The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3301  
Old 01-20-2018, 12:46 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawin View Post
Now that the succession to the crown is no longer dependent on gender I suppose it's possible Charlotte and any younger sisters might be created Duchesses, especially if attitudes toward royal daughters change within the next twenty or thirty years.
Unless the general public changes the attitude about supporting more members of the royal family, I highly doubt that. In general, the trend has been less titles given out and less working royals. I can see this current only those that are children of a monarchy/future monarch being working members rather than all grandchildren of monarch. And if they aren’t working members, I see a more less title approach like Wessex children rather than more titles given out.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3302  
Old 01-20-2018, 12:52 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Unless the general public changes the attitude about supporting more members of the royal family, I highly doubt that. In general, the trend has been less titles given out and less working royals. I can see this current only those that are children of a monarchy/future monarch being working members rather than all grandchildren of monarch. And if they aren’t working members, I see a more less title approach like Wessex children rather than more titles given out.
By the time they are 30, Charlotte and any sister will be the children of the monarch more then likely. By the time Charlotte, George and baby 3 wed, the majority of the senior royals will have retired off by then. Unless she chooses not to, its highly unlikely Charlotte will not be a working royal.

People are becoming more equal minded as years to come. If Baby 3 is a boy and he gets a title, why shouldn't his older sister? Now that there is equal inheritance to the throne, equal rights to titles needs to be addressed.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3303  
Old 01-20-2018, 12:58 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
By the time they are 30, Charlotte and any sister will be the children of the monarch more then likely. By the time Charlotte, George and baby 3 wed, the majority of the senior royals will have retired off by then. Unless she chooses not to, its highly unlikely Charlotte will not be a working royal.

People are becoming more equal minded as years to come. If Baby 3 is a boy and he gets a title, why shouldn't his older sister? Now that there is equal inheritance to the throne, equal rights to titles needs to be addressed.
Charlotte will be Princess Royal, and she can still be a working royal without being a Duchess. Princess Anne is. I just don’t see the attitude about less royals being supported by public funds change. And thus royal family being more cautious about handing out titles.
Reply With Quote
  #3304  
Old 01-20-2018, 01:01 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Unless the general public changes the attitude about supporting more members of the royal family, I highly doubt that. In general, the trend has been less titles given out and less working royals. I can see this current only those that are children of a monarchy/future monarch being working members rather than all grandchildren of monarch. And if they aren’t working members, I see a more less title approach like Wessex children rather than more titles given out.
William's daughters will (presumably) be the children of a monarch so if the trend toward gender equality continues it seems only fair that they be given titles if his sons are, especially sons younger than Charlotte, a la the Swedish royal family.

But as you point out the current trend is toward fewer titles. So it's possible that none of William's children will be given titles. Or perhaps they will be given "life" peerages that die with them and aren't inherited by their own children.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Charlotte will be Princess Royal, and she can still be a working royal without being a Duchess. Princess Anne is. I just don’t see the attitude about less royals being supported by public funds change. And thus royal family being more cautious about handing out titles.
But a son can be a working royal without being a Duke. So if William's sons are created Dukes it's only fair that the daughters be created Duchesses. Yes, Anne was created Princess Royal, but she was also superseded in the line of succession by her two younger brothers. Charlotte won't be - attitudes toward gender are changing and will continue to change by the time she is an adult.
Reply With Quote
  #3305  
Old 01-20-2018, 01:07 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Charlotte will be Princess Royal, and she can still be a working royal without being a Duchess. Princess Anne is. I just don’t see the attitude about less royals being supported by public funds change. And thus royal family being more cautious about handing out titles.
When people realize the amount of money the royals get every year keeps going up...and the number of engagements keeps going down???? Currently there are 14 working royals, soon to be 15 with Meghan (16 if you include Tim who does some events with Anne). In 30 years, other then King William and Queen Kate, there is likely only their kids, and Harry. Edward and Sophie may still do the odd event. If George's siblings aren't working royals, besides the monarch and his wife, that leaves 3 (Harry, Meghan and George). How many engagements do you think they are going to handle between them?

Yes, Charlotte will be Princess royal, doesn't mean she cant also be a duchess. What about if baby 3 is a girl? There will likely be more of a push for their husbands to also be involved (like the husbands of royal women on the continent).

If baby 3 is a boy and going to be a duke, then baby 3 as a girl should be a duchess. If they want to streamline handing out titles, then only the heir should be given a duchy plain and simple. Reduces the worry that they will run out of duchies, as the duchy will merge with the throne anyways.


Besides just as having no title doesn't mean they cant be working royals- the same goes the other way. The Earl of.... or duke of.... could be a private citizen just the same.
Reply With Quote
  #3306  
Old 01-20-2018, 01:17 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
When Charles becomes King, Prince William will become Prince of Wales, and likely Kate will become Princess of Wales? Or, will they not wish to use the Princess of Wales title again so soon? Obviously, the Duchess of Cornwall doesn't use the title in deference to Diana.

I would imagine that Harry will receive a dukedom upon marriage and not an earldom. I agree with those who say why give Harry an earldom only to turn around and have Prince Charles give him a dukedom after inheriting the throne when his mother passes. It's up to QE, and I think Harry is so well loved that QE will want to bestow the dukedom upon Harry when he marries in May.
Reply With Quote
  #3307  
Old 01-20-2018, 01:21 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,757
I can see Charlotte becoming a duchess when she marries. Just like the #3 will be a duke or duchess as well. I don't see Charles or William denying the spares that title.

William and Harry's kids will all be working royals because it is just the two of them. I suspect Charles has a great chance of reigning well into his 90s like his parents. So that means by the time William take over he will be in his 50s and his kids will be early 20s.

That means William, Kate, and their three kids? Nah. Harry, Meghan and their kids will quite busy as well.
Reply With Quote
  #3308  
Old 01-20-2018, 01:22 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
There of course will be a balance between number of people versus number of engagements needed. While I’m not convinced it’ll get less than monarchy, children, siblings, and grown grandchildren, I’m not convinced it’ll be more either. If I’m understanding correctly, you are proposing Charlotte’s husband being granted Duke, and Charlotte becoming Duchess that way. When Anne and Mark decided to forego a title rather than follow Margaret’s example as both of their husbands were untitled prior to marriage, that was seen as being more modern. I don’t see this changing. And honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if the title granting to sons lessen as well. HMQ has already delayed the process by only granting them upon marriage. That’s not how it was done in the past. I wouldn’t be surprised in a few decades, that changes too.

I’m not sure how the cost of royals would go up if there are fewer working royals? That doesn’t make sense.
Reply With Quote
  #3309  
Old 01-20-2018, 01:25 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
When Charles becomes King, Prince William will become Prince of Wales, and likely Kate will become Princess of Wales? Or, will they not wish to use the Princess of Wales title again so soon? Obviously, the Duchess of Cornwall doesn't use the title in deference to Diana.

I would imagine that Harry will receive a dukedom upon marriage and not an earldom. I agree with those who say why give Harry an earldom only to turn around and have Prince Charles give him a dukedom after inheriting the throne when his mother passes. It's up to QE, and I think Harry is so well loved that QE will want to bestow the dukedom upon Harry when he marries in May.
I'd be surprised if Charles didn't create William Prince of Wales when he becomes King. As you state, he might not wish to see the title used again so soon, but in that case he could wait a few months before doing that. Edward VII waited ten months before creating his son Prince of Wales (future George V) for that same reason.
Reply With Quote
  #3310  
Old 01-20-2018, 02:55 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
When Charles becomes King, Prince William will become Prince of Wales,
Maybe.

The titles Prince of Wales, Earl of Chester, are not automatic titles.

Charles actually waited longer than any other Duke of Cornwall before being created Prince of Wales, Earl of Chester - 6 years.

The instant the Queen passes Charles becomes King and William will become HRH The Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge, Duke of Rothesay etc etc.

Whether Charles decides to create William as Prince of Wales will be a personal decision by Charles and will also take into account the feelings of the Welsh people and Welsh Assembly.

There is no reason why Diana having held a title for 15 years more than 20 years ago should stop her son and his wife having the title in the future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
I can see Charlotte becoming a duchess when she marries. Just like the #3 will be a duke or duchess as well. I don't see Charles or William denying the spares that title.

William and Harry's kids will all be working royals because it is just the two of them. I suspect Charles has a great chance of reigning well into his 90s like his parents. So that means by the time William take over he will be in his 50s and his kids will be early 20s.

That means William, Kate, and their three kids? Nah. Harry, Meghan and their kids will quite busy as well.
If the rumour of a 'smaller' royal family is true there is no way Harry's kids will be working royals as that will simply see another large working family as we have today. After all they will be the cousins etc of the monarch - as are the Gloucesters and Kents and therefore need to be supported by that cousin.

If the number of working royals is analysed by generation we end up with:

The Queen's - 8 (at the most)
Charles' - 5 (at the most)
William's - 4 (assuming the rumours of the York girl never going to be needed)

Why would George's generation want to go up again - 4 would be fine (George and spouse and his two siblings) so no need for Harry's children or for Charlotte's spouse or the new babies siblings.

If we are to say all of William and Harry's children and Harry also have three children you are already at close to the number of the Queen's generation which reportedly seen as too many. It isn't the relationship to the monarch but the number needed.
Reply With Quote
  #3311  
Old 01-20-2018, 03:32 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Not quite the same, but consider the Duke of Cornwall title! If George has a daughter who is the heir apparent when he is King, will the rules for this title be changed? What about the Prince of Wales title? Since an eldest daughter can no longer be displaced by a younger brother then would it not be logical for these titles be available to the female heir apparent?
It seems many traditional ways of doing things may need some modern tweaking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Charlotte will be Princess Royal, and she can still be a working royal without being a Duchess. Princess Anne is. I just don’t see the attitude about less royals being supported by public funds change. And thus royal family being more cautious about handing out titles.
Charlotte cannot be made Princess Royal until William is King and Princess Anne has died though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
If I’m understanding correctly, you are proposing Charlotte’s husband being granted Duke, and Charlotte becoming Duchess that way.
No, I don't think that is what is being proposed. Charlotte's future husband would not be granted a dukedom- Charlotte herself would- to be treated equally to a younger brother lower in succession.
In an earlier post, someone suggested life peerages- that actually seems like a sensible idea in many ways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
When Charles becomes King, Prince William will become Prince of Wales, and likely Kate will become Princess of Wales? Or, will they not wish to use the Princess of Wales title again so soon? Obviously, the Duchess of Cornwall doesn't use the title in deference to Diana.
William will want his wife to be Princess of Wales. No question about it.
Reply With Quote
  #3312  
Old 01-20-2018, 04:11 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
For sure Kate will be the Princess of Wales.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #3313  
Old 01-20-2018, 04:16 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,214
Only if William is created Prince of Wales. If he isn't created Prince of Wales then she won't become Princess of Wales.
Reply With Quote
  #3314  
Old 01-20-2018, 04:18 AM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades CA, United States
Posts: 4,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
If the number of working royals is analysed by generation we end up with:

The Queen's - 8 (at the most)
Charles' - 5 (at the most)
William's - 4 (assuming the rumours of the York girl never going to be needed)
I don't understand 5 for Charles. I count 6 - or do you mean Charles plus 5?
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #3315  
Old 01-20-2018, 04:31 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Only if William is created Prince of Wales. If he isn't created Prince of Wales then she won't become Princess of Wales.
I can't see why he would not be created POW..
Reply With Quote
  #3316  
Old 01-20-2018, 04:41 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
By the time they are 30, Charlotte and any sister will be the children of the monarch more then likely. By the time Charlotte, George and baby 3 wed, the majority of the senior royals will have retired off by then. Unless she chooses not to, its highly unlikely Charlotte will not be a working royal.

People are becoming more equal minded as years to come. If Baby 3 is a boy and he gets a title, why shouldn't his older sister? Now that there is equal inheritance to the throne, equal rights to titles needs to be addressed.
Charlotte will get the title of Princess Royal when it is available.

Succession to the Crown may be gender neutral now, but succession to titles in the peerage of the UK is not. Most titles can be inherited only by male descendants in paternal line. The reason for that is not gender discrimination per se, but rather to keep the title in the same family, whose name is recorded patrilineally. If the UK allowed children to take their mother's family name as their last name, as some countries like Belgium and Sweden now do, then I think a major obstacle to gender neutral succession in the peerage would be removed.

Quote:
Not quite the same, but consider the Duke of Cornwall title! If George has a daughter who is the heir apparent when he is King, will the rules for this title be changed? What about the Prince of Wales title? Since an eldest daughter can no longer be displaced by a younger brother then would it not be logical for these titles be available to the female heir apparent?
It seems many traditional ways of doing things may need some modern tweaking
Prince of Wales in particular is a good candidate IMHO to become a gender neutral title as it is a personal ( i.e. non-hereditary ) title and, therefore, the above-referenced succession issues that apply to dukedoms do not come into play.

In the Netherlands, the title of Prince of Orange also used to be for male heirs to the throne only as it was historically attached to a principality with agnatic sucession (which, however, has been officially part of France since the 18th century and no longer has any connection to the Netherlands). Thus, neither Wilhelmina, nor Juliana, nor Beatrix were ever the Princess of Orange. The title was made officially gender neutral only in 2002 and Amalia has now become the first Princess of Orange in her own right.

By contrast, the title of Prince of Asturias has always been gender neutral and two of the daughters of Isabella I (the Catholic) were already titled Princess of Asturias back in the late 15th and early 16th centuries. One of them was the later Queen Joanna the Mad (Juana I "la Loca"), mother of the King-Emperor Charles V.
Reply With Quote
  #3317  
Old 01-20-2018, 04:51 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Tjhere is notihng to stop people taking their maternal surname.. it is just that the convetion in the UK is for children to use their father's surname.
And royal dukedoms are not the same as ordinary peerages, in some ways. Even peerages can be inherited by females if the original creation stated this...
Reply With Quote
  #3318  
Old 01-20-2018, 05:08 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
I've been pondering the number [or lack of] Royal Ducal Titles available in the future...
We know that Edinburgh and Cambridge will 'revert' at some point, but Edinburgh will be re-created for the Earl of Wessex.
Sussex is likely to be awarded in May.. and [unless the 'Harkles' are childless] it eventually becomes an 'un-royal' Dukedom..
That leaves JUST Cambridge for the future..

Would it not be sensible for the existing Royal Dukedoms [with a long and glorious history as such] to revert to the Crown, when the existing holder dies ?

Thus - Gloucester and Kent 'revert' when the current Dukes die, leaving their heirs as 'the noble Earls of Ulster' and of 'St Andrews' respectively.
Then Gloucester, Kent and Cambridge [and possibly York] would be on hand for William V or George VIII to utilise as necessary ?
If future 'creations' were made for the same duration as the 'HRH' was held [therefter reverting back to the Crown], Dukedoms would no longer 'be lost for the future' as they are now...

Ultimately the 'pool' of Dukedoms available would be - Edinburgh, York, Cambridge, Gloucester, Sussex and Kent..A FAR more workable number than just one or two !
Reply With Quote
  #3319  
Old 01-20-2018, 05:15 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,385
I agree with your points re this, Wyevale. I think it's terribly sad when a centuries old noble title like that of Gloucester moves out of the Royal orbit, never to come back again. Same for the future if titles like York do the same.
Reply With Quote
  #3320  
Old 01-20-2018, 05:27 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Tjhere is notihng to stop people taking their maternal surname.. it is just that the convetion in the UK is for children to use their father's surname.
And royal dukedoms are not the same as ordinary peerages, in some ways. Even peerages can be inherited by females if the original creation stated this...
Yes, but both (1) and (2) are rare. Even in recent times when females were allowed to inherit a peerage to prevent it from becoming extinct, the remainder was for their male heirs only as in the case of the Countess Mountbatten of Burma.

It is worth noting that, in Belgium, even when the law was changed so that children could take any of their parents' family names as their last name, the Association of the Nobility stated their position that titles of nobility should continue to descend in paternal line only.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale View Post
I've been pondering about the number [or lack of] Royal Ducal Titles available in the future...
We know that Edinburgh and Cambridge will 'revert' at some point, but Edinburgh will be re-created for the Earl of Wessex.
Sussex is likely to be awarded in May.. and [unless the 'Harkles' are childless] it eventually becomes an 'un-royal' Dukedom..
That leaves JUST Cambridge for the future..

Would it not be sensible for the existing Royal Dukedoms [with a long and glorious history as such] to revert to the Crown, when the existing holder dies ?

Thus - Gloucester and Kent 'revert' when the current Dukes die, leaving their heirs as 'the noble Earls of Ulster' and of 'St Andrews' respectively.
Then Gloucester, Kent and Cambridge [and possibly York] would be on hand for William V or George VIII to utilise as necessary ?
If future 'creations' were made for the same duration as the 'HRH' was held [therefter reverting back to the Crown], Dukedoms would no longer 'be lost for the future' as they are now...

That is actually what happens in Spain where the titles of nobility born by the infantes and infantas are actually "titles of nobility belonging to the Crown" that are used by members of the Royal Family on a personal basis by grace of the monarch. They are legally distinct then from the ordinary titles of nobility in the hereditary peerage, which the King of Spain now grants under Art 63(f) of the Spanish constitution.

In Sweden, on the other hand, the Instrument of Government of 1974 removed the King's power to grant nobility and, since 2003, when the House of Nobility was officially separated from the State, nobility is no longer officially recognized although it is not technically abolished. However, the duchies held on a personal basis by the princes and princesses of Sweden, despite not having any clear legal basis, could also be interpreted, I suppose, as titles belonging to the Crown.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, consort, duke of york, kate, princess beatrice, queenmother, spouse, styles and titles, titles uk styles


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 13 (4 members and 9 guests)
JoanHarry, Osipi, principessa, Prinsara
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
Non-British Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 792 08-22-2021 12:16 PM
Abdication Beatrix and Inauguration WA: Titles, Names, Succession, Precedence Princess Robijn King Willem-Alexander, Queen Máxima and family 78 08-21-2021 07:14 AM
Diana's Styles and Titles florawindsor Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 894 11-26-2019 11:04 PM
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1897 11-29-2017 03:13 AM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 50 06-02-2017 02:28 PM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian baby names biography birth britain britannia british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing clarence house colorblindness coronation daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii family life family tree gemstones george vi gradenigo hello! henry viii hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume highgrove history hochberg hypothetical monarchs japan jewellery kensington palace książ castle list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchy mongolia mountbatten names nara period plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess eugenie queen louise royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family speech sussex suthida taiwan thai royal family united states united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:18 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×