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
 
  #981  
Old 07-29-2012, 08:43 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
What I anticipate to happen in the years to come is Letters Patent issuing a change of the styles and titles granted to the grandchildren of the monarch. I don't think it unreasonable to suggest that Henry's offspring will be accorded the styles of a Duke's children (assuming that he shall be created a Duke when married) and not that of Prince or Princess of the United Kingdom through the male line as was seen with Beatrice and Eugenie. And for any daughters of the sovereign who have children, then I'd imagine the current system to remain much the same (as is seen with Peter and Zara).

The royal house will consist of the sovereign, their consort, children and grandchildren who are born of the heirs apparent or presumptive. Any other grandchildren, if any, would be classified as membes of the extended royal family and would have no official function to perform, but who are "left" to 'enjoy' their familial connections. In this instance, Henry's children would hold no official representative position, only William's.
__________________

__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #982  
Old 07-30-2012, 04:44 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,197
^^^^
If that happens, it's a true shame because the amount of engagements the royal family does now is going to plummet.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Meadow View Post
I wondered about that too. Andrew, Anne and Edward have a lot of patronages between them what happens to all of that when Charles becomes King? Do they continue to do Royal Duties or is the plan to get them to "retire" as such. I for one can't see Anne doing that. It's going to be a very lonely balcony at Trooping of The Colour time....
Anne, Andrew and Edward will retire and give up or pass on their patronages when they see fit. This does not exclude them from the balcony appearance as we see every year that it's a huge family event whether you are participating in royal engagements or not. Charles, IMO, cannot afford to push out the working royals when his own children aren't set on what they want to do with their lives yet. If he wants to maintain the image of the royal family, the engagements they do year to year then a slim down Monarchy is going to ruin that. I have an image of Charles trying to do everything himself and excluding his family because he doesn't think they can do it.
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #983  
Old 07-30-2012, 04:48 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meadow View Post
I wondered about that too. Andrew, Anne and Edward have a lot of patronages between them what happens to all of that when Charles becomes King? Do they continue to do Royal Duties or is the plan to get them to "retire" as such. I for one can't see Anne doing that. It's going to be a very lonely balcony at Trooping of The Colour time....

The has been a report somewhere that Charles has no intention of depriving his siblings of their royal duties but he only wants his own sons in the next generation.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #984  
Old 07-30-2012, 05:15 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
^^^^
If that happens, it's a true shame because the amount of engagements the royal family does now is going to plummet.
I think quite naturally that there will be various organisations, causes or charitable services that will no longer hold royal patronage in the coming reign anyway.

I think it's unreasonable for anyone to expect that the majority of patronages currently held by the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh will be inherited by their children or grandchildren. Realistically something's got to give and I can't see it being the causes of interest of either Charles, his children or siblings. Nor of those of the women who have married into a senior position within the family, i.e; Camilla, Sophie and Catherine.

Anything else would become, certainly in my mind, a secondary priority if deemed manageable.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #985  
Old 07-30-2012, 10:15 AM
DukeOfAster's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pembroke, United States
Posts: 180
I just want to say this on the whole matter.If a person is a royal patron today they will be even when Charles is King. No one is saying that the York girls threaten anyone position. The reason behind the downsize is like young Couple getting married and choosing a guest list. You can only fit so many people on a balcony and you can only say close family for so many people. Right now this family is including Grand children of King George the fifth at events. Now when you see official photos come out from a event even the press stop taking pictures after a point. These organizations will not loose a patron because a person is not on a balcony or at a event. Just like the Duke of Windsor remained royal after Leaving the crown behind it will not be taken from these people. We try to make this more of a issue then it is. Time has come to let the balcony breathe and the photographers leave a event and go home to their loved ones before midnight. What man would not want protection for his girls and not have to pay for it himself. The old saying is Keep It Simple Stupid and I am sure it is not a big deal to most involved.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #986  
Old 07-30-2012, 10:28 AM
DukeOfAster's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pembroke, United States
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Royale

I think quite naturally that there will be various organisations, causes or charitable services that will no longer hold royal patronage in the coming reign anyway.

I think it's unreasonable for anyone to expect that the majority of patronages held by the Queen and Duke of Eddinburgh will be inherited by their children or grandchildren. Realistically something's got to give and I can't see it being the causes of interest of either Charles, his children or siblings. Nor of those of the women who have married into a senior position within the family, i.e; Camilla, Sophie and Catherine.

Anything else would become, certainly in my mind, a secondary priority if deemed manageable.
Well said. I say the person passes away and that organization looses it patron unless that organization is picked up by someone else. I noticed how the Duchess of Cambridge once married announced her organization she was going to be patron for. They were not forced on her once announced they made since for her. I understand when you hear of things going to them that had been the Queen Mother because let's face it she was a big part of this family as a core. I would find it strange if a patronage went to Catherine or Camillia that was Queen Alexandra's unless they like it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #987  
Old 07-30-2012, 10:41 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 2,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyger View Post



Thought just occurred to me - is that why she was not allowed? Ha! My mind works in such devious ways - if Beatrice were allowed to be a full working royal might it happen that she would surpass William in popularity like Anne did for a while there with Charles - and instead of William being called upon to be King, it would be Beatrice people would be calling for to be Queen? That just came to me - I'm so bad. I should be a screen writer - oh, wait, I am.

I really doubt that, since every time there's an item about the York girls in the press the reader comments are pure vitriol!

If it's true that Charles doesn't want them in the Firm because he can't separate them from their mother, it seems he is not alone.
Far from calling for Beatrice to become Queen, I expect if it ever seemed likely to happen, then the Republicans would get their way and abolish the monarchy altogether.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #988  
Old 07-30-2012, 10:51 AM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
I really doubt that, since every time there's an item about the York girls in the press the reader comments are pure vitriol!

If it's true that Charles doesn't want them in the Firm because he can't separate them from their mother, it seems he is not alone.
Far from calling for Beatrice to become Queen, I expect if it ever seemed likely to happen, then the Republicans would get their way and abolish the monarchy altogether.
This is interesting because in the "normal" course of events, its a case of "The King is dead, Long live the King" - ie it is instant. As soon as the reigning monarch dies the heir becomes the monarch. But if the example as raised occurred, ie William and Harry did not have children, then it would become apparent early on that Beatrice would be the next Monarch and politically that could lead to a referendum on the future of the Head of State role.

I agree - end of the monarchy.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #989  
Old 07-30-2012, 01:04 PM
DukeOfAster's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pembroke, United States
Posts: 180
We are putting to much thought into this. If that was the case Diana would have overtaken the whole family and would have been made Queen and we would be in a Windsor-Spencer royal family and William would be her heir. I am sure Prince Charles is not fond of Sarah but I do not see him in that way to distance himself from Beatrice and Eugenie because of Sarah. I feel we are going way out there but I guess we can because we do. I still say it is time to streamline and that is what is happening. We all know who is in line to be Monarch and streamlining does not change that. It goes to in line to the throne and presidence. They are different but nothing in that sense has changed. Just what we call the immediate royal family has. It is the Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh, The Prince of Wales, and the Prince of Wales Family. Lets not hope for the saddest thing and the lost of so many making Beatrice Queen. No one wants that
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #990  
Old 07-30-2012, 01:09 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by DukeOfAster
We are putting to much thought into this. If that was the case Diana would have overtaken the whole family and would have been made Queen and we would be in a Windsor-Spencer royal family and William would be her heir.
Where did you get that from?!
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #991  
Old 07-30-2012, 01:15 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by DukeOfAster View Post
We are putting to much thought into this. If that was the case Diana would have overtaken the whole family and would have been made Queen and we would be in a Windsor-Spencer royal family and William would be her heir.
I agree with Lumutqueen - what a strange idea. Diana had no claim to the throne at all.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #992  
Old 07-30-2012, 02:05 PM
DukeOfAster's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pembroke, United States
Posts: 180
Just saying if popularity had anything to do with it then she could have overtaken the show with her popularity.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #993  
Old 07-30-2012, 02:13 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by DukeOfAster
Just saying if popularity had anything to do with it then she could have overtaken the show with her popularity.
You can't overtake. It's not a running race m'dear.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #994  
Old 07-30-2012, 03:16 PM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
You can't overtake. It's not a running race m'dear.
I think DukeofAster is well aware of that fact. He/she (sorry, not sure which), is merely responding to the suggestion of personal popularity having anything to do with who should or should not be monarch. I think it was Tyger who suggested that if Beatrice began undertaking royal engagements, she might become more popular than William and there would be a clamour for her to become Queen. DukeofAster is merely pointing out that if popularity with the public were the main criteria then Diana would've been made Queen at the height of Diana-mania.

DukeofAster, I hope I'm not misrepresenting your point.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #995  
Old 07-30-2012, 03:41 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,662
I think the other point is if she doesn't take up royal engagements and the scenario as described (no off-spring from William and Harry) occurs, she would not be known and therefore the public might reject her and the monarchy.

Interesting conumdrum (spelling? why dint I just write puzzle?) Personally I'd hedge my bets and get her doing some voluntary/charity work just in case. But I like the idea of insurance.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #996  
Old 07-30-2012, 03:50 PM
DukeOfAster's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pembroke, United States
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by EIIR

I think DukeofAster is well aware of that fact. He/she (sorry, not sure which), is merely responding to the suggestion of personal popularity having anything to do with who should or should not be monarch. I think it was Tyger who suggested that if Beatrice began undertaking royal engagements, she might become more popular than William and there would be a clamour for her to become Queen. DukeofAster is merely pointing out that if popularity with the public were the main criteria then Diana would've been made Queen at the height of Diana-mania.

DukeofAster, I hope I'm not misrepresenting your point.
Thank so very much. That is exactly my point.l feel this is being made into a bigger deal than it needs to be. We are making this out to be that organizations will loose it's patron once Charles is King and that can be done if he wants to but are we sure we want to go there. What is being said he plans to do is more far fetched than Diana being Queen. I do believe I have witnessed many a countries loosing a leader and someone easly taking over. I just find it funny some of things that are being said and yet a popular women being made queen because she is popular could not happen. We must have a poor idea of the power of the people and sadly we must not think highly of Charles.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #997  
Old 07-30-2012, 03:53 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by DukeOfAster

Thank so very much. That is exactly my point.l feel this is being made into a bigger deal than it needs to be. We are making this out to be that organizations will loose it's patron once Charles is King and that can be done if he wants to but are we sure we want to go there. What is being said he plans to do is more far fetched than Diana being Queen. I do believe I have witnessed many a countries loosing a leader and someone easly taking over. I just find it funny some of things that are being said and yet a popular women being made queen because she is popular could not happen. We must have a poor idea of the power of the people and sadly we must not think highly of Charles.
I don't get what you mean? Diana becoming Queen because she was popular is a ridiculous idea because she had no actual real concept of her role, for her it was just fun and games. When she lost her HRH she disappeared and didn't seem to care that much.

What exactly do you think Charles is planning to do that is so far fetched? It's probably fact that organisations will loose their royal patronages because their aren't enough royals to go around.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #998  
Old 07-30-2012, 04:12 PM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
I think the other point is if she doesn't take up royal engagements and the scenario as described (no off-spring from William and Harry) occurs, she would not be known and therefore the public might reject her and the monarchy.
I don't think Beatrice will fall into a black hole, never to be seen again. It's clear she'll continue with a handful of charitable endeavours, even while working privately. She'll still be a princess, likely attend all the big royal events (weddings, birthdays, funerals etc. etc.), I'll bet we'll still see pictures of her out and about in London. Plus, it would be clear whether Kate and the future Princess Henry are able to produce the next generation within the next 15-20 years say. Even then William will only be about 50, and Harry 47, with a good 30+ years' life expectancy each. That's plenty of time to call on Beatrice, get her into a proper royal role, and get her children used to being part of the Firm proper.

There'll be plenty of time to address this problem if it ever (God forbid) actually happens. No need to panic.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #999  
Old 07-30-2012, 04:17 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,662
no panic - keep royal and carry on. I was just taking some of the discussions points already expressed to a possible conclusion. My view is that it will carry on as it does at present but with no additional family members going onto the permanent payroll. But the priority is Charles' and his family which is what the Jubilee service and balcony appearance was about.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #1000  
Old 07-30-2012, 04:42 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,260
Just because the intention seems to slim down the official working royal family does not mean that those who don't make the cut cannot be involved in cultural and charitable activities on their own (much like everyone else) and could still do the ribbon cuttings/openings/galas on behalf of those groups in a manner similar to what the Michaels of Kent do today. Also they will still attend the big family events like weddings/funerals/birthdays etc. In a sense they will get the best of both worlds, royals when they want to be and pretty much private citizens the rest of the time or at least out of the glare of the royal spotlight unless they misbehave. Not too bad a deal really.
__________________

__________________
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




Popular Tags
belgium carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:07 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]