The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1741  
Old 05-22-2013, 06:46 AM
Daimyo's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 22
LADBROKES betting odds at present:

Alexandra (favorite)
5/1

Elizabeth
6/1

Diana
6/1

Victoria
7/1

Frances
8/1

George
10/1

Mary
10/1

Charles
12/1

Anne
12/1

Alice
12/1
__________________

__________________
  #1742  
Old 05-22-2013, 10:43 AM
stella1971's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: montreal, Canada
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by wymanda View Post
It's been said many times many ways but - Diana NO. If you read right back to the begining of this thread you will find lots of fors & againsts.

For a little Prince I like the individual names you have selected but the combination sounds like an 80's pop singer with no class.
'george michael' haha that is just what I thought too.
__________________

__________________
"People are much like stained glass windows. When the sun is shining through them, they glow brightly and sparkle. But when the sun goes down and it is dark and gloomy outside; Their true beauty is revealed only if there is light from within." ~ Elisabeth Kubler-Ross
  #1743  
Old 05-22-2013, 08:27 PM
scooter's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
If POW and DOC titles haven't been re-written to allow for female heirs, if Baby Cambridge is a girl she will not get a royal dukedom upon her fathers accesion. Doesn't work like that.
Which is why I said 'perhaps they would adjust'
__________________
  #1744  
Old 05-22-2013, 08:46 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 2,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Actually I don't think that's what's going to happen. The equal primogeniture is applied only in the line of succession to the Crown. It has no bearing whatsoever on peerage titles.
That's what they say now, but once equal primogeniture is enacted, I believe it will apply to everyone.

I can just see the lawsuits lining up!
__________________
  #1745  
Old 05-22-2013, 09:07 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,503
The changes to the law of succession do not change or set a precedent for the changes to the peerage. It is already possible, through variations in the wording of LP to enable females to inherit a title. Good example is Countess Mountbatten

Arguments of the distribution of inheritance wealth (ie the Lambton sisters) are a completely different matter.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
  #1746  
Old 05-22-2013, 09:48 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
The charter of the duchy of Cornwall says the eldest living son and heir to the throne is the duke. So if baby c is a girl she not the duke of Cornwall. If Charles dies tomorrow, William isn't the duke of Cornwall because he isn't the son of the monarch. The Cambridge dukedom will merge into the crown upon William becoming king. The Cambridge Children won't get a peerage until they marry and if baby c is a girl her husband would get the peerage like they did with prince Phillip.
Times are changing. Every peerage has its own laws, on who can inherit the title. Some allow for female inheritance. These letter patents are written at the time of creation. With the throne allowing equal primogeniture, I see Charles creating his granddaughter a Duchess in her own right on marriage, and allowing for females to inherit the titles. They wont rock the boat like the Spaniards and change existing inheritance, unless perhaps the family requested it (like earl mountbattan did when he only had daughters), but with new titles IMHO, I see the change being made.
__________________
  #1747  
Old 05-22-2013, 09:49 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
I think the only way to "psych out" boy or girl is psychic. As I said, I used to have this psychic ability but it departed when I had a hysterectomy. My only present observation is that Kate looks huge for seven months, at least in her garden party coat. This may mean a very large baby, but girls have been known to be large. So no way to really tell from that.
__________________
  #1748  
Old 05-22-2013, 10:10 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 1,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post

Times are changing. Every peerage has its own laws, on who can inherit the title. Some allow for female inheritance. These letter patents are written at the time of creation. With the throne allowing equal primogeniture, I see Charles creating his granddaughter a Duchess in her own right on marriage, and allowing for females to inherit the titles. They wont rock the boat like the Spaniards and change existing inheritance, unless perhaps the family requested it (like earl mountbattan did when he only had daughters), but with new titles IMHO, I see the change being made.
Charles may not be alive by the time baby c weds. There is no need to make baby c a duchess in her on right upon marriage. You make her husband a duke or a prince/duke like they did for Phillip and Daniel. She becomes the duchess of place then queen and husband stays as royal duke. Unless they alter the charter from 1337, the duchy of Cornwall doesn't allow for female "dukes" so that title isn't automatic when William becomes King.
__________________
  #1749  
Old 05-22-2013, 10:14 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
That's what they say now, but once equal primogeniture is enacted, I believe it will apply to everyone.

I can just see the lawsuits lining up!
JWell it has aleardy been announced that the legislation will not apply to the hereditary peers.
Just which political party do you imagine will want to align itself with the hereditary aristocracy? Why would a political party want to do anything that might keep the hereditary peerages from eventually becoming extinct? The hereditary peers are no longer automatic members of the House of Lords so preserving them is of no special benefit to the nation.
__________________
  #1750  
Old 05-22-2013, 10:25 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
Charles may not be alive by the time baby c weds. There is no need to make baby c a duchess in her on right upon marriage. You make her husband a duke or a prince/duke like they did for Phillip and Daniel. She becomes the duchess of place then queen and husband stays as royal duke. Unless they alter the charter from 1337, the duchy of Cornwall doesn't allow for female "dukes" so that title isn't automatic when William becomes King.
Daniel wasn't made a Duke in his own right. Victoria has been Duchess since birth, like her daughter is a Duchess from birth. Victoria's husband was given her title, when they wed. And Sweden and the UK are two very different countries, with two very different ways of doing things.

The same thing would happen if baby c was made Duchess of Oxford lets say. Her husband would be Duke, and when she became queen, he would remain Duke and prince consort. It is completely out dated that only men are granted titles and not women. And we're not only talking about the heir. The second child or both could be girls. The second child would never be queen, bar tragedy. Then there would be no title to merge with the throne. It seems fitting if we are bringing the throne into the 21st century, out dated policies of giving husbands the title, and only allowing sons to inherit, are cast aside. If baby c 2 is a girl, IMO she will be made the Duchess in her own right, and both her and baby c 1's titles, will be written with letters patent allowing for female inheritance.

I am not talking about Cornwall or Wales, but the individual titles granted on marriage. It stands to be seen if the letters patent on those will be re-written as well. I have a feeling the POW at least will be. If the heir can be female, it is an educated guess to believe the POW will be changed to allow for female inheritance. Elizabeth was never POW, but she was also never the heir apparent to the throne. Will's daughter if born first will be heir apparent, and therefore should be Princess of Wales IMO.
__________________
  #1751  
Old 05-22-2013, 10:27 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
JWell it has aleardy been announced that the legislation will not apply to the hereditary peers.
Just which political party do you imagine will want to align itself with the hereditary aristocracy? Why would a political party want to do anything that might keep the hereditary peerages from eventually becoming extinct? The hereditary peers are no longer automatic members of the House of Lords so preserving them is of no special benefit to the nation.
Yes, it will not apply to existing titles. But very likely will apply to future titles. Peerages are not an act of parliament, their inheritance is governed by the monarch. If the queen wanted, she could write letters patent and change every peerage right now. I believe in the future, any royal duchies made, will be made allowing for equal inheritance. I think even Prince Harry's will be, allowing for if he has daughters, they will inherit, unlike Bea and Eug.
__________________
  #1752  
Old 05-22-2013, 10:37 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariel View Post
I think the only way to "psych out" boy or girl is psychic. As I said, I used to have this psychic ability but it departed when I had a hysterectomy. My only present observation is that Kate looks huge for seven months, at least in her garden party coat. This may mean a very large baby, but girls have been known to be large. So no way to really tell from that.
Is it that you are consistently wrong? If so what do you think Kate's having.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
  #1753  
Old 05-22-2013, 10:43 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Yes, it will not apply to existing titles. But very likely will apply to future titles. Peerages are not an act of parliament, their inheritance is governed by the monarch. If the queen wanted, she could write letters patent and change every peerage right now. I believe in the future, any royal duchies made, will be made allowing for equal inheritance. I think even Prince Harry's will be, allowing for if he has daughters, they will inherit, unlike Bea and Eug.
Actually changes to existing peerages would require an act of Parliament to amend the hundreds of current letters patent. While in theory the Queen could issues new letters patent for all the current hereditary peers she would basically be creating new peerages resulting in their possibly being a Countess of X under one letters patent and an Earl of X under a different letters patent.
The bottom line is that it is not in anyones best political interest to do anything to preserve the hereditary peerage which is why outside of the BRF they are no longer created. I can evenn imagine new royal perages being only for life and that Harrys children will only be Lord or Lady X Windsor.
__________________
  #1754  
Old 05-23-2013, 12:10 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
JWell it has aleardy been announced that the legislation will not apply to the hereditary peers.
Just which political party do you imagine will want to align itself with the hereditary aristocracy? Why would a political party want to do anything that might keep the hereditary peerages from eventually becoming extinct? The hereditary peers are no longer automatic members of the House of Lords so preserving them is of no special benefit to the nation.
I think you're right here. As hereditary peerages are no longer created (outside of Royal peerages), and as the Queen at least has continued to use the typical "heirs male" when creating peerages for her own children and grandchildren, not altering the way that existing peerages are inherited seems like an attempt to slowly reduce the number of hereditary peers over time. You can see this in the dukedoms - there are only something like 31 current dukedoms, 7 of which belong to royals (and 2 belong to Charles).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
The same thing would happen if baby c was made Duchess of Oxford lets say. Her husband would be Duke, and when she became queen, he would remain Duke and prince consort. It is completely out dated that only men are granted titles and not women. And we're not only talking about the heir. The second child or both could be girls. The second child would never be queen, bar tragedy. Then there would be no title to merge with the throne. It seems fitting if we are bringing the throne into the 21st century, out dated policies of giving husbands the title, and only allowing sons to inherit, are cast aside. If baby c 2 is a girl, IMO she will be made the Duchess in her own right, and both her and baby c 1's titles, will be written with letters patent allowing for female inheritance.
You're right it is an outdated concept that only men are created titles, it's also wrong. Women are bestowed life peerages under QEII. Life peerages.

There is absolutely no need to bestow any titles on a daughter of William's upon her marriage. Either she will marry someone who has titles - and will become the whatever as such - or she will marry someone who doesn't, and he'll be offered one, and she'll become the whatever of whatever as a result. Either way she'll also remain a princess.

Consider - the then Princess Elizabeth became Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh on her marriage. Princess Margaret became Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon. Had the titles been bestowed upon then instead of their husbands they would have had the same titles, but their husbands would have remained Mr. Philip Mountbatten and Mr. Anthony Armstrong-Jones.

William's titles didn't allow for female inheritance, and I doubt we should expect future titles to do so either. Simply put this ensures that titles do not go on forever. The hereditary peerage is slowly being shrunk because it's seen as outdated. Enabling women to inherit counters this.

Quote:
I am not talking about Cornwall or Wales, but the individual titles granted on marriage. It stands to be seen if the letters patent on those will be re-written as well. I have a feeling the POW at least will be. If the heir can be female, it is an educated guess to believe the POW will be changed to allow for female inheritance. Elizabeth was never POW, but she was also never the heir apparent to the throne. Will's daughter if born first will be heir apparent, and therefore should be Princess of Wales IMO.
PoW doesn't have restrictions regarding gender. If William has a daughter she can be PoW - although it's my opinion that she would be Prince of Wales, not Princess, as the title Prince is for the heir apparent and Princess for the (female) consort.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post

Yes, it will not apply to existing titles. But very likely will apply to future titles. Peerages are not an act of parliament, their inheritance is governed by the monarch. If the queen wanted, she could write letters patent and change every peerage right now. I believe in the future, any royal duchies made, will be made allowing for equal inheritance. I think even Prince Harry's will be, allowing for if he has daughters, they will inherit, unlike Bea and Eug.
The Queen does not have the power to change already existing peerages. She can only set the inheritance rules when she creates a peerage - sure she could recreate every peerage to allow for female inheritance, but that would counter a distancing from the peerage that we've see during her reign.

If HM is still Queen when Harry marries she'll not be allowing for female inheritance. She didn't do so with William, why would she do so with Harry?
__________________
  #1755  
Old 05-23-2013, 12:14 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post

I can evenn imagine new royal perages being only for life and that Harrys children will only be Lord or Lady X Windsor.
I think given as other royal titles have been hereditary then we can expect Harry's to be so as well. There's a distancing for creating hereditary peerages for the general public, but I don't think that's going to extend to the actual royal family.

Harry's children will, at least once his father's king, be Prince or Princess of X.
__________________
  #1756  
Old 05-23-2013, 01:16 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
No, Gracie, I am not consistently wrong, because I draw a complete blank when if I try to discern what a baby's gender will be. After I lost the gift when I had the hysterectomy, I think I tried a couple of times to discern this, but I just drew a blank, not a wrong answer. Like blank paper. So I don't have any idea about Baby C's gender except that little tweak that just possibly an invitro scenario was done in order to push the odds toward a boy, which would give more time to change succession laws. My neighbors some years ago tried to have a boy after 3 girls and had some "spinning" thing done at a fertility center and it failed. 4th boy showed up even after nursery decorated in blue. Maybe there are more precise techniques now. This was a tragedy for the neighbors, as he was XYZ VI (yes Americans also have their dynasties among certain families), and they wanted XYZ VII. I didn't realize they were an "old American family" until later.
__________________
  #1757  
Old 05-23-2013, 08:55 AM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
I think given as other royal titles have been hereditary then we can expect Harry's to be so as well. There's a distancing for creating hereditary peerages for the general public, but I don't think that's going to extend to the actual royal family.

Harry's children will, at least once his father's king, be Prince or Princess of X.
I predict that new Letters Patent will be issued around the time Harry is engaged, and the HRH will be limited to children of the sovereign or those in direct line, making Harry's kids lords and ladies, along the same lines as the Wessex kids. This will clarify the titles of the Wessex children, and there will be a grandfather clause for all existing HRH's (i.e., Beatrice, Eugenie - and Harry if the Queen is still living).

I predict that hereditary peerages will be changed to also reflect equal primogeniture. Not a matter of "if" but of "when".

And that concludes the day's predictions from the Giraffe.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
  #1758  
Old 05-24-2013, 07:06 AM
wymanda's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 1,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
I predict that hereditary peerages will be changed to also reflect equal primogeniture. Not a matter of "if" but of "when".

And that concludes the day's predictions from the Giraffe.
That would indicate that you think that the Duke of York title will be amended so that Princess Beatrice will become Duchess of York in her own right.
__________________
Everything I write here is my opinion and I mean no offence by it.
  #1759  
Old 05-24-2013, 07:12 AM
Molly2101's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
I predict that new Letters Patent will be issued around the time Harry is engaged, and the HRH will be limited to children of the sovereign or those in direct line, making Harry's kids lords and ladies, along the same lines as the Wessex kids. This will clarify the titles of the Wessex children, and there will be a grandfather clause for all existing HRH's (i.e., Beatrice, Eugenie - and Harry if the Queen is still living).

I predict that hereditary peerages will be changed to also reflect equal primogeniture. Not a matter of "if" but of "when".

And that concludes the day's predictions from the Giraffe.
I do think Letters Patent will be released by Charles to limit the HRH to children of the eldest child, but I don't think his LP would affect the Wessex children unless it was made retrospective. Is it possible to make it retrospective? Louise and James ARE a Princess and Prince legally, their parents just CHOSE to not use the styles. Legally they are a HRH's, and can choose to use the style when they turn 18 (which I doubt they will.) Unless Charles makes his LP retrospective from 2003 (Louise's birth), they can choose to use the style when they are 18.
__________________
"I am yours, you are mine, of that be sure. You are locked in my heart, the little key is lost and now you must stay there forever."
Written by Princess Alix of Hesse and by Rhine in the diary of her fiance, Tsarevich Nicholas.
  #1760  
Old 05-24-2013, 06:59 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 1,206
Depending on how many kids the Cambridges have, Harry kids may have to do some part time royal work. If you limit the hrh to only William's kids by the time William is on the throne, it just his kids, Harry, non working royals Yorkies and dead/old Anne, Andrew, Ed & Sophie.
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread


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
HRH Duke Carlos Javier (1970- ) and the Royal House of Bourbon-Parma: August 2010- Warren Royal Families of Italy 220 10-04-2014 03:36 PM
Potential Names and Godparents for Zara Phillips Tindall and Mike Tindall First Child Zonk The Princess Royal and Family 110 06-05-2014 04:47 AM
Baby Cambridge: Musings and Suggestions Zonk The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Family 3615 07-22-2013 02:30 AM
Possible names and godparents for Joachim & Marie's baby principessa Prince Joachim and Princess Marie and Family 390 07-26-2009 11:56 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery 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 olympics ottoman poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:34 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]