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
 
  #1561  
Old 03-26-2014, 02:03 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: brisbane, Australia
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal-blue View Post
A genuine question to those who support a large family of royals carrying out royal duties: When the Queen and DofE have gone, would you then like to see Beatrice and Eugenie wheeled out, perhaps even Prince and Princess Michael to become full time royals to share the workload?
Yes especially the York Princess'. I am a firm believer that if you enjoy the privilege of a position, (title, wealth, social standing) then you must also take up the responsabilities. If Beatrice and Eugenie don't work as Royals, then they should give up their titles, get jobs and earn any wealth they get that way and don't use their relationship to the Monarch to get favours or social standing. Not saying that they don't want to work as Royals though but they don't seem to do much for their position.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1562  
Old 03-26-2014, 07:53 AM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 4,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
If Beatrice and Eugenie choose to join "The Firm" either full or part time (personally I don't think you can be a part time royal and do something else) and are comfortable with what they're going to take on, then I have no issues with that. The more representation the royal family gets the better as far as I'm concerned.
Perhaps they are giving them time to dabble but also to find their way. Marriage and children may be on the horizon for them sooner rather than later.

It is worth remembering that Sophie didn't come into her own until her mid to late 30's and has served the BRF exceptionally well with Edward at every major royal wedding, throughout Europe.

She now seems to be giving credence to the theory that when you reach 40 you start aging backwards and without a needle in sight! She is one elegant lady and a credit to the firm.

On a more serious note, Charles as King, is not going to squander the knowledge and personal relationships the Wessexes have acquired as the BRF 'go to' team. They don't just talk fashion at these occasions and both Edward and Sophie have a lot to offer.
__________________

__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #1563  
Old 03-26-2014, 08:43 AM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,803
I have no doubt that the minor royals will continue on serving their patronages and presidencies once Charles comes to the throne but it's his own family that should be the major focus though.
__________________
"If you are always trying to be normal you will never know how amazing you can be."

Dr. Maya Angelou
Reply With Quote
  #1564  
Old 03-26-2014, 10:50 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 1,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by fearghas View Post
Yes especially the York Princess'. I am a firm believer that if you enjoy the privilege of a position, (title, wealth, social standing) then you must also take up the responsabilities. If Beatrice and Eugenie don't work as Royals, then they should give up their titles, get jobs and earn any wealth they get that way and don't use their relationship to the Monarch to get favours or social standing. Not saying that they don't want to work as Royals though but they don't seem to do much for their position.
IMHO it is possible for the York girls to keep their titles and have outside careers. Dutch princes Friso and Constantijn were able to do so very well.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1565  
Old 03-26-2014, 11:15 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by fearghas View Post
Yes especially the York Princess'. I am a firm believer that if you enjoy the privilege of a position, (title, wealth, social standing) then you must also take up the responsabilities. If Beatrice and Eugenie don't work as Royals, then they should give up their titles, get jobs and earn any wealth they get that way and don't use their relationship to the Monarch to get favours or social standing. Not saying that they don't want to work as Royals though but they don't seem to do much for their position.
Thing is, both of these girls do work supporting charities and patronages but they're not part of the "official Firm" and for the most part, not listed on the court circular. I really don't see the Queen throwing any more favors towards the York girls than she does any of her other grandchildren (excluding William as the heir to the heir). As far as titles and social standings go, they could move to Hawaii, open a automotive repair service and study belly dancing but the fact will still remain that they are princesses of the United Kingdom.
__________________
“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
  #1566  
Old 03-26-2014, 05:42 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Balmoral, United Kingdom
Posts: 264
Maybe if there were fewer royals overall working, but doing considerably more engagements each, this would be a solution.
__________________
Virtually Royalty
Reply With Quote
  #1567  
Old 03-26-2014, 05:49 PM
RoyalDaisy's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal-blue View Post
Maybe if there were fewer royals overall working, but doing considerably more engagements each, this would be a solution.
What we see is not all they do. There is no mention in the CC that the Queen spends hours on the Red Boxes every day (bar Christmas Day); there is no mention of planning meetings, putting together speeches/presentations; and all the other prep work required.

Then they have the engagements.........
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1568  
Old 03-26-2014, 10:44 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: brisbane, Australia
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Thing is, both of these girls do work supporting charities and patronages but they're not part of the "official Firm" and for the most part, not listed on the court circular. I really don't see the Queen throwing any more favors towards the York girls than she does any of her other grandchildren (excluding William as the heir to the heir). As far as titles and social standings go, they could move to Hawaii, open a automotive repair service and study belly dancing but the fact will still remain that they are princesses of the United Kingdom.
If the young women are doing charitiy work etc than that's fine and yes as you say they could move away and they would still be Princess. What I'm saying is that if you have benefits from a job,(Princess) then you need to be taking on the responsabilities. The York girls get a huge amount of social standing, simply of their birth and they should be giving more back in return. If they don't want that, that's fine but thn they need to give up the perks. Easier said than done, for sure, and mmaybe they want to do more and are nor being given the opportunity, I don't know.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1569  
Old 03-26-2014, 11:29 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by fearghas View Post
If the young women are doing charitiy work etc than that's fine and yes as you say they could move away and they would still be Princess. What I'm saying is that if you have benefits from a job,(Princess) then you need to be taking on the responsabilities. The York girls get a huge amount of social standing, simply of their birth and they should be giving more back in return. If they don't want that, that's fine but thn they need to give up the perks. Easier said than done, for sure, and mmaybe they want to do more and are nor being given the opportunity, I don't know.
I'm not clear on what perks you're talking about here for the York girls to give up. AFAIK, they are privately funded either through their father or mother and I would imagine they have their own resources such as trust funds that were set up for them from QEQM. Their security is also privately funded by their father.
__________________
“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
  #1570  
Old 03-27-2014, 11:22 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: brisbane, Australia
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I'm not clear on what perks you're talking about here for the York girls to give up. AFAIK, they are privately funded either through their father or mother and I would imagine they have their own resources such as trust funds that were set up for them from QEQM. Their security is also privately funded by their father.
Social standing for starters, you can't tell me that doors aren't opened for them, simply because of their position as Princess' And any wealth, which may be private, would originally have been obtained because of their parents position as members of the royal family. The York daughters have an immensily privileged position, socially, financially etc.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1571  
Old 03-27-2014, 11:32 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,187
Except you can strip them of their titles and they will still have all of this. The Phillips have it, as do the Wessexes and Armstrong-Joneses and in their day the Lascelles. All without royal titles or obligations of royal duties.

It can be argued that the Yorks got the short end of the stick, by being born to the titles that they have without the position that the Wales/Cambridges have. Much like the Kents and Gloucesters before them they haven't been given a free pass by the public or institution because of their titles - even if they are allowed, like Prince Michael or the Yorks, to pursue a private career, they have far more of their private life made public and criticized than they would if they didn't have titles. Further, if they're not seen as doing enough in the way of working they're criticize as lazy, and if they're seen as taking advantage of the wealth or social connections that they have as a result of their birth then they're made out to be royal hanger ons. This is despite the fact that in all reality they do perform functions and duties similar to what their other royal relatives do - Beatrice in particular has been involved in charities and has represented the government abroad - without getting the same recognition in the CC - which is controlled by the Queen, not them. For all we know, Beatrice at least could want to fulfill a part time or full time royal role, but is being told no.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1572  
Old 03-28-2014, 07:05 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by fearghas View Post
Social standing for starters, you can't tell me that doors aren't opened for them, simply because of their position as Princess' And any wealth, which may be private, would originally have been obtained because of their parents position as members of the royal family. The York daughters have an immensily privileged position, socially, financially etc.
You can say the same about any other child of a wealthy or powerful parent, such as Chelsea Clinton, Bill Gates's children, etc... That is the way the world works and, quite simply, that is the way monarchies work.

I don't think Charles has encouraged his nieces and nephews to take on major duties because he correctly perceives the public wants a slimmed down monarchy. The public mood may change as the reality of fewer public engagements sets in, but I think people will adjust. I can't see the public rising in protest because there aren't enough royal family members to open all the new hospital wings in the country.

William will probably not have four children, and I doubt Harry will either. I expect Harry's children will have the HRH title. That would allow William the flexibility to utilize them as full-time royals if necessary. If it is not necessary, Harry's children will have several options. They could go into the military or follow Beatrice and Eugenie precedent of the monarch's grandchildren making their way in the private sector.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1573  
Old 03-28-2014, 03:25 PM
RoyalDaisy's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
You can say the same about any other child of a wealthy or powerful parent, such as Chelsea Clinton, Bill Gates's children, etc... That is the way the world works and, quite simply, that is the way monarchies work.

I don't think Charles has encouraged his nieces and nephews to take on major duties because he correctly perceives the public wants a slimmed down monarchy. The public mood may change as the reality of fewer public engagements sets in, but I think people will adjust. I can't see the public rising in protest because there aren't enough royal family members to open all the new hospital wings in the country.

William will probably not have four children, and I doubt Harry will either. I expect Harry's children will have the HRH title. That would allow William the flexibility to utilize them as full-time royals if necessary. If it is not necessary, Harry's children will have several options. They could go into the military or follow Beatrice and Eugenie precedent of the monarch's grandchildren making their way in the private sector.
Interesting statement - are you saying that in order to carry out royal engagements, you have to be an HRH? so, for example, Lady Louise Windsor can never carry out a royal engagement?

The more I think about it the more obvious it becomes, but it isnt how Ive considered it - Ive always seen royal engagements/patronages/charities as an extension of working on behalf of the monarch. Plus of course receiving funding to run the offical office

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1574  
Old 03-28-2014, 03:56 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,187
I think the reason why Edward and Sophie chose to have their children styled as the children of an Earl instead of the children of a Prince was so that they could grow up without the pressure of having been royal.

The HRH, combined with recognition in the CC, is what makes any engagements, patronages, charities, etc a royal duty. Beatrice and Eugenie perform many royal duty like functions, but don't get the recognition for it in the CC therefore they aren't doing royal duties. Louise and James may one day perform similar duties, but they themselves aren't royal. The same applies to Peter and Zara.

The engagements that you describe are a part of working on behalf of the monarch, the other part is being recognized by the monarch for such work in the CC. Not all engagements get recognized, and therefore if they aren't recognized they aren't a royal duty. The funding at this point comes completely from either the Queen, through the Duchy of Lancaster, or Charles, through the Duchy of Cornwall. Asides from security there really isn't that much public funding of the extended BRF anymore.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1575  
Old 03-28-2014, 04:26 PM
RoyalDaisy's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
I think the reason why Edward and Sophie chose to have their children styled as the children of an Earl instead of the children of a Prince was so that they could grow up without the pressure of having been royal.

The HRH, combined with recognition in the CC, is what makes any engagements, patronages, charities, etc a royal duty. Beatrice and Eugenie perform many royal duty like functions, but don't get the recognition for it in the CC therefore they aren't doing royal duties. Louise and James may one day perform similar duties, but they themselves aren't royal. The same applies to Peter and Zara.

The engagements that you describe are a part of working on behalf of the monarch, the other part is being recognized by the monarch for such work in the CC. Not all engagements get recognized, and therefore if they aren't recognized they aren't a royal duty. The funding at this point comes completely from either the Queen, through the Duchy of Lancaster, or Charles, through the Duchy of Cornwall. Asides from security there really isn't that much public funding of the extended BRF anymore.
I get all that bit - thank you. But if Lady Louise Windsor at some time in the future, carried out an engagement and it was in the CC - is it a royal engagement?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1576  
Old 03-28-2014, 07:17 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyalDaisy View Post
I get all that bit - thank you. But if Lady Louise Windsor at some time in the future, carried out an engagement and it was in the CC - is it a royal engagement?
As Ish explained, a royal engagement is carried out by someone with the title of His/Her Royal Highness combined with the recognition in the CC. Otherwise we could call it a royal engagement if the Queen asked the Prime Minister to make an appearance and it was recognized in the CC.

I don't think Lady Louise is the best example because she is technically HRH Princess Louise, her parents have just decided not to use that title. The better questions would be whether it would be a royal engagement if the Queen asked Zara or Peter to make an appearance for her. I would argue that Zara and Peter can't make royal appearances because they don't have royal titles.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1577  
Old 03-28-2014, 07:39 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,187
It's debatable as to whether or not Louise and James are royal. Personally, I think that regardless of whether or not they are, any event that results in them being recognized in the CC using titles that aren't royal wouldn't count as a royal engagement for them.

It can be tricky - consider Tim. He gets recognized in the CC for stuff he does with Anne. For Anne this is a royal engagement and a royal duty. For Tim it's not, because he's not royal. The same extends to Anne's children and to the Wessex children.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1578  
Old 03-28-2014, 09:30 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: many places, United States
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by fearghas View Post
Social standing for starters, you can't tell me that doors aren't opened for them, simply because of their position as Princess' And any wealth, which may be private, would originally have been obtained because of their parents position as members of the royal family. The York daughters have an immensily privileged position, socially, financially etc.
Rank has its privileges. It is a fact of life. Their father was son of a Queen. Ours was not. They have born social standings which we do not. They must live in a "gold fish bowl" all their lives which we do not. They certainly should have many more doors open to them because of this birth. Newspaper follow their every move and print daily about it. Media certainly don't care a bit about ours. Also a fact. But, then, more is expected of them by the public. Definitely not of you or me. Two sides to every coin. We shouldn't covet their lives as it might not be as great as it seems to be born into Royalty.
__________________
Forgiveness is the fragrance the violet shed on the heel that crushed it - Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #1579  
Old 03-28-2014, 10:48 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,892
I'd be willing to bet that for every though that we mere mortals think how great it would be to live in palaces, wear stunning jewels and seem to have each fancy and whim become realities, those that are royal would think how nice it would be to be totally ordinary and become invisible in the masses and actually be able to sneeze without it being heard around the world. When we really think about it, there's more of a downside to being royal than privilege. Palaces are drafty and cold for the most part, the jewels are far too valuable to wear without heavy insurance and protection officers and frankly, from some of the schedules I've seen the royals keep as far as duties and engagements, their time is strictly planned down to the minute and they don't have the luxury of saying "excuse me, but I need to use the bathroom. I'll be right back". The world would be buzzing should a piece of the royal toilet paper be stuck to the royal shoe! Royal life certainly isn't what its cracked up to be.

I think the slimming down of the monarchy has already entered its transitional stage with Anne and Edward's children not having royal titles nor being royal. Its clear to them that in the future, they'd be minor royals at best. They're free to pursue any occupation or career they wish, can support their own charities and patronages should they want to and for grand occasions, they're still members of the extended royal family.

I'm still of the opinion that by the time Charles does ascend the throne, the way we look at royal duties and engagements will also have gone under a transition. Many charities and patronages may be umbrella'd in organizations such as the Prince's Trust and the Royal Foundation and many becomes global efforts such as we've seen lately with Walking With The Wounded and with conservation/endangered species effort.

We'll have to wait and see what happens but it should make for some interesting discussions.
__________________
“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
  #1580  
Old 03-29-2014, 04:40 AM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 4,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
I think the reason why Edward and Sophie chose to have their children styled as the children of an Earl instead of the children of a Prince was so that they could grow up without the pressure of having been royal.

The HRH, combined with recognition in the CC, is what makes any engagements, patronages, charities, etc a royal duty. Beatrice and Eugenie perform many royal duty like functions, but don't get the recognition for it in the CC therefore they aren't doing royal duties. Louise and James may one day perform similar duties, but they themselves aren't royal. The same applies to Peter and Zara.

The engagements that you describe are a part of working on behalf of the monarch, the other part is being recognized by the monarch for such work in the CC. Not all engagements get recognized, and therefore if they aren't recognized they aren't a royal duty. The funding at this point comes completely from either the Queen, through the Duchy of Lancaster, or Charles, through the Duchy of Cornwall. Asides from security there really isn't that much public funding of the extended BRF anymore.
Unfortunately for Lady Louise Windsor and James, Vicount Severn, their parents are the living embodiment of everything that can possibly go wrong when someone is a royal or even dating a royal and trying to have a career let alone a 'life'.

Edward's attempts to be independent of his heritage outside of the military were doomed to fail. He was accused of being lazy when he had the guts to say "the military life is not for me". His attempts to create a career have all been met with derision and accusations of "using the BRF" to his advantage. There is no way he could "not" be the son of the Queen and, with a lot of support from his family and friends he basically gave up the attempt.

Any lingering ideas that he could ever have a job were futher reinforced when he started to date Sophie and her doomed attempt to retain her career was both painful and humiliating. That they both triumphed and live a comfortable family life and carry out royal engagements is a tribute to their innate sense of duty.

I think that is why their children are titled the way they are. They are the Queen's grandchildren but it will be easier for them when they are older and become the Kings nephew and neice and later cousin. They are a generation behind their older cousins and the challenges of Beatrice and Eugenie so that too will cushion the adverse "royal" effect.

Fortunately for both their father and Uncle Andrew, the pressure will effectively come off when they too become one step further from the throne as the King's Uncles.
__________________

__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
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 current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan 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 olympics ottoman picture of the month poland pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias 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 12:57 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]