The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #4301  
Old 05-08-2019, 06:57 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Some reporters have stated that Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor will become HRH Prince at the time his grandfather becomes King. Are those reporters simply looking at the letters patent of 1917, or has the Palace itself confirmed that the 1917 letters patent will be followed for the Sussex children, unlike the Wessex children?
Unless an announcement is made while the Queen is still here, Archie will automatically become HRH the minute Charles becomes King. Saying nothing means LP of 1917 is in effect. It'll take a monarch's will to change it, but it doesn't need a monarch's will to follow it. In all likelihood, I expect that it'll still be announced at some point soon after Charles' reign that he will not use HRH.

I was initially puzzled as to why BP wouldn't just announce that. But I think it may have to do with publicly talking about The Queen's future passing, so there might be some taboo there. In the old days, it'll get heads chopped.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #4302  
Old 05-08-2019, 06:57 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
What I meant was official staff or spokespersons for any member of the royal family.

Looking at the most recent few pages of the thread for the birth, ACO commented there that some of the royal correspondents clarified there was no discussion of the child's future status.




Have any correspondents said or implied that they did receive an official word from palace communications about the child's eventual title?
Nope.
__________________

__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #4303  
Old 05-08-2019, 07:00 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
What I meant was official staff or spokespersons for any member of the royal family.

Looking at the most recent few pages of the thread for the birth, ACO commented there that some of the royal correspondents clarified there was no discussion of the child's future status.




Have any correspondents said or implied that they did receive an official word from palace communications about the child's eventual title?
It would be rather bipolar to call him Master Archie instead of Lord Dumbarton and then later make him HRH Prince Archie of Sussex. There is no logic to it.
Reply With Quote
  #4304  
Old 05-08-2019, 07:02 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
It would be rather bipolar to call him Master Archie instead of Lord Dumbarton and then later make him HRH Prince Archie of Sussex. There is no logic to it.
I agree. I do believe that in the future the decision will be made by either the Queen or Charles as King that, at the request of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, their children will not bear the honorific titles of HRH Prince/ss.

I think the announcement today is a trailer of things to come.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #4305  
Old 05-08-2019, 07:05 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
It would be rather bipolar to call him Master Archie instead of Lord Dumbarton and then later make him HRH Prince Archie of Sussex. There is no logic to it.
While I agree that Archie is unlikely to take up the HRH title, is there any logic to not fix an LP that just keeps getting the same exception?
Reply With Quote
  #4306  
Old 05-08-2019, 07:13 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
While I agree that Archie is unlikely to take up the HRH title, is there any logic to not fix an LP that just keeps getting the same exception?
I think it comfuzzles a lot of people right about now. The whole "why" thing. Perhaps the Queen is wise enough to leave things open for the future and allow her son and heir to make the right choices. Perhaps the whole Harry and Meghan thing have blown the monarchy to bits and they're hoping things settle down (you have to admit there's been too much backlash against this couple) and even perhaps there's reasons we're not privy to know at this time.

One thing I can state for certain is this whole situation has probably been a big eye opener for someone not familiar with the monarchy and how titles and styles work within the royal family and the peerage works. Its been a crash course for sure. I was lucky over 10 years ago to have good teachers here. I still thought Diana was actually Princess Diana.

We ask questions and we seek and find out the answers and discuss them. Someone asked me earlier about American coverage in the US here. I have no clue. I've been glued to here for information. Go figure.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #4307  
Old 05-08-2019, 07:22 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
What we do know is that this Sussex child, and presumably any more to follow, aren't following the 1917 Letters Patent already. Under those LPs Archie should be styled as the child of a Duke - as are Lord Frederick and Lady Gabriella Windsor - at the very least. The fact that he is the child of a Duke and isn't being styled that way is a clear indication of the wishes of Harry and Meghan and I suspect Charles as well.

I wouldn't be surprised if, on the day of his accession, Charles does do three things regarding titles in addition to announcing his own regnal name:

1. confirm Camilla as Queen
2. create William as Prince of Wales so Catherine becomes Princess of Wales
3. announces that Harry's children won't be HRH
That is a good point. On the other hand, if the wishes of the future king and the parents are already clear (to themselves), why has there not been a public announcement (or a repeal of the Letters Patent)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Unless an announcement is made while the Queen is still here, Archie will automatically become HRH the minute Charles becomes King. Saying nothing means LP of 1917 is in effect. It'll take a monarch's will to change it, but it doesn't need a monarch's will to follow it. In all likelihood, I expect that it'll still be announced at some point soon after Charles' reign that he will not use HRH.

I was initially puzzled as to why BP wouldn't just announce that. But I think it may have to do with publicly talking about The Queen's future passing, so there might be some taboo there. In the old days, it'll get heads chopped.
I am aware of the legal circumstances, but as you said, it continues to be possible that a change could be willed by the monarch at a future time. Because the British Royal Family has not consistently followed the 1917 Letters Patent, and the LPs are not even being followed for Archie as of this moment, presumably the palace realizes that conjecture about the child's status in Charles' reign will continue until an announcement is made, regardless of the Letters Patent.

There doesn't seem to be a taboo on discussing titles in the next reign, given the aforesaid announcement (now removed) in regard to Camilla's eventual title as the king's consort.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
It would be rather bipolar to call him Master Archie instead of Lord Dumbarton and then later make him HRH Prince Archie of Sussex. There is no logic to it.
Unless one or both of the parents simply dislikes the sound of the Dumbarton title, I suppose, but that would raise the question of why they did not ask the Queen for an alternate earldom at the time of the wedding.
Reply With Quote
  #4308  
Old 05-08-2019, 07:38 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
While I agree that Archie is unlikely to take up the HRH title, is there any logic to not fix an LP that just keeps getting the same exception?
I think it is so that there is no pressure on people like Dukes of Gloucester and Kent, Prince Michael and Princess Alexandra to give up the titles. No one wants to do that.

I do think they will issue the LPs - in time - probably after the passing of the last of those born with the HRH in that group. They may even include the stripping of HRH from Beatrice and Eugenie.

The way they are doing it now is simply setting up the scenario whereby in the future it will be the norm that only the children of the heir apparent have HRH and when no one is left who gained HRH under the old LPs they will fix it.
Reply With Quote
  #4309  
Old 05-08-2019, 07:47 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I think it is so that there is no pressure on people like Dukes of Gloucester and Kent, Prince Michael and Princess Alexandra to give up the titles. No one wants to do that.

I do think they will issue the LPs - in time - probably after the passing of the last of those born with the HRH in that group. They may even include the stripping of HRH from Beatrice and Eugenie.

The way they are doing it now is simply setting up the scenario whereby in the future it will be the norm that only the children of the heir apparent have HRH and when no one is left who gained HRH under the old LPs they will fix it.
I actually think if it's the will of the Queen, no one would pressure them to. At this point, the Queen it seems can do no wrong. And after her decades of service, it's certainly earned respect. It would be much easier if she would just do rather than wait another few decades and so many exceptions would have to be made in the meantime with speculation on it every time.

And you mentioned them talking about Camilla's title under the next reign, that's correct. Which begs another question of why they wouldn't just settle the issue of Harry's children's HRH title completely. If the Queen's wish is needed for Archie not to be Lord, then it is odd that she didn't make it clear it was her wish and just have an announcement from the parents that made it sound like it's their choice. Going back on their word on Camilla's title WILL create drama in a time that's already going to be very busy. With Charles taking away his grandchild's HRH title, that's just another thing the some can use to freak out about at that time.
Reply With Quote
  #4310  
Old 05-08-2019, 08:17 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
I actually think if it's the will of the Queen, no one would pressure them to. At this point, the Queen it seems can do no wrong. And after her decades of service, it's certainly earned respect. It would be much easier if she would just do rather than wait another few decades and so many exceptions would have to be made in the meantime with speculation on it every time.
I honestly think its the Queen's will to leave options open and as Archie is only a newborn, she knows she has no clue what the monarchy will be like in 18 years. Maybe even Charles doesn't have a clue what the monarchy will be like in 18 years.

I've been fortunate that I was introduced to a PHC (primitive home computer) in 1982. I'm a senior citizen at 67 years old now and can remember holding a mouse for the first time and manipulating the thing with my fingers. OH! its supposed to roll on a pad. OK. I've run a computer business in Florida that failed in the 90s because it was the land of "I've fallen and can't program my VCR". My husband doesn't use a computer at all except to play Sudoku. I remember laughing and saying "shopping online? Will never happen" and my most famous words that come back to haunt me still "what the hell we need a modem for??"

My point is that we're looking at all of this in the here and now and how it applies to the monarchy here and now. HM, The Queen knows how fast this world is changing and the monarchy will have to adapt to that. That'll be Charles' job and after that, William's and then George's. If anyone has "gone with the flow" of things, its the Queen.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #4311  
Old 05-08-2019, 08:51 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I think it is so that there is no pressure on people like Dukes of Gloucester and Kent, Prince Michael and Princess Alexandra to give up the titles. No one wants to do that.

I do think they will issue the LPs - in time - probably after the passing of the last of those born with the HRH in that group. They may even include the stripping of HRH from Beatrice and Eugenie.

The way they are doing it now is simply setting up the scenario whereby in the future it will be the norm that only the children of the heir apparent have HRH and when no one is left who gained HRH under the old LPs they will fix it.
Why would the Kents or the Gloucesters , or the York princesses for that matter, have to give up their titles ? Any new LPs would not affect previous titles , I suppose, unless there was an explicit provision otherwise. Or am I wrong ?
Reply With Quote
  #4312  
Old 05-08-2019, 09:24 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,219
It would depend on the wording of the new LPs.

If they simply said 'only the children of the heir apparent' will have style and titles of HRH Prince/Princess' then those LPs would strip the existing people who don't fit that criteria of HRH.

They could word it so they could keep it but then the pressure comes because you get why should xxxx who is the child of the 2nd/3rd/4th son of a monarch have HRH and not yyyy who is also the child of the 2nd/3rd/4th son/child of a monarch?

Just because the wording of the LPs doesn't strip others of their titles doesn't mean that there won't be pressure on those who should be unaffected to give up that style of address.
Reply With Quote
  #4313  
Old 05-08-2019, 09:51 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 6,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
As it stands now, when Charles becomes King, his grandchildren all are entitled to HRH Prince/ss. As no "will of the monarch" has been made known to state otherwise, that is what will happen.
I think the problem is that we don't know whether today's message was 'the will of the monarch' or not. We only found out later that that was the case for Louise and James...

So, some clarification from the palace would be helpful.
Reply With Quote
  #4314  
Old 05-08-2019, 10:12 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
It would be rather bipolar to call him Master Archie instead of Lord Dumbarton and then later make him HRH Prince Archie of Sussex. There is no logic to it.
I suppose it's possible Harry & Meghan don't want their oldest child to be treated/styled/etc. any differently than any future children. No courtesy title for the younger sons (and definitely no courtesy title for any daughters) so let's not have Archie use one either. But that doesn't explain why they don't at least call him Lord Archie since all the children can be Lord/Lady.
Reply With Quote
  #4315  
Old 05-08-2019, 10:18 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
I actually think if it's the will of the Queen, no one would pressure them to. At this point, the Queen it seems can do no wrong. And after her decades of service, it's certainly earned respect. It would be much easier if she would just do rather than wait another few decades and so many exceptions would have to be made in the meantime with speculation on it every time.

And you mentioned them talking about Camilla's title under the next reign, that's correct. Which begs another question of why they wouldn't just settle the issue of Harry's children's HRH title completely. If the Queen's wish is needed for Archie not to be Lord, then it is odd that she didn't make it clear it was her wish and just have an announcement from the parents that made it sound like it's their choice. Going back on their word on Camilla's title WILL create drama in a time that's already going to be very busy. With Charles taking away his grandchild's HRH title, that's just another thing the some can use to freak out about at that time.
But I think that's part of the issue--the Queen can determine who is or is not an HRH Prince/Princess. And she can give a Royal Dukedom. But once it is given, she doesn't have the power to change the rules of the peerage.
Reply With Quote
  #4316  
Old 05-08-2019, 11:06 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
I think the problem is that we don't know whether today's message was 'the will of the monarch' or not. We only found out later that that was the case for Louise and James...

So, some clarification from the palace would be helpful.
With Edward and Sophie, the will of the Queen was made on their wedding day before they had the chance to have a "legally begotten child".

At that time too, Edward and Sophie saw their lives going in a different direction than working for the "Firm"
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #4317  
Old 05-08-2019, 11:15 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
I think the problem is that we don't know whether today's message was 'the will of the monarch' or not. We only found out later that that was the case for Louise and James...

So, some clarification from the palace would be helpful.
No, the wording on Wessex announcement was clear the decision was made by Queen with agreement of the parents. The confusion there is that if it means they are just not styled as HRH or not HRH since the Queen didn’t issue and LP. The Palace said the Queen’s wish (decision) was enough.

I guess if anyone is going to issue the announcement, it’s likely to be Charles. If she didn’t intervene today, I don’t think she would in the future.
Reply With Quote
  #4318  
Old 05-08-2019, 11:18 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I think it is so that there is no pressure on people like Dukes of Gloucester and Kent, Prince Michael and Princess Alexandra to give up the titles. No one wants to do that.

I do think they will issue the LPs - in time - probably after the passing of the last of those born with the HRH in that group. They may even include the stripping of HRH from Beatrice and Eugenie.

The way they are doing it now is simply setting up the scenario whereby in the future it will be the norm that only the children of the heir apparent have HRH and when no one is left who gained HRH under the old LPs they will fix it.
Exactly. Everything and every angle will be well thought out with all its repercussions taken into consideration.

It wasn't so long ago that actually some members of the BRF were allowed back into the line of succession because they married a Roman Catholic. That was retroactive. LPs can change a lot of things.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #4319  
Old 05-08-2019, 11:32 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
I think the problem is that we don't know whether today's message was 'the will of the monarch' or not. We only found out later that that was the case for Louise and James...

So, some clarification from the palace would be helpful.
The message on the day of the Wessex wedding stated that the decision was the Queen's.
Title of HRH The Prince Edward

The Queen has today been pleased to confer an Earldom on The Prince Edward. His titles will be Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn. The Prince Edward thus becomes His Royal Highness The Earl of Wessex and Miss Sophie Rhys-Jones on marriage will become Her Royal Highness The Countess of Wessex.

The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh and The Prince of Wales have also agreed that The Prince Edward should be given the Dukedom of Edinburgh in due course, when the present title now held by Prince Philip eventually reverts to the Crown.

The Queen has also decided, with the agreement of The Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones, that any children they might have should not be given the style His or Her Royal Highness, but would have courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
At that time too, Edward and Sophie saw their lives going in a different direction than working for the "Firm"
True, however it is worth mentioning that per the then spokeswoman, the decision was based upon the circumstances of the future Wessex children rather than the circumstances of Prince Edward and Sophie:

BBC NEWS | Special Report | 1999 | 06/99 | royal wedding | Wessex titles for Edward and Sophie
The decision reflects "the clear personal wish of Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones as being appropriate to the likely future circumstances of their children," said a spokeswoman before Saturday's wedding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
If the Queen's wish is needed for Archie not to be Lord, then it is odd that she didn't make it clear it was her wish and just have an announcement from the parents that made it sound like it's their choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
But I think that's part of the issue--the Queen can determine who is or is not an HRH Prince/Princess. And she can give a Royal Dukedom. But once it is given, she doesn't have the power to change the rules of the peerage.
I believe the original poster was referring to the rules of the 1917 letters patent, not the rules of the peerage. There would be no confusion if Archie had been born as the son of a non-royal duke in the British peerage, since it is established that following the rules of courtesy titles is not mandatory for the children of normal peers (a number of peers' children have chosen not to use them).
Reply With Quote
  #4320  
Old 05-08-2019, 11:48 PM
loonytick's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Tennessee, United States
Posts: 755
I have a question about how things tend to be these days in the families of non-royal, “normal” peers. If circumstances are such that a young child is eligible to use a courtesy title, how frequently would the child actually be in a situation where they are referred to as “Lady X” or “Viscount Y?” I know there were many eras when, say, household staff would greet all of the children as formally as befit their title, but does that still happen widely today? Or is the title something that is referred to much more often for an adult than a child?
__________________

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: 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
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 british british royal family camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels customs daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii family tree genetics george vi gradenigo harry and meghan hello! highgrove history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs japan japanese imperial family japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos książ castle liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers meghan markle monarchists monarchy mongolia pless politics portugal prince harry queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry solomon j solomon spanish royal family st edward sussex suthida thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:46 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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