The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #5521  
Old 02-01-2021, 08:28 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,385
I'm not sure there is any particular 'Royal source' in reality in many of these articles. I do believe that there were/are staff at both KP and BP that dislike(d) Meghan and werent averse to leaking all sorts of stuff about her to journalists including Royal correspondents.

[.....]
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #5522  
Old 02-01-2021, 08:56 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 3,433
A number of posts have been edited or deleted as either being off topic, empty, or speculative.

Barring additonal information, it's time to move on.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #5523  
Old 02-02-2021, 08:19 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,931
A report with additional information: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...toxic-row.html


Quote:
Buckingham Palace, meanwhile, suggested on Sunday — in comments clearly discussed in advance with the Sussexes — that a ‘clerical error’ had precipitated the need formally to change the birth certificate.

For Royal-watchers, this was interesting. Immediately after Archie’s birth on May 6, 2019 — itself shrouded in much secrecy, as many will remember — Royal aides followed the template set by the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge for their children when it came to Archie’s birth certificate.

In this, they were led by the Queen’s highly experienced former deputy private secretary, Samantha Cohen. [...]

Mrs Cohen is not someone given to making significant errors, clerical or otherwise. And nor, for that matter, are the team at Westminster Register Office, who are well-versed in recording royal births.
Quote:
In what was clearly designed to be the most tactful rejoinder possible, insiders gently insisted that no one ‘dictated’ anything.

One source told the Mail that the use of the word ‘dictated’ was an ‘unfortunate’ choice that might, they politely continued, have been ‘lost in translation’ from the U.S. Perhaps, they suggested, there could have been a misunderstanding about what ‘royal protocol’ required in this situation.
Quote:
The New York Post, seemingly guided by the Sussexes’ representatives, suggested yesterday that the changes were required by the Garter Principal King of Arms and Senior Herald, Thomas Woodcock, a member of the Royal Household and chief adviser to the Queen on ceremonial matters and heraldry.

But when I spoke to the genial Mr Woodcock at the College of Arms yesterday, he was bemused by the suggestion. ‘This doesn’t ring a bell with me,’ he said. ‘I may have said some time that if you are the Duchess of Sussex then that is your name. “Rachel Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex” rather implies that you are a dowager, or widowed. That’s a bit old-fashioned.

‘I haven’t had any part in it but am very happy to take the blame, if that is what’s required.

‘It is undoubtedly my role to advise, and maybe I offered some thoughts in one context but they are being used in another. Whenever I am asked a question, I do try to answer it as honestly as possible. I just have no recollection particularly of being asked for any advice on how things should be entered on a birth certificate.’

His sense of bemusement is echoed by the Palace.

‘There is no set protocol with these things,’ one source told me. ‘The birth certificate is a civic document, so there are options on how it is filled out.
Reply With Quote
  #5524  
Old 02-02-2021, 08:27 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,931
It is interesting that, per Garter and the anonymous Palace source, for British royals a "civic document" has more "options" than the "set protocol" used in other contexts (which ones?). In many other European countries, it would be the other way around.

I wonder whether those "options" would allow Princess Eugenie the freedom to decide whether she wishes to use Princess Eugenie, Princess Eugenie of York, or Princess Eugenie, Mrs. Jack Brooksbank when she or her husband register their child's birth.
Reply With Quote
  #5525  
Old 02-02-2021, 08:55 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 6,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
It is interesting that, per Garter and the anonymous Palace source, for British royals a "civic document" has more "options" than the "set protocol" used in other contexts (which ones?). In many other European countries, it would be the other way around.

I wonder whether those "options" would allow Princess Eugenie the freedom to decide whether she wishes to use Princess Eugenie, Princess Eugenie of York, or Princess Eugenie, Mrs. Jack Brooksbank when she or her husband register their child's birth.
Indeed, you would think that civic documents are stricter and not less strict than for example royal protocols.
Reply With Quote
  #5526  
Old 02-03-2021, 10:05 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 5,186
https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/sussex...ersial-155384/


Quote:
Prince Harry is best known as the Duke of Sussex – a title granted to him by The Queen in May 2018 upon his marriage to Meghan Markle. A lesser known title also bestowed upon him was Baron Kilkeel – a subsidiary peerage which the prince can use when he visits Northern Ireland. However, when it was announced that Harry would become the Baron Kilkeel, it caused controversy on the island of Ireland between Unionists and Irish Republicans.
Nothing to do with the man himself, but unfortunately it's due to the friction between Protestants and Catholics.
Reply With Quote
  #5527  
Old 02-03-2021, 07:34 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,866
There is no smoke without a fire . . . unless someone lobbed a smoke grenade. I beggars belief that Harry and Meghan are supposedly the authors of their own misfortune about every little bit of "Official" muck ups. Yes, Meghan is not au fait with royal procedure but Harry surely, as indeed is Samantha Cohen.

It is all very murky if not downright fishy.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #5528  
Old 02-03-2021, 10:33 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,740
Y'know, I just thought of something. It really doesn't matter what is on a birth certificate or if it follows protocol or whatever. Both Harry and Meghan are adults and when Archie reaches his majority, all three of them could legally change their names to the Boat family and have first names of Wynken, Blynken and Nod if they choose to. Anyone can change their names legally unless there is intent to defraud.
__________________
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
  #5529  
Old 02-03-2021, 11:35 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
So since Archie was born in London even to an American mother is he automatically an American or do they have to make him an American? And is he allowed to have titles as an American?
Reply With Quote
  #5530  
Old 02-04-2021, 12:14 AM
Sunnystar's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Oregon, United States
Posts: 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
So since Archie was born in London even to an American mother is he automatically an American or do they have to make him an American? And is he allowed to have titles as an American?
He has American citizenship since he is the child of an American citizen. There's nothing he needs to do. He is allowed to have titles as an American. The only prohibition on titles in the US Constitution/US law is that an American citizen may not have titles bestowed on them/accept foreign titles - eg. Tom Hanks could not accept a knighthood. You don't lose titles you are born with or inherit.
Reply With Quote
  #5531  
Old 02-04-2021, 03:15 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLLK View Post
https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/sussex...ersial-155384/



Nothing to do with the man himself, but unfortunately it's due to the friction between Protestants and Catholics.
It has been custom for Princes of the United Kingdom to hold subsidiary Northern Irish titles since the foundation of Northern Ireland in 1921; Duke of Kent = Baron Downpatrick; Duke of York = Baron Killyleagh; Duke of Cambridge = Baron Carrickfergus. These titles have been in no way controversial. In the cases of Killyleagh, Carrickfergus and Kilkeel these are towns with a strong Unionist identity and history of service to the Crown.
Reply With Quote
  #5532  
Old 02-04-2021, 03:27 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,214
Those are the baronies. The Duke of Gloucester's Earldom is Earl of Ulster and is used by his son and heir while his grandson uses Baron Culloden.
Reply With Quote
  #5533  
Old 02-04-2021, 03:45 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunnystar View Post
The only prohibition on titles in the US Constitution/US law is that an American citizen may not have titles bestowed on them/accept foreign titles - eg. Tom Hanks could not accept a knighthood. You don't lose titles you are born with or inherit.
It's not even that strict; the prohibition only applies to federal government officials. (I believe this is why presidents Reagan and Bush were made honorary knights grand cross of the Order of the Bath after their terms.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
Indeed, you would think that civic documents are stricter and not less strict than for example royal protocols.
English law is very loose on names compared to civil law jurisdictions. Nobody has a single official legal name that they are obligated to use on all official paperwork. This is also why the various royal surnames are so murky. There's a lot of room for people to make things up as they go along, and we're left trying to find order in the chaos.
Reply With Quote
  #5534  
Old 02-04-2021, 05:30 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 31,982
Is Princess Antonia, Duchess of Wellington styled Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Wellington or Her Grace the Duchess of Wellington in the UK?
Reply With Quote
  #5535  
Old 02-04-2021, 05:48 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,469
Technically, you can call yourself by any name you like without legally changing it. Most people of my age can remember a dear old Great Uncle Fred whose official name was actually John, or a dear old Great Auntie Dolly whose official name was actually Mary - it seemed to be quite common for people born in Edwardian times to become known by some random name which had nothing to do with what was on their birth certificate! It's much less common now, because you have to show ID for so many things, and it's pretty difficult to open a bank account in the name of Fred Smith if your birth certificate says John Smith. But Archie could choose to call himself anything, and it wouldn't actually be illegal.
Reply With Quote
  #5536  
Old 02-04-2021, 06:17 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
So since Archie was born in London even to an American mother is he automatically an American or do they have to make him an American? And is he allowed to have titles as an American?

He is automatically American (actually a "natural born citizen of the United States") under US law. He doesn't have to claim US citizenship to become a citizen and he won't lose his citizenship unless he publicly and officially renounces it. As a natural born citizen, upon reaching the age of 35, he will qualify to become President of the United States if elected under the terms set out in the US constitution.

There is no impediment to natural born US citizens holding a foreign title of nobility or using it in a private capacity, but the title is not recognized by the United States or any state and will not appear in any US ID document. People who hold a federal public office are, however, barred from accepting foreign titles unless authorized by Congress (Section 9(8) of the US constitution).


Naturalized citizens of the United States, contrary to natural born citizens, are required to renounce any foreign title upon naturalization. Prince Harry for example, if he became a US citizen, would have to renounce all his titles (Prince of the United Kingdom, Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton, Baron Kilkeel, Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order).


Quote:
Originally Posted by An Ard Ri View Post
Is Princess Antonia, Duchess of Wellington styled Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Wellington or Her Grace the Duchess of Wellington in the UK?

Good question. I would be strongly inclined to say "Her Grace The Duchess of Wellington" since her Prussian title is in principle not recognized in the UK. However, Prince Ernst of Hanover is known for example to be cited as "His Royal Highness" in official UK documents, so I am not sure what the official policy regarding foreign royal titles and styles actually is.
Reply With Quote
  #5537  
Old 02-04-2021, 06:28 AM
AC21091968's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by An Ard Ri View Post
Is Princess Antonia, Duchess of Wellington styled Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Wellington or Her Grace the Duchess of Wellington in the UK?
What a great question!

I think this could boiled down to whether UK recognise or legally consider foreign royal titles (Princess [First Name] of Prussia in her own birth right). I think there is more chance that the UK does not recognise Prussia's royal title, ever since George V relinquished German Titles.

So in this case, Princess Antonia is probably styled as Her Grace The Duchess of Wellington, as in the wife of a non-royal duke in the UK. The reason I specified in the UK, because the 9th Duke of Wellington is also 9th Prince of Waterloo (Prins van Waterloo) of both the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Kingdom of Belgium, 9th Duke of Victoria (Duque da Vitória) of the Kingdom of Portugal and 10th Duke of Ciudad Rodrigo of Spain. If these foreign titles are not recognised in the UK, he is style as His Grace The Duke of Wellington (non-royal Duke).
Reply With Quote
  #5538  
Old 02-04-2021, 07:59 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 4,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by An Ard Ri View Post
Is Princess Antonia, Duchess of Wellington styled Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Wellington or Her Grace the Duchess of Wellington in the UK?
An interesting question, indeed! Having considered the Heraldica page on foreign titles (https://www.heraldica.org/topics/bri...eigntitles.htm) it is my opinion that for official purposes in the UK, the wife of the current Duke of Wellington is Her Grace The Duchess of Wellington. She seems to be described as Princess Antonia of Prussia and Princess of Waterloo and by other foreign titles, either in her own right or by reason of her marriage, but those titles are all foreign. As I understand it, her husband does not hold any licence to use a foreign title in the UK, and neither does she. So their use of the foreign titles is unofficial. Prussia doesn't even exist any longer and the Prussian titles are not recognised in Germany, but people seem to like clinging to titles as long as they can.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #5539  
Old 02-04-2021, 09:00 AM
Somebody's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 6,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Y'know, I just thought of something. It really doesn't matter what is on a birth certificate or if it follows protocol or whatever. Both Harry and Meghan are adults and when Archie reaches his majority, all three of them could legally change their names to the Boat family and have first names of Wynken, Blynken and Nod if they choose to. Anyone can change their names legally unless there is intent to defraud.
It depends on the country. For Meghan only the US-laws are relevant. Not sure what the rules are in the UK...

At least in the Netherlands, you cannot just change your name. You need to argue your case for a judge based on a very limited number of legal reasons.
Reply With Quote
  #5540  
Old 02-04-2021, 09:32 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 31,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by AC21091968 View Post
What a great question!
Its also one that has caused me quite a bit of confusion too regarding her style.
__________________

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: 2 (0 members and 2 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
america american archie mountbatten-windsor asian baby names biography birth britain britannia british royal family british royals buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing colorblindness coronation 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 house of windsor hypothetical monarchs king juan carlos liechtenstein list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists monarchy mongolia mountbatten names nara period plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess eugenie queen elizabeth ii queen louise queen victoria royal ancestry royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family sussex suthida unfinished portrait united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:16 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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