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
 
  #521  
Old 04-15-2011, 07:02 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,984
Retirement doesn't really work like that in royal circles, though.

If of able body and mind, they'll generally continue to represent the monarch, or themselves for as long as they can or is required of them.

The Duke of Kent is not retired and the Duchess retired due to personal reasons which has enabled her to focus on her love of music and teaching, amongst other pursuits.

Nice avatar btw :)
__________________

__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #522  
Old 04-15-2011, 06:44 PM
Duchess of Darwin's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 215
Good point. Thanks for clearing that up.

The Kents and The Gloucesters will hopefully all overlap with Harry's children, and wonderful as it would be for them to have such long lives, The Monarchy would not exactly be downsized, as Charles seemingly wants it to be.

I hope he opts for a gradual downsizing, though, because when William is King, it will be a very small Family if Henry's children are not members. Pretending that the spouses of Henry's children don't qualify (a downsizing measure I would not object to), is anyone going to revolt over presence of two or three peripheral members, who aren't even on the civil list?

About my avatar, Thanks I chose a Dragonfly because there's a dragonfly in the logo of the Darwin City Council (I live in Sydney at the moment, as my stats show, but I want to live in the tropical north when I live by myself. I like warm weather) The stained glass is the Royal aspect. I was going to change my avatar every month, but I don't think I will now.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #523  
Old 04-17-2011, 01:35 AM
Duchess of Darwin's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 215
Is it only those with HRHs who stand on The Balcony at The Troping of The Colour?

I came across a short thread on here (admittedly an old one) about Marina Oglivy, and someone linked to a picture of her and her daughter on the balcony. I mean no disrespect to them, but they are not Princesses.

Surely it would project the image of a smaller Royal Family, if only those with HRHs stood on the balcony. Others in the line of succession could still stand at the front of the crowd

What does everyone think of this idea?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #524  
Old 04-17-2011, 01:56 AM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 3,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess of Darwin View Post
Is it only those with HHS who stand on The Balcony at The Trooping of The Colour?

I came across a short thread on here (admittedly an old one) about Marina Oglivy, and someone linked to a picture of her and her daughter on the balcony. I mean no disrespect to them, but they are not Princesses.

Surely it would project the image of a smaller Royal Family, if only those with HRHs stood on the balcony. Others in the line of succession could still stand at the front of the crowd

What does everyone think of this idea?
At the front of the crowd? Sandwiched against the railings with the general public? No way!

Imagine in the elbowing going on when they try to enter the Palace for Luncheon or High Tea or whatever follows said Trooping.

They may not be HRH's, but they are family. The Queen's cousins, second cousins, grandchildren, etc.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #525  
Old 04-17-2011, 03:27 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess of Darwin View Post
Is it only those with HRHs who stand on The Balcony at The Troping of The Colour?

I came across a short thread on here (admittedly an old one) about Marina Oglivy, and someone linked to a picture of her and her daughter on the balcony. I mean no disrespect to them, but they are not Princesses.

Surely it would project the image of a smaller Royal Family, if only those with HRHs stood on the balcony. Others in the line of succession could still stand at the front of the crowd

What does everyone think of this idea?
The problem with limiting the balcony to HRH's is that some of the HRHs are lower in the line of succession than totally untitled persons.

If it was to be only HRHs then it would be limited to:

The Queen
Philip
Charles
Camilla
William
Kate (after 29th April)
Harry
Andrew
Beatrice
Eugenie
Edward
Anne
Duke of Gloucester
Duchess of Gloucester
Duke of Kent
Duchess of Kent
Michael of Kent
Princess Michael of Kent
Alexandra

but...

# 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 would miss out as they aren't HRH but the Duke of Gloucester is 20th but is an HRH. The Duke of Kent is 28th (those between the Duke of Kent and Duke of Gloucester and the non-HRH descendents of the Duke of Gloucester. Princess Alexandra is 39th but again is an HRH with a number of non-HRH's above her in the line of succession.

This comes about of course because of the discrimination within the 1917 LPs that allows male line grandchildren to be automatic HRH but doesn't allow female line grandchildren the same rights (#8 and 9 could be classes as HRH but they don't use it and there is one argument that although no new LPs were issued the Queen's will has been made known and that is enough to deprive Louise and James of HRH while others argue that it isn't).


Personally I would restrict the balcony to the children and grandchildren of the present monarch only - thus Savannah wouldn't be there and nor would Princess Margaret's descendents or the Gloucester, Kents, Mountbattens etc who all regularly appear.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #526  
Old 04-17-2011, 06:59 AM
Duchess of Darwin's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
At the front of the crowd? Sandwiched against the railings with the general public? No way!

Imagine in the elbowing going on when they try to enter the Palace for Luncheon or High Tea or whatever follows said Trooping.

They may not be HRH's, but they are family. The Queen's cousins, second cousins, grandchildren, etc.
Good point. Maybe they could have a special stand
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #527  
Old 04-17-2011, 07:25 AM
Duchess of Darwin's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The problem with limiting the balcony to HRH's is that some of the HRHs are lower in the line of succession than totally untitled persons.

If it was to be only HRHs then it would be limited to:

The Queen
Philip
Charles
Camilla
William
Kate (after 29th April)
Harry
Andrew
Beatrice
Eugenie
Edward
Anne
Duke of Gloucester
Duchess of Gloucester
Duke of Kent
Duchess of Kent
Michael of Kent
Princess Michael of Kent
Alexandra

but...

# 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 would miss out as they aren't HRH but the Duke of Gloucester is 20th but is an HRH. The Duke of Kent is 28th (those between the Duke of Kent and Duke of Gloucester and the non-HRH descendents of the Duke of Gloucester. Princess Alexandra is 39th but again is an HRH with a number of non-HRH's above her in the line of succession.

This comes about of course because of the discrimination within the 1917 LPs that allows male line grandchildren to be automatic HRH but doesn't allow female line grandchildren the same rights (#8 and 9 could be classes as HRH but they don't use it and there is one argument that although no new LPs were issued the Queen's will has been made known and that is enough to deprive Louise and James of HRH while others argue that it isn't).


Personally I would restrict the balcony to the children and grandchildren of the present monarch only - thus Savannah wouldn't be there and nor would Princess Margaret's descendents or the Gloucester, Kents, Mountbattens etc who all regularly appear.
The only way to avoid untitled people coming before HRHs in the line of sucession, would be to give absolutely everybody, or absolutely nobody HRHs. It would happen in any system where Neices/Nephews could displace their Uncles/Aunts. The current system is sexist, and needs changing, but it is not the sole reason some non HRHs come before HRHs.

Restricting the balcony to children and Grandchildren of The Sovereign would be a good idea. It would give the impression of a small family. Of course everyone else could get a special stand to be in. It has been bought to my attention that it would be a nightmare to be at the front of the crowd O_O
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #528  
Old 04-17-2011, 11:56 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 349
Who cares who is on the balcony? They are guests of the Queen. It doesn't cost the public anything for them to be there. It's a treat for the children to see the flypast.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #529  
Old 04-17-2011, 12:06 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,984
Quote:
Who cares who is on the balcony? They are guests of the Queen.
You are absolutely right. The Queen can allow whoever she likes on her balcony. And whoever Charles allows on it when he is King is entirely up to him.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #530  
Old 04-17-2011, 01:04 PM
Dierna23's Avatar
Heir Apparent
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: -, Germany
Posts: 3,588
I second that. And also, the more family members on the balcony, the more fun to watch.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #531  
Old 04-17-2011, 01:46 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Las Vegas, United States
Posts: 103
Downsizing

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess of Darwin View Post
I have heard alot on this forum, about Prince Charles planning to downsize the British Monarchy, when he is King. Some people have claimed that Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie will be stripped of their HRHs upon marraige, and that Prince Harry's children will not enjoy Princely status.
In 1714 with the arrival of King George I, the British monarchy adopted the German traditions. The children and grandchildren of the monarch all became royal and prince/princess. The great grandchildren from male lines became Prince and Princess, but were only entitled to HH (His/Her Highness with the royal omitted).

In 1917 when George V was trying to cut ties with German titles, he also decided to downsize the titles of the royal family. Basically he cut out the great grandchildren with the sole exception of the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. He eliminated the HH title entirely, and he cut back grandchildren to only male line descendants.

According to these rules, Prince Charles and Princess Anne were grandchildren along a female line, and were not automatically royal. George VI used his position to make them royal at birth. If William's first born is a girl, she will not qualify either, but you can bet that Queen Elizabeth will make her a princess.

I sincerely doubt that as monarch, Charles will remove the HRH titles from his 3 nieces and 1 nephew. Edward's children do not use the title right now anyway. He has the power to strip their titles (as did George V), but I am sure that he is more concerned with them being working royals. They will probably not be given grace and favor apartments in Kensington Palace.

Harry's children will not automatically be royal as long as his grandmother lives. In the event the QEII outlives Charles, Harry's children will never be royal, as they will never be the male line grandchildren of a monarch.
However, as fount of honor, Queen Elizabeth II can make anyone royal. So it remains to be seen what they will decide.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #532  
Old 04-17-2011, 05:46 PM
Lenora's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 2,036
I think Prince Charles will downsize the royal family,keeping just family members and his siblings' family.Many papers stayed this idea and that many people are not satisfied that the royal family is so extended.From other side,it will be interesting to see his actions towards this.I wonder just about a thing,let's suppose he will downsize the royal family,will this affect his cousins' families?I mean Viscount Linley and Lady Sarah Chatto 's families?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #533  
Old 04-17-2011, 07:21 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,134
The question really comes down to who qualifies as the 'royal' family? How far distant from the monarch should that qualification extend?

Obviously the children of the monarch and the siblings of the monarch. The grandchildren of the monarch would also qualify but.. should neices and nephews, cousins and cousins' children also be regarded as members of the royal family?

If limited to the children, grandchildren and siblings of the monarch currently the royal family would be The Queen, Philip, Charles, Camilla, William, Harry, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Sophie, Louise, James, Anne, Tim, Peter, Autumn, Savannah and Zara with Kate and Mike to be added later this year. That is 21 members by the end of this summer.

Currently though it extends beyond those 21 to include the 4 Linley's, 4 Chatto's, 7 Gloucesters, 28 Kents and then the Mountbattens also regularly appear.

Now most of these 43 other members of the royal family aren't on any form of taxpayer support but...that isn't the appearance given to the public and public perception is important.

If the limit is applied to children, grandchildren and siblings of the monarch then when Charles becomes King those extra 43 will disappear along with the Linley's, Chatto's and also his neices and nephews. The number on the balcony would then be 11 currently living and in time an extra as Harry's wife and William and Harry's children (of course Philip will cease to appear in time as he will also pass away).

Even 11 appearing gives the impression of 11 being supported totally by the taxpayers but that is better than the current number that are perceived as being supported - we know better here but unfortunately the majority of people don't.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #534  
Old 04-17-2011, 08:08 PM
Anna Catherine's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: U.C., United States
Posts: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
If Charles was to say his children and grandchildren it would be unfair on others who are children and grandchilden of a monarch unless some are to lose it when that relationship changes and could you imagine that.

Currently not all grandchildren of the monarch get HRH.

There are currently 10 as male line grandchildren who are eligible to be HRH but there are another 5 grandchildren of a monarch who aren't HRH simply because their royal parent was female.

If Charles was to say all grandchildren then those 5 should be added.

Personally I would prefer to see it limited to the children of the monarch during the reign of the monarch but no grandchildren at all. That way children wouldn't get it until their parent became monarch.
So here its what I am actually saying. You can split everyone into Royal Family and Royal House like some monarchies do. He only has to included his immediate family and grandchildren in the royal family. His siblings and nieces and nephews and everyone else can be in the Royal House. I don't think he needs to strip titles, but he can separate out. Besides that fact not everyone even now are on the Civil List so it's really not that big of a deal in my opinion.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #535  
Old 04-18-2011, 12:40 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Las Vegas, United States
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The question really comes down to who qualifies as the 'royal' family? How far distant from the monarch should that qualification extend?..
Now most of these 43 other members of the royal family aren't on any form of taxpayer support but
...
that isn't the appearance given to the public and public perception is important.
The term royal family is informal, and I don't think anyone cares who is in or out. The definition is arbitrary. The royals is a legal definition. The working royals is an even smaller group.

I don't think King Charles III cares who is in the royal family, and I don't think he will further limit who is royal. But I think he wants to limit the working royals to his own descendants.

As I understand it, when QEII came to the throne in 1952, she was originally asked to limit her working family to her sister and two cousins (the dukes and the future duke). In 1953, Peter Townsend was divorced from his first wife; he proposed marriage to Margaret. He was sixteen years her senior, and had two children from his previous marriage. Margaret accepted, and informed the Queen of her desire to marry Townsend. After this incident, parliament wanted to increase the working royals to three cousins, as Princess Alexandra (who was only 15 when her cousin ascended) was very popular and seen as a more controlled princess to counterbalance Margaret.

When Prince William died in 28 August 1972, the working royal cousins ended up being all of them except for Prince Michael.

Prince Michael and his mother, Princess Marina, moved to Kensington Palace shortly after the Queen ascended to the throne in 1952. She died in 27 August 1968, when Prince Michael was age 26. He married at age 36 in a civil ceremony, and had a son 40 weeks later. The Queen gave him a grace and favor apartment in Kensington Palace where he had lived as a teenager.

Parliament made him pay rent recently (so he had to sell his country house in 2006). I think Charles is concerned about this sort of thing and does not want to guarantee jobs and apartments for his nieces and nephews.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #536  
Old 04-18-2011, 01:12 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,134
Whatever he wants to do he needs to make it clear to his neices now and the public also needs to be made aware of the situation.

When some people are becoming anti-monarchy because of the people living off taxpayers money who actually aren't then something needs to be done to clear up the perception of who is supported by the taxpayers and who isn't so limiting the balcony, defining who is part of the family etc would make that clearer to the general public - on whose support the royal family depends.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #537  
Old 04-18-2011, 02:02 AM
LadyG's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fox Chapel, United States
Posts: 13
Happy a future King has opinions which reflect his own views. A study of architecture makes his question of a library plausible. Perhaps the media has not shown enough of the genuine man. In a world possibly headed for a singular global control it is nice to know how intelligent this man really is and how he thinks about world affairs. With an outstanding Mother, Her Majesty, such likenesses are considered valueable. Looking out for the future and the ways of the world I admire his opinions. Hope to hear more of them and read between the lines of some biased press pieces.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #538  
Old 04-18-2011, 03:36 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by pacomartin View Post
In 1714 with the arrival of King George I, the British monarchy adopted the German traditions. The children and grandchildren of the monarch all became royal and prince/princess. The great grandchildren from male lines became Prince and Princess, but were only entitled to HH (His/Her Highness with the royal omitted).

.
The German system is very patriarchically orientated. Thus only the male line grandchildren became HRH. Alas, the daughters either married princes or remained spinsters, so these grandchildren, if they were born to the married daughters, had titles through their father.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #539  
Old 04-18-2011, 07:17 AM
Duchess of Darwin's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 215
There have been some interesting points raised here

I think that people get on their high horses because it is not made clear who benifits from their money, and who doesn't.

My original opinion was that this was an issue of princely status or no princely status, but I have come to appreciate that it is not so clear cut. They are, at the end of the day, a large group of relatives, who socialise, on a very public scale, which is all very well, but Charles will have to show a cynical public, just who he's giving pocket money.

Titles are not an issue, if it's clear what money who lives off. Limiting the balcony is a start (I have already suggested a special stand for guests who don't stand on the balcony) and a Family/House seperation of those with princely titles would also be a great idea.

I would also recommend a minimum amount of Royal duties, and charity work for Royals over the age of eighteen. Of course this could be ajusted to suit circumstances (study, personal issues, health issues) but a lot of disgruntlement stems from the fact that it is supposedly acceptable to do absolutley nothing.

This is all easier said than done when not everyone bothers to do their research like we do, but it is possible.

Sorry to ramble, but you've all got alot of thoughts going through my head
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #540  
Old 04-18-2011, 08:07 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Las Vegas, United States
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
Everybody gets to keep their titles, but I suspect there will be some pressure on B & E to drop the Princess title - which I think they will fight to keep!

Would be happy to hear everybody's views.
I think there is absolutely no chance the Beatrice and Eugenie will be asked to give up their titles, which seems to be the common consensus.

The question is who will replace duties of the Princess Royal (age 60) when she retires. Will that duty fall naturally to Beatrice, and will it come with her own regal apartment in Kensington Palace?

Prince Andrew often has travel expenses equal to or exceeding that of Prince Charles or the Queen and Prince Phillip. Frequently he goes over 0.5 million pounds in jet charters and airline tickets alone. Who will succeed to that post at the UKTI? It's less of an issue since Prince Andrew is only 50. However, the Princess barely shows up on the travel budget because she primarily uses the royal helicopter and very seldom charters a jet for an international trip.

It's no secret that Prince Charles would like to have his own jet in addition to the royal helicopter.



Itemized travel expenses last year
Her Majesty £692,916
Prince of Wales £529,722
Duke of York £519,062
Princess Royal £28,095
Duke of Kent £25,627
Duke of Gloucester £11,714

The royal do not itemize most of their trips. It is only required if they exceed £10,000. Because Princess Anne did not travel overseas last fiscal year, only two trips went over £10,000
a) a 4 day trip using the royal helicopter from her home to 16 different destinations (£17,521 transient costs)
b) A trip to London, Belfast, and Edinburgh that required a charter jet for £10,574

Her majesty is very frugal, but she usually has one or two major state or commonwealth visits involving the charter of a large jet.

The Duke of York takes the lions share of public criticism for travel expenses.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british, camilla, charles of wales, duchess of cornwall, legacy, prince charles, prince of wales, 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
The Monarchy in Greece Fireweaver The Royal Family of Greece 283 01-29-2014 08:57 AM
Monarchy vs Republic marian Royalty Past, Present, and Future 311 10-12-2013 10:34 PM
The Monarchy after Elizabeth II ysbel British Royals 311 12-29-2012 03:36 PM
The Monarchy And The Media Alexandria Royal House of Norway 12 04-08-2004 04:06 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth birthday bourbon-parma camilla charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria danish royals engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hohenzollern infanta elena jordans king king abdullah king abdullah ii king albert ii king carl xvi gustav king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander palace picture thread pom pregnancy prince albert prince albert ii prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince frederik prince henrik prince joachim princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess maxima queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia state 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

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV 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 06:59 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]