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
 
  #381  
Old 12-14-2010, 06:23 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,188
Nope.

I woudl assume that unless Letters of Patents are adressed or they announce that they would be known by a lesser name, then Beatrice and Eugenie will be known as HRH Princess Beatrice of York, Mrs. David Clark....like Princess Anne was when she first married Mark Phillips:

There have been some small precendents so its possible:

HRH Princess Patricia of Connaught (granddaughter of Victoria) when she married she announced that she would be known as Lady Patricia Ramsay (adopting the style of her husband) but she was still a member of the BRG.

I don't believe any LP's were introduced for this. Same thing with Princess Katharine of Greece...she was known as Katharine Branaham (sp) and that was it.
__________________

__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #382  
Old 12-14-2010, 06:24 PM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,844
Sorry I misspoke I meant their children would not be titled unless the husbands were give a title upon marriage like Princess Margerets children -?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #383  
Old 12-14-2010, 06:25 PM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 2,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
How refreshingly well balanced Peter Hitchens article is. He brings out the "ordinary" that lies behind the Headlines....

When you put it that way Charles talking to parsnips seems quite sensible when you consider the alternative of talking to the press. The parsnips have so much more to offer.
Since I talk to asparagus ferns, Charles is OK in my book!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #384  
Old 12-14-2010, 06:28 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,188
Okay..than yes...they would be like Margaret or Anne's children.

Yes, you are correct.

Really, by the time Charles takes the throne you will have lost at least four to five people who do a lot of engagements (Queen, Prince Phillip, Princess Alexandra and the Duke of Kent)...I mean Alexandra is the youngest at 74...between them they do about 600 engagements a year right?

So Kate will have to step it up...and Camilla and Sophie will have to pick up more...and they might need Beatrice and Eugenie to pick up some of the slack. Only time will tell.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #385  
Old 12-14-2010, 06:29 PM
AnnEliza's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle, United States
Posts: 316
Isn't the list of HRH going to get smaller just because of who is currently royal? Only the children of the sons of the monarch have HRH, so it will end up just being William and Harry. The Duke of York's daughters will not pass on HRH to their children, and the Princess Royal's children don't have HRH. The Earl of Wessex's children are HRH, but not using that style. So as the Queen's cousins pass away, there won't be many HRH's left at all.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #386  
Old 12-14-2010, 06:31 PM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnEliza
Isn't the list of HRH going to get smaller just because of who is currently royal? Only the children of the sons of the monarch have HRH, so it will end up just being William and Harry. The Duke of York's daughters will not pass on HRH to their children, and the Princess Royal's children don't have HRH. The Earl of Wessex's children are HRH, but not using that style. So as the Queen's cousins pass away, there won't be many HRH's left at all.
Man, William and Kate and Harry and whoever better plan to have a lot of kids (just a joke!) :)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #387  
Old 12-14-2010, 06:32 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnEliza View Post
Isn't the list of HRH going to get smaller just because of who is currently royal? Only the children of the sons of the monarch have HRH, so it will end up just being William and Harry. The Duke of York's daughters will not pass on HRH to their children, and the Princess Royal's children don't have HRH. The Earl of Wessex's children are HRH, but not using that style. So as the Queen's cousins pass away, there won't be many HRH's left at all.
Yes, there is no real reason to reduce the size of the royal family as the process of natural selection will do it naturally.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #388  
Old 12-14-2010, 07:05 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittyAtlanta View Post
Since I talk to asparagus ferns, Charles is OK in my book!
Ahhhhhh... its not easy being green
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #389  
Old 12-15-2010, 03:02 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,075
The Queen should start handing off to Charles.....

I put this text on the wrong thread - just realized it should be here...

You know what I think? I think the Queen is going to - or should - start handing off more royal duties and responsibilities to Charles. I would hope he is in conversation with his mother about this. It makes perfect sense and would cushion the transition (passing from the Queen to the next King) when it inevitably comes. I think I see indications that this is being contemplated, in fact.

The Queen must understand that she needs to begin 'investing' in Charles if the future (of her family) is to be sanely shaped. She likely very much wants to slow down a bit, too - who doesn't at her age - and it just makes all kinds of sense for her to open up the situation more.

If this isn't in the works, I think it should be. The Queen needs to be far-thinking in this way to ensure a seamless and healthy transition, built on the known and an established trust. Too much potential damage could be done otherwise without that clear, steady hand setting in motion the future course.

P.S. Please forgive if I am presenting a topic that has already been thoroughly discussed. I have not read all of this thread and in fact just skipped back and found interesting stuff - so......
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #390  
Old 12-15-2010, 03:31 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
It remains to be seen ...
As for the monarchy under Prince Charles, it will be usual, traditional as the monarchy is supposed to be ... Prince Charles will be a placid King. It would be fair to presume that being a King will significantly constrain his controversial comments.
I would say just the reverse. Charles will be the one to change the monarchy and press it forward into the 21st century - he has the intelligence and the capacities developed over a lifetime of entrepreneurial and managerial endeavor. There is nothing placid about Charles.

He has created networks of relationships and taken seriously his role as a steward of 'his people' via his businesses that engage young people in all manner of preparations for life. He has created endeavors that change lives. He has not been just a Patron of Charities and the Arts doing photo ops. He has been a working man all his adult life - innovative, prescient and thinking outside-the-box.

Charles is going to be anything but a placid King and will be a hard act for William to follow.

William would be the placid and traditionalist king at this point. He presents as shy and very ill-at-ease in his role. He needs considerably more tutelage under his father before he will be ready for kingship. In fact, it is my keen hope that Kate (Catherine) has a bit more on the ball than William for their children's sake. William has a great deal more living he needs to do before he will have the capacity to be king intelligently and not just be a fellow who makes sure everyone likes him.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #391  
Old 12-15-2010, 05:53 AM
muriel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
As the title is automatic there is no need for Parliament to do anything.

The last thing the BRF want is a debate about anything to do with the royal family as it could so easily backfire - particularly with a minority government.
Quite right, no need to go to Parliament. Debates of this type are best avoided in Parliament.

FYI, We have a coalition government, not a minority one.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #392  
Old 12-15-2010, 06:05 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
Quite right, no need to go to Parliament. Debates of this type are best avoided in Parliament.

FYI, We have a coalition government, not a minority one.

Does one party have a majority? No

Do the two parties concerned usually form a coalition government? No

Is the coalition committed to the same things on all policies? No

When we have a coalition government here we know before the election which two parties will form that coalition (Liberals and Nationals). They pretty much agree on all major policies before the election and make it known to the population what they will do. To me that is a coalition.

A minority government is when two or more parties or individuals, after the election join together to form government but when the next election comes they will campaign against each other again.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #393  
Old 12-15-2010, 06:45 AM
muriel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,771
Your personal definition of a coalition may be at variance to the publicly accepted form, but a minority government is one that does not have a majority in Parliament, period. As to whether the parties went into the election with a coalition agreement already in place or not relevant as to whether the resulting government is a coalition or a minority government.

The current government in the UK is comprised of Conservative and LD members of Parliament, both of whom are integral to the cabinet and government. They are bound by the coalition agreement (which runs for the full term of the Parliament) that they entered into after the election in May 2010. This would have been a minority government if a coalition agreement had not been entered into, and the LDs were not a part of the government, but merely provided the Conservatives issue based support in Parliament
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #394  
Old 12-15-2010, 06:50 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,451
Obviously we have a different understanding of what sort of government constitutes a coalition. As we have them regularly in this country my understanding is that they go into the election that way. Yours is different. We have even had coalitions where one of the two parties could form government on their own but they stay in the coalition - that is a coalition to me.

We must disagree on this point.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #395  
Old 12-16-2010, 03:53 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: everywhere, United States
Posts: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
Yes, there is no real reason to reduce the size of the royal family as the process of natural selection will do it naturally.
Is natural selection fast enough for the British public? I don't know but I do think that the royal family will have to change in order to survive.

I do wish Charles would give some ideas about how he plans on changing things. I know it might be considered rude to discuss such things while she is alive but he is a man that does not appeared to be scared to discuss controversial issues.

If I were the Queen I would want to know what he plans to do after I was gone. Then again I might be a little controlling
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #396  
Old 12-16-2010, 03:57 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jemagre View Post
Is natural selection fast enough for the British public? I don't know but I do think that the royal family will have to change in order to survive.

I do wish Charles would give some ideas about how he plans on changing things. I know it might be considered rude to discuss such things while she is alive but he is a man that does not appeared to be scared to discuss controversial issues.

If I were the Queen I would want to know what he plans to do after I was gone. Then again I might be a little controlling
To be quite honest, the british public unless you are a royal watcher doesn't understand the system of titles. If the remaining royals with titles show that they are worthy of their titles then I think that will satisfy the public.

I'm sure he knows what he would like to do and has discussed this with HM. But I don't see why we should know until he becomes king.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #397  
Old 12-16-2010, 04:07 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: everywhere, United States
Posts: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
To be quite honest, the british public unless you are a royal watcher doesn't understand the system of titles. If the remaining royals with titles show that they are worthy of their titles then I think that will satisfy the public.

I'm sure he knows what he would like to do and has discussed this with HM. But I don't see why we should know until he becomes king.
I think that is a tragedy that some people worldwide are not that interested enough in their own governments to want to know how they function. Then again I have always though that apathy is the worst thing that can happen to anyone. At least if people hate you they care enough to pay attention to you.

As for what he will do well...I understand what you are saying. I just think that maybe it might be nice for an outline. He is not a popular choice to be king. No, I don't mean that William should be king. I just think that maybe an outline might change some perceptions about him for those who want him to be King. For those like myself who don't live in England but are interested in history it is a unique situation to watch a different kind of government hand-over.

I also think that the days when the royals positions were secure ones are gone. Nowadays they almost have to sell themselves like politicians to win public approval. Like it or not we are in those days. If we were not then the royal family would not be on facebook or twitter.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #398  
Old 12-16-2010, 05:22 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,451
What changes would people like him to make?

The monarchy has evolved even during the present reign and that evolution will continue for the rest of this reign and then into Charles' reign.

It would be totally inappropriate for him to make public any plans for what he would like to do when his mother dies.

In addition he doesn't have a lot of say anyway as the government will decide all official roles of the monarchy so any changes Charles would like to make would be purely superficial and not substantial to the role of the monarch.

Outside of the monarch no other royals have anything to do with the running of the government anyway and most people I am sure realise that - and the monarch doesn't do much - signs the legislation, talks to the PM, hosts visiting officials and provides entertainment for the masses - that is the main role for the royals - entertainment. If you think about what we as royal watchers discuss it comes down to what they wear, who they are dating, what their children look like, when their babies are due, and what events they attend to give us the information to discuss the above - nothing about their role in government as they don't really have one.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #399  
Old 12-16-2010, 05:32 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jemagre View Post
I think that is a tragedy that some people worldwide are not that interested enough in their own governments to want to know how they function. Then again I have always though that apathy is the worst thing that can happen to anyone. At least if people hate you they care enough to pay attention to you.
A lot of people in this country know how the government functions. But government and the monarchy are two very different things. People don't know how the title system works, which is what I said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jemagre View Post
As for what he will do well...I understand what you are saying. I just think that maybe it might be nice for an outline. He is not a popular choice to be king. No, I don't mean that William should be king. I just think that maybe an outline might change some perceptions about him for those who want him to be King. For those like myself who don't live in England but are interested in history it is a unique situation to watch a different kind of government hand-over.
IMO, if he released some kind of information, it would add fuel to the critical fire about what he is going to do. At the moment people can say "Charles won't be a good king", but they cannot give a reason. If he says he's going to do x, y and z. People can then critisize him for what he has suggested.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jemagre View Post
I also think that the days when the royals positions were secure ones are gone. Nowadays they almost have to sell themselves like politicians to win public approval. Like it or not we are in those days. If we were not then the royal family would not be on facebook or twitter.
I don't think facebook and twitter is "selling themselves", I think it's moving with the times. A lot more people access faceboook and twitter than read the newspapers or follow this forum.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #400  
Old 12-17-2010, 05:27 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: everywhere, United States
Posts: 566
[I don't think facebook and twitter is "selling themselves", I think it's moving with the times. A lot more people access faceboook and twitter than read the newspapers or follow this forum.[/QUOTE]

I think moving with the times and selling themselves is almost interchangeable. Then again I think anyone in the public spotlight has to sell themselves in order to get heard. For example: If he did not sell themselves then nobody would know about his charities. For the record I don't consider selling oneself is always a bad thing. It just depends on the situation.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british, camilla, charles iii, charles of wales, coronation, crown jewels, duchess of cornwall, legacy, prince charles, prince of wales, queen camilla, titles, william v


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
The Monarchy in Greece Fireweaver The Royal Family of Greece 287 08-24-2014 07:56 AM
Monarchy vs Republic marian Royalty Past, Present, and Future 327 06-12-2014 06:11 PM
The Monarchy after Elizabeth II ysbel British Royals 311 12-29-2012 04:36 PM
The Monarchy And The Media Alexandria Royal House of Norway 12 04-08-2004 04:06 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympics ottoman palace pieter van vollenhoven pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:05 PM.

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]