The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #101  
Old 11-03-2006, 04:31 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polly
William, of course, but only because he's the Heir Apparent.
When did William become the 'heir apparent'?

I didn't hear any news to the effect that something had happened the Prince Charles and he was no longer in the line of succession.

NB The 'Heir Apparent' is the next in line to the throne - not the eldest son of that person.

William will only be 'Heir Apparent' when either his father dies while his grandmother is Queen or when his father becomes king. Until either of these things happen he is the second in line to the throne and not the Heir Apparent.

Forgive me - but I do like the correct terms to be used and not to jump people up the line of succession.

Quote:
I don't think him particularly good-looking but I do think that he's somewhat serious about himself and his future role. And if one's going to have king, then that's what he should be like.

Harry, now. Well, after the Nazi uniform affair,I couldn't care less about him. He's the product of an expensive and comprehensive education, but still, he was so ignorant of his offence.

His alleged partying and wild life doesn't bother me: he's a young, silly man, after all. But he doesn't display any sense of dignity whatsoever, towards his family, his name and his royal house.

Polly
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 11-03-2006, 05:48 PM
kittencrews's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: , United States
Posts: 1,081
HARRY!!! he looks like much more fun and much less baggage!!
__________________

__________________
Don't squat with yer spurs on
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 11-03-2006, 09:49 PM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 653
William is the 'heir apparent' because his father is the Heir. Period. 'Heir apparent' means that, if all goes well, he/she will inherit. Charles is not the Heir Apparent; he is the definite and acknowledged Heir. Period.

As for Prince Harry's "ignorance" of his offence - why, he said so himself!

I should have made the distinction more clear.

HRH Charles of Wales is the Heir Presumptive, not, like his first-born son, the Heir Apparent.

Polly
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 11-03-2006, 10:48 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Distinction between heir apparent and heir presumptive from the http://dictionary.laborlawtalk.com/heir_apparent:


heir apparent - an heir whose right to an inheritance cannot be defeated if that person outlives the ancestor

Antonyms: heir presumptive - a person who expects to inherit but whose right can be defeated by the birth of a nearer relative

According to the order of succession of many monarchies, the heir apparent is a descendant of a monarch who is the heir to their throne, whose status as heir cannot be defeated by the birth of someone else who would then become the heir. An heir apparent differs from an heir presumptive in that, although an heir presumptive inherits the throne upon the death of the monarch, the right of the heir presumptive could be defeated by the birth of another person who would then be the heir apparent. For example, in Britain, if the monarch has a daughter and no sons, the daughter is the heiress presumptive, who becomes Queen if the monarch dies. But if the monarch later has a son, the son is then the heir apparent. In most monarchies, the monarch's oldest son, even if not the oldest child, becomes heir apparent. A growing number of monarchies, however, now allow the monarch's oldest child, irrespective of sex, to become heir apparent. Where that heir has died leaving children, their oldest child (or oldest son) becomes heir apparent.

It is an error to call the heir apparent simply the "heir." The heir is the person who currently owns the estate, having inherited it— in this case, the currently reigning monarch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to this definition, neither Charles or William is the heir presumptive because no one else can assume their right to the throne ahead of them if they live long enough. If Charles outlives the Queen, he will be King. If William outlives the Queen and Charles, he will be King. Also neither one of them is the heir. According to this definition, the Queen is the heir because she has inherited the throne.

I'm only used to seeing the immediate heir (in this case Charles) called the heir apparent but under this definition, I suppose William could be also the heir apparent.

Chrissy, do you know if both William and Charles could be the heir apparent or is there only one at one time?
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 11-04-2006, 12:36 AM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 653
My understanding is that the Heir Presumptive is the acknowledged Heir to the throne unless someone of superior claim supplants them, eg., where the Salic law operates and a female is replaced by a male. This is not so in HRH Prince Charles' case. He is the Heir Presumptive.

The Heir Apparent is someone who, in the normal course of events, might reasonably be expected to ascend the throne, i.e HRH, William of Wales, the Heir Presumptive's eldest son.

If I'm wrong, I'd be grateful to be enlighted.

Polly
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 11-04-2006, 12:58 AM
Sereta's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The, United States
Posts: 2,019
I'd choose William I think. He seems more mature and smarter (he got better grades at school). He doesn't do as many controversial things.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 11-04-2006, 07:03 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polly
My understanding is that the Heir Presumptive is the acknowledged Heir to the throne unless someone of superior claim supplants them, eg., where the Salic law operates and a female is replaced by a male. This is not so in HRH Prince Charles' case. He is the Heir Presumptive.

The Heir Apparent is someone who, in the normal course of events, might reasonably be expected to ascend the throne, i.e HRH, William of Wales, the Heir Presumptive's eldest son.

If I'm wrong, I'd be grateful to be enlighted.

Polly

You are wrong because you are confused between heir apparent and heir presumptive.

Heir apparent is the next in line to the throne who cannot be supplanted by anyone - namely Prince Charles. The only way he won't become the next king is if he dies before his mother.

Heir presumptive is the next in line to the throne who could be supplanted by the birth of another - e.g. the current Queen when she was Princess Elizabeth during the reign of her father - she could have been supplanted by the birth of a younger brother. George VI during his brother's reign was only ever heir presumptive because his brother could have married and had a child.

There can only be ONE heir apparent at a time - as the heir apparent is the next in line to the throne who can't be supplanted - that is Charles is the heir apparent and the term is singular in nature and therefore only one.

William is not yet the heir apparent - he will be, in the normal course of events - when either his father dies in the reign of his grandmother or when his father succeeds but he is not yet the heir apparent.

He is the eldest son of the heir apparent. You could say he is the heir apparent to the heir apparent but he is NOT the heir apparent to the British throne.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 11-04-2006, 12:45 PM
TonyaR's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: *, United States
Posts: 328
I am apparently and appropriately confused, but not presumptive enough to ask for a clearer explanation!!
__________________
“Promise me you'll always remember: You're braver than you believe, ..stronger than you seem, and smarter than you think.”
~Christopher Robin to Pooh
(A.A. Milne)
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 11-04-2006, 12:46 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrissy57
William is not yet the heir apparent - he will be, in the normal course of events - when either his father dies in the reign of his grandmother or when his father succeeds but he is not yet the heir apparent.

He is the eldest son of the heir apparent. You could say he is the heir apparent to the heir apparent but he is NOT the heir apparent to the British throne.
Thanks chrissy. That is my understanding but the definitions I found were a little murky on that detail. They gave the impression that the heir apparent could be anyone who could inherit the throne if they lived long enough.

Technically speaking William if he outlives the Queen and Charles will inherit the throne but its a little unusual to see him called the heir apparent. What's the rationale for William NOT being the heir apparent; is it because he isn't the immediate successor after the current monarch? If so, its curious that the immediacy is not made clear in the definitions.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 11-04-2006, 12:49 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyaR
I am apparently and appropriately confused, but not presumptive enough to ask for a clearer explanation!!
Well I guess that makes me presumptive!
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 11-04-2006, 05:28 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
Thanks chrissy. That is my understanding but the definitions I found were a little murky on that detail. They gave the impression that the heir apparent could be anyone who could inherit the throne if they lived long enough.

Technically speaking William if he outlives the Queen and Charles will inherit the throne but its a little unusual to see him called the heir apparent. What's the rationale for William NOT being the heir apparent; is it because he isn't the immediate successor after the current monarch? If so, its curious that the immediacy is not made clear in the definitions.
Remember that the term is HEIR APPARENT which is grammatically singular in tone. (I have capitilised for emphasis only not to shout). That is why the definitions don't need to go further - there can only be one

If the term was heirs apparent then more than one could use the term but it isn't.

The reason William isn't the heir apparent is as you stated - he isn't the immediate heir - he is second in line.

The heir apparent is the heir who will next hold the title and no one else.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 11-04-2006, 05:39 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyaR
I am apparently and appropriately confused, but not presumptive enough to ask for a clearer explanation!!
Tony, I will try again for you



The heir apparent will be the next monarch unless they die before reaching that title. Nothing or no one can stop them except for their own death. They are the obvious and 'apparent' heir.


The heir presumptive is the presumed heir unless something else happens i.e. in the case of the present queen when Princess Elizabeth if a younger brother had been born then she would have dropped in the order behind her younger brother.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 11-04-2006, 05:53 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrissy57
Remember that the term is HEIR APPARENT which is grammatically singular in tone. (I have capitilised for emphasis only not to shout). That is why the definitions don't need to go further - there can only be one

If the term was heirs apparent then more than one could use the term but it isn't.

The reason William isn't the heir apparent is as you stated - he isn't the immediate heir - he is second in line.

The heir apparent is the heir who will next hold the title and no one else.
But chrissy, heir presumptive is also only referred to in the singular. To my mind a good definition is one that cannot be interpreted any other way regardless of who reads it and a definition that simply implies a condition by referring to the term in the singular assumes too much.

However, I wonder if the traditional structure for a definition dictated if a term can be used in the plural, its plural forms must included in the definition. I think that worked when everybody knew the components of a standard definition (or reference) but nowadays I think the definitions have to spell things out more.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 11-04-2006, 07:43 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,357
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
But chrissy, heir presumptive is also only referred to in the singular. To my mind a good definition is one that cannot be interpreted any other way regardless of who reads it and a definition that simply implies a condition by referring to the term in the singular assumes too much.

However, I wonder if the traditional structure for a definition dictated if a term can be used in the plural, its plural forms must included in the definition. I think that worked when everybody knew the components of a standard definition (or reference) but nowadays I think the definitions have to spell things out more.
There can only be one heir presumptive at any given time with the proviso that that person is the heir BUT someone could replace them and they would cease to be the heir at all but there is only one.

The heir - either apparent (can't be supplanted) or presumptive (could be supplanted) is singular. There is only one heir - whether apparent or presumptive is the issue and that is determined by applying whether or not the person who is the heir could be supplanted as the heir. In Charles case no one can supplant him so he is the heir apparent. In his mother's case, a younger brother could have supplanted her, so she was only ever the heir presumptive. In Queen Victoria's case any child born to Queen Adelaide could have supplanted her.

Heir is singular regardless of apparent or presumptive and their is only one of either.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 11-04-2006, 08:26 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Thanks crissy, you've explained it very well. Since that's the case, I'm just complaining about the lack of clarity in the definitions. If there IS only one heir apparent (or heir presumptive) it seems simple enough to say so in the definition.

But its not a big thing; I'll get over it!
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 11-05-2006, 02:51 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
But its not a big thing; I'll get over it!
Don't get too caught up in the definitions (though thanks to Chrissy they are quite clear).
Charles is the Heir Apparent, and William is second in line to the throne. That's all that matters.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 11-07-2006, 08:14 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: -, Malaysia
Posts: 20
Definitely William..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 11-08-2006, 11:07 PM
Penny Lane's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 29 Palms, United States
Posts: 318
Well to begin with I'm only a few years younger than their mom so they would be kind of like boy toys for me-not that I'm complaing!
I honestly don't care for William's looks I think Harry is far cuter and bertter looking in general,I also love that smile and devil -may-care way.He also has his compassionate as well-they both do but my choice of the two would be Harry.
My real choice would be CP Hakkon though
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 11-14-2006, 03:24 PM
Next Star's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 874
I would pick neither both of them are too famous for me but their still going looking princes.
__________________
Patience is a virtue.

I'm head of a dynastic house no matter what others say.
Princess Kamorrissa,Countess of Welle
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 11-14-2006, 11:10 PM
iowabelle's Avatar
Royal Highness
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Des Moines, United States
Posts: 2,405
I don't picture me as Princess Laura (although that doesn't sound too bad, we have a Laurentien, after all), but I have a soft spot for Harry. He just has that impish look of his mother's, you know he's going to be fun to have around (although he might make a difficult husband for the same reason). Alas, both boys are too young for me!
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
prince harry, prince william


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
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess Prince Harry and Prince William 1110 07-12-2014 10:00 PM
Christenings of William and Harry HMQueenElizabethII Prince Harry and Prince William 34 12-27-2012 07:12 PM
Has anyone ever written to William or Harry? Honey Prince Harry and Prince William 30 05-27-2011 10:07 AM
Preferred Wives For William and Harry clar Prince Harry and Prince William 2078 11-17-2010 08:49 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta cristina infanta elena jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games ottoman pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince laurent prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess eleonore princess elisabeth princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

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

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:28 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]