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
 
  #181  
Old 02-18-2009, 11:19 AM
Lakshmi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: *, United States
Posts: 1,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Fewer people on the official list receiving allowance would mean either two, one or none as only two actually receive anything now - the monarch and the spouse of the monarch

Depending on who dies first out of Philip and Elizabeth there would be either two or three at the beginning of Charles' reign - Charles, Camilla and possibly Philip.

Anything that any of the others receive is repaid by the Queen.
Oops, I didn't know this. So, the list of people getting allowance would remind the same, I guess.
__________________

__________________
"Do what you feel in your heart to be right - for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't.''
Eleanor Roosevelt

"The course of true love never did run smooth " William Shakespeare, 'A Midsummer Night's Dream'

http://www.aishwarya-rai.com/
Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 02-18-2009, 01:17 PM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lakshmi View Post
I think finally British heir to throne will allowed to marry Catholic and more.
Perhaps de jure, but never de facto.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lakshmi View Post
There will be limited group of people having title HRH.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. The style of Royal Highness has been limited to British princes and princesses since 1714.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 02-18-2009, 01:44 PM
kimebear's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Albany, United States
Posts: 1,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
I'm not sure what you mean by that. The style of Royal Highness has been limited to British princes and princesses since 1714.
I think Lakshmi was speaking of the rumor that Charles would like to decrease the size of the royal family. There is already talk about the York princesses being asked to give up their HRHs and perhaps it will become a style limited to the heir of the heir.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 02-18-2009, 02:02 PM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 464

Where have you read that? That would be horrible! Which style would the rest of the Royal Family enjoy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimebear View Post
...perhaps it will become a style limited to the heir of the heir.
So, only Charles, Camilla and William would be Royal Highnesses? The Sovereign's younger children wouldn't be Royal Highness either?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 02-18-2009, 07:45 PM
kimebear's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Albany, United States
Posts: 1,382
No, I think what the rumor was saying was that, the children of the sovereign would be styled HRH, but only the heir of the heir would be HRH. ex, when Charles becomes King, William and Harry are both HRH, but only William's heir will be an HRH until William himself becomes King. No more automatic male line HRHs for the sovereign's grandchildren.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #186  
Old 02-19-2009, 01:53 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimebear View Post
No, I think what the rumor was saying was that, the children of the sovereign would be styled HRH, but only the heir of the heir would be HRH. ex, when Charles becomes King, William and Harry are both HRH, but only William's heir will be an HRH until William himself becomes King. No more automatic male line HRHs for the sovereign's grandchildren.

Some evidence to suggest that this will happen is that Edward's children aren't using the HRH at the moment (and we don't need another discussion about whether or not the announcement of their titles constitutes a change to the 1917 Letters Patent).

As the decision regarding Edward's children came after the first suggestion that Beatrice and Eugenie might lose their HRH on turning 18 I think it does suggest that Charles intends to limit the HRH to the children of the monarch and the children/heir to the heir only so William's children would eventually become HRH but Harry's wouldn't.

It would also give those children more of a choice about what they want to do - royal jobs or other work.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #187  
Old 02-19-2009, 03:39 AM
HRHofNothing's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: somewhere in, Canada
Posts: 208
So according to this say William has a second son named Clamcy. He will not be an HRH at birth and then all of a sudden when his father accedes (and say Clamcy is 35 has a family of his own and has been sucessfully emplyed as a circus clown for years) he suddenly becomes HRH Prince Clamcy of the United Kingdom and has to give up his career to perform royal duties! That does not sound right.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #188  
Old 02-19-2009, 04:42 AM
muriel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,801
A couple of points that come to mind:

1) These are just a bunch of rumours flying around, and have been or sime time. In practice, it will be a while before anything like this is put into practice, and I have no doubt that obvious anomolies in the porposed system will be ironed iot. I suspect it will end up allowing children of the monarch, and children of the heirs to the throne having HRH titles. However, if you are the second or third child of the monarch, or the second or third child of the heir to the throne, your descendants would not have the HRH title. eg. arry will have HRH, but hsi children will not. Clancy will always have HRH, but will not pass it on.

2) There is no direct link between having the HRH title and having to undertyake royal duties. Prince & Princess Michael of Kent at HRHs, but do not really do any royal engagements.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #189  
Old 02-19-2009, 04:14 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHofNothing View Post
So according to this say William has a second son named Clamcy. He will not be an HRH at birth and then all of a sudden when his father accedes (and say Clamcy is 35 has a family of his own and has been sucessfully emplyed as a circus clown for years) he suddenly becomes HRH Prince Clamcy of the United Kingdom and has to give up his career to perform royal duties! That does not sound right.

That is exactly the situation under the current Letters Patent.

If either or both of William and Harry marry and have children during the Queen's reign only William's eldest son will be HRH from birth. Any other child/ren of William and/or Harry would get the HRH only when Charles becomes King. Of course if Charles dies before his mother then any children of Harry's won't get the HRH at all as they would never be the male line grandchildren of the monarch.

The current LPs give the HRH to

a) the children of the monarch - Charles, Andrew, Edward and Anne
b) male line grandchildren of a monarch - William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, James, Louise (who aren't using it), Richard Duke of Gloucester, Edward Duke of Kent, Prince Michael of Kent, Princess Alexandra of Kent.
c) the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales (namely William's eldest son only).


The fact that two of those entitled to the HRH are currently not using it suggests to me that in future the LPs might be changed to limit the HRH to the children of the monarch and only the eldest son/child of the heir to the throne. That would mean that people like Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, James, Louise, Richard, Edward of Kent, Michael and Alexandra wouldn't get it in the future but I don't think that Charles would necessarily remove it from those who already have and use it (although they might voluntarily give it up).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #190  
Old 02-19-2009, 05:18 PM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
That is exactly the situation under the current Letters Patent.

If either or both of William and Harry marry and have children during the Queen's reign only William's eldest son will be HRH from birth. Any other child/ren of William and/or Harry would get the HRH only when Charles becomes King. Of course if Charles dies before his mother then any children of Harry's won't get the HRH at all as they would never be the male line grandchildren of the monarch.
BUT, I doubt that any of Henry's children would be 35-year-olds with a family and career of their own during Queen Elizabeth II's lifetime. I doubt that she'll live for 200 years (unless you believe that David Icke is right when he says that Her Majesty is a lizard ).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #191  
Old 02-19-2009, 05:20 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,189
Ahhh....so that's why she takes an extended holiday during the winter...she slows down in cold weather. Actually, I've read some of David Icke's stuff just out of curiosity. Bizarre.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
. I doubt that she'll live for 200 years (unless you believe that David Icke is right when he says that Her Majesty is a lizard ).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #192  
Old 02-20-2009, 03:02 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
BUT, I doubt that any of Henry's children would be 35-year-olds with a family and career of their own during Queen Elizabeth II's lifetime. I doubt that she'll live for 200 years (unless you believe that David Icke is right when he says that Her Majesty is a lizard ).
The said 35 year old Clamcy would become an HRH when Charles becomes king but the original post said

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHofNothing
So according to this say William has a second son named Clamcy. He will not be an HRH at birth and then all of a sudden when his father accedes (and say Clamcy is 35 has a family of his own and has been sucessfully emplyed as a circus clown for years) he suddenly becomes HRH Prince Clamcy of the United Kingdom and has to give up his career to perform royal duties! That does not sound right.
meaning that I assumed that the Clamcy was 35 when the Queen died and thus would become an HRH at that point.

Regardless of how old Clamcy is when the Queen dies he won't be an HRH until his grandfather, Charles becomes king.

Maybe we read the original post incorrectly or differently.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Old 02-20-2009, 06:35 AM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 464
I think that HRHofNothing (who mentioned Clamcy) responded to the poster who said that Charles intends to limit the style of Royal Highness to the children of the monarch and the children/heir to the heir only so William's children would eventually become HRH but Henry's wouldn't.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #194  
Old 02-20-2009, 06:55 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
I think that HRHofNothing (who mentioned Clamcy) responded to the poster who said that Charles intends to limit the style of Royal Highness to the children of the monarch and the children/heir to the heir only so William's children would eventually become HRH but Henry's wouldn't.
The original mention of the hypothetical Clemcy was that he was the second son of William and would therefore be born without the HRH, under Charles maybe reforms. I pointed out that as the second son of William Clamcy wouldn't be an HRH under the present LPs.

My reading of the original post was that the poster didn't realise that William's eldest son will be born with the HRH but no other child of William's and none of Harry's born during the reign of The Queen. Any later sons and any daughters of William will be born as plain Master or Miss (unless William gets a dukedom on marriage in which case they will be Lord or Lady - remembering the eldest son and heir will be HRH) until Charles becomes King.

If Charles doesn't become King then Harry's children will never get the HRH.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #195  
Old 02-20-2009, 12:50 PM
HRHofNothing's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: somewhere in, Canada
Posts: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The original mention of the hypothetical Clemcy was that he was the second son of William and would therefore be born without the HRH, under Charles maybe reforms. I pointed out that as the second son of William Clamcy wouldn't be an HRH under the present LPs.

My reading of the original post was that the poster didn't realise that William's eldest son will be born with the HRH but no other child of William's and none of Harry's born during the reign of The Queen. Any later sons and any daughters of William will be born as plain Master or Miss (unless William gets a dukedom on marriage in which case they will be Lord or Lady - remembering the eldest son and heir will be HRH) until Charles becomes King.

If Charles doesn't become King then Harry's children will never get the HRH.
I wote the post under the assumption that Clamcy would become a HRH upon the accession of William but that is not correct. He would become an HRH on his grandfather's accession.

LOL @ EIIR being a lizzard.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #196  
Old 02-20-2009, 06:19 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHofNothing View Post
I wote the post under the assumption that Clamcy would become a HRH upon the accession of William but that is not correct. He would become an HRH on his grandfather's accession.

LOL @ EIIR being a lizzard.
Thank you for clearing up, in my mind, what you were saying and to what I was replying.

I hope everyone else is clear now on when (and if) Wiliam and Harry's children will get the HRH.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #197  
Old 11-03-2009, 11:27 PM
Princejohnny25's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: , Antarctica
Posts: 2,033
What do you think about changing the succession laws so that the youngest child, regardless of sex, would inherit the throne. Simply because people are living longer, so we could be seeing a lot of Elizabeth/Charles situations.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #198  
Old 11-04-2009, 02:15 AM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,189
I think that it's better to see an Elizabeth/Charles situation rather than one where someone is thrown into kingship at a young age, as the current Queen was. She had to sacrifice a lot in terms of family life once she became Queen, and the Duke had to let go any naval aspirations he had.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Princejohnny25 View Post
What do you think about changing the succession laws so that the youngest child, regardless of sex, would inherit the throne. Simply because people are living longer, so we could be seeing a lot of Elizabeth/Charles situations.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #199  
Old 11-04-2009, 03:19 AM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 4,033
Utterly ghastly thought. I have read many really critical articles about QEII because she didn't spend enough time with her children when they were young.

Charles and Diana were luckier as heirs in that the could take William with them on their first overseas trip. Also the advent of jet travel largely protected later monarchs as they did not have the sail around the world for weeks or monthw.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #200  
Old 11-04-2009, 03:23 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princejohnny25 View Post
What do you think about changing the succession laws so that the youngest child, regardless of sex, would inherit the throne. Simply because people are living longer, so we could be seeing a lot of Elizabeth/Charles situations.

Are you suggesting that instead of Charles being the Queen's heir that Edward should be because he is the Queen's youngest child and that then James should follow Edward as Edward's younger child?

I don't agree because of the simple fact of not knowing and too many changes to who the next monarch is to be at times e.g. during Queen Victoria's reign there would have been nine changes to the order with Beatrice being the eventual Queen (or course Victoria wouldn't have become Queen anyway as she was not a product of the youngest child - not for that matter would the present Queen as Margaret would have inherited with Sarah Chatto being the heir.)
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
future of the monarchy


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
Future of the Spanish Monarchy TODOI Royal Family of Spain 882 06-22-2014 07:19 PM
Prince Albert, Duke of York and Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon - 1923 Mandy Historical Royal Weddings 31 02-14-2014 05:14 PM
The Mechanics of Abdication and of Succession to the Throne Ellie2 British Royals 147 06-15-2013 07:14 PM
Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip's Visit to the Netherlands; February 5, 2007 Empress Dutch Royals 54 02-08-2007 03:04 AM
Relationship between King Juan Carlos and Queen Elizabeth Conde Valleverde King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia 4 11-12-2004 09:54 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery 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 nobility olympic games ottoman pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess mary fashion queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:47 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]