The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3261  
Old 03-19-2018, 02:05 PM
Molly2101's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosena6 View Post
What would have been different had they been HRH Prince and Princess?
They wouldn't be working royals either way I think?
Well one thing they won’t have to endure now as they aren’t Princess Louise and Prince James is the issue that people have with Beatrice and Eugenie at present. Thy have HRH styles and people are questioning the need for them. They were never going to be working royals but are now stuck inbetween a rock and a hard place.

Louise and James are free to get jobs without the public essentially thinking, “what’s the point of them?” They haven’t got any of the burdens of being seen to be useful like their York cousins. The Princesses have patronage’s and attend certain events, most likely at the invitation of their grandmother. I can’t see Charles requesting his youngest niece and nephew attend a reception at BP when he is King.

Edward and Sophie saw the future for their children and knew that they would have no royal engagements. They wanted their children to lead private lives (or as private as they can be when their relatives are the Monarch.)
__________________

__________________
"I am yours, you are mine, of that be sure. You are locked in my heart, the little key is lost and now you must stay there forever."
Written by Princess Alix of Hesse and by Rhine in the diary of her fiance, Tsarevich Nicholas.
  #3262  
Old 03-19-2018, 02:08 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosena6 View Post
What would have been different had they been HRH Prince and Princess?
They wouldn't be working royals either way I think?
You're right. Princess Margaret's children are another example of being in the royal family and having relatively private lives.

I think one of the disadvantages we see right now with Beatrice and Eugenie being HRH and princesses is that, for the most part, people don't realize that these two women are private citizens that happen to be granddaughters of the monarch and not working for the BRF's "Firm".

Perhaps with being styled as Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, there won't be so much expectations put on her to be "royal" and it makes it easier for her to have a private life.
__________________

__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #3263  
Old 03-19-2018, 07:41 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
Why would the queen issue LPs to give her greatgrandchildren a title she actively withheld from her grandchildren?
Because their parents rejected titles for them. The Queen didn't 'withhold them' so they couldn't have them.


LaRae
  #3264  
Old 03-19-2018, 07:50 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
George V followed the (pre-Revolution) French standard under which the Royal House consisted of:


1. The King and the Queen Consort.
2. The monarch's legitimate children.
3. The monarch's legitimate grandchildren in male line.
4. The legitimate children of the eldest son of the heir to the throne.
5. The Queen Dowager when applicable.

In addition, wives of royal princes were also members of the Royal House by marriage whereas husbands of royal princesses were not.

With the introduction of equal primogeniture, the list above could be modernized to include all legitimate grandchildren of the monarch (in both paternal and maternal line) and all royal consorts and widows/widowers, either male or female, which is close to the Belgian system now (with the exception that, in Belgium, all grandchildren of the heir are also members of the Royal House).
I doubt that they will go to a broader number of royals. They are trying to reduce the number so they will be reducing who is royal to the children of the monarch and the children of the heir apparent.

The public don't want Beatrice and Eugenie as royals so there is no way they will want to see that number expanded again (last time I was in Britain I asked numerous people their thoughts on the York girls and no one had a good word to say about them).

Quote:
I don't see a need for a minimalist Royal House, as in Spain or Norway today for example, as long as public funding is limited to the monarch, the monarch's consort, and the heir (and his/her consort), while other members of the Royal House get reimbursed only for official duties they perform. There could be public funding also for the dowager or former monarch upon abdication, which is fair.
You are advocating expanding the amount of money spent by the taxpayers on the royals. Other than the Queen and Philip the rest are funded from the private incomes of the Duchies for their official duties not from the Sovereign Grant.

There won't be an abdication in the UK - unless William decides to do so, which I can see him doing - but neither the Queen nor Charles will ever abdicate. They believe they are there for life. If they do decide to abdicate they should get nothing as they have given up their duty and no moneys at all should be paid for that.

The spouse of the previous monarch is covered in the Sovereign Grant now so no increase there.

The streamlining of the royal family is clear for anyone to see if they look at the way the York girls are sidelined and so the family is going to have fewer workers doing fewer engagements - in line with the reported, but never confirmed, ideas that Charles wants a smaller royal family. The fact that that has been repeated over and over again makes it virtually impossible now for anyone to go back.

We have already seen The Queen change the LPs with Edward's children by the use of Her Will which would suggest a future where they LPs themselves will be changed to reduce rather than expand the number of HRHs as you are suggesting.

If all the grandchildren of a monarch were HRHs then by Christmas this year there would be 36 HRHs compared to the 21 we will have. That number would also only increase as Harry has children. The intention though is to reduce that number not add to it.

I would even go so far as to say that HRH should be limited to the first 6 in the line of succession - regardless of relation to the monarch and so people would lose it as others were born - as they do the need to ask permission to marry.
  #3265  
Old 03-19-2018, 07:52 PM
cepe's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
Edward and Sophie saw their children had the opportunity for private lives and gave it to them, which was a very wise decision, I think. Louise and James will still have all the unofficial privileges associated with being the grandchildren of a monarch - first rate educations, social and family connections, the opportunity to pursue their careers of choice, a nice, although probably not exorbitant sum of money set aside for them in trusts - without the constant attention and expectations that fall on working royals.
These are the privileges that come with any child of someone with money eg
-Branson children
-family of the late Duke of Westminster (although educated at the local comprehensive school)
-children of celebrities

the difference is that their parents will still be receiving public money (albeit not as a salary) and therefore will stay in the public eye. Don't see the DM losing sight of these two.

Since the revived interest in royalty (via social media, blogs and forums) media chase the younger children now. Although the children of (say) Duke of Kent missed it, there is now focus on the grandchildren, especially the girls.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
  #3266  
Old 03-19-2018, 07:55 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
Bertie I don't think you can compare the York girls to the Wales boys. Their popularity has always been very different.


LaRae
  #3267  
Old 03-19-2018, 08:05 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post

The public don't want Beatrice and Eugenie as royals so there is no way they will want to see that number expanded again (last time I was in Britain I asked numerous people their thoughts on the York girls and no one had a good word to say about them).

If all the grandchildren of a monarch were HRHs then by Christmas this year there would be 35 HRHs compared to the 23 we will have. That number would also only increase as Harry has children. The intention though is to reduce that number not add to it.

I would even go so far as to say that HRH should be limited to the first 6 in the line of succession - regardless of relation to the monarch and so people would lose it as others were born - as they do the need to ask permission to marry.
1) I think more people are indifferent to Beatrice and Eugenie than actively are negative. Many of those that are negative towards the girls either dislike their mother and/or father or believe they get money for doing nothing.

2) How so? The Queen has only eight grandchildren.

3) So are you advocating stripping the HRH from those that fall below the 6the position in the successsion even if they'd had it all their life previously?
  #3268  
Old 03-19-2018, 08:27 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post

2) How so? The Queen has only eight grandchildren.
If I am assuming and counting right, I think she is including all of the living grandchildren and spouses of a monarch,:

HRH Meghan
HRH Prince Peter
HRH Autumn
HRH Princess Zara
HRH Princess Louise
HRH Prince James
HRH Prince David
HRH The Countess of Snowdon
HRH Princess Sarah
HRH The Dowager Countess of Harewood
HRH Prince/ss xyz of Cambridge

I guess I am missing one
  #3269  
Old 03-19-2018, 08:28 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosena6 View Post
Do their kids attend boarding school?
I read that only Beatrice attended a day school, unlike her cousins. Is that true?
I thought her sister was a day scholar, too?
To get back to education and not the title discussion, to answer you.....

All of the cousins went to day school at one point, but most went to boarding.

Both Beatrice and Eugenie attended St George's, but different locations. Due to her dyslexia, Beatrice went to the Ascot location. She remained there as a day student until she finished her a levels. Eugenie went to Windsor location, but later spent five years as a boarder at Marlborough. Because of her learning disability, it was decided better for Beatrice to remain with her teachers at a school that had top programs for kids with dyslexia.

Louise and James attended, James still, St George's Windsor like Eugenie. But the school is only until 13. There is no word of where Louise now goes.
  #3270  
Old 03-19-2018, 08:45 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
Existing HRHs

1. HRH The Duke of Edinburgh
2. HRH The Prince of Wales
3. HRH The Duchess of Cornwall
4. HRH The Duke of Cambridge
5. HRH The Duchess of Cambridge
6. HRH Prince George of Cambridge
7. HRH Princess Charlotte of Cambridge
8. HRH Prince Henry of Wales
9. HRH The Duke of York
10. HRH Princess Beatrice of York
11. HRH Princess Eugenie of York
12. HRH The Earl of Wessex
13. HRH The Countess of Wessex
14. HRH The Princess Royal
15. HRH The Duke of Gloucester
16. HRH The Duchess of Gloucester
17. HRH The Duke of Kent
18. HRH The Duchess of Kent
19. HRH Prince Michael of Kent
20. HRH Princess Michael of Kent
21. HRH Princess Alexandra

If ALL children, grandchildren of a monarch AND their non-divorced spouses were HRH the list by Christmas would be:

1. HRH The Duke of Edinburgh
2. HRH The Prince of Wales
3. HRH The Duchess of Cornwall
4. HRH The Duke of Cambridge
5. HRH The Duchess of Cambridge
6. HRH Prince George of Cambridge
7. HRH Princess Charlotte of Cambridge
8. HRH Baby Cambridge
9. HRH Prince Henry of Wales
10. HRH Princess Henry of Wales
11. HRH The Duke of York
12. HRH Princess Beatrice of York
13. HRH Princess Eugenie of York
14. HRH Prince Jack Brookshank
15. HRH The Earl of Wessex
16. HRH The Countess of Wessex
17. HRH Prince James of Wessex
18. HRH Princess Louise of Wessex

19. HRH The Princess Royal
20. HRH Prince Timothy Laurence
21. HRH Prince Peter
22. HRH Princess Peter
23. HRH Princess Zara
24. HRH Prince Michael Tindall
25. HRH The Earl of Snowdon
26. HRH The Countess of Snowdon
27. HRH Princess Sarah
28. HRH Prince Daniel Chatto

29. HRH The Duke of Gloucester
30. HRH The Duchess of Gloucester
31. HRH The Duke of Kent
32. HRH The Duchess of Kent
33. HRH Prince Michael of Kent
34. HRH Princess Michael of Kent
35. HRH Princess Alexandra
36. HRH The Dowager Countess of Harewood

Red is for those who would be added who aren't already HRH but are in the extended family while the blue will be HRH but aren't yet.
  #3271  
Old 03-19-2018, 08:59 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
But Bertie that's not going to happen (all the red)....at the most it would be children of Harry ..nothing (new) below that.


LaRae
  #3272  
Old 03-19-2018, 09:19 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
I am fully aware of that. My point was in reply to a suggestion made by Mbruno that all grandchildren and their spouses should be HRHs due to the changes in the succession.
  #3273  
Old 04-22-2018, 12:05 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
We have already seen The Queen change the LPs with Edward's children by the use of Her Will which would suggest a future where they LPs themselves will be changed to reduce rather than expand the number of HRHs as you are suggesting.
But the fact that HM used Her Will rather than issuing a new LP like she did for Charlotte tells me that she wants to leave the option open for future generations to decide. And perhaps she has some reservations about this. She had four children, and they all had children. By the time Louise and James were born, they were so far from the throne and also the Wales boys were at an age where they provided a lot of tabloid fodder that it wasn't as big of a deal.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the current LP will be changed to expand to include additional HRHs, but I don't see a reduction either to the level that you suggested earlier. I don't think I'll see the children of a monarch be stripped of their HRH status. I don't really see a new LP issued during the York princesses' lives either. The most it'll be is probably through a sovereign's will, but that's probably it. I don't see Charles or William issuing a LP that would strip them of the HRH title or making an exception for them while issuing LP that would strip their own grandchildren of the title automatically. They would likely leave the choice to the parents and then issue His Will to address it.
  #3274  
Old 05-20-2018, 08:13 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Balmoral, United Kingdom
Posts: 515
Is Prince Andrew now undoubtedly a minor royal? With the expansion of Charles's family, the Yorks are well and truly out of the limelight.
  #3275  
Old 05-20-2018, 08:22 AM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal-blue View Post
Is Prince Andrew now undoubtedly a minor royal? With the expansion of Charles's family, the Yorks are well and truly out of the limelight.
I'm going to give a creepy if practical answer. He's not so far out of it when you think of Charles/Wills/Harry family being together (as I am sure there are times they are) and the gas main blows or something else equally catastrophic happens. He is suddenly very relevant, again in that case.
__________________
"And the tabloid press will be a pain in the ass, as usual." - Royal Norway
  #3276  
Old 05-20-2018, 08:37 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal-blue View Post
Is Prince Andrew now undoubtedly a minor royal? With the expansion of Charles's family, the Yorks are well and truly out of the limelight.
As long as he's the son of the current monarch, I don't think he can be truly considered a minor royal. That will happen when he becomes the brother of the monarch who himself has plenty of heirs. Then he'll just be a spare in the background.
  #3277  
Old 05-21-2018, 11:21 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I am fully aware of that. My point was in reply to a suggestion made by Mbruno that all grandchildren and their spouses should be HRHs due to the changes in the succession.

No, the change would apply only to the descendants of Prince Charles when he were King. It would not be retroactive to all descendants of George V or George VI.


Also, I am proposing the Belgian model that applies only to people born as children and grandchildren of a living monarch.


All people who were already HRHs prior to the change in the titles systems obviously would keep their styles while they are alive, again as the 2015 Belgian royal decree did to people who were princes/princess of Belgium under the royal decrees of 1891 and 1991.



I imagined that would be obvious to other posters, but, apparently, it was not. If the concern is, however, an increase in the number of HRHs because of the inclusion of maternal grandchildren, then the Dutch model may be used and only the children of the heir would become HRHs. The important point is to eliminate gender inequality to keep the title rules in line with the succession rules, i.e. either all grandchildren (in paternal and maternal line) are HRHs, or only the children of the heir are (whether the heir is male or female).
  #3278  
Old 05-21-2018, 01:39 PM
Jacknch's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,228
Off-topic posts relating to Prince Andrew have been deleted - clearly not a topic for this thread.
__________________
JACK
  #3279  
Old 05-21-2018, 08:57 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 27
Do people think it matters who is on the throne when Harry and Meghan have their kid(s), as far as the title goes? Prince/Princess and would Charles be as likely as his mother let them have this or would he change the Letters of Patent? Of course it seems quite possible that, like the Wessex family, they won't want this for their children.
  #3280  
Old 05-21-2018, 11:45 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizier View Post
Do people think it matters who is on the throne when Harry and Meghan have their kid(s), as far as the title goes? Prince/Princess and would Charles be as likely as his mother let them have this or would he change the Letters of Patent? Of course it seems quite possible that, like the Wessex family, they won't want this for their children.
Yes, it does matter who is on the throne when Harry and Meghan have children. Under the current LPs, any children born during the Queen's reign will be styled as the children of a Duke, not as HRH Prince/Princess.

It is possible that the Queen might modify the LPs, but that's no guarantee. It's equally as possible that Charles might modify the LPs or issue a statement during his reign that would prevent any children of Harry and Meghan from being HRH Prince/Princess, comparable to Edward and Sophie.

We really won't know until if/when Harry and Meghan have children.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
british, camilla, charles iii, charles of wales, coronation, crown jewels, duchess of cornwall, legacy, prince charles, prince of wales, queen camilla, titles, william v


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
Monarchies & Republics: Future and Benefits marian Royalty Past, Present, and Future 552 04-07-2021 03:53 PM
The Monarchy after Elizabeth II ysbel British Royals 523 05-22-2018 02:06 PM
The Monarchy in Greece Fireweaver The Royal Family of Greece 310 04-09-2018 01:37 PM
The Monarchy And The Media Alexandria Royal House of Norway 12 04-08-2004 04:06 PM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian british british royal family buckingham palace 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 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 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 names plantinum jubilee 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 unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:35 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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