrice and Eugenie of the HRH just because Edward and Sophie decided that their children wouldn't use it - different times and circumstances led to different situations.

I think Charles will deprive them simply because he doesn't like Andrew all that much and apparently has little time for the girls or Sarah - if various reports are to believed he called them 'twits' or something else equally unsavoury (twits in case you don't know is a colloquial term meaning 'idiot' - hardly flattering).

I also wouldn't be surprised to see the girls voluntarily give up the HRH on their wedding days and move right away from the royal circus - see them making their own lives and only attend the really big royal events e.g. Coronations and funerals.

I do the future of the BRF centring on Charles, William and Harry and the rest will simply slip by the wayside. Enjoy seeing the extended family during the rest of the Queen's reign as I suspect that the next reign will see the drop off of the cousins and neices and nephews (not his siblings) and then William will extend that so that Harry's children aren't appearing either.
Reply With Quote
  #1647  
Old 11-20-2012, 12:13 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Well, I believe Beatrice and Eugenie have already been told to get jobs and will eventually lose their royal protection officers, so that doesn't indicate a future as Royal Highnesses. The fact is they are minor members of the royal family and will certainly continue to move down the list once William and Catherine start having children.

I believe Charles has made it quite clear he thinks both of his brothers are useless, but who knows if he extends that dislike to their children.
Reply With Quote
  #1648  
Old 11-20-2012, 07:27 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 9,219
Beatrice already has a job and they lost their security over a year ago.

They won't be working royals but that won't stop them being HRHs.
Reply With Quote
  #1649  
Old 11-21-2012, 02:04 AM
AnnEliza's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle, United States
Posts: 330
That sounds reasonable to me. It's hard for me to imagine that Charles would strip the HRH just because he doesn't like them. But with the change to an eldest child inheriting the throne regardless of gender perhaps a change would be to have only the children of the heir apparent and monarch be HRH instead of letting male line grandchildren have it, i.e. Andrew's daughters are princesses and Anne's children have no titles.

I wonder if this will change with the change to the oldest child rather than oldest son being able to inherit the throne?
Reply With Quote
  #1650  
Old 11-21-2012, 04:07 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by McKeen View Post
I wonder if this will change with the change to the oldest child rather than oldest son being able to inherit the throne?
That's a thought that came to me recently too. Up until now, the bloodline of the royal house has been male line descent. Would equal primogeniture of the heir apparent also mean that the matriarchal line be just as valid as the patriarchal line?
__________________
“We live in a world where we have to hide to make love, while violence is practiced in broad daylight.”
~~~ John Lennon ~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1651  
Old 11-21-2012, 05:28 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by McKeen

That sounds reasonable to me. It's hard for me to imagine that Charles would strip the HRH just because he doesn't like them. But with the change to an eldest child inheriting the throne regardless of gender perhaps a change would be to have only the children of the heir apparent and monarch be HRH instead of letting male line grandchildren have it, i.e. Andrew's daughters are princesses and Anne's children have no titles.
Equal primogeniture has yet to be signed into law.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #1652  
Old 11-21-2012, 09:56 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Being a Royal Highness means you are expected to carry out public duties on behalf of The Sovereign as a working member of the family. The reality is Beatrice and Eugenie are not going to be doing that in the future.

The public's expectations have evolved to a general consensus that the senior members of the family who are serving should be supported. Everyone else should be living their own lives without any indirect cost to the taxpayers.

In line with that, the family should be downsized in terms of HRH to reflect the new realities.
Reply With Quote
  #1653  
Old 11-21-2012, 02:02 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 848
There is absolutely no question of stripping Beatrice and Eugenie of their HRH. They may be "advised" to completely lower their "profile" and they will most likely never be "working royals". So even with HRH, they will be practically living like Peter and Zara.
If "reforms' are really needed, Charles should start with his own family. He should limit HRH Prince(ess) to only William's kids, and not Harry's kids. Because harry's kids are going to be Beatrice and Eugenie of next generation..
Reply With Quote
  #1654  
Old 11-21-2012, 02:36 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
...I think Charles will deprive them simply because he doesn't like Andrew all that much and apparently has little time for the girls or Sarah - if various reports are to believed he called them 'twits' or something else equally unsavoury (twits in case you don't know is a colloquial term meaning 'idiot' - hardly flattering).
I dont understand why so many people are hell-bent to 'believe' that Charles hates his brothers, their wives and kids, and thinks they are useless. Is there any 'authentic' source for that (not inside' ones)? just because he doesnt kiss them or hug them or paste a broad smile or adoring look in front of media, doesnt mean he hates them.
And why Charles..Is may be very much the Queen's idea to downstream the royal family..She herself did it in Diamond Jubilee..She must have advised Charles to plan for future,,
Why do we mix Business and Family?
Giving HRH, getting on balcony, giving KG/KT/GCVO, Civil List is all business. Anyone in his place has to bring reforms, for the institution to survive.
Dealing with your family, siblings, nieces their lives is all personal family thing.
The latter need not be announced/exhibited in front of media..
I am surprised so many mix up these two, making charles someone who cant love anyone or who hates everyone and planning to torture them when he becomes King..attributing all negativity to him..
Reply With Quote
  #1655  
Old 11-21-2012, 03:20 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
There is absolutely no question of stripping Beatrice and Eugenie of their HRH.
Sorry, but there is a question of stripping them of their titles. You cannot say for certain that there isn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
I dont understand why so many people are hell-bent to 'believe' that Charles hates his brothers, their wives and kids, and thinks they are useless.
Nobody has ever said that Charles hates his brothers, or their children or that he thinks they are useless. You will find no reports to confirm this theory, neither will you find anything where Charles stated he wished to scale down the monarchy. Everything comes from 'senior figures' and 'sources'. But on an official ceremony like the Diamond Jubilee, and you only see William, Catherine and Henry on the balcony - would you think otherwise?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
And why Charles..Is may be very much the Queen's idea to downstream the royal family..She herself did it in Diamond Jubilee..She must have advised Charles to plan for future,,
And many people say that the appearances at the Diamond Jubilee were ideas given to The Queen by Charles, who several say is 'running the show'. I don't see what Charles has to plan for, of all the futures in the world his is almost set out for him.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
Why do we mix Business and Family?
You do realise which family you are referring to don't you? In royal families, business and family mix all the time. Their job is their title, which they get as a family, simply by being born. If the 90s showed anyone anything is that royal family life definitely mixes, heavily with business. Taking away someone's HRH, someone who's lived with it all their lives, is a big deal.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
I am surprised so many mix up these two, making charles someone who cant love anyone or who hates everyone and planning to torture them when he becomes King..attributing all negativity to him..
Could you please show me where anyone suggested that Charles would torture his nieces when he becomes King? Where did anyone say he can't love anyone?


As male line grandchildren, Beatrice and Eugenie are entitled to their titles. So let them keep them. These are provisions set out in 1917, and in the years to come the royal family is going to shrink and shrink until only 5 people are left to do the job of 15.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #1656  
Old 11-21-2012, 03:31 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Nobody has ever said that Charles hates his brothers, or their children or that he thinks they are useless. You will find no reports to confirm this theory, neither will you find anything where Charles stated he wished to scale down the monarchy.
Actually if you read back a couple of pages you will find posters who claim that Charles does feel his brothers are useless and his nieces are twits, but you are correct I have never seen any indication of that from Charles himself or read of any such claims from his staff.
Reply With Quote
  #1657  
Old 11-21-2012, 03:53 PM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 8,482
I think The Prince of Wales love his sibilings and truly appreciate their contribution to the work of the "Firm." I also think he love and adore his nieces. I think The Queen is the one that really wanted to present the future of the Monarchy in her Jubilee year. I also think we may see this same thing for her Coronation celebrations next year.
Reply With Quote
  #1658  
Old 11-21-2012, 03:56 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 9,219
I don't see that it is anything to do with the public what titles a person holds - and HRH Prince/Princess is simply a title.

They aren't supported by the public so it is none of the public's business if they are called Lady Beatrice/Lady Eugenie or Princess Beatrice or Princess Eugenie - they are still titles and they get them from their father.
Reply With Quote
  #1659  
Old 11-21-2012, 04:13 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 848
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Actually if you read back a couple of pages you will find posters who claim that Charles does feel his brothers are useless and his nieces are twits, but you are correct I have never seen any indication of that from Charles himself or read of any such claims from his staff.
Thansks NGalitzine..I did find such posts thats why I said. I could have quoted all of them but didnt know how to quote more than one post. Lumutqueen in simply pouncing on me..

And Lumutqueen..here are some clarifications..

Not mixing business and family..I mean that because Charles doesnt give his brothers KT or make his nieces working royals, doesnt mean he doesnt like them..Both are different..Got it?

And regarding reforms, whatever they may be, what I say is Charles may not be fully responsible. Queen and DoE would have thoroughly discussed with him what all is going to happen once they pop off, and put forth their views and suggestions. The trimming of family on Balcony might very well be their own idea as much as we think its Charles'.

You are not getting that point because a few pages back people were just mixing up things saying Charles will downgrade them just because he doesnt like them and all..
Reply With Quote
  #1660  
Old 11-21-2012, 04:20 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish

Not mixing business and family..I mean that because Charles doesnt give his brothers KT or make his nieces working royals, doesnt mean he doesnt like them..Both are different..Got it?
Actually, I don't. Because Charles can't do either of the things you suggest whether he wishes to or not.
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
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 camilla carl philip chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events death fashion fashion poll funeral general news infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia maxima nobility official visit picture of the week poland president gauck president hollande president komorowski prince carl philip prince daniel prince henrik princess charlene princess claire princess madeleine princess mary princess mary fashion princess mette-marit princess of asturias queen fabiola queen letizia queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen maxima queen maxima fashion queen maxima style queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sonja royal fashion sofia hellqvist spain state visit stockholm sweden the hague visit wedding willem-alexander william


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 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:51 AM.

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]