Titles Of The Heirs

[labtnr]

Hello!
Do you guys prefer general titles of the heir to the throne (like the Crown Prince of Norway, Denmark, etc.), or more specific ones (like the Prince of Wales, Duke of Brabant)? And why?

 

[lucien]

Hello!
Do you guys prefer general titles of the heir to the throne (like the Crown Prince of Norway, Denmark, etc.), or more specific ones (like the Prince of Wales, Duke of Brabant)? And why?

How do you like your egg in the morning......

 

[ladyfizzle101]

I prefer the crown prince of.... Only because we know what country they're from based on their title.a frie nd of mines thought that the prince of wales was only prince in Wales lol

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

Crown Prince/Princess. I don't know why, I just think it sounds more right, probably because I'm from Denmark & we have Crown Princes/Princesses.

 

[Next Star]

Most kingdoms their heirs/heiresses is crown prince/princess and some are hold other subtitles like Prince of Wales in the UK.That is the way they chose to style and title their heirs/heiresses.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

I like the title of the heir to include the phrase the Crown Prince.
It designates the heir.
The title of Dauphin is nice. However, if you are not familiar with French Royalty, you may not know that Dauphin referred to the French heir.
​

 

[Jacknch]

I think variety is the spice of life - it's nice that different royal families have different ways of doing things, and I suppose the name or title of the heir the throne is one of those things. My preference - at a push I would say a named title like Duke of Brabant or Prince of the Asturias.

 

[Stefan]

I think Crown Prince /Crown Princess of .... In one was it is nice that others have speicial titles like Duke of Brabant, Prince of Wales etc. But on the other hand they are very often referred to as Crown Prince Philippe etc. which they are not.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I loved Tsarevich and Dauphin. I also like that Prince of Wales let's me know its the first son and Duke of York tells me its the second; but in regards to the other titles like Austirias(sp) it confuses me.

 

[Somebody]

Most kingdoms their heirs/heiresses is crown prince/princess and some are hold other subtitles like Prince of Wales in the UK.That is the way they chose to style and title their heirs/heiresses.

I don't think you can consider those titles a sibtitle as that is their main title and in most cases they do not officially hold the title of crown prince; for example:
There is no crown prince Charles of the UK but 'the prince of Wales'
Nor is there a 'crown princess Amalia of the Netherlands' but 'the princess of Orange (Oranje)'
Nor does crown princess Elisabeth of Belgium exist, however, in her case both 'the duchess of Brabant' and 'princess Elisabeth of Belgium' seem to be used.
Nor does Spain have a 'crown princess Leonor of Spain' but a 'princess of Asturias' (who previously was known as 'infanta Leonor de España' not 'princesa Leonor de España'

The only one who holds a ducal title as well as the title of crown princess is Victoria of Sweden as her ducal title is a personal one and not related to her position as crown princess (Estelle has a different ducal title and will not take over her mother's ducal title).

 

[Countessmeout]

I loved Tsarevich and Dauphin. I also like that Prince of Wales let's me know its the first son and Duke of York tells me its the second; but in regards to the other titles like Austirias(sp) it confuses me.

Duke of York is not always second son. It has traditionally been given as such, but not always. Harry wont become Duke of York when his dad is king, Andrew will still be. Louis wont be Duke of York when his dad is king, Andrew will still be alive.

The Austrians seem pretty simple. Back when they had a monarchy the head was emperor, his heir was Crown prince. And the others were archdukes/duchesses. Of course there are a whole list of other titles like king of Hungary and so on. But then again the Spanish have many as do the Brits and other royal houses.

 

[Mbruno]

I loved Tsarevich and Dauphin. I also like that Prince of Wales let's me know its the first son and Duke of York tells me its the second; but in regards to the other titles like Austirias(sp) it confuses me.

The modern Kingdom of Spain was actually formed by the union of several previous kingdoms in the Iberian peninsula, e.g. the kingdoms of Leon, Castile, Aragon, Navarre and Grenada. The heir to the Spanish Crown is, from what I understand:

• Prince/Princess of Asturias as the heir to the former crown of Castile
• Prince/Princess of Girona as the heir to the former crown of Aragon
• Prince/Princess of Viana as the heir to the former crown of Navarre

In addition, he/she also holds the titles of Duke/Duchess of Montblac, Count/Countess of Cervera and Señor/Señora (equivalent to baron/baroness) of Balaguer, which are Aragonese titles if I am not mistaken.


Princess Leonor for example is officially styled then:


Su Alteza Real Doña Leonor de Todos los Santos de Borbón y Ortiz, Princesa de Asturias, de Gerona y de Viana, Duquesa de Montblanc, Condesa de Cervera, Señora de Balaguer

(Her Royal Highness Doña Leonor de Todos los Santos de Borbón y Ortiz, Princess of Asturias, Girona and Viana, Duchess of Montblanc, Countess of Cervera, Lady of Balaguer)


The interesting thing about Spain, however, is that only the heir to the Crown has the title of Prince/Princess. The other children of the king who are not the Prince/Princess of Asturias, and the children of the Prince/Princess of Asturias him/herself are titled instead Infantes/Infantas of Spain, although they are also styled "Royal Highness". The children of an Infante/Infanta, on the other hand, are not HRHs, but only "His/Her Excellency" based on their rank of "Grandees of Spain".

As it happens with princes/princesses of the Royal House in other monarchies, an Infante/Infanta of Spain is also normally granted the right to use a ducal title, usually when they get married, but, unlike in the UK, those titles are not hereditary, but rather personal and non-transferible. For example, King Felipe VI's sisters, Infanta Elena and Infanta Cristina, were given the titles respectively of Duchess of Lugo and Duchess of Palma de Mallorca; Cristina unfortunately lost her title after her husband was involved in a corruption scandal of which she was also accused of being a part, but was later found not guilty in a court of law.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

To add to your post, it is worth mentioning that granting dukedoms to Infantas/Infantes only became the norm after 1987, when King Juan Carlos's decree restricted royal titles to the monarch, the heir, and their spouses and children (leaving out their children's spouses).

Previously, whenever an Infanta/Infante of Spain married "equally" (excepting Infantas who married foreign royalty and became part of their husbands' families), the husband or wife also became an Infanta/Infante of Spain, and a dukedom was unnecessary. King Juan Carlos's uncle and sisters were granted dukedoms only because they married "unequally" and their spouses were not allowed to use the title of Infanta/Infante. The dukedom gave their spouses a courtesy title, making them the duke consort or duchess consort.

Nor does Spain have a 'crown princess Leonor of Spain' but a 'princess of Asturias' (who previously was known as 'infanta Leonor de España' not 'princesa Leonor de España'

A minor clarification: The title is indeed "Infanta de España", but in Spain, Infantas are generally known as Infanta Leonor or Infanta Leonor de Borbón rather than Infanta Leonor de España.

 

[Mbruno]

A minor clarification: The title is indeed "Infanta de España", but in Spain, Infantas are generally known as Infanta Leonor or Infanta Leonor de Borbón rather than Infanta Leonor de España.

True, note this royal decree giving Infanta Elena the right to use the title of Duchess of Lugo. She is called "Su Alteza Real Doña Elena de Borbón, Infanta de España".


In this other royal decree , where King Felipe VI revokes Infanta Cristina's right to use the title of Duchess of Palma de Mallorca, he refers to her sister as "Su Alteza Real la Infanta Doña Cristina". That is BTW also how Doña Elena is cited in the preamble of the first royal decree above.


So it appears that both the long style in paragraph one and the short style in paragraph two are used, but "Su Alteza Real la Infanta xxx de España" is never used.

Previously, whenever an Infanta/Infante of Spain married "equally" (excepting Infantas who married foreign royalty and became part of their husbands' families), the husband or wife also became an Infanta/Infante of Spain, and a dukedom was unnecessary. King Juan Carlos's uncle and sisters were granted dukedoms only because they married "unequally" and their spouses were not allowed to use the title of Infanta/Infante. The dukedom gave their spouses a courtesy title, making them the duke consort or duchess consort.

Infanta Pilar married a viscount though. Even though that was an "unequal" marriage for an infanta, her husband nevertheless already had a title of his own, so a dukedom would not have to be created for her so that her husband could have a courtesy title. That seems to go against your theory.

 

[Princess Bobbi]

While i'm all for individuality, and like titles like Prince of Wales and Duke of Brabant, and the like, if one is not familiar with a particular Royal Family's customs, it might be hard to determine who is next in line for the throne.

While Crown Prince(ss) may be more generic, most countries use King/Queen, which while different in each language, translate to King/Queen in English, which makes it easier to see who is Head of State.

 

[Mbruno]

While i'm all for individuality, and like titles like Prince of Wales and Duke of Brabant, and the like, if one is not familiar with a particular Royal Family's customs, it might be hard to determine who is next in line for the throne.

While Crown Prince(ss) may be more generic, most countries use King/Queen, which while different in each language, translate to King/Queen in English, which makes it easier to see who is Head of State.

That is a fair point: Crown Prince/Princess is a generic term for the heir to the throne, as King/Queen is a generic name for the Head of State. Both terms are easily recognized then by an international audience without having to know specific conventions of each individual monarchy.



There is also a little confusion, however, in the sense that a Crown Princess may be also the wife of a Crown Prince (as Mary and Mette-Marit for example) and a Queen can be also the wife of a King (as Letizia, Máxima, Mathilde, Silvia, or Sonja for example). But that also applies to special titles: for example, the wives of the Prince of Asturias, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Brabant are also the Princess of Asturias, the Princess of Wales and the Duchess of Brabant. The only exception is really the Prince of Orange whose wife, since 2002, is no longer called Princess of Orange, but rather receives a separate title of Princess of the Netherlands in her own right.


Personally, I prefer special titles like Prince of Wales , Prince of Asturias or Dauphin because of their historical significance, but I agree with you that, if a monarchy has never used a special title for the heir, it shouldn't create one just for the sake of it (as the title of Duke of Brabant in Belgium for example) and would be better off sticking with the generic "Crown Prince".

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Most kingdoms their heirs/heiresses is crown prince/princess [...]

While Crown Prince(ss) may be more generic, most countries use King/Queen, which while different in each language, translate to King/Queen in English, which makes it easier to see who is Head of State.

I don't think most reigning monarchies use the titles Crown Prince/Princess or King/Queen in their own countries, as they mostly speak languages which are not descended from the same language family as the European languages and have historic titles for their own royals. However, they use European titles in contexts where European languages are spoken. For instance, when English is in use, the heir to the Japanese throne is called "HIH the Crown Prince" or "HIH the Crown Prince of Japan" rather than translating "Kotaishi denka" literally.


As for European monarchies, in previous times they frequently restricted the "title of the heir to the throne" to heirs who were sons of reigning monarchs. When the heir was the daughter, sibling, or uncle/aunt of the monarch, it was not a given that she/he would use a special title.

However, this has been changed for the most part. Four out of the six European monarchies in which legislation governing the title of the heir exists have passed legislation to allow anyone who is number one in the line of succession to use the title of the heir to the throne, independently of their relationship to the monarch.

Spain (Prince/ss of Asturias) in 1987: BOE.es - Documento BOE-A-1987-25284
Monaco (Hereditary Prince/ss) in 2002: Ordonnance Souveraine n° 15.368 du 29 mai 2002 relative aux Statuts de la Famille Souveraine. / Journal 7550 / Année 2002 / Journaux / Accueil - Journal de Monaco
Netherlands (Prince/ss of Orange) in 2002: wetten.nl - Informatie - Wet lidmaatschap koninklijk huis - BWBR0013729
Luxembourg (Hereditary Grand Duke/Duchess of Luxembourg) in 2012: Décret grand-ducal du 18 juin 2012 portant coordination du Statut de famille du 5 mai 1907. - Legilux

On the other hand, Belgium and Liechtenstein continue to restrict the titles of Duchess/Duke of Brabant and Hereditary Prince of Liechtenstein to heirs who are children or grandchildren of the reigning monarch. Perhaps it will be changed if Princess Elisabeth of Belgium does not have children or Prince Joseph Wenzel of Liechtenstein does not have sons.

Infanta Pilar married a viscount though. Even though that was an "unequal" marriage for an infanta, her husband nevertheless already had a title of his own, so a dukedom would not have to be created for her so that her husband could have a courtesy title. That seems to go against your theory.

It wasn't my own theory but an explanation by a Spaniard that I read. But the ducal titles are not used by the Infantas themselves, so I cannot see a different explanation.

With Infanta Pilar and Luis Gómez-Acebo, my own theory is that she was allowed a dukedom for her husband to share since his own title of Viscount was lower than all of the other titles used by unequal spouses of Infantes/Infantas at the time (the Countess of Covadonga, the Duchess of Segovia, Prince Alessandro Torlonia, Count Marone, the Countess of Odiel, and Prince Irakly of Bagration).

 

[Somebody]

A minor clarification: The title is indeed "Infanta de España", but in Spain, Infantas are generally known as Infanta Leonor or Infanta Leonor de Borbón rather than Infanta Leonor de España.

You are right. Thanks for clarifying. They are indeed infantas of Spain but it isn't used in combination with their fist name. However, in mbruno's example the combination of infanta and surname isn't used either. Would be strange to have infante/a X Rodríguez if Leonor marries a Rodríguez, a HRH don X Rodriguez, infante de España sounds slightly better.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

True, note this royal decree giving Infanta Elena the right to use the title of Duchess of Lugo. She is called "Su Alteza Real Doña Elena de Borbón, Infanta de España".

In this other royal decree , where King Felipe VI revokes Infanta Cristina's right to use the title of Duchess of Palma de Mallorca, he refers to her sister as "Su Alteza Real la Infanta Doña Cristina". That is BTW also how Doña Elena is cited in the preamble of the first royal decree above.

So it appears that both the long style in paragraph one and the short style in paragraph two are used, but "Su Alteza Real la Infanta xxx de España" is never used.

You are right. Thanks for clarifying. They are indeed infantas of Spain but it isn't used in combination with their fist name. However, in mbruno's example the combination of infanta and surname isn't used either.

Based on what I see, the most common style is Infante/a and their first name, the combination of Infante/a, first name, and surname occurs from time to time, and the combination of Infante/a, first name, and "de España" is less frequent than the other two but still in use.

An example of "Infante X surname" on the website of the Spanish monarchy:

Sus Majestades los Reyes y Sus Majestades los Reyes Don Juan Carlos y Doña Sofía asistieron a la misa córpore insepulto oficiada por Su Alteza Real el Infante Don Carlos de Borbón-Dos Sicilias, que falleció el pasado día 5.

Casa de Su Majestad el Rey de España - Actividades y Agenda - Misa córpore insepulto por Su Alteza Real Don Carlos de Borbón-Dos Sicilias, Infante de España

Would be strange to have infante/a X Rodríguez if Leonor marries a Rodríguez, a HRH don X Rodriguez, infante de España sounds slightly better.

That might be why Reina Letizia Ortiz is so uncommonly used compared to Reina Sofía de Grecia, Reina Victoria Eugenia de Battenberg, etc. Since it is foreseen that Leonor and her oldest child will be Queen/King of Spain, her children will almost certainly be SAR Don/Doña X de Borbón Rodríguez, Infante/a de España. Her son could then be SAR el Infante Don X de Borbón.

 

[Mbruno]

Based on what I see, the most common style is Infante/a and their first name, the combination of Infante/a, first name, and surname occurs from time to time, and the combination of Infante/a, first name, and "de España" is less frequent than the other two but still in use.

An example of "Infante X surname" on the website of the Spanish monarchy:



Casa de Su Majestad el Rey de España - Actividades y Agenda - Misa córpore insepulto por Su Alteza Real Don Carlos de Borbón-Dos Sicilias, Infante de España



That might be why Reina Letizia Ortiz is so uncommonly used compared to Reina Sofía de Grecia, Reina Victoria Eugenia de Battenberg, etc. Since it is foreseen that Leonor and her oldest child will be Queen/King of Spain, her children will almost certainly be SAR Don/Doña X de Borbón Rodríguez, Infante/a de España. Her son could then be SAR el Infante Don X de Borbón.

Shouldn’t her children have their father’s name as last name ? If she marries another royal, I can see her children getting a compound name ,, but, if she marries a commoner, do you think the children will get the maternal name before the paternal one ?

Just to compare, Infanta Elena’s children are “ de Marichalar y Borbón”, not the inverse and, in the short style, they are called only “don/doña xxx de Marichalar”

 

[An Ard Ri]

Didn't the Greek Crown Prince use the title Duke of Sparta in the past?

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Duke of York is not always second son. It has traditionally been given as such, but not always. Harry wont become Duke of York when his dad is king, Andrew will still be. Louis wont be Duke of York when his dad is king, Andrew will still be alive.
.

And who is Andrew.... The second son of the reigning monarch when he was born. I never implied that Andrew's title would be taken away once his mother died.

@Mbruno thank you for the explanation of Spain. I think my confusion came from an article I read that referred to one of Felipe's sisters as a Princess of Austuria. But your explanation helps, so Christina is an Infanta?

 

[Mbruno]

And who is Andrew.... The second son of the reigning monarch when he was born. I never implied that Andrew's title would be taken away once his mother died.

@mbruno thank you for the explanation of Spain. I think my confusion came from an article I read that referred to one of Felipe's sisters as a Princess of Austuria. But your explanation helps, so Christina is an Infanta?

Yes, both Elena and Cristina are Infantas. Leonor is now the Princess of Asturias and her sister , Sofia, is also an Infanta. All of the above are HRHs though.

 

[Somebody]

In Spain a surname consists of first the paternal and second the maternal surname but I believe parents can choose to change the normal order. A few people, for example the former prime minister Zapatero, choose to be known by their maternal surname but still the first (paternal normally) surname is passed on (Rodríguez in his case).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Shouldn’t her children have their father’s name as last name ? If she marries another royal, I can see her children getting a compound name ,, but, if she marries a commoner, do you think the children will get the maternal name before the paternal one ?

All children of non-British queens regnant in Europe since the 17th century have used their mother's name or the names of both parents if in need of a surname, and gender equality has made significant progress in Europe over the recent centuries. I would be highly surprised if Leonor, Ingrid Alexandra, Elisabeth, Catharina-Amalia, or Estelle did not pass on their names to their legitimate children.

In Spain, because the first surname is the name that is passed on, Leonor's children would need to be de Borbón Rodríguez in order to pass on the Borbón name to Leonor's grandchildren.

Just to compare, Infanta Elena’s children are “ de Marichalar y Borbón”, not the inverse and, in the short style, they are called only “don/doña xxx de Marichalar”

That's so, but Infanta Elena's children were never expected to ascend the throne. If Felipe and Letizia had never had children, I believe that Felipe de Marichalar y Borbón would have changed the order of his surnames in due course.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

I especially like the title of Dauphine. I like the fact that Dauphine Marie Therese of France, Duchess of Angouleme, had previously been born a French princess.

 

[Countessmeout]

I especially like the title of Dauphine. I like the fact that Dauphine Marie Therese of France, Duchess of Angouleme, had previously been born a French princess.

It was common for a French prince to marry a French princess. Especially when the heir to the throne wasn't the son of the king he was succeeding. In Marie's case, she was the only living child of Louis the 16th. Her marriage to the heir of her Uncle Charles, was meant to secure the claim of Charles and his son to the throne. Louis was followed by 2 brothers, Charles being the second, though he and his son of course both had to abdicate.

We see other examples throughout French history. Though dauphine was a newer title. Margaret of Valois, daughter of Henry II and wife of Henry IV is another good example.

 

[Countessmeout]

And who is Andrew.... The second son of the reigning monarch when he was born. I never implied that Andrew's title would be taken away once his mother died.

@mbruno thank you for the explanation of Spain. I think my confusion came from an article I read that referred to one of Felipe's sisters as a Princess of Austuria. But your explanation helps, so Christina is an Infanta?

Yes but he ceases to be the 2nd son of the monarch when his mother dies. He will be the brother of the monarch, the uncle of the monarch, the great uncle possibly of the monarch.

Duke of York doesn't denote a 2nd son. Yes, it has been customary, but not a rule. You know Prince of Wales is the eldest son/heir of the monarch, plain and simple. We know the Duke of Cornwall is the eldest son of the monarch plain and simple. These titles and who hold them is clear. Duke of York is not. Duke of York is inheritable, though only once has a Duke of York who was the son of a monarch, had a son to pass it to.

If Andrew remarried and had a son. Or Beatice had been Prince Bruce, the 2nd duke of York would never have been a 2nd son of the monarch.


Your point was you know automatically- Duke of York equals 2nd son of the monarch. That isn't true, it currently is, but not permanently.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Yes but he ceases to be the 2nd son of the monarch when his mother dies. He will be the brother of the monarch, the uncle of the monarch, the great uncle possibly of the monarch.

Duke of York doesn't denote a 2nd son. Yes, it has been customary, but not a rule. You know Prince of Wales is the eldest son/heir of the monarch, plain and simple. We know the Duke of Cornwall is the eldest son of the monarch plain and simple. These titles and who hold them is clear. Duke of York is not. Duke of York is inheritable, though only once has a Duke of York who was the son of a monarch, had a son to pass it to.

If Andrew remarried and had a son. Or Beatice had been Prince Bruce, the 2nd duke of York would never have been a 2nd son of the monarch.


Your point was you know automatically- Duke of York equals 2nd son of the monarch. That isn't true, it currently is, but not permanently.

Now this explanation makes sense, the earlier one was lacking. The title would have passed to his sons if he had them.

 

[alvinking]

In Monaco
The heir is indeed The hereditary Prince of Monaco, but has the Title of Marquis des Baux, A title belonging to the Prince Souverain (Reigning Prince, but that is when possible passed to the first male heir apparent or heir presumptive of the Monegasque throne.

In France, the heir, was Dauphin of France, more precisely the title is Dauphin of Viennois

In Greece, the Heir was The Diadochos

As for the Duke of York, indeed it is traditionally the title of the second son of the monarch in England, and Duke of Albany in Scotland.
I think to solve the issues with these titles, they should be linked, Duke of York and Albany, they should work once linked be like the title Princess Royal. Not transferable, and once the holder is deceased, it reverts to the crown, and then it would be available again to be issued to the second son of the monarch at that moment